50 outer chain ring on triple?
#1
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
50 outer chain ring on triple?
I have an Ultegra triple with 52/39/30 and would like to go to 50/39/30. Is this a big deal (need to adjust front shifters, rear etc.) or simply a matter of changing out the rings?
Thanks!
Thanks!
#3
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,257
Likes: 5
From: A Coffin Called Earth. or Toronto, ON
Bikes: Bianchi, Miyata, Dahon, Rossin
you should also lower the front dérailleur since having it set too high results in poor shifting performance.
__________________
Food for thought: if you aren't dead by 2050, you and your entire family will be within a few years from starvation. Now that is a cruel gift to leave for your offspring. ;)
https://sanfrancisco.ibtimes.com/arti...ger-photos.htm
Food for thought: if you aren't dead by 2050, you and your entire family will be within a few years from starvation. Now that is a cruel gift to leave for your offspring. ;)
https://sanfrancisco.ibtimes.com/arti...ger-photos.htm
#6
Spin Meister
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 2,658
Likes: 74
From: California, USA
Bikes: Trek Émonda, 1961 Follis (French) road bike (I'm the original owner), a fixie, a mountain bike, etc.
I also have to wonder why you would bother to do this, especially if you aren't using a smaller inner chainring, like a 26 or even a 24. What do you gain?
__________________
This post is a natural product. Slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and are in no way to be considered flaws or defects.
This post is a natural product. Slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and are in no way to be considered flaws or defects.
#7
Tandem Mountain Climber
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,104
Likes: 3
From: San Mateo, CA
Bikes: Calfee Tandem, Litespeed Gravel, SuperSix Evo HM, Larry vs. Harry Bullitt (e-cargo)
Why not swap the 39 for a 42, and use the middle ring more?
Middle ring has the best chainline too (or should).
Middle ring has the best chainline too (or should).
#8
Spin Meister
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 2,658
Likes: 74
From: California, USA
Bikes: Trek Émonda, 1961 Follis (French) road bike (I'm the original owner), a fixie, a mountain bike, etc.
>Why not swap the 39 for a 42, and use the middle ring more?<
Why would swapping out the 39 for a 42 give more use of the middle ring? Wouldn't the fitness - or lack of fitness - have more to do with the number of appropriate teeth on a ring?
Why would swapping out the 39 for a 42 give more use of the middle ring? Wouldn't the fitness - or lack of fitness - have more to do with the number of appropriate teeth on a ring?
__________________
This post is a natural product. Slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and are in no way to be considered flaws or defects.
This post is a natural product. Slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and are in no way to be considered flaws or defects.
#9
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,213
Likes: 1
From: San Jose, Ca
Bikes: 09 Specialized Tricross Sport
I actually do have a triple with 42/52 rings and I like the 42 a lot for a quick sprint when I just don't want to change rings. I seldom if ever use my big ring. A 42 tooth ring is what you'll often see on 1x9 set-ups for just that reason.
#10
Spin Meister
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 2,658
Likes: 74
From: California, USA
Bikes: Trek Émonda, 1961 Follis (French) road bike (I'm the original owner), a fixie, a mountain bike, etc.
>That 39/12 is just not high enough whereas the 42/12 might be.<
I understand. However, some riders, depending on strength/age, etc., might be better able to make use of the 39, which I'm guessing is a lot of people. Otherwise many bikes wouldn't come equipped that way. In my case, I like riding hills, and I find I use the bottom end of my 39 a lot, even on steep grades - the 42 wouldn't help me much.
I understand. However, some riders, depending on strength/age, etc., might be better able to make use of the 39, which I'm guessing is a lot of people. Otherwise many bikes wouldn't come equipped that way. In my case, I like riding hills, and I find I use the bottom end of my 39 a lot, even on steep grades - the 42 wouldn't help me much.
__________________
This post is a natural product. Slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and are in no way to be considered flaws or defects.
This post is a natural product. Slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and are in no way to be considered flaws or defects.
