Why 50-34 sucks for commuting
04-23-16 | 10:53 PM
#101
Senior Member
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 1
From: Washington DC Metro Area
Bikes: Breezer Uptown 8, Jamis Renegade Expert
One advantage of being an inexperienced cyclist - I have very little idea how much my life will soon suck riding on a 50-34. I do know I'll probably never go up in chainring size as I don't race. It'll be interesting to see how much time I spend on the 50 vs. the 34 once I start commuting on the Jamis. The commute is spit roughly 50-50 between streets and MUPs. I don't trust our motorists here enough to try to blast away at 30+ mph except in limited sections of the commute. I saw a video in which a cyclist was cranking at high speed down a DC street and he suddenly collided with a car/truck whose driver decided to make a turn at exactly the wrong second. Got hurt really bad as I recall.
Last edited by GovernorSilver; 04-23-16 at 10:59 PM.
04-24-16 | 12:14 AM
#102
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,103
Likes: 4,737
From: Beaverton, OR
Bikes: Yes
Good to know. 
I've been accident-prone enough that you never know when a future mishap will result in the destruction of a chainring, necessitating a replacement crankset. Is there a Shimano 105 version of a 46-34? I just see alternatives with more teeth, not less.
I've been accident-prone enough that you never know when a future mishap will result in the destruction of a chainring, necessitating a replacement crankset. Is there a Shimano 105 version of a 46-34? I just see alternatives with more teeth, not less.
__________________
My Bikes
My Bikes
04-24-16 | 01:30 AM
#103
Mostly harmless ™
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,462
Likes: 243
From: Novi Sad
Bikes: Heavy, with friction shifters
I can't see any "different set of advantages" that 1x and compact double cranks have for many outside of racing. If you know your course, a 1x system can be tuned to take the best advantage of it. But if you are just out riding and encountering very different terrains, the 1x systems fall flat on their face. Most of us don't ride a closed loop all the time and would do better with a multigear system with a wide range.
The customized system that I've presented aren't that difficult to put together nor are they that "ridiculous". They might require a little bit more work to put together then just using what comes out of the box but it's not that much effort and the results can be a lot better than the stock version. Do you always just take what is given to you? Never experiment to find out what is possible?
Frankly, when I see the shift pattern on compact doubles, I think it would take a continuing education course to figure out how to use them effectively. Most people would could grasp a cross-over system quite readily. Most people already shift their bikes that anyway.
The customized system that I've presented aren't that difficult to put together nor are they that "ridiculous". They might require a little bit more work to put together then just using what comes out of the box but it's not that much effort and the results can be a lot better than the stock version. Do you always just take what is given to you? Never experiment to find out what is possible?
Frankly, when I see the shift pattern on compact doubles, I think it would take a continuing education course to figure out how to use them effectively. Most people would could grasp a cross-over system quite readily. Most people already shift their bikes that anyway.
For road cycling, I like regular doubles - no big jumps up front. But for commuting, triple is practically a double, with an extra gear for loaded/exhausted situations.
04-24-16 | 08:02 AM
#104
Disco Infiltrator
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 15,332
Likes: 3,520
From: Folsom CA
Bikes: Stormchaser, Paramount, Tilt, Samba tandem
So much melodrama!
__________________
Genesis 49:16-17
"Well, well!" said Holmes, impatiently. "A good cyclist does not need a high road. The moor is intersected with paths and the moon is at the full."
Genesis 49:16-17
"Well, well!" said Holmes, impatiently. "A good cyclist does not need a high road. The moor is intersected with paths and the moon is at the full."
04-24-16 | 07:55 PM
#106
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,873
Likes: 153
From: BOSTON BABY
I can't see any "different set of advantages" that 1x and compact double cranks have for many outside of racing. If you know your course, a 1x system can be tuned to take the best advantage of it. But if you are just out riding and encountering very different terrains, the 1x systems fall flat on their face. Most of us don't ride a closed loop all the time and would do better with a multigear system with a wide range.
The customized system that I've presented aren't that difficult to put together nor are they that "ridiculous". They might require a little bit more work to put together then just using what comes out of the box but it's not that much effort and the results can be a lot better than the stock version. Do you always just take what is given to you? Never experiment to find out what is possible?
Frankly, when I see the shift pattern on compact doubles, I think it would take a continuing education course to figure out how to use them effectively. Most people would could grasp a cross-over system quite readily. Most people already shift their bikes that anyway.
