destikon

I'm riding a 42 X 16 and I find my cadence is to high for the terrain I ride. I want to know if there is a big difference from 42 X 16 to 42 X 15 or even 14. I'm not interested in a new chain ring. I just want a new cog. Does one or two teeth make much of a difference?

darksiderising

This topic has been covered many times and you are bound to get more unhelpful responses than helpful ones, so use the search function.

That said, if you want a big change, go multiple teeth smaller. If you want just a little change, go one tooth.

happytruck

https://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/

muckymucky

@happytruck: dont do that

devilshaircut

I ride 49:13 and I like it. For me, and perhaps this is personal, I think a 42t chainring is just tooooooo small. Even in Atlanta, as hilly as it is, I prefer a higher gearing so I can soar. Even so, I still spin out on some downhills.

You probably want something like 46:16. Not too high, not too low. A lot of people I know find that ratio very comfortable. And you wouldn't need to get a new cog.

destikon

Thanks everyone! Just looking for some opinions. I've read the SB fixed gear bicycles for the road page and find it helpful and informative. Just wanted to hear some people chime in. @ Devilshaircut: I haven't considered a new chainring but who knows. I'll leave that as an option. Thanks!

Atra

Definitely consider a new chainring. I rode a day on some hills with my bikes normal gearing of 48X16 gearing and then a day on 46X17 gearing and it was a world of difference. Also unless you have weird cranks installing a new chainring is easier then installing a new cog.

xxguitarist

First, there's no reason to buy a new chainring. You have plenty of adjustment range in your cog, and it's cheaper that way. Think about what speed you want to be going at a given cadence, play with the gear calculators, and buy the cog to match.

devilshaircut

Cog is cheaper, yeah, but if all he has is a 42t chainring, I'd suggest getting a higher tooth count one just to have. Personally I have 3 spare chainrings and like 5-6 spare fixed/free cogs.

And as stated earlier, he wouldn't need a wrench to change his chainring. I assume if he only has the one chainring, he probably doesn't have many tools either.

destikon

I have tools, but no chain whip.

xxguitarist

Well, on consideration that a 42t chainring will give up to 92 GI (42x12), I see no need for a different chainring.
I'm using a 42x14 for about 79 GI, which puts me at a cadence of about 60 for 15 mph. Accordingly, I can ride 30 mph, but I'm spinning at the top of my range.

[edit]
It's not exactly reccomended, but you can rotafix (google/search) the cog if you have a lockring tool.

PluperfectArson

You roll around normally with 99 GI?

oneangrytoast

thats pretty nuts.

Critical Jeff

48x17

[/thread]

devilshaircut

I actually don't think it's bad at all. But I am pretty sure I am just "used to it" because you guys basically react the same way my friends do when they ask me my ratio.

I used to run 46:16, 49:14, and 48:15 (my steel bike is currently 46:15) and ... because I am not much of an endurance rider ... I actually think the larger gear helps me climb hills better. I also have a 50t Record chainring but that might just be excessive?

I don't recommend people use my gearing because I realize it's tailored to my personal tastes which are generally bizarre. But in this case, I do think he would benefit from a new chainring, or cog. I just think the chainring upgrade would be easier for him, and it would be a good investment. Although the reality is I think he should get some other cogs to, particularly in the event he might want to change his ratio on the go.

clink83

This post just makes me shake my head in shame/confusion.

devilshaircut

Genuinely I don't see why?

Larger gear = I can mash up hills faster. Again, it's what works for me personally. If I had a smaller gear, climbing would take me longer. The big gear works coz I am relatively good at mashing hard, just not sustaining it for a long time. If you were wondering why I have so many ratios, it's because all my rear wheels I run fixed/fixed.

EDIT: Oh and my polo bike has a 46:19 although I'll probably change that to a 22t cog. And maybe a smaller chainring also.

beeftech

The only down side to small chain rings and small cogs, is that they wear faster.

beanswuah

WORD. I live in Seattle (hilly) and switch between 46:16 and 46:17. high enough for flat and downhill, low enough for hill climbs. boo, too much of a good thing. hooray, moderation!

xxguitarist

FWIW, the 46:16/17 above is essentially the same as a 42:14/15, though I didn't bother to look at skid patches.

LionsHeart

devilshaircut

Definitely not recommending 42:14 as it has only *1* skid patch ... 15t has 5. Considering he is apparently married to using a 42t chainring, I'd recommend the 15t cog as it is closest to 46:16 which I would consider standard. If it were me, I'd do a 13t cog though since it has 13 skid patches and would be a lot faster.

operator

Yeah bad advice including yours. +/- 1t change is a fairly big difference already at 42. Some people know exactly what they want and can handle a larger difference. Irresponsible to recommend a bigger change.

And also to the guy that runs 49x13, good luck to your knees. Learn how to ride a bike.

operator

Lawl.

Except with a smaller gear, you just up the cadence, save your knees produce equal or more power and go faster in the end.

Srsly?

toezter

https://software.bareknucklebrigade.c...it.applet.html

I found that to help. Trial and error, cheap parts (compared to some), sell them if you don't like it.

btw, I moved from a 42/16 to 48/16. SOOO much nicer [/personal opinion]