Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

Big Ring or Small Ring for Flats?

Search
Notices
Road Cycling “It is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.” -- Ernest Hemingway

Big Ring or Small Ring for Flats?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-03-15 | 09:17 AM
  #26  
LesterOfPuppets's Avatar
The space coyote lied.
15 Anniversary
Community Builder
Community Influencer
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 48,734
Likes: 10,988
From: dusk 'til dawn.

Bikes: everywhere

Big ring for me. I shift to 53x20 (or 52x20 depending on bike) at stoplights. Shift up a couple for cruising speed.

Assuming not too much wind, of course.
LesterOfPuppets is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 09:18 AM
  #27  
rpenmanparker's Avatar
Senior Member
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 28,682
Likes: 63
From: Houston, TX

Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build

Originally Posted by chaadster
I don't think I'm getting 28mph out of my 53/15 very often, but 24mph sounds about right. And no, I wasn't talking about just cruisin' along, but rather doing some work, so yeah, I guess if that's what you call "near time trial efforts", then that's what I was talking about. And yes, I'm often on group rides and do pace line, so that's a good point which I'd not given consideration to. But in any case, I'm *never* in the small ring (solo, cruising, or whatever) on the flat, only the 53. And yes, I can reel off many miles north of 18mph.
You're right, it is more like 26.5 according to the details you provided (53/15, 95 rpm). Here is the calculation: (53 teeth X 26.5 in X 3.14 X 95 rpm X 60 min/hr) / (15 teeth X 12 in/ft X 5280 ft/mile) = 26.5 miles/hr. At the lower end of the cadence range you mentioned, 90, it would be 25.1.
rpenmanparker is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 09:36 AM
  #28  
Ben I.'s Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
From: Illinois

Bikes: 2015 Ridley Fenix Ultegra, 2016 Ridley X-Trail

If I'm on a shorter ride, a couple hours then I'll keep it in the big ring pretty much the whole time. On longer rides that have more elevation changes and I'm on crushed limestone most of the time, I'll usually be in my small ring to save my legs and knees. I'm running a compact crankset and 11-25 cassette.
Ben I. is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 09:39 AM
  #29  
andr0id's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,522
Likes: 7
Originally Posted by chaadster
EDIT: I don't want to be a braggart, but I really don't want to be seen as a trash talking keyboard jockey, so here's Saturday's ride file. Cut out the in-town portions (which dragged the average speed down to 17.6mph over the 54mi), and we're looking at an average of more than 19mph for more than 40mi. Only 1.27k feet of climbing, so flat to rolling, and the whole back half of that I pulled a flailing club mate as I was riding sweep that day. Never even thought about touching the small ring.

https://www.strava.com/activities/35...ysis/2002/9233


You might like the 52/36 mid-compact front with an 11-25 then.

You loose a tiny bit of top end and get about 7% lower gears on the low end.
andr0id is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 09:49 AM
  #30  
Thread Starter
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by rpenmanparker
No doubt, but at about 28 mph that sounds like fast paceline, group ride stuff or some really hard solo work. I got the impression we were talking about moderate riding. I don't see how the question of what ring to ride on the flats even has any relevance if you are talking about near-time trial efforts. I mean that's large ring stuff automatically, right?

Not too many folks claim average speeds for their riding of over 18 mph. Let's say the climbs hurt more than the descents help, so assume the flats make up the difference and run at about 20 mph. That would put you solidly on the 39/15 right in the middle of your one-tooth jumps on the rear 11-25, 11-speed cassette. I would much rather be riding there than on the 53/21 in the middle of the 2-tooth jumps. And interestingly, if I wanted to fall in with you when you were passing me on one of your power efforts, all I would have to do would be to shift the front.
I don't see the point of even calculating an average speed on my rides. On a one hour ride, I'll have to stop at least 15 to 20 times, many of them at stoplights, the rest at rec trail stops for cross traffic.
sam_cyclist is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 09:54 AM
  #31  
rpenmanparker's Avatar
Senior Member
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 28,682
Likes: 63
From: Houston, TX

Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build

Originally Posted by chaadster
EDIT: I don't want to be a braggart, but I really don't want to be seen as a trash talking keyboard jockey, so here's Saturday's ride file. Cut out the in-town portions (which dragged the average speed down to 17.6mph over the 54mi), and we're looking at an average of more than 19mph for more than 40mi. Only 1.27k feet of climbing, so flat to rolling, and the whole back half of that I pulled a flailing club mate as I was riding sweep that day. Never even thought about touching the small ring.

