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

Any other 1x road climbers here?

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

Any other 1x road climbers here?

Old 12-10-22, 12:52 PM
  #26  
climber has-been
 
terrymorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 7,345

Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1

Liked 3,818 Times in 1,902 Posts
Originally Posted by terrymorse
Are you clicking up a gear or two when you stand?
Originally Posted by Lombard
Yes
​​​​​​​
Then I'd guess your legs are just getting fatigued when standing. It takes training to build up fatigue resistance in your quads.

Standing drills should help: Stand for 10 revolutions, sit for 30, repeat. Eventually you should be able to stand for 30 revolutions without fatigue.
__________________
Ride, Rest, Repeat. ROUVY: terrymorse


terrymorse is offline  
Likes For terrymorse:
Old 12-10-22, 01:38 PM
  #27  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 702

Bikes: '23 Poseidon Redwood, '07 Specialized Roubaix Comp Triple, '12 Gravity Fixie, '21 Liv Rove 4, '06? Giant EB Spirit

Liked 237 Times in 151 Posts
Originally Posted by t2p
with availability of 50-34 and 46-30 doubles - paired with 10 spd ... 11spd ... and now 12 spd ... there is little reason for a triple

50-34 or 46-30 paired with 11-28 ... 11-30 ... 11-32 ... 11-34 ... etc ... will provide for climbing and top end

back in the early / mid 90's - before wide availability of 50-34 and 46-30 cranksets - many in my group installed off-road cranks on their road bikes (using just two outer rings)
good points
i don’t think triples will come back in vogue until granularity of gear changes and fast switching of large gear steps is valued.

if I could get a 52 30 crank with a 10-30 cassette I might be happy with a double. Although the flat gear granularity would probably bug me.

I like having one road bike geared for hills and flats
Symox is offline  
Old 12-10-22, 02:11 PM
  #28  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 8,217
Liked 11,455 Times in 4,888 Posts
Originally Posted by Symox
if I could get a 52 30 crank with a 10-30 cassette I might be happy with a double. Although the flat gear granularity would probably bug me.
A 52-10 would get you nearly 45mph at a very reasonable 110rpm cadence.

So, are you really a faster sprinter than Mark Cavendish?
Koyote is offline  
Old 12-10-22, 02:38 PM
  #29  
Senior Member
 
big john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 25,619
Liked 9,456 Times in 4,641 Posts
Originally Posted by Koyote
A 52-10 would get you nearly 45mph at a very reasonable 110rpm cadence.

So, are you really a faster sprinter than Mark Cavendish?
I have a 52x11 on one of my bikes. It's useful on some descents and big rollers when I'm trying to make the little climbers work. Doesn't happen much anymore though.
big john is offline  
Likes For big john:
Old 12-10-22, 02:45 PM
  #30  
Senior Member
 
big john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 25,619
Liked 9,456 Times in 4,641 Posts
Originally Posted by terrymorse

I hadn't heard that before. Yours truly comes in at 1.9 pounds per inch.
That explains why you're such a goat. I didn't hear how you did on that hill climb?

​​​​​​​A few years ago I was climbing with 2 ladies and one was right at 2 pounds per inch and the other one complained she was 5 pounds over. I mentioned to them that I was 55 pounds over that mark.
big john is offline  
Old 12-10-22, 02:55 PM
  #31  
Sock Puppet
 
Lombard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2022
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,701

Bikes: 2014 Cannondale Synapse Carbon, 2017 Jamis Renegade Exploit and too many others to mention.

Liked 863 Times in 573 Posts
Originally Posted by terrymorse
Then I'd guess your legs are just getting fatigued when standing. It takes training to build up fatigue resistance in your quads.

Standing drills should help: Stand for 10 revolutions, sit for 30, repeat. Eventually you should be able to stand for 30 revolutions without fatigue.
Thanks! I'll have to try this. I would think all the hill climbing I do would build up my quads, but I always climb seated and get super winded if I climb standing.

​​​​​​​
Lombard is offline  
Old 12-10-22, 03:00 PM
  #32  
Sock Puppet
 
Lombard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2022
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,701

Bikes: 2014 Cannondale Synapse Carbon, 2017 Jamis Renegade Exploit and too many others to mention.

Liked 863 Times in 573 Posts
Originally Posted by big john
The 2 pounds per inch of height is regarded as the ideal weight for climbing by some people. For some body types this is nearly impossible.
Right now, I'm around 2.5 pounds per inch. I'm 5' 10" and 175 pounds. At best, I can get down to around 165 pounds which would be 2.35 pounds per inch.

