Originally Posted by Homeyba
(Post 14533134)
Ideally everyone would own several bikes with different set-ups and a box of chainrings and cassettes to mix and match with.
|
Originally Posted by Homeyba
(Post 14529172)
I think you need to tell your "ego" who's boss. ;) Nobody has ever been big enough to tease me about riding a triple, and I've ridden/raced with some very talented people. Your choice of gearing should be just like choosing the right tool out of the tool chest. Would you choose the wrong tool just because someone might perceive you as a sissy? That doesn't make much sense. .
Originally Posted by Homeyba
(Post 14529172)
I don't understand why people want to point out that a 50-11 is bigger than a 53-12? Sure it is but it's not bigger than a 53-11. It's best to compare apples to apples. The advantage of running a triple is that you can run a tighter cassette. I personally am not fond of big jumps (on my compact) so I typically run an 11-25 cassette and for hilly rides a 11-27. I spend most of my time in the triple on the middle chainring so cross chaining isn't really an issue.
Originally Posted by Homeyba
(Post 14529172)
Just as an aside, I took my compact on a hilly century a few years back and was with the fast (Pro/cat1/cat2) guys for the first 65 miles of hills then we hit a 5 mile flat section and I got spit off the back of the group because I couldn't spin fast enough. That really sucked. Especially answering the "what happened to you" questions afterward... I still use the compact in the right circumstances but I'd rather have people make fun of my triple as I blow their doors off than get spit out the back because I don't have the right gears.
[QUOTE=Homeyba;14529974]I don't really understand the cross chaining complaint. I rarely end up cross chained. Maybe it's just me. QUOTE] If you're riding with pro's and getting dropped at speeds in excess of 50kph I understand you wouldn't have the same concern as Mrs. Fred, who averages about 22-24kph on her rides. Presuming you don't want to use the two most extreme chainring/cog combos and maintaining a cadence of roughly 90, the crossover from small to large chainring on a 34/50 happens at 27-29 kph. That's right in the sweet spot for Mrs. Fred when we're cycling along nice flat to rolling terrain. Subsequently, she finds herself frequently having to shift both front and rear to maintain the correct gearing. Versus a 39, which can carry you up into the low 30's before heading for the big ring. |
1 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by Homeyba
(Post 14533134)
We are pretty close in our thinking and you are so right that the answer is rarely just throwing on a compact or a triple. There are so many choices and options out there it isn't even funny. That's why people really need to take a look at themselves and decide what they are doing and what they want to get out of their cycling before they just jump out there and spend a bunch of money. Ideally everyone would own several bikes with different set-ups and a box of chainrings and cassettes to mix and match with. That'd probably be too much trouble for most people though. ;)
Originally Posted by Homeyba
(Post 14533134)
That's a rather ingenious solution. I have three different bikes. ;) I've never tried to use a mtn bike crank because a 24 fits on both my Tru-Vativ and FSA cranks with an Ultegra (2006-8 6700) triple FD. Does your bike have an odd shaped seat tube that the shimano FD won't clear it?
On a sidenote, at one point I was sent a 5 arm 48t ring instead of a 4 arm so I winded up meeting IBOHUNT for my first ride with the rig having only the 34-24 installed. Luckily we coasted down the mountains because with only a 12x34 my cadence would shoot through the roof everytime I tried to pedal on anything above 21-22 mph. http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=263724 |
Originally Posted by bigfred
(Post 14533184)
You would probably also advise me to pick a fight with my redheaded wife:-) Trust me when I say I couldn't care less about other's perception. It's all about me, my ego and not accepting that my age continues to increase.
Originally Posted by bigfred
(Post 14533184)
Well, if you're going to try to hang with the "Pro/1/2's" you might want to look around at what they're driving. There were probably a fair few 54 or 55 tooth chainrings in that group if "any" of them could push the pace that high. A 50/11 gives you plenty of gear inches and at a cadence of a mear 90 should have you going in the low 50's (kph). Plenty for most us mortals.
Originally Posted by bigfred
(Post 14533184)
If you're riding with pro's and getting dropped at speeds in excess of 50kph I understand you wouldn't have the same concern as Mrs. Fred, who averages about 22-24kph on her rides. Presuming you don't want to use the two most extreme chainring/cog combos and maintaining a cadence of roughly 90, the crossover from small to large chainring on a 34/50 happens at 27-29 kph. That's right in the sweet spot for Mrs. Fred when we're cycling along nice flat to rolling terrain. Subsequently, she finds herself frequently having to shift both front and rear to maintain the correct gearing. Versus a 39, which can carry you up into the low 30's before heading for the big ring.
