I hear alot about spinning higher rpms being a good thing, but how come I can spinout a 48/18 at 166rpms at 35mph, but then this morning I passed by a guy pushing like a 54/15 and doing it quite slow. I was beside him for a couple miles before my leg muscles started to feel like they were burning. So my question is what do I do about that? I need 4 more speed! And Im not really sure which way to go optimze my rpms better or just get a Big Ass Gear?

https://www.bikecult.com/works/collec...rossinTTcr.jpg

BIG ASS GEAR

Was he on a yellow bike with black electrical tape striping on the seatstays and chainstays?

Dumpster Vegan!

That bike is right in their store window. Wish I had a picture of it. Not only is the gearing HUGE but the top tube on that bike must slope down towards the front at least 20 degrees.

Yeah I love that rossin and when I picked up my gardin Dave was telling me about all the old tt frames. It used to be red and silver or white I think, but I have only seen it with my eyes in the current striped down state.

Try 50-18. Looks butch

But does anyone have ideas on where I should go with gearing, im thinking about going to 52/18, but know someone who has a 65 chainring. So I was thinking maybe 65/22 for sick speed? But I do still like to get decent rpms. Im lost.

Merton has a 65t chainring in his stashpocket...next to the lotion.

Try changing your rear cog to a 16. It doesn't sound like much but it will make a big difference.

Go to harris cycling website for gear calculator. 52/18 is TALLER ratio than 65/22, believe it or not. Reducing rear cog by 1T is equal to increasing chainring by 4T.

Yeah...I know big Chainring looks Cool even if big rear cog makes gearing not as impressive as huge chainring would suggest.

Interestingly enough I was trying to build a 60x20 (in reality same ratio as 48x16) for asthetic purposes.
People called this a Macho gear Which is kind of funny because it is really equal to a stock langster gearing!!

"Reducing rear cog by 1T is equal to increasing chainring by 4T."

Only if you're running a around 4:1 gear ratio. The real point is you're concerned about two things: gear ratio (divide the front by the back--bigger numbers are harder to push but faster) and the number of teeth overall in your drivetrain (bigger means more teeth to distribute wear and power to).

Yep, Wear is another benefit. That 20T rear cog is going to last 25% longer than a 16T cog. 25% more teeth to distrubute wear. Same with front chainring...25% more teeth.....25% more wear.

I used to run a 44x16 in hilly San Diego, and now I run a 52x18 in flat Munich. The new gear is taller, but not by much. It works well for me. I can go fast enough, and stop relatively quickly. I spin out sometimes, but that's not very common just for normal tooling around.

yeah, but your chain will wear faster.

chains are cheaper than chainrings and cogs.

To say nothing of a damn sight easier to replace.

right, but you'll have to do it more often with bigger rings and cogs. might as well just get a nice medium gearing, like 48/16 or 17. and replace the chain 1.5 times a year, and the ring and cog like, .25 times a year.

However, the bigger gear combinations are heavier, and also require more chain. Everybody should just ride around on 11x28 and be super light.

Is everyone here running 165mm cranks? Albeit small, it makes a difference.

yeah, 165 cranks have come on all the bikes that I've bought except one. 175mm was really great for pushing a bigger gear, with the bigger lever arms.

170, but only because my road conversion came with 170s and when I was building up my current bike, they only had 170s in the shop (apart from much more expensive cranks). Impatience will be my downfall.