The customized system that I've presented aren't that difficult to put together nor are they that "ridiculous". They might require a little bit more work to put together then just using what comes out of the box but it's not that much effort and the results can be a lot better than the stock version. Do you always just take what is given to you? Never experiment to find out what is possible?
Frankly, when I see the shift pattern on compact doubles, I think it would take a continuing education course to figure out how to use them effectively. Most people would could grasp a cross-over system quite readily. Most people already shift their bikes that anyway.
I know you're going to give a long explanation of how this simplicity isn't an advantage, but of course it is. It's just offset by disadvantages that you've noted already for a lot of situations. As these drivetrains get better, the proportion of situations for which they aren't adequate will continue to shrink. Most of the people arguing for triples already get it, I see so many of them saying that they leave the chain on the middle ring for the large majority of the time. Commuter and city bikes with single-chainring derailleur drivetrains have been around for many decades. The concept obviously has appeal.
The effort to customize a gearing system might not be large in the grand scheme, but it's still a friction point and lots of people don't bother with it. I would argue that less need for customization is a benefit for triples, rather than citing more customization as a positive. You've got to go to the bike shop, or order parts online, calculate gear ratios... it's a pain in the ass. I find that stuff more fun than most people, cause I'm a nerd, but even I'd rather just ride my bike and be done with it.
As for compact doubles, I don't think I spent any time defending the typical 50-34 arrangement, which isn't great. It has its uses, but that big ring is still really big for a lot of people. Still, downsize the big ring a little bit to 48 or 46 and the whole thing starts to make a lot of sense. Shift pattern, whatever. I don't recognize the use of a shift pattern in my own riding, and I suspect very few people shift gears that way. The idea of a specific sequence of shifts to get acceptable spacing between gears made sense in the days of half-step gearing, when you had freewheels with a small number of cogs and low-capacity front derailleurs. These days, the wide range of modern cassettes means you just don't have to concern yourself with shifting in a particular order, and almost no one does. Use the big ring when you're going faster, the little ring when you're going slower, and make the fine adjustments on the cassette, done. That can be a little awkward when the gap between the chainrings is large, like on a 50-34, but that can be ameliorated a bit with the wide range cassettes modern drivetrains can handle.
04-24-16 | 08:03 PM
#107
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,873
Likes: 153
From: BOSTON BABY
Thumbs up for the 46 big ring. My commuter and cross bikes are 46-36 and 46-38 respectively (130 BCD crank on the cross bike). That's a nice size for a big ring!
04-25-16 | 10:31 AM
#108
Mad bike riding scientist
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 29,156
Likes: 6,216
From: Denver, CO
Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones
Not having to deal with managing a set of three chainrings in addition to the rear cluster is an advantage no matter what the context. Historically, it's been strongly offset by the limitation in gear range, but that's mostly going away. It turns out that there's a point at which additional gear range isn't a strong advantage, and very few people aside from road racers care about having their gears all that closely spaced. Even road racers have the luxury of not caring so much about gear spacing anymore - I have an 11-28 11-speed cassette on my road bike, low enough to race up hills in the big cogs, yet still closely spaced enough in the smaller cogs to not need to change cassettes for flat crits.
For someone who doesn't race and/or may not be much more than a casual rider or even for commuters who may encounter hills while carrying more of a load than a racer does, triples and very wide gearing are the advantage
I know you're going to give a long explanation of how this simplicity isn't an advantage, but of course it is. It's just offset by disadvantages that you've noted already for a lot of situations. As these drivetrains get better, the proportion of situations for which they aren't adequate will continue to shrink. Most of the people arguing for triples already get it, I see so many of them saying that they leave the chain on the middle ring for the large majority of the time. Commuter and city bikes with single-chainring derailleur drivetrains have been around for many decades. The concept obviously has appeal.
The effort to customize a gearing system might not be large in the grand scheme, but it's still a friction point and lots of people don't bother with it. I would argue that less need for customization is a benefit for triples, rather than citing more customization as a positive. You've got to go to the bike shop, or order parts online, calculate gear ratios... it's a pain in the ass. I find that stuff more fun than most people, cause I'm a nerd, but even I'd rather just ride my bike and be done with it.
I wouldn't suggest customization if the manufacturers and component companies had any inkling of what gearing is to begin with.