2 pounds per inch is 144 pounds for someone who is 6 feet tall! I think I know one person like that.
Lombard is offline  
Old 12-10-22, 03:46 PM
  #33  
Senior Member
 
big john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 25,619
Liked 9,456 Times in 4,641 Posts
Originally Posted by Lombard
Right now, I'm around 2.5 pounds per inch. I'm 5' 10" and 175 pounds. At best, I can get down to around 165 pounds which would be 2.35 pounds per inch.

2 pounds per inch is 144 pounds for someone who is 6 feet tall! I think I know one person like that.
I know a few guys like that but I think it's easier for women. One friend is 6 feet and always around 140-145. 30 years ago he was one of the fastest climbers in our club. Small upper body, small shoulders, I think he can wear a little boy's tee shirt.

A new guy joined our club recently. He's maybe 35 years old, 6'3" or so and 215 pounds. He climbs very well for a guy over 200 but will never be able to climb with the little climbers.

On the topic of the thread, I see a few people in the clubs I ride with who use single chainring set-ups but they are not common. I have a 1x on my mountain bike and it's fine because if I'm going fast I'm probably coasting. When I've ridden it on the road I notice the gaps in the gearing and I spin out easily on slight downhills or even flat ground.
big john is offline  
Old 12-10-22, 04:50 PM
  #34  
Sock Puppet
 
Lombard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2022
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,701

Bikes: 2014 Cannondale Synapse Carbon, 2017 Jamis Renegade Exploit and too many others to mention.

Liked 863 Times in 573 Posts
Originally Posted by big john
I know a few guys like that but I think it's easier for women. One friend is 6 feet and always around 140-145. 30 years ago he was one of the fastest climbers in our club. Small upper body, small shoulders, I think he can wear a little boy's tee shirt.
While I am pretty good at hill climbing, what you say here is one reason I will never be aero. I have wide shoulders not to mention spinal issues prevent me from ever riding in a race position.
Lombard is offline  
Old 12-10-22, 05:51 PM
  #35  
climber has-been
 
terrymorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 7,345

Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1

Liked 3,818 Times in 1,902 Posts
Originally Posted by big john
I didn't hear how you did on that hill climb?
I got sick somewhere along the way out to St. George, didn't do the race.
__________________
Ride, Rest, Repeat. ROUVY: terrymorse


terrymorse is offline  
Old 12-10-22, 05:53 PM
  #36  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 702

Bikes: '23 Poseidon Redwood, '07 Specialized Roubaix Comp Triple, '12 Gravity Fixie, '21 Liv Rove 4, '06? Giant EB Spirit

Liked 237 Times in 151 Posts
Originally Posted by Koyote
A 52-10 would get you nearly 45mph at a very reasonable 110rpm cadence.

So, are you really a faster sprinter than Mark Cavendish?
no, but I like to pedal sometimes going downhill at 90 rpm max
Symox is offline  
Old 12-10-22, 06:02 PM
  #37  
t2p
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2022
Location: USA - Southwest PA
Posts: 3,331

Bikes: Cannondale - Gary Fisher - Giant - Litespeed - Schwinn Paramount - Schwinn (lugged steel) - Trek OCLV

Liked 2,147 Times in 1,198 Posts
Originally Posted by Koyote
A 52-10 would get you nearly 45mph at a very reasonable 110rpm cadence.

So, are you really a faster sprinter than Mark Cavendish?
almost 138 gear inches ... smh ...
t2p is offline  
Old 12-10-22, 06:04 PM
  #38  
t2p
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2022
Location: USA - Southwest PA
Posts: 3,331

Bikes: Cannondale - Gary Fisher - Giant - Litespeed - Schwinn Paramount - Schwinn (lugged steel) - Trek OCLV

Liked 2,147 Times in 1,198 Posts
Originally Posted by big john
I have a 52x11 on one of my bikes. It's useful on some descents and big rollers when I'm trying to make the little climbers work. Doesn't happen much anymore though.
52x11 is around 125 gear inches

52x10 is around 138 gear inches
t2p is offline  
Old 12-10-22, 06:17 PM
  #39  
Senior Member
 
big john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 25,619
Liked 9,456 Times in 4,641 Posts
Originally Posted by terrymorse
I got sick somewhere along the way out to St. George, didn't do the race.
Bummer. Back to normal now I hope?
big john is offline  
Old 12-10-22, 06:21 PM
  #40  
Senior Member
 
big john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 25,619
Liked 9,456 Times in 4,641 Posts
Originally Posted by t2p
52x11 is around 125 gear inches