https://www.strava.com/activities/35...ysis/2002/9233
I never doubted your speed claims. Heck if a shlub like me could routinely cover 20 solo miles in an hour and occasionally 50 miles in 2.5 hours in the Houston heat and humidity BITD, then there are no limits on what anyone could do. The only difference is that back then just like today I rode almost exclusively on the small ring. Of course back then it was a 42, not today's 39. I would have to be going a lot faster than that to have needed the 52. These days when averages are more like 16 mph solo, the 39 is fine and dandy all the time.
rpenmanparker is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 09:54 AM
  #32  
Thread Killer
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 13,140
Likes: 2,162
From: Ann Arbor, MI

Bikes: 15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, 76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, 17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, 12 Breezer Venturi, 09 Dahon Mariner, 12 Mercier Nano, 95 DeKerf Team SL, 19 Tern Rally, 21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, 19 T-Lab X3, 91 Serotta CII, 23 3T Strada

Originally Posted by andr0id
You might like the 52/36 mid-compact front with an 11-25 then.

You loose a tiny bit of top end and get about 7% lower gears on the low end.
Hmm, that does sound appealing, well, the 7% lower part anyway! I'll pull up a calculator and take a look at the numbers, and consider my rides. I'm thinking of grabbing a Salsa La Cruz for dirt road rides, so that may be the ideal setup for that bike. The roads around here are hardback most of the time, so pretty fast and often rideable on 23c, but having a fatter tire and less concern for recently graded, loose surfaces and the potholes will recommend slightly lower gearing than a standard. Thanks!
chaadster is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 09:54 AM
  #33  
andr0id's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,522
Likes: 7
Originally Posted by sam_cyclist
I don't see the point of even calculating an average speed on my rides. On a one hour ride, I'll have to stop at least 15 to 20 times, many of them at stoplights, the rest at rec trail stops for cross traffic.
Most cycle computers will pause when the bike is stopped. Yes, your average goes down when stopping or slowing for lights and then accelerating back up to speed.

Some of us do 18mph+ even after all that.
andr0id is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 09:57 AM
  #34  
rpenmanparker's Avatar
Senior Member
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 28,682
Likes: 63
From: Houston, TX

Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build

Originally Posted by sam_cyclist
I don't see the point of even calculating an average speed on my rides. On a one hour ride, I'll have to stop at least 15 to 20 times, many of them at stoplights, the rest at rec trail stops for cross traffic.
Moving speed only as most modern calculators provide. It isn't the be all and end all, and there is no sense reopening that argument here. It is just a tool, that's all. If one rider's moving average speed was 17 mph and another's was 23 over a course, well you could understand them being on different rings most of the time. A quick and dirty.
rpenmanparker is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 09:57 AM
  #35  
Nachoman's Avatar
well hello there
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 15,489
Likes: 388
From: Point Loma, CA

Bikes: Bill Holland (Road-Ti), Fuji Roubaix Pro (back-up), Bike Friday (folder), Co-Motion (tandem) & Trek 750 (hybrid)

Tons of rollers where I live. Lots of undulation. I'm always flipping back and forth looking for the right gear.
__________________
.
.

Two wheels good. Four wheels bad.
Nachoman is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 10:02 AM
  #36  
Thread Starter
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by rpenmanparker
Moving speed only as most modern calculators provide. It isn't the be all and end all, and there is no sense reopening that argument here. It is just a tool, that's all. If one rider's moving average speed was 17 mph and another's was 23 over a course, well you could understand them being on different rings most of the time. A quick and dirty.
I have a sigma BC 16. Does that calculate moving speed only?
sam_cyclist is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 10:09 AM
  #37  
Thread Starter
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by rpenmanparker
I never doubted your speed claims. Heck if a shlub like me could routinely cover 20 solo miles in an hour and occasionally 50 miles in 2.5 hours in the Houston heat and humidity BITD, then there are no limits on what anyone could do. The only difference is that back then just like today I rode almost exclusively on the small ring. Of course back then it was a 42, not today's 39. I would have to be going a lot faster than that to have needed the 52. These days when averages are more like 16 mph solo, the 39 is fine and dandy all the time.
Some of these speed claims do sound high. I rode with a university cycling team on numerous occasions, and I was one of the faster riders, and I tend to doubt that we ever averaged over 20 mph on rides.

Group riding dynamics are very different, however. Some of the riders were quite slow, some were very fast, we tried to stay together as a group not to drop riders, focused on paceline technique, other times we talked a lot together during the ride, etc.

