Search
Notices
Singlespeed & Fixed Gear "I still feel that variable gears are only for people over forty-five. Isn't it better to triumph by the strength of your muscles than by the artifice of a derailer? We are getting soft...As for me, give me a fixed gear!"-- Henri Desgrange (31 January 1865 - 16 August 1940)

48/16 to 46/16

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-02-09 | 10:09 PM
  #1  
jacobsever's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 187
Likes: 1
From: Denver

Bikes: Super Pisa, Vigorelli, Scrambler

48/16 to 46/16

I know I know.
USE THE SEARCH.
To be honest, there is just SO much on this forum, it's a bit overwhelming.
So I'm making a thread about my specific question.

I'm new to riding fixed, and currently riding a 48/16 setup with 170mm crank.
I'm thinking of getting a 160mm crank with 46 teeth.

I live in central IL, and have slight hills, but nothing too drastic.
Was wondering how much of a difference I will notice.

Thanks for the help.
jacobsever is offline  
Reply
Old 08-02-09 | 10:11 PM
  #2  
PedallingATX's Avatar
Comanche Racing
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,820
Likes: 0
From: Deep in the heart of Texas

Bikes: Presto NJS build, Specialized Allez Pro w/ full Dura Ace and Ksyrium SLs, 1990something Specialized Sirrus

i donno, the change in teeth might be counteracted by the shorter crankarms. It might end up being no difference, I'm not sure. Use a gear inch calculator to get a specific answer. you can google it.
PedallingATX is offline  
Reply
Old 08-02-09 | 10:17 PM
  #3  
hairnet's Avatar
Fresh Garbage
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 13,190
Likes: 30
From: Los Angeles

Bikes: N+1

well using Sheldon's gain ratio calculator(which incorporates crank length), it seem there will an insignificant change.
hairnet is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-09 | 07:27 AM
  #4  
dsh's Avatar
dsh
Oh, you know...
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
From: DC

Bikes: '74 Schwinn Sports Tourer (Polo), S-Works E5 Team Festina (Chorus 11), Trek 2200 Bonded Carbon (Fixed), Trek 920 (7 speed IGH), Chesini Olimpiade SL (1x7)

Go for it. Don't forget to readjust your seatpost height after you get the shorter cranks.
dsh is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-09 | 07:45 AM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 876
Likes: 0
https://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/
entukay is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-09 | 08:45 AM
  #6  
King of the Hipsters
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,128
Likes: 2
From: Bend, Oregon

Bikes: Realm Cycles Custom

With all respect to Sheldon, try this online singlespeed and fixed-gear cycling calculator:

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

The calculator above will define all the terms, such as "Gain Ratio," "Gear Inches" and "Development" in very understandable and usable language.

The calculator above also allows the user to see the impact of gear changes on all parameters, in real time, as well as showing mph at various rpm.

For the OP, try prime numbers, such as 47/17.
Ken Cox is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-09 | 08:49 AM
  #7  
dsh's Avatar
dsh
Oh, you know...
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
From: DC

Bikes: '74 Schwinn Sports Tourer (Polo), S-Works E5 Team Festina (Chorus 11), Trek 2200 Bonded Carbon (Fixed), Trek 920 (7 speed IGH), Chesini Olimpiade SL (1x7)

To the OP:
Prime numbers are good if you intend to do any skidding. If you do not intend to skid, prime numbers make absolutely no difference.
dsh is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-09 | 10:45 AM
  #8  
das_pyrate's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
From: dirty meda

Bikes: EAI Bareknuckle, 1981 Gios Aerodynamic, Giant Boulder

i'd do 48/17 instead. cogs are cheaper.
das_pyrate is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-09 | 11:24 AM
  #9  
King of the Hipsters
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,128
Likes: 2
From: Bend, Oregon

Bikes: Realm Cycles Custom

Originally Posted by dsh
Prime numbers are good if you intend to do any skidding. If you do not intend to skid, prime numbers make absolutely no difference.
Yes, correct.

I don't skid (expensive tires), but, nonetheless, I like prime numbers for aesthetic and emotional reasons.

And, I wonder if riding with prime numbers doesn't spread the workload and stress more evenly throughout the drive train.
Ken Cox is offline  
Reply
Old 08-03-09 | 07:29 PM
  #10  
JacoKierkegaard's Avatar
Fixed-gear roadie
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,048
Likes: 0
From: Wilmington, NC

Bikes: 2008 Masi Speciale Fixed

Originally Posted by PedallingATX
i donno, the change in teeth might be counteracted by the shorter crankarms. It might end up being no difference, I'm not sure. Use a gear inch calculator to get a specific answer. you can google it.
Crank arm length has no effect on gearing, only on the radius of your pedaling arc and the perceived effort of pedaling. In that sense you're right, the 160mm cranks will give him a little less leverage but the slightly lowered ratio will make pedaling easier, so it might even out in terms of perceived pedaling effort.
JacoKierkegaard is offline  
Reply
Old 08-04-09 | 09:40 AM
  #11  
dsh's Avatar
dsh
Oh, you know...
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
From: DC

Bikes: '74 Schwinn Sports Tourer (Polo), S-Works E5 Team Festina (Chorus 11), Trek 2200 Bonded Carbon (Fixed), Trek 920 (7 speed IGH), Chesini Olimpiade SL (1x7)

Originally Posted by Ken Cox
And, I wonder if riding with prime numbers doesn't spread the workload and stress more evenly throughout the drive train.
Interesting question. Intuitively, I'd say yes.
dsh is offline  
Reply
Old 08-04-09 | 10:17 AM
  #12  
click. click click.
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 222
Likes: 0

Bikes: Leader 725TR https://velospace.org/node/23532

That's a big change..From 79.1 Gear Inches to 75.8 Gear inches.

Gain ratio from 48/16 with 170mm crank arms = 5.91
Gain ratio from 46/16 with 165mm crank arms = 5.84

Gear ratio 48/16 = 3.0
Gear ratio 46/16 = 2.88

I'd be much more comfortable with 46/16 to save your knees. If you're strong enough, stick with your 48/16. But, obviously it's a problem since you're starting a thread over it..
ALaS is offline  
Reply
Old 08-04-09 | 03:28 PM
  #13  
filtersweep's Avatar
Senior Member
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,615
Likes: 1
Intuitively I would say no.

Originally Posted by dsh
Interesting question. Intuitively, I'd say yes.
filtersweep is offline  
Reply

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.