As for compact doubles, I don't think I spent any time defending the typical 50-34 arrangement, which isn't great. It has its uses, but that big ring is still really big for a lot of people. Still, downsize the big ring a little bit to 48 or 46 and the whole thing starts to make a lot of sense. Shift pattern, whatever. I don't recognize the use of a shift pattern in my own riding, and I suspect very few people shift gears that way. The idea of a specific sequence of shifts to get acceptable spacing between gears made sense in the days of half-step gearing, when you had freewheels with a small number of cogs and low-capacity front derailleurs. These days, the wide range of modern cassettes means you just don't have to concern yourself with shifting in a particular order, and almost no one does. Use the big ring when you're going faster, the little ring when you're going slower, and make the fine adjustments on the cassette, done. That can be a little awkward when the gap between the chainrings is large, like on a 50-34, but that can be ameliorated a bit with the wide range cassettes modern drivetrains can handle.
I disagree, however, that you don't have to worry about shifting in a particular order. Cadence and gearing are related. A wider cassette doesn't change the large gap between the two rings on the 50-34 compact. The step between the two rings is still large enough that it makes shifts awkward.
But the 50-34, like the 10, 11, 12 or flavor du jour of cassette and the "xx speed" bike, is about marketing, not good engineering. The bike companies tell you that the compact double offers the same range as a triple...which is almost does. But what they don't tell you is that it almost impossible to use it effectively. They trust that most people don't know diddly about gearing and will buy the "latest and greatest" because that what won the Tour...and if you ain't riding what "won the Tour" you aren't a real cyclist.
__________________
Stuart Black
Dreamin' of Bemidji Down the Mississippi (in part)
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
Stuart Black
Dreamin' of Bemidji Down the Mississippi (in part)
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
04-25-16 | 11:36 AM
#109
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,977
Likes: 191
From: Washington, DC
A 1x system that allows you to comfortably ride between 5 and 30 mph is just about right for most commuters (and most others). I'd be very surprised if 1x drivetrains don't take off in the next couple years and become standard. The MTBer who needs even lower gearing and the roadie who needs even higher gearing will become the outliers. Think about it. If the marketers can sell a 1x system over a 2x or 3x, and still charge the customer the same, they'll do it in a heartbeat. I can see chainrings in the 38 range and 12-speed cassettes with 10-50 becoming standard for road setups. That's a 500% gear range. FDs and multi-chainring cranks will quickly fall by the wayside.
04-25-16 | 11:52 AM
#110
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 40,863
Likes: 3,115
From: Sacramento, California, USA
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur
I am perfectly satisfied with my old-school 53-39. It's flat here, and I don't carry much, but I can't see ever needing anything lower than 39x27.
04-25-16 | 11:54 AM
#111
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,103
Likes: 4,737
From: Beaverton, OR
Bikes: Yes
__________________
My Bikes
My Bikes
04-25-16 | 11:58 AM
#112
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,977
Likes: 191
From: Washington, DC
When I'm riding in Florida on my road bike, 53-39, 12-21 is perfect. I do that about one week a year. The rest of the time, I prefer a wider gear range due to the hillier terrain.
04-25-16 | 11:58 AM
#113
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,103
Likes: 4,737
From: Beaverton, OR
Bikes: Yes
A 1x system that allows you to comfortably ride between 5 and 30 mph is just about right for most commuters (and most others). I'd be very surprised if 1x drivetrains don't take off in the next couple years and become standard. The MTBer who needs even lower gearing and the roadie who needs even higher gearing will become the outliers. Think about it. If the marketers can sell a 1x system over a 2x or 3x, and still charge the customer the same, they'll do it in a heartbeat. I can see chainrings in the 38 range and 12-speed cassettes with 10-50 becoming standard for road setups. That's a 500% gear range. FDs and multi-chainring cranks will quickly fall by the wayside.
__________________
My Bikes
My Bikes
04-25-16 | 12:06 PM
#114
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,977
Likes: 191
From: Washington, DC
I've got an 11-36 cassette and a clutch-type MTB derailleur on a shelf in the garage (both of which I bought just because I found them cheap and thought I might have a use for them some day). This discussion has inspired me to build something up to see how I like it. I think it will be pretty good for commuting.
