rjerney

I'm a recreational rider that lives in Salt Lake City. We have a variety of terrain & I sometimes ride the flats of the valley & have on occasion ridden up Big & Little Cottonwood Canyons & everything in between. I think it's time to retire my 53/39 crankset. It's great on the flats but I'm tired of plodding up the steeps at 30 rpm. I'm wondering if I would be happy with a 52/36 semi compact or go for the 50/34 compact (Ultegra) with an 11 speed 11/32 cassette? I want to make my climbs easier without spinning out on the flats & downhills too often. Anyone in the area with a similar experience? Does one crankset stand out as an all around workhorse?

79pmooney

Or ... consider a triple. Less popular now but the advantages are still there. You get to keep everything you like and add a full range of climbing gears spaced close enough that the shifts are small and easy, a real blessing on long and hard climbs. Expensive - yes. You will probably need new brifters to get triple capable front shifting and a rear derailleur with more chain take-up as well as the crankset and bottom bracket. Longer chain.

Best thing about a triple - that grim fact of life. We age. A triple, especially one based on the tried and true 110-73 BCD chainring standard allows one to easily downsize chainrings as our power ebbs while keeping all the sweet shifting, cassettes, etc we love. I've been on the 110-73 since 1995, first as a 50-38-24 7-speed (and my first ever 12 tooth high gear), then a 53-42-28 9-speed that has evolves to 50-38-24 (still 9-speed). I run cassettes with 23, 25 or 28 inner rings giving me gears of close to 1:1 and lower with great flat ground choices. (I took my racing gearing when I retired from competition in the late 70s and just added a 28 tooth inside ring. When the riding is fast, I pay zero penalty for the low gears and when the road gets very steep, I get to play! Fewer chainrings and you have to start making choices and trade-offs.

Iride01 

I use to run a 53/39 and have been on a 52/36 for quite a while. I don't think you'll see enough change in the low gearing to make it completely worth it.

I've got a Shimano road 52/36 crankset in my current bike and I just swap out the rings for 50/34 when I go to more mountainous areas like Colorado. The ring assembly for the Shimano 4 arm spiders is compatible across the 105, Ultegra and DuraAce line. However the shades and profile of where the outer ring matches the spider might be different along with the shades of black. But functionally they work. My current Ultegra ring set is on a 105 spider. As long as I'm pedaling no one can see the difference. And only the mechanic at the bike shop has ever noticed it that I know of.

eljayski 

This is a topic that's near and dear to my heart!

I suggest that a smaller chain ring is a great step forward but going to bigger (more teeth) rear cogs in your cassette seals the deal.

Of course, I don't know what you ride or what your budget is but if you can swing both chain ring and cassette upgrades you'll be pleased. I've run half marathons in both the Cottonwood Canyons and they ain't no picnic on the climb.

I live in Loveland CO and ride from the flats onto the foothills of the Rockies and the 1:1 granny gear provided by Shimano 105 di2 (34/34) is good to have. It will drop to 0.91:1 when my cassette with 36-tooth granny arrives.

I'm already running sub 1:1 with Campy Chorus (32/34) and on climbs approaching 7% it's a godsend.

With respect to previous posters, I'd stay away from triple cranks for the usual reasons, redundant gears, extra weight, and extra complexity.

Good luck with your quest!

datlas 

I went from 53/39 to 50/34 a few years back. I highly recommend it.

I can get by with an 11-28 but most folks prefer 11-32.

Ultegra level crankset is fine, or 105 if on a budget, or Dura-Ace for a splurge. Part of the magic of Shimano FD shifting is in the ramps on the chainrings so I would stick with them for best performance.

RB1-luvr

my Kestrel has a 50/34. I like it, especially when I climb the local "mountain", which has a 1.1 mile/700' section. I'm 59 years old.

aliasfox

- What's the tallest gear you use right now? Do you use 53x11? Or maybe you generally top out at 53x13?
- Are you using 39x32 a lot?