Also, we rode very hilly terrain, which also dropped average speeds quite a bit.

I do think we tend to ride quite a bit faster on solo rides, however, which are the norm anyway.
sam_cyclist is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 10:15 AM
  #38  
rpenmanparker's Avatar
Senior Member
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 28,682
Likes: 63
From: Houston, TX

Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build

Originally Posted by sam_cyclist
Some of these speed claims do sound high. I rode with a university cycling team on numerous occasions, and I was one of the faster riders, and I tend to doubt that we ever averaged over 20 mph on rides.

Group riding dynamics are very different, however. Some of the riders were quite slow, some were very fast, we tried to stay together as a group not to drop riders, focused on paceline technique, other times we talked a lot together during the ride, etc.

Also, we rode very hilly terrain, which also dropped average speeds quite a bit.

I do think we tend to ride quite a bit faster on solo rides, however, which are the norm anyway.
I'm in flatland. Zilch climbing. I have to admit, when I see how hard I work to make a 16 mph average these days (67 yrs old, 1 heart attack), I almost doubt my own memory about what I used to do. But no, my moving speeds (and there were hardly any stops) did often average 20 when I was riding solo back then.
rpenmanparker is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 10:17 AM
  #39  
rpenmanparker's Avatar
Senior Member
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 28,682
Likes: 63
From: Houston, TX

Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build

Originally Posted by sam_cyclist
I have a sigma BC 16. Does that calculate moving speed only?
Sam, it's pretty easy to tell. You just ride two or three blocks, look at the avg. speed and then sit there a minute or two. If it stays constant, the answer is yes. If it steadily drops, then no.
rpenmanparker is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 11:02 AM
  #40  
Senior Member
 
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
From: Portage, MI

Bikes: 2016 Emonda ALR 5, 2014 Trek 7.2 FX

50/11 all day, all terrain.

I kid. On my old bike, I used the small ring a lot, but it was a Shimano 2300 group with no extra trim levels up front. Now with the 105 5800 group, I'm almost always in the big ring unless I'm climbing pretty hard and in need of the biggest cogs in the back. I'd say about 90% of the time (or more), I'm in the big ring. 100% of the time on flats. I feel like the big ring is much more efficient in power transfer.
cicatrize is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 11:12 AM
  #41  
Reynolds's Avatar
Passista
Titanium Club Membership
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 8,247
Likes: 1,211

Bikes: 1998 Pinarello Asolo, 1992 KHS Montaña pro, 1980 Raleigh DL-1, IGH Hybrid, IGH Utility

I ride on flat terrain only. 42/16 or 15 for casual solo riding, 52/16 or 15 for paceline or tailwinds.
Reynolds is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 11:26 AM
  #42  
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,114
Likes: 0

Bikes: 2006 Raleigh Cadent 2.0, 2016 Trek Emonda ALR 6, 2015 Propel Advanced SL 2, 2000 K2 Zed SE

Originally Posted by chaadster
EDIT: I don't want to be a braggart

https://www.strava.com/activities/35...ysis/2002/9233
You must be awesome to average that when I see spots with more than 7000% grade on that profile. (Yeah, Strava bug, but funny...)
kc0bbq is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 12:51 PM
  #43  
ThermionicScott's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Anniversary
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 22,676
Likes: 2,642
From: CID

Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers), All-City Space Horse (hers)

Originally Posted by sam_cyclist
Back in the day, I used to putter along in the 42 (small)/17 or 42/19 a lot on slight uphills/flats.

There was really no use for the big (53) on anything except for downhills.

Now, with a smaller, and therefore more useful big (50) on compacts, along with a wider gear range on 10 speed cassettes, I am using both the big and small to an almost equal degree on flats, and small rolling hills.

I do find myself double shifting quite a bit, probably because both the big ring is more useful and also because STI makes a lot of shifting a lot easier.

So, I'm using the 50 a lot with the 5 lower gears, and the 34 a lot with the 5 higher gears. I find myself 'experimenting' a lot looking for the 'best' gear on flats.

Do you have a preferred or favorite gear on flats/slight uphills?

Do any of you consider a triple with a 39 middle ring a better solution for gearing than compact?
From what I've gathered through brief experience and some amount of reading and tinkering on HTML5 Gear Calculator, joy or misery with a compact double is hugely dependant on the cassette you use. The wrong cassette will have you cross-chaining all the time, but with the right one, you can use that 50T for the bulk of your riding, only shifting to the 34T for steep and/or prolonged climbs. For example, I would be pretty miserable with a compact and 11-21T cassette, because my preferred flatland gear of 72" is near the extreme in both rings, and there are 2-3 gears on the top that would never get used by me. By comparison, a 12-25T or 13-26T would be much nicer.