04-25-16 | 12:13 PM
#115
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 40,863
Likes: 3,115
From: Sacramento, California, USA
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur
Do you ride near the Mall? I was surprised how steep Capitol Hill is. (Independence near the Rayburn)
04-25-16 | 12:20 PM
#116
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,977
Likes: 191
From: Washington, DC
I have, but not not very often. So much security around there now, but they don't stop bikes, which is kind of cool. Most of my riding, at least commuting, is along the Potomac River valley, which is fairly flat, but there are some decent hills in Northern VA and Maryland as you ride away from the river.
04-25-16 | 01:22 PM
#117
Senior Member
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 1
From: Washington DC Metro Area
Bikes: Breezer Uptown 8, Jamis Renegade Expert
The most challenging climb I've attempted in DC so far is 15th St. northbound, after crossing Florida Ave, but that was while I was test riding a road bike (Felt V85). I've no doubt the climb would have been more difficult on the Uptown 8.
I have yet to commute on my Renegade. Hope to do so within 2 weeks.
04-25-16 | 01:38 PM
#118
Mostly harmless ™
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,462
Likes: 243
From: Novi Sad
Bikes: Heavy, with friction shifters
If there were widely available and cheap cassettes starting with 14t, I'd be happy with a 53-39. However, with cassettes starting at 11, or 12, I have no use of big ring being over 50t. Also, I find that on flats, around 46 is the sweet spot - gives me minimal cross chaining and is good when riding both fast and slow. When I come to a stop, just make one shift up front, to the middle ring. So a triple is an ideal crankset for my riding - which includes both fast riding, and slow, loaded tired up hills. 46-36-24 would be perfect for my taste for 28" wheels, while on 26" MTB I prefer 48-38-28 (mostly urban, paved riding).
04-25-16 | 01:46 PM
#119
Disco Infiltrator
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 15,332
Likes: 3,520
From: Folsom CA
Bikes: Stormchaser, Paramount, Tilt, Samba tandem
An extreme example from another subforum. 53-34 on a tandem:
https://www.bikeforums.net/tandem-cyc...m-luddite.html
https://www.bikeforums.net/tandem-cyc...m-luddite.html
__________________
Genesis 49:16-17
"Well, well!" said Holmes, impatiently. "A good cyclist does not need a high road. The moor is intersected with paths and the moon is at the full."
Genesis 49:16-17
"Well, well!" said Holmes, impatiently. "A good cyclist does not need a high road. The moor is intersected with paths and the moon is at the full."
04-25-16 | 01:58 PM
#120
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 40,863
Likes: 3,115
From: Sacramento, California, USA
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur
If there were widely available and cheap cassettes starting with 14t, I'd be happy with a 53-39. However, with cassettes starting at 11, or 12, I have no use of big ring being over 50t. Also, I find that on flats, around 46 is the sweet spot - gives me minimal cross chaining and is good when riding both fast and slow. When I come to a stop, just make one shift up front, to the middle ring. So a triple is an ideal crankset for my riding - which includes both fast riding, and slow, loaded tired up hills. 46-36-24 would be perfect for my taste for 28" wheels, while on 26" MTB I prefer 48-38-28 (mostly urban, paved riding).
When you mentioned 14t cassettes it reminded me of setting up my son's race bike. Juniors are limited to a maximum gear development of 7.9m or 26". With 23mm tires on 700c (622) wheels, you can do this with a 52x14 or 45x12. Since 12-25 cassettes are so much cheaper and easier to find than 14-25, it just made sense to go with a 45t big ring. (It also makes it possible for us to swap wheels, which is a nice benefit.)
I found this TA chainring on Wiggle and it's worked flawlessly with a Tiagra FD.
04-26-16 | 05:38 PM
#121
Disco Infiltrator
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 15,332
Likes: 3,520
From: Folsom CA
Bikes: Stormchaser, Paramount, Tilt, Samba tandem
Sauce for the goose: someone posting about weight loss in the MTB subforum today made me do the math. You can save about 11 oz with the XT single vs the XT triple... depending on your choices. But the range is definitely reduced. Do you need that bottom or that top?
