compact drive trains?
07-12-04, 08:45 PM
#1
rider of small bicycles
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Rochester, New York
Posts: 1,687
Bikes: Cannondale
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
compact drive trains?
What's the story behind this? What sort of advantage are they supposed to provide? What are the downsides?
just curious.
-mark
just curious.
-mark
07-13-04, 11:19 AM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: England
Posts: 12,948
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
For the same gear ratio, you use a smaller chainring and rear cog.
Pros: less weight, easier to get lower gears
Cons: limit to largest gear, faster rate of wear, ring-to-ring distance does not always work with indexed roadie shifters, there is a very small decrease in efficiency with smaller cogs, but its hardly measurable.
Most tourists use MTB style chainsets to get lower gears.
Pros: less weight, easier to get lower gears
Cons: limit to largest gear, faster rate of wear, ring-to-ring distance does not always work with indexed roadie shifters, there is a very small decrease in efficiency with smaller cogs, but its hardly measurable.
Most tourists use MTB style chainsets to get lower gears.
07-13-04, 12:51 PM
#3
Bicycle Luge Racer
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 379
Bikes: Modern, old, fixed, mountain.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
You can get almost the range of a triple crank using a compact double. So, you end up with a low granny if you live in the hills and a usable top end for all but the most screaming downhill runs. Quicker front shifting than a triple. Campy is due out with their versions along with FSA. I don't know what is planned by Shimano.
07-13-04, 02:45 PM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: fogtown...san francisco
Posts: 2,276
Bikes: Ron Cooper, Time VXSR, rock lobster, rock lobster, serotta, ritchey, kestrel, paramount
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'm using a 48x34 chainrings with 11x25 rear cogs. I live in san francisco and my house is at an elevation of about 800 feet above sea level. For years I have made do with a 53x39 and 12x25, but the compact cranks allows me to spin faster up the hills and the shifting has been great. I could not find a 11x25 cog set but I took a 11x23 and put it together with my 12x25. I spin out with a 48x12, but the 48x11 has been great! It's almost the same as a 52x12 and I'm able to pedal at 44 mph. FSA sells a 50x34, the 50 produces a 112.5 gear inches, 48x11 produces a 117.8 gear inches, 53x12 produces 119.25 gear inches.
The advantage to the lower gearing is that I'm able to stay in the big chainring on most of the flats and rolling hills.
I'm going to have one bike with a compact set up for the hills, one standard double with 27 cog in the rear, and a commuter bike also with a 53x27.
The advantage to the lower gearing is that I'm able to stay in the big chainring on most of the flats and rolling hills.
I'm going to have one bike with a compact set up for the hills, one standard double with 27 cog in the rear, and a commuter bike also with a 53x27.
07-13-04, 07:39 PM
#5
Mad Town Biker
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MichaelW
Cons: limit to largest gear, faster rate of wear,
-murray