JFYI, I get dropped all the time, just not usually in the flats or downhill. It seems like every time the road tilts up my fat butt is off the back. ;) In reality Mr's Fred's problem isn't any different than one that I might have or anyone else for that matter. The only difference is the speed and the gear choice. She just needs to change to a different cassette or change her chainrings so that it moves her sweet spot to the middle of the cassette. That's pretty simple. |
Originally Posted by TrojanHorse
(Post 14533138)
I need to PM you my wife's contact info. Clearly she needs to hear this from somebody else. :D
|
Originally Posted by paisan
(Post 14533223)
...The seattube junction with the Bottom Bracket is this huge square layup of carbon so the knuckle/spring of the triple FD would hit the seat tube before it could drop the chain to the inner ring using the 109mm Ultegra BB. ...
|
Originally Posted by Homeyba
(Post 14533305)
...You probably could have gotten away with the Ultegra FD on my Colnago or Calfee. They both have more traditional seat tubes and that knuckle has lots of room. I went through all those chain alignment issues with my tandem but even then they weren't as difficult as yours.
|
my next bike will be a 50/34 x 11/32. Either that or turn the clock backwards about 20 years.
|
Find the the routes you can handle without grinding out your knee cartilage. If you're taking on some 18% grade hills, that's very steep, and your cadence is 40, you need to learn how to stand up, for this cadence at very least, or you need to go to a 22-front triple, or you need challenge the hill, when it beats you, walk it the rest of the way, or to turn around, and work on going farther with more practice runs. Or you need to learn how to pedal really fast before you hit the steep section, so you can take it to the top, without ruining your knees.
Basically your quads send signals. You have to decide how much you want to strain them (and your patellar menisci, the former self-repairing and strenghtening, the latter not so much). I was a test-guinea pig at UCSD School of Medicine. They set normal resistances, my speed was high ( I used to do 28 mi in an hour , alone, no areobar), and instead of letting me ride for three hours at my preferred resistance, they cranked it up to make my HR go into failure range. I was happy at 300 W. I can do this for three hours. They weren't getting the fatigue results they wanted, becuse my HR was 150 and I could keep that up all day. They cranked up the resistance and made me see how long I could keep up 700 W. IOf course I couldn't keep that up. Five minutes, I was spent. I was in the anaerobic zone, and my muscles screamed, "Stop". Thirty years later, I can't do the speed I used to. In the old days, nobody passed me. Now, a lot of people do. Even girls. It's okay. Age 29 vs. 59, speed 27 mph vs. 14 mph, weight 165 pounds vs. 235 pounds, it happens. I'm a millionaire now, versus barely making it paycheck to paycheck back then. Life happens. |
Originally Posted by Eclectus
(Post 14538893)
Now, a lot of people do. Even girls.
|
Originally Posted by Eclectus
(Post 14538893)
Find the the routes you can handle without grinding out your knee cartilage. If you're taking on some 18% grade hills, that's very steep, and your cadence is 40, you need to learn how to stand up, for this cadence at very least, or you need to go to a 22-front triple, or you need challenge the hill, when it beats you, walk it the rest of the way, or to turn around, and work on going farther with more practice runs.
|
Originally Posted by starving
(Post 14541712)
Traffic permitting, weaving up the hill beats walking up the hill.
|
While on the subject of replacing the cranks, I am wondering if I should go to a shorter crank. I recently measured myself and found that I am right at a 31" inseam, or maybe a smidge under; or about 78 cm. According to the web searches I have done, this is the only measurement that needs to be taken for the crank length. And according to this I should be running a crank in the neighborhood of 162.5 to 170. I currently have 175mm cranks and I find it difficult if not impossible to spin over 85 rpm without bouncing. Should I be looking at a shorter crank arm length in my search? Would these shorter cranks help me to spin higher rpms more comfortably? I am not talking about only on these hills, but all over. Is this the right way to measure, or are there any other measurements that need to be takin into account to determine correct crank length?
|
Originally Posted by cwcaesar
(Post 14544697)
While on the subject of replacing the cranks, I am wondering if I should go to a shorter crank. I recently measured myself and found that I am right at a 31" inseam, or maybe a smidge under; or about 78 cm. According to the web searches I have done, this is the only measurement that needs to be taken for the crank length. And according to this I should be running a crank in the neighborhood of 162.5 to 170. I currently have 175mm cranks and I find it difficult if not impossible to spin over 85 rpm without bouncing. Should I be looking at a shorter crank arm length in my search? Would these shorter cranks help me to spin higher rpms more comfortably?
|
Oh. Spinning is something that I haven't practiced. If I get over 100 RPM, I feel as I could bounce right off the seat sometimes. Around 85 or 90 I feel as if I have a leg out of balance or something. I guess I could just practice this technique. Thanks!
|
Thanks to you all for the suggestions. In the end I have made a decision to get a different bike altogether. When looking at the cost of the changes to the current bike, I felt it best to instead get a new bike and sell the old one to my brother. I am getting the Specialized Secteur Apex Comp. This comes with the 50-34 Compact up front and the 11-32 in the rear, so it should be a significant improvement for maintaining a higher cadence over the 39-27 climbing gear. I was thinking about swapping components for the gears and swapping fork to raise the bars to where I want them, but in the end I just decided that this would be the better (cheaper) solution. Plus I will be properly fitted to my new ride. It will be the middle of the month before I take delivery, but I am pretty excited about it.