[TABLE="width: 513"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]triple[/TD]
[TD]single[/TD]
[TD]note[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]left shifter weight[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD]listed "230g/pair"[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]right shifter weight[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]FD weight[/TD]
[TD]151[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD]high clamp band[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]FD cable weight[/TD]
[TD]neglected[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]crankset weight[/TD]
[TD]774[/TD]
[TD]694[/TD]
[TD]32 for single, 30 and 34 available[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]RD weight[/TD]
[TD]275[/TD]
[TD]271[/TD]
[TD]sgs for triple, gs for single[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]cassette weight[/TD]
[TD]411[/TD]
[TD]450[/TD]
[TD]11-40 for triple, 11-46 for single[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]weight difference[/TD]
[TD]1841[/TD]
[TD]1530[/TD]
[TD]311 difference - 11 oz[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top ring teeth[/TD]
[TD]40[/TD]
[TD]32[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top cog teeth[/TD]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom ring teeth[/TD]
[TD]22[/TD]
[TD]32[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom cog teeth[/TD]
[TD]40[/TD]
[TD]46[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top ratio[/TD]
[TD]3.64[/TD]
[TD]2.91[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom ratio[/TD]
[TD]0.55[/TD]
[TD]0.70[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]total range[/TD]
[TD]6.61[/TD]
[TD]4.18[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top gear inches 29er[/TD]
[TD]105.45[/TD]
[TD]84.36[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom gear inches 29er[/TD]
[TD]15.95[/TD]
[TD]20.17[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="width: 513"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]triple[/TD]
[TD]single[/TD]
[TD]note[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]left shifter weight[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD]listed "230g/pair"[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]right shifter weight[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]FD weight[/TD]
[TD]151[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD]high clamp band[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]FD cable weight[/TD]
[TD]neglected[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]crankset weight[/TD]
[TD]774[/TD]
[TD]694[/TD]
[TD]32 for single, 30 and 34 available[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]RD weight[/TD]
[TD]275[/TD]
[TD]271[/TD]
[TD]sgs for triple, gs for single[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]cassette weight[/TD]
[TD]411[/TD]
[TD]450[/TD]
[TD]11-40 for triple, 11-46 for single[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]weight difference[/TD]
[TD]1841[/TD]
[TD]1530[/TD]
[TD]311 difference - 11 oz[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top ring teeth[/TD]
[TD]40[/TD]
[TD]32[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top cog teeth[/TD]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom ring teeth[/TD]
[TD]22[/TD]
[TD]32[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom cog teeth[/TD]
[TD]40[/TD]
[TD]46[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top ratio[/TD]
[TD]3.64[/TD]
[TD]2.91[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom ratio[/TD]
[TD]0.55[/TD]
[TD]0.70[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]total range[/TD]
[TD]6.61[/TD]
[TD]4.18[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top gear inches 29er[/TD]
[TD]105.45[/TD]
[TD]84.36[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom gear inches 29er[/TD]
[TD]15.95[/TD]
[TD]20.17[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
__________________
Genesis 49:16-17
"Well, well!" said Holmes, impatiently. "A good cyclist does not need a high road. The moor is intersected with paths and the moon is at the full."
Genesis 49:16-17
"Well, well!" said Holmes, impatiently. "A good cyclist does not need a high road. The moor is intersected with paths and the moon is at the full."
04-26-16 | 06:45 PM
#122
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 4,849
Likes: 750
From: Pasadena, CA
Bikes: Schwinn Varsity
Lots of guys don't want to admit they can never use 120 inch, or even 111 inch gear. You are talking about their manhood now.... be careful.
04-26-16 | 07:26 PM
#123
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,977
Likes: 191
From: Washington, DC
Sauce for the goose: someone posting about weight loss in the MTB subforum today made me do the math. You can save about 11 oz with the XT single vs the XT triple... depending on your choices. But the range is definitely reduced. Do you need that bottom or that top?