#11
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Thanks for the responses.
My reasoning is that I rarely get onto the 52. But I spin out of the 39 too easily. When I do go to the 52, the double shift to a larger rear cog is pretty large.
Truth be told, I would rather go to a compact, but that requires all sorts of changes and expense. The idea of switching to a 42 middle ring is interesting. I would then need to go to my small ring more on the hills and wouldn't that also increase the cross-chaining?
My rides are hilly, but not mountainous. So, the choice is, would I rather spend more time in my middle ring, with slightly more time on the small ring or more time on the big ring and almost no time on the smallest ring?
What do you guys think?
My reasoning is that I rarely get onto the 52. But I spin out of the 39 too easily. When I do go to the 52, the double shift to a larger rear cog is pretty large.
Truth be told, I would rather go to a compact, but that requires all sorts of changes and expense. The idea of switching to a 42 middle ring is interesting. I would then need to go to my small ring more on the hills and wouldn't that also increase the cross-chaining?
My rides are hilly, but not mountainous. So, the choice is, would I rather spend more time in my middle ring, with slightly more time on the small ring or more time on the big ring and almost no time on the smallest ring?
What do you guys think?
#12
Solo Rider, always DFL
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,004
Likes: 0
From: Beacon, NY
Bikes: Cannondale T800, Schwinn Voyageur
The difference between a 50 and a 52 is not actually that big if you run the gear calculations. What kind of cassette are you working with, and would another cassette give you a better range of options, potentially?
#14
Spin Meister
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 2,658
Likes: 74
From: California, USA
Bikes: Trek Émonda, 1961 Follis (French) road bike (I'm the original owner), a fixie, a mountain bike, etc.
If you look at a gear chart, with a 50t and a 39t, you go up from about an 88 gear inch on the 39t, to 90.0 on the 50t. You get an additional three gears, approx. 96, 104 and 113.
With your current 52, you make exactly the same jump, from the 12t to the 15t, this time from about 88 to about 94. You again get an additional three gears, approx. 100, 108 and 117.
So you'd have to make the same amount of jump when going from 39t to 50t as you do now w/ 52t. What you really get out of the smaller chainring is a closer jump, from 88 to 90, instead of your current 88 to 94.
Going with a 42 might make more sense because you would pick up an extra high gear in your middle ring, which is what your looking for, and you wouldn't lose anything off the low end (it would be there w/ the 30t).
With your current 52, you make exactly the same jump, from the 12t to the 15t, this time from about 88 to about 94. You again get an additional three gears, approx. 100, 108 and 117.
So you'd have to make the same amount of jump when going from 39t to 50t as you do now w/ 52t. What you really get out of the smaller chainring is a closer jump, from 88 to 90, instead of your current 88 to 94.
Going with a 42 might make more sense because you would pick up an extra high gear in your middle ring, which is what your looking for, and you wouldn't lose anything off the low end (it would be there w/ the 30t).
__________________
This post is a natural product. Slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and are in no way to be considered flaws or defects.
This post is a natural product. Slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and are in no way to be considered flaws or defects.
#15
Junior Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 181
Likes: 1
From: Chicago
Bikes: Madone 5.2 Trek Pilot 2.1 Trek 7300 FX
My bike came with a 52/42/30 and I changed the rings to a 50/39/30. Just lower the front derailer slightly and it works fine.
#17
Spin Meister
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 2,658
Likes: 74
From: California, USA
Bikes: Trek Émonda, 1961 Follis (French) road bike (I'm the original owner), a fixie, a mountain bike, etc.
My final thought - leave your gearing alone. All the gears you want are there. You have to make a jump to the larger chainring at some point, anyway, once you get up to speed. You're not going to gain or lose anything by changing either the outer or middle chainring. OK, you could lose a few grams by dropping two teeth with a 50T chainring - that's all.
__________________
This post is a natural product. Slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and are in no way to be considered flaws or defects.
This post is a natural product. Slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and are in no way to be considered flaws or defects.




