Will GRX handle a 11-46 cassette?
10-11-19, 01:50 PM
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,764
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1975 Post(s)
Liked 232 Times
in
173 Posts
Do I misunderstand what power means? Isn't it true that for a given hill, you need the same amount of power to get up that hill, regardless of what gearing you have? I suppose the limiting factor is speed you're going and if you can keep the bike upright at eg. sub 3mph speeds or whatnot.
10-11-19, 01:53 PM
#27
Senior Member
I suppose the limiting factor is speed you're going and if you can keep the bike upright at eg. sub 3mph speeds or whatnot.
10-11-19, 03:22 PM
#28
Senior Member
Probably a large majority of people who ride any kind of mountainous stuff. In my area, we've got plenty of gravel climbs that average 12% or more over a mile at a time. And check out this gorgeous road that one of my friends recently found:
I suppose "need" is a strong word, but if it's a question of what's optimal, I actually think that most road bikes in hilly areas should come with ratios of 1:1 or lower, whether intended for gravel or otherwise. Even in the paved lowlands around here, I see tons of people badly bottomed out on their gearing during climbs, and people avoiding very fun roads simply because the gradients get steep. That's awful.
Ideally, common chainring combinations would span a much wider range than they currently do. From what I can tell, a majority of people on road bikes have very little use for the top-end on modern road bikes. For the weaker riders, a 42-26 or even 40-24 would offer adequate top-end in a 1x-plus-granny scheme, while permitting a comfortably tight-spaced cassette.
I suppose "need" is a strong word, but if it's a question of what's optimal, I actually think that most road bikes in hilly areas should come with ratios of 1:1 or lower, whether intended for gravel or otherwise. Even in the paved lowlands around here, I see tons of people badly bottomed out on their gearing during climbs, and people avoiding very fun roads simply because the gradients get steep. That's awful.
Ideally, common chainring combinations would span a much wider range than they currently do. From what I can tell, a majority of people on road bikes have very little use for the top-end on modern road bikes. For the weaker riders, a 42-26 or even 40-24 would offer adequate top-end in a 1x-plus-granny scheme, while permitting a comfortably tight-spaced cassette.
*or simply make mtb and road parts cross compatible.
Likes For Racing Dan:
03-19-20, 01:10 PM
#29
Newbie
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
It's possible
I'm new so I can't post any links yet, but check out the corvid map on bikepacking.com, it uses GRX in combination with an 11-46 cassette.
Likes For avg:
03-20-20, 10:34 PM
#30
Senior Member
Thread Starter
As it turns out the Evil Chamois Hagar uses an 11-46 so I think I'm good.
03-21-20, 10:16 AM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,410
Bikes: 2017 Specialized Allez Sprint Comp
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 850 Post(s)
Liked 344 Times
in
247 Posts
I suppose "need" is a strong word, but if it's a question of what's optimal, I actually think that most road bikes in hilly areas should come with ratios of 1:1 or lower, whether intended for gravel or otherwise. Even in the paved lowlands around here, I see tons of people badly bottomed out on their gearing during climbs, and people avoiding very fun roads simply because the gradients get steep. That's awful.
Likes For smashndash:
03-29-20, 12:24 PM
#32
Senior Member
Yes, you need a certain number of posts before you can post links, they do that to cut down on the forum spam.
Here's the link to that sweet MAP (More Adventure Please) bike: https://bikepacking.com/bikes/corvid-cycles-map/
