I switched to a COMPACT because..........
11-01-09, 03:25 PM
#1
Rider
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Seal Beach, Ca
Posts: 108
Bikes: Trek Madone 5-Series Campy 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I switched to a COMPACT because..........
"...anything other than a 53-11 is just an excuse."
Your turn. Why did you switch or why will you switch....?
Your turn. Why did you switch or why will you switch....?
11-01-09, 03:34 PM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Near Sacramento
Posts: 4,886
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Needed better hill gears for my old knees, and the q-factor of a triple just plain hurts.
__________________
-------
Some sort of pithy irrelevant one-liner should go here.
-------
Some sort of pithy irrelevant one-liner should go here.
11-01-09, 03:38 PM
#3
Bike ≠ Car ≠ Ped.
50x11 is tall enough, and 34x26 is short enough.
Actually, I wouldn't have bothered switching if my bike's crank wasn't being replaced under warranty. I just took it as an opportunity to try something different.
Actually, I wouldn't have bothered switching if my bike's crank wasn't being replaced under warranty. I just took it as an opportunity to try something different.
11-01-09, 03:38 PM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Central CA
Posts: 1,414
Bikes: A little of everything
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I don't get it- a lot of compacts are 50/34. I equip one when I want a little inner ring 
11-01-09, 03:44 PM
#5
Not actually Tmonk
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 14,117
Bikes: road, track, mtb
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2630 Post(s)
Liked 3,144 Times
in
1,654 Posts
Because my LBS ordered and installed the wrong crankset!
They told me to take it for a ride or two before I switched to a 53/39 and I decided that I liked it.
They told me to take it for a ride or two before I switched to a 53/39 and I decided that I liked it.
11-01-09, 03:49 PM
#8
No matches
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Eastern PA
Posts: 11,647
Bikes: two wheeled ones
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1398 Post(s)
Liked 444 Times
in
250 Posts
I gained gear inches at the top (50x11 is bigger than 53x12) and lost gear inches at the bottom (34x25 versus 39x27).
Just makes more sense unless you're really strong or only ride in flat places.
Just makes more sense unless you're really strong or only ride in flat places.
11-01-09, 04:29 PM
#10
Voice of the Industry
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1188 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
8 Posts
I don't need the gear inches of a full double and like the shorter climbing inches. I like to save my knees and spin high cadence. I love my compact.
11-01-09, 04:36 PM
#11
Senior Member
50/34 because I am 50 and climb a lot of hills. On the advice of a knowledgable team racer. As it turns out, he was right.
11-01-09, 04:39 PM
#12
Sucking Wheel at the back
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Bristol, VA
Posts: 779
Bikes: Lynskey Helix Sport, Lynskey M290, Cervelo S3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I am switching because I live in the Blue Ridge Mountains and have to climb them all the time.
11-01-09, 04:58 PM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: central jersey coast
Posts: 764
Bikes: 2008 Cervelo RS, 2004Trek 2100,1985 Nishike Prestige
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Bought a new bike at 62 this year with compact gearing and although at first I felt like a girlie man now I wouldnt go back. Had my old bike out this am because of the lousy weather we've been having and I could not believe how much more tired my legs felt when done as compared to last Sunday on almost the exact same ride.Besides that my average speed seems to always be greater on the compact. I think pushing smaller gears on the bigger ring has some benefit, perceived or otherwise.Maybe its the leverage I donno but there is a difference.
Should say my first bike had a 52/39 on it, my second a 53/42 which felt a stretch for me as I bought it while over 55 and had been used to the smaller gearing on my first bike. This bike seems like a dream compared to the 53/42.
Should say my first bike had a 52/39 on it, my second a 53/42 which felt a stretch for me as I bought it while over 55 and had been used to the smaller gearing on my first bike. This bike seems like a dream compared to the 53/42.
11-01-09, 05:29 PM
#14
All Bikes All The Time
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Boise, ID
Posts: 2,343
Bikes: Giant TCR 0, Lemond Zurich, Giant NRS 1, Jamis Explorer Beater/Commuter, Peugeot converted single speed
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
....because one was equipped on two bikes I was test riding for frames....I could not believe the difference!!!! Now I am happily spinning my way up the steepest climbs in Boise and beating my friends while doing it. 
11-01-09, 05:47 PM
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: burlington, mass
Posts: 234
Bikes: Jamis Quest Elite - 2014
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
As others have said, easier on the knees, easier to climb, I get to spend more time in the big ring without cross-chaining, one change I made was from a 50/34 to a 50/36. Didn't give up much on the climbing gears and have less adjusting to do on the rear cassette when switching from the big to little ring or vice-versa.
11-01-09, 06:16 PM
#16
Erect member since 1953
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Antioch, CA (SF Bay Area)
Posts: 7,000
Bikes: Trek 520 Grando, Roubaix Expert, Motobecane Ti Century Elite turned commuter, Some old French thing gone fixie
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 121 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 38 Times
in
21 Posts
In the old days 52-42
In my late 30s 52-39
Then 50-36
Then 50-34
Then I put a 12-27 on the 50-34.
Sure, there are a lot of hills here, but not more than in 1975.
In my late 30s 52-39
Then 50-36
Then 50-34
Then I put a 12-27 on the 50-34.
Sure, there are a lot of hills here, but not more than in 1975.
11-01-09, 06:27 PM
#17
Senior Member
11-01-09, 09:32 PM
#21
TCR Advanced SL
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Ulah Proper N.C.
Posts: 1,043
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Pretty much a wrap ----- Lp
11-01-09, 11:17 PM
#22
well hello there
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Point Loma, CA
Posts: 15,430
Bikes: Bill Holland (Road-Ti), Fuji Roubaix Pro (back-up), Bike Friday (folder), Co-Motion (tandem) & Trek 750 (hybrid)
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 503 Post(s)
Liked 336 Times
in
206 Posts
because I bought a new bike. I had no previous problems with a standard double, but I doubt I'll ever go back.
__________________
.
.
Two wheels good. Four wheels bad.
.
.
Two wheels good. Four wheels bad.
11-01-09, 11:54 PM
#24
bumpersoar
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Minden, NV
Posts: 138
Bikes: Trek Madone 6.9, Trek 5000
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
The problem I have with the compact is that when I accelerate I tend to break traction and do burn outs far too easily. Any suggestions for lightening up on the pedals would be appreciated.