Personally, I went from an 11x34 cassette to a 12x29 on my 50x34 crank. I never used 50x11 for very long, and my 34 and 30T cogs were almost clean enough to eat off of. The 12x29 allows me single tooth jumps where it matters, as well as a bailout gear as low as I've needed (so far).

In your case, if your top (typical) gear is a 53x13, you could even consider a gravel subcompact - something like a 46x30 GRX. You'll get a top gear (paired with your 11x32 cassette) that's comparable, but get better than a 1:1 ratio on the bottom. The only downside is that you'll have a wider Q factor, and you'll need a GRX front derailleur to accommodate that (though it will be compatible with your current shifter, at least).

I agree with 79pmooney that triples rock - my Bianchi's 30-40-52 paired with my 11-27 9-spd cassette gives me a range as wide as my other bikes, with smaller jumps between gears. Too bad they're out of fashion and (as far as I'm aware) no longer being produced. But with regards to being able to match cadence to terrain? Unbeatable.

chaadster

Although I don’t have mountains to ride, I am fat, so even hills feel like mountains to me! With that in mind, I have roadies equipped with both 52/36 and 50/34 cranksets turning 11spd 11-30t and 11-32t cassettes respectively. Because I either gain or lose a tremendous amount of momentum depending on which way the road tilts, and because I group ride a lot, the 52-11 combo gets a fair amount of use, while the 36-30 combo is barely adequate if I have to climb a 6% gradient for more than a half mile. If I could get a an 11-36, I think that suit my needs fine, since I’m not really fine-tuning my output on climbs; at 240lbs, I pretty much gotta get in my lowest gear, set watts to threshold/L4 levels, and pray my roll-in momentum saves me a little time spent in-climb.

The 50/34 I find entirely too low and inadequate for fast road work around here, but if my riding was all either 30 minute climbs and 8 minute descents (where I don’t/can’t pedal anyway), I’d be happy to have it.

So, I suppose I’m with eljayski on this, and if you can get a mid-compact and can run a 36t rear cog, that’d probably do you pretty well.

Calsun

The alternative is changing out the rear cassette for one with a different set of gears. In the old days the derailleurs could only handle a maximum size cog of 28 teeth but now there models than can handle up to 46 teeth without difficulty. Each tooth difference has a much greater impact on the bike's gearing with the cog than with the chainring. In the days of 5-speed rear freewheels the only way to get a much greater range of gears was with two or three chainrings but now there are 11-speed cassettes and derailleurs so a very diffent situation.

I like two chainrings as on a step grade I can roll into the hill and just before getting to where I need to pedal I drop to the smaller chainring and know I am good to go regardless of how steep or how long the grade. I find this simpler than trying to get to the specific cassette cog at the rear.

With one of my road bikes with 1x gearing I replaced the 11-42t cassette with a 11-34t one to have smaller spacing of the gears but I could have also gone in the other direction if need be. I actually wanted to get a 11-32t cassette but none were available when I wanted to make the change.

rjerney

Thanks! That's a help!

mattcalifornia

Same here. I switched from 53/39 to 50/34 a few years ago with an 11-32 cassette. I don't worry about spinning out. With a top gear of 50 front and 32 rear, you will hit 32.5 mph at 90rpm and 36 mph at 100 rpm: https://www.bikecalc.com/speed_at_cadence That's fast enough for me. If anything, I should have gotten the 11-34 cassette. I spend much more time grinding up long hills than I do worrying about hitting top speed.

rjerney

I use the 53/11 a lot but I may not need it so much. I need to pay more attention to my cadence; I suspect that I'm spinning slower with more pressure on the 53/11 & perhaps the 53/13 would be fine on the top end.

rjerney

I appreciate the responses & people chiming in!

genejockey 

I'm not a big fan of 50/34, myself. I have to change gear in the front way too much. I he one bike with 52/36 x 11-34, and it's great for climbing, but also nice on fast, non-technical descents.

delbiker1 

My bikes now have 48 or 46 big ring, 34,36,or 38 small ring. I have various cassettes for the rear. I also have 1X 12, 44 ring with either11/34, or I can run it as 11 speed with 11-36 or 11-42. I am using bar ends in friction mode with that set up, makes changing number of speeds and size of cassettes very easy.

urbanknight

If you "feel" like you're grinding up climbs, you likely won't regret getting a 50/34. I recommend this for the simple fact that you won't need to change any other parts. Going to a triple would require a new left shift/brake lever and probably a new rear derailleur. Getting a wider cassette would probably require a new rear derailleur and longer chain. With the compact crankset option, the only thing you MIGHT have to do is take a couple links out of the chain.