Again, thanks for all the help and suggestions. |
Originally Posted by cwcaesar
(Post 14557548)
Thanks to you all for the suggestions. In the end I have made a decision to get a different bike altogether. When looking at the cost of the changes to the current bike, I felt it best to instead get a new bike and sell the old one to my brother. I am getting the Specialized Secteur Apex Comp. This comes with the 50-34 Compact up front and the 11-32 in the rear, so it should be a significant improvement for maintaining a higher cadence over the 39-27 climbing gear. I was thinking about swapping components for the gears and swapping fork to raise the bars to where I want them, but in the end I just decided that this would be the better (cheaper) solution. Plus I will be properly fitted to my new ride. It will be the middle of the month before I take delivery, but I am pretty excited about it.
Again, thanks for all the help and suggestions. |
Thanks, I think it will work out well. I will be sure to report in and post some pics once I have her.
|
I gave up trying to be macho on hills and put a DuraAce triple on my road bike giving me 30 in the front and 28 in the back for my low gear and I'm not ashamed to use it. My touring bike has a low gear of 26 in the front and 25 in the back. My recently completed trail bike, dubbed "The Goat", has a 22 up front and 32 in the back but I haven't had much chance to take it out to play since I'm still waiting for my trail tires to arrive (should be here tomorrow, yayah). I try to keep my cadence above 60 without mashing whenever possible. This is the first year I've done a significant amount of hills, but with the gearing changes, I'm rather enjoying them.
|
With a 22-32 available, I can understand why you dubbed it 'The Goat'. :)
|
42/32/22 Alivio crankset with 11-32 9-speed cassette should give me all the range I'd ever want even if some of the rear shifts are kinda wide. Can't wait to get it out in the ND sand hills, which are actually sandy prairie with some rocky areas. The hills vary from rolling to short stretches of "Oh my God". The other area its designed for is the MN lakes country where there are lots of twisty packed loam trails with assorted climbs and drops. This is the first offroad bike (hard tail with rigid fork, cross between a cyclocross and old style MTB) I've built so wish me luck.
|
Nice discussion on gearing for clydes. I recently began cycling for fitness after a lenghty hiatus. Hauled out my old vintage MTB (Hybridized). I wound up replacing freewheel and the outer two chainrings of a triple due to wear (chain/cog skipping). I got to pick the gearing I wanted based on the gear range I use the most. I went from 50-44-30 to 44-38-30 in the front. In the rear I went from a 14-34 to a 14-28. I lost a little at both ends but I like the closer ratios for fine tuning cadence. Cadence is important to me as I have had knee issues in the past (not from cycling). I certainly do not do hill climbing like some in earlier posts, but I do live near the base of "South Moutain" (Phoenix), so every ride I do either starts or finishes whith some form of climb . Albeit mostly a mild climb, it still represents a signifigant change in work load at my mass. Of course I still miss the the 34 in the rear when my route takes me into a more direct attack of the mountain, but I am hoping continued weight loss will help on that issue.
Spin out Eking |
Originally Posted by cwcaesar
(Post 14557548)
Thanks to you all for the suggestions. In the end I have made a decision to get a different bike altogether. When looking at the cost of the changes to the current bike, I felt it best to instead get a new bike and sell the old one to my brother. I am getting the Specialized Secteur Apex Comp. This comes with the 50-34 Compact up front and the 11-32 in the rear, so it should be a significant improvement for maintaining a higher cadence over the 39-27 climbing gear. I was thinking about swapping components for the gears and swapping fork to raise the bars to where I want them, but in the end I just decided that this would be the better (cheaper) solution. Plus I will be properly fitted to my new ride. It will be the middle of the month before I take delivery, but I am pretty excited about it.
Again, thanks for all the help and suggestions. |
Well, the Secteur Apex is out of stock everywhere, and the 2013 models are not out yet. So I gave a ring to the closest Specialized Concept store and he said that he can get me a 2013 Roubaix Apex by the end of next week. I am stoked! It will be a bit more money, but I think it will be a better bike. And the thing looks awesome. I will let you know how it all turns out.
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:43 AM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.