52x10 is around 138 gear inches
Guess I'd better start looking for a 10 tooth cog.
big john is offline  
Old 12-10-22, 09:24 PM
  #41  
Method to My Madness
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 3,901

Bikes: Trek FX 2, Cannondale Synapse x2, Cannondale CAAD4, Santa Cruz Stigmata 3

Liked 1,576 Times in 1,091 Posts
Originally Posted by big john
The 2 pounds per inch of height is regarded as the ideal weight for climbing by some people. For some body types this is nearly impossible.
I am so far above this threshold that it is a miracle my frame does not assplode when I stand to pedal out of the saddle (or when I sit back down).

But seriously, I really do not see the point of going 1x on a drop bar bike.
SoSmellyAir is offline  
Old 12-10-22, 10:28 PM
  #42  
Senior Member
 
big john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 25,619
Liked 9,456 Times in 4,641 Posts
Originally Posted by SoSmellyAir

But seriously, I really do not see the point of going 1x on a drop bar bike.
I don't either, but some people seem to like them. The only cyclists I ride regularly with who have 1x set ups are on e-bikes.
big john is offline  
Old 12-10-22, 10:30 PM
  #43  
just another gosling
 
Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,638

Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004

Liked 2,004 Times in 1,423 Posts
Climbing. What sort of climbing? There's your short roller, your substantial roller, your several hundred foot climb, and your multi-thousand foot climb. Above the "substantial roller" level, the most desired thing to have is close ratio low gears. If one is on a short ride, say less than a century, one can power over the first two categories. On the real climbs though, most mortals sit. Pantani on drugs was an exception, but there aren't too many like him.

That said, there's a local long distance record holder. He was on a ride of mine that involved a 500' steep climb and he was on a new tandem. Somehow he started in the big ring and then discovered that of course he was stuck in that ring. Tandems are like that. So he just did the whole climb in the big ring. That's legendary around here.

Me, I've been a triple rider ever since triples were invented. My current setup on my most-used single has the lowest 2 gears only 4 gear-inches apart. The thing is, when you're seated, you'll have a favorite cadence for long climbs. The closer one can come to that favorite cadence, the faster you'll be up the climb. There's a reason after all that you even have a favorite climbing cadence. 1X is therefore the worst of all possible choices for a climbing bike. Even Pantani would have hated it. He used 180mm cranks in the mountains BTW and he was short.

The best climber I every rode with was 6'1" and weighed 145. Back in his 20s, he ran a 4:17 mile. Yeah, he was just gone. In the saddle of course.
__________________
Results matter
Carbonfiberboy is offline  
Old 12-11-22, 03:03 AM
  #44  
Senior Member
 
Trakhak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 5,725
Liked 3,262 Times in 1,859 Posts
Originally Posted by big john
I have a 52x11 on one of my bikes. It's useful on some descents and big rollers when I'm trying to make the little climbers work. Doesn't happen much anymore though.
I'm a little climber, and it always amused me when big guys tried to get away on descents. The faster they pedal downhill, the easier it is to sit in behind them and coast.
Trakhak is online now  
Old 12-11-22, 08:02 AM
  #45  
Senior Member
 
big john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 25,619
Liked 9,456 Times in 4,641 Posts
Originally Posted by Trakhak
I'm a little climber, and it always amused me when big guys tried to get away on descents. The faster they pedal downhill, the easier it is to sit in behind them and coast.
True, I couldn't get away but I just wanted to work them a little, if I could. Surprise attacks, catch them napping maybe. When riding with traffic lights if someone can get going and sprint then everyone will chase back on. This could tax them a little, too.

Actually, the best I could hope for is that the climbers would wear each other down making it easier for me to stay in their same zip code later in the ride.
big john is offline  
Old 12-11-22, 08:06 AM
  #46  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2021
Posts: 4,083
Liked 2,097 Times in 1,314 Posts
Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy
Climbing. What sort of climbing? There's your short roller, your substantial roller, your several hundred foot climb, and your multi-thousand foot climb. Above the "substantial roller" level, the most desired thing to have is close ratio low gears. If one is on a short ride, say less than a century, one can power over the first two categories. On the real climbs though, most mortals sit. Pantani on drugs was an exception, but there aren't too many like him.

That said, there's a local long distance record holder. He was on a ride of mine that involved a 500' steep climb and he was on a new tandem. Somehow he started in the big ring and then discovered that of course he was stuck in that ring. Tandems are like that. So he just did the whole climb in the big ring. That's legendary around here.