SoSmellyAir

One thing to clarify: are you (a) already using or (b) switching to a 11-speed 11-32 cassette? If the latter, what is your current cassette?

Broctoon

If you're going to replace just the crank, go all the way down to a compact, so you'll have a 34 chainring. You might find you're spinning out on some descents with the 50 tooth big ring, but you can always coast and not descend quite as fast. For most people this is an acceptable compromise. If you can get a mid-compact 52x36 AND a cassette with larger cog, maybe this will give you a low ratio that you need, with very little compromise. The only tradeoff would be slightly larger steps on some shifts.

I climb Big Cottonwood (never ridden up Little), American Fork Cyn, North Ogden Divide and Trappers Loop, East Canyon, and some high passes in southeast Idaho. I like a ratio no higher than 36x32 for the steeper parts on any of these. (I'm not very powerful, but I'm also not very heavy.)

What kind of drivetrain do you have? Shimao/SRAM? How many speeds? Maybe I have some parts in my bin that you could borrow to try out, see what works for you. I'm in Davis Co. and get to SLC fairly often.


Edit: I just re-read your post and see you're on 11 speed. Do you currently have a 27 or 29 largest cog? I'll let you try my 11-32 and see if you like it. I have tools to swap it for you. Going down to a 36 chain ring, with 11 tooth cog you will not spin out on flats. I think the only time you'll want to go smaller than the 13 cog is on steep descents, or moderate descents with a tail wind.

t2p

53/11 will provide almost 127 gear inches - on 23mm tires ... close to 129 gear inches on 28 mm tires

thatsalotta gear inches ... Sean Yates type gear inches - and I don’t know if he / they would want 53/11

bruce19

I think this is one of those things that is a trial and error thing. It depends very much on who you are and where you are in your cycling. Having said that, this is my experience: About 20 years ago I went from the 53/39 to a 50/34 compact crankset. I was 57 at the time. I rode the compact set until about 3 years ago when I bought a CAAD 12 that came with 105 11 sp in the mid-compact. I have several road bikes so in the early season I would ride an 11 sp compact and later transition to the mid-compact when I felt stronger. Over time I concluded that I didn't need to do that and I now ride the mid-compact all the time unless I'm riding very hilly terrain. This is very convenient since I just bought a Canyon Aeroad that came with Ultegra 11 sp mid-compact.

rjerney

Right now I have a 9 speed cassette & would be switching to an 11 speed.

rjerney

Thanks for the reply! Right now I'm using Shimano Ultegra with a 53/9 up front & 11/23 on the rear.

Broctoon

Yeah, you're geared too high for sure. Your lowest is 39x23? I might climb Emigration Canyon with that drivetrain, but nothing steeper. Get yourself a crank with 36 or even 34 small ring, and a cassette that goes up to 32 or 34. You'll be amazed at how much easier the steep climbs get.

My offer stands to lend you a cassette, if you're comfortable with that.

Iride01 

That will require changing quite a bit. The STI's will be one of the more expensive things in the change along with a rear wheel if your current hub won't fit a 11 speed cassette, which most 9 speed hubs don't. You might should consider a new bike if you want more gears.

Making your bike 3x on the front as another member suggested will give you the widest range of gearing possible for just the cost of a 3x crank, 1 front STI and a front 3x RD.

Personally, I'd just try a 9 speed cassette with what ever max size low sprocket your rear derailleur is spec'd to handle and a 50/34 set of ring or 50/34 crank. 3 more gears in between on the rear won't make it easier to climb hills.

Broctoon

Ohhh... I missed that he's on 9-speed currently. Iride01 has the best advice.