[TABLE="width: 513"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]triple[/TD]
[TD]single[/TD]
[TD]note[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]left shifter weight[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD]listed "230g/pair"[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]right shifter weight[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]FD weight[/TD]
[TD]151[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD]high clamp band[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]FD cable weight[/TD]
[TD]neglected[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]crankset weight[/TD]
[TD]774[/TD]
[TD]694[/TD]
[TD]32 for single, 30 and 34 available[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]RD weight[/TD]
[TD]275[/TD]
[TD]271[/TD]
[TD]sgs for triple, gs for single[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]cassette weight[/TD]
[TD]411[/TD]
[TD]450[/TD]
[TD]11-40 for triple, 11-46 for single[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]weight difference[/TD]
[TD]1841[/TD]
[TD]1530[/TD]
[TD]311 difference - 11 oz[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top ring teeth[/TD]
[TD]40[/TD]
[TD]32[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top cog teeth[/TD]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom ring teeth[/TD]
[TD]22[/TD]
[TD]32[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom cog teeth[/TD]
[TD]40[/TD]
[TD]46[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top ratio[/TD]
[TD]3.64[/TD]
[TD]2.91[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom ratio[/TD]
[TD]0.55[/TD]
[TD]0.70[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]total range[/TD]
[TD]6.61[/TD]
[TD]4.18[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top gear inches 29er[/TD]
[TD]105.45[/TD]
[TD]84.36[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom gear inches 29er[/TD]
[TD]15.95[/TD]
[TD]20.17[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="width: 513"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]triple[/TD]
[TD]single[/TD]
[TD]note[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]left shifter weight[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD]listed "230g/pair"[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]right shifter weight[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]FD weight[/TD]
[TD]151[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD]high clamp band[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]FD cable weight[/TD]
[TD]neglected[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]crankset weight[/TD]
[TD]774[/TD]
[TD]694[/TD]
[TD]32 for single, 30 and 34 available[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]RD weight[/TD]
[TD]275[/TD]
[TD]271[/TD]
[TD]sgs for triple, gs for single[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]cassette weight[/TD]
[TD]411[/TD]
[TD]450[/TD]
[TD]11-40 for triple, 11-46 for single[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]weight difference[/TD]
[TD]1841[/TD]
[TD]1530[/TD]
[TD]311 difference - 11 oz[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top ring teeth[/TD]
[TD]40[/TD]
[TD]32[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top cog teeth[/TD]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom ring teeth[/TD]
[TD]22[/TD]
[TD]32[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom cog teeth[/TD]
[TD]40[/TD]
[TD]46[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top ratio[/TD]
[TD]3.64[/TD]
[TD]2.91[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom ratio[/TD]
[TD]0.55[/TD]
[TD]0.70[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]total range[/TD]
[TD]6.61[/TD]
[TD]4.18[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top gear inches 29er[/TD]
[TD]105.45[/TD]
[TD]84.36[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom gear inches 29er[/TD]
[TD]15.95[/TD]
[TD]20.17[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
04-26-16 | 08:32 PM
#124
Disco Infiltrator
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 15,332
Likes: 3,520
From: Folsom CA
Bikes: Stormchaser, Paramount, Tilt, Samba tandem
Got the numbers from Shimano site, couldn't find a weight for the cable. The single has a NW ring that's going to be pretty beefy.
__________________
Genesis 49:16-17
"Well, well!" said Holmes, impatiently. "A good cyclist does not need a high road. The moor is intersected with paths and the moon is at the full."
Genesis 49:16-17
"Well, well!" said Holmes, impatiently. "A good cyclist does not need a high road. The moor is intersected with paths and the moon is at the full."
04-26-16 | 08:45 PM
#125
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 7,391
Likes: 13
From: Memphis TN area
Bikes: 2011 Felt Z85 (road/commuter), 2006 Marin Pine Mountain (utility/commuter E-bike), 1995 KHS Alite 1000 (gravel grinder)
I use a compact double and 10sp 11-28 on my commuter road bike, just because that's what it came with. Gearing seems fine for me. In my hilly area I make use of the entire gear range from 34-28 all the way up to 50-11.
Mostly, though, I stay in the 3rd-7th cogs most of the time. I usually start from a stop in the small ring and 5th cog from lowest. I usually switch between the small and big rings while on the 5th or 6th cog. Sometimes if the large ring and 5th cog gets too hard, I'll switch to the little ring and 6th cog, and can usually maintain about the same speed as before, but at a higher cadence.
I'm sure I don't have the best shifting and cadence technique, but it seems to work for me. My other 2 bikes are both 3x8, and honestly I prefer having only 2 rings up front. I'd probably like 1x if I could go to a 11sp cassette and just eliminate front shifting altogether.
Mostly, though, I stay in the 3rd-7th cogs most of the time. I usually start from a stop in the small ring and 5th cog from lowest. I usually switch between the small and big rings while on the 5th or 6th cog. Sometimes if the large ring and 5th cog gets too hard, I'll switch to the little ring and 6th cog, and can usually maintain about the same speed as before, but at a higher cadence.
I'm sure I don't have the best shifting and cadence technique, but it seems to work for me. My other 2 bikes are both 3x8, and honestly I prefer having only 2 rings up front. I'd probably like 1x if I could go to a 11sp cassette and just eliminate front shifting altogether.