That said, my road bikes have 130BCD doubles on them, and after installing a 42T inner ring on one of them (replacing a 39T), I can see the appeal. A 42T works really nicely for starting out, riding on flatlands, and getting some decent speed before shifting to the big ring. I can do my whole commute to work, which is very gradually uphill with a few dips and faster sections, without needing to shift the front, which is nice.

Finally, I'm a big fan of identifying the biggest gear I need for my riding, and then "tuning" my cassette and big ring combination to eliminate any gears I don't want. By switching to a 48T or 50T big ring on my bikes, I've gained that advantage of the compact where I can use the big ring a lot more.

You might also consider replacing the 34T with a 36T if you don't use the lowest gears on your bike. That would fix a little of the cross-chaining you get with that ring and improve shifting a little. Hope at least some of this helps.
ThermionicScott is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 01:17 PM
  #44  
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
I think I'd run out of gear if I used the small ring... definitely the big ring. Spend most of my time in 50x16, 50x15, or 50x14 @ 90-95 cadence
Alias530 is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 04:24 PM
  #45  
SpeshulEd's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 8,088
Likes: 5
From: Phoenix, AZ
Originally Posted by Alias530
I think I'd run out of gear if I used the small ring... definitely the big ring. Spend most of my time in 50x16, 50x15, or 50x14 @ 90-95 cadence
You spend most of your time going 25mph?
__________________
Hey guys, lets go play bikes! Strava

SpeshulEd is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 04:25 PM
  #46  
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by SpeshulEd
You spend most of your time going 25mph?
50x16 is like 22mph at 90rpm. Usually going 22-26 on flat terrain
Alias530 is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 04:31 PM
  #47  
rmfnla's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 6,301
Likes: 14
From: La La Land (We love it!)

Bikes: Gilmour road, Curtlo road; both steel (of course)

Originally Posted by dvdslw
I live in Florida so no big climbs around here and I almost never switch to the small ring up front, if I do I'm exhausted and going over an overpass. I've never concerned myself with cross chaining, not sure what the big deal is? I'm a big guy that rides hard and have never had an issue as a result of that, maybe it was more of an issue with a triple up front? My bike has a 53/39 with a 12/25 cassette but if I had it my way, a single 50 up front with an 11-28 rear would be perfect and no need for a front derailleur at all. Unless I move to Colorado?
I remember that!

I had a 54/45 front with a 12/17 straight block rear when I moved from FLA to L.A. and almost died the first time I rode up to Mulholland...
__________________
Today, I believe my jurisdiction ends here...
rmfnla is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 04:35 PM
  #48  
SpeshulEd's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 8,088
Likes: 5
From: Phoenix, AZ
Originally Posted by Alias530
50x16 is like 22mph at 90rpm. Usually going 22-26 on flat terrain
I miss riding in places without stop signs.
__________________
Hey guys, lets go play bikes! Strava

SpeshulEd is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 04:37 PM
  #49  
rpenmanparker's Avatar
Senior Member
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 28,682
Likes: 63
From: Houston, TX

Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build

Originally Posted by Alias530
50x16 is like 22mph at 90rpm. Usually going 22-26 on flat terrain
Okey, dokey.
rpenmanparker is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-15 | 04:59 PM
  #50  
RollCNY's Avatar
Speechless
 
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 8,842
Likes: 39
From: Central NY

Bikes: Felt Brougham, Lotus Prestige, Cinelli Xperience,

Originally Posted by ThermionicScott
From what I've gathered through brief experience and some amount of reading and tinkering on HTML5 Gear Calculator, joy or misery with a compact double is hugely dependant on the cassette you use. The wrong cassette will have you cross-chaining all the time, but with the right one, you can use that 50T for the bulk of your riding, only shifting to the 34T for steep and/or prolonged climbs. For example, I would be pretty miserable with a compact and 11-21T cassette, because my preferred flatland gear of 72" is near the extreme in both rings, and there are 2-3 gears on the top that would never get used by me. By comparison, a 12-25T or 13-26T would be much nicer.
Very nicely said. My one bike with a compact is coupled to a 12-23T 9 speed, and there is zero overlap ring to ring, barring the two crosschain combos. As long as one is comfortable multishifting, it is very easy to not worry about what ring you are riding.
RollCNY is offline  
Reply


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.