Me, I've been a triple rider ever since triples were invented. My current setup on my most-used single has the lowest 2 gears only 4 gear-inches apart. The thing is, when you're seated, you'll have a favorite cadence for long climbs. The closer one can come to that favorite cadence, the faster you'll be up the climb. There's a reason after all that you even have a favorite climbing cadence. 1X is therefore the worst of all possible choices for a climbing bike. Even Pantani would have hated it. He used 180mm cranks in the mountains BTW and he was short.

The best climber I every rode with was 6'1" and weighed 145. Back in his 20s, he ran a 4:17 mile. Yeah, he was just gone. In the saddle of course.
I did all of Paris Brest Paris on the big ring. Fortunately, I had taken the 56 off and mounted a 53. The BB failed and I could not shift onto the small ring. Good thing I was on a recumbent that year.

In my early 20's, the brother of a friend wanted to take up racing. He was a Sr in HS and state 2 mile champ or 2nd place, I forget. His first race was a crit riding an old schwinn with bobbly wheels, I tell him to stay with the pack. He goes off the front immediately and solos. He was a Cat 2 by Summer. First time we climbed together, I was at threshold and he was yacking my ear off. Depressing.
GhostRider62 is offline  
Old 12-11-22, 02:08 PM
  #47  
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,952
Liked 5,239 Times in 3,233 Posts
Originally Posted by Lombard

2 pounds per inch is 144 pounds for someone who is 6 feet tall! I think I know one person like that.
I'm 6 foot tall and weigh around 175 lbs, so 2.4 lbs/inch. i can get down to 165 lbs for specific climbing events, so that's 2.3 lbs/in, lol. I'm a pretty steady climber and can handle the big alpine epics, but the little guys leave me for dead. I'm much more competitive on rolling terrain at my weight. I would happily run a modern 1x road setup for climbing. Probably with a 42T chainring and the largest range cassette I could find. Campag Ekar looks good for that kind of thing. My current setup is a 2x SRAM e-tap with 48/35 chainset and 10-33T cassette. It's not bad, but would prefer a 46/33 chainset and 10-36T cassette for pure climbing, especially if steep and long.
PeteHski is offline  
Old 12-11-22, 04:18 PM
  #48  
Method to My Madness
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 3,901

Bikes: Trek FX 2, Cannondale Synapse x2, Cannondale CAAD4, Santa Cruz Stigmata 3

Liked 1,576 Times in 1,091 Posts
Originally Posted by big john
The only cyclists I ride regularly with who have 1x set ups are on e-bikes.
That is because an electric motor has a broad powerband such that less gear ratios are needed. That is why most EVs do not even have a transmission which offers multiple gear ratios (other than forward and reverse).
SoSmellyAir is offline  
Old 12-11-22, 05:03 PM
  #49  
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,952
Liked 5,239 Times in 3,233 Posts
Originally Posted by SoSmellyAir

But seriously, I really do not see the point of going 1x on a drop bar bike.
Looking at it from another perspective, what's the point in a 2x when you may have 12 or even 13 cassette ratios available? It's at the point now where it's a pretty close call either way. I still ride a 2x road bike and it works well enough, but as a mountain biker I've long been a fan of 1x setups. For a pure climbing bike 1x makes even more sense.
PeteHski is offline  
Old 12-11-22, 05:23 PM
  #50  
Senior Member
 
big john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 25,619
Liked 9,456 Times in 4,641 Posts
Originally Posted by SoSmellyAir
That is because an electric motor has a broad powerband such that less gear ratios are needed. That is why most EVs do not even have a transmission which offers multiple gear ratios (other than forward and reverse).
The two who I ride with do ride with their motors off part of the time, especially her. She rides very well on her regular bike and doesn't need the e-bike to do the rides we do but her husband needs the motor at times.

I get what you're saying about the motor having torque over a wide range of rpm. I was an electric car certified mechanic for the last 10 years on the job. The difference is the motor in the car supplies all of the power and the e-bikes, at least the Turbo Creos, only supplement the rider's power, so they can't just leave it in one gear. Still have to shift down for hills, etc.

I have chatted briefly with other riders with 1by gearing on road bikes but these have typically been riders who are much younger and more fit than I am.
I'm sure I could set one up with a low enough gear for the climbing I do but wonder if there would be gaps in the gearing. I'd be curious to try one but I'm not sold on them for road bikes.
big john is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.