Hi,

I've been able to find some information on climbing road grades in the US, but most of it is hearsay.

Is there a common method of calculating hill climbing ability much like there is a Gear Inch table telling how fast you could go in a particular gear?

Questions
1. What is the typical climb % of hills in US? Is this 1/2 grade or what?

2. What is the worst % hill climb you have faced? [ anyone use a inclinometer, or just eyeball. I know you didn't get out the binoculars and run the trigometry formulas. ]

3. On a 10 point fitness scale with 10 being the high, and 1 low. With a fitness level of 3, what gears/GI would you need to climb most hills?

Here's the practical description of the problem:
35 GI is too high, 17GI will cover most, but is it really needed?

Simple Solution:
Keep crankset [ 30.42.52 ] and choose one of the following cassettes:
X..36 for low of 23GI [36x30], but harder shifts
X..34 for low of 24GI [34x30], but not sure if low enough with some hard shifts
X..32 for low of 25GI [32x30], fair shifts
X..28 for low of 29GI [28x30], smooth shifts

Harder solution:
Change both crankset and cassettes
22-X-44, 12..34 for low of 17gi [22x34]. still hard shifts
22-X-44, 12..32 for low of 19gi [22x32], fair shifts
22-X-44, 12..28 for low of 21gi [22x28], good shifts
26-X-48, 12..28 for low of 25gi [28x26], better shifting

Hickers here are higher cost and don't know if possible to put mtn crankset on Giant OCR. Rear is Deore, so I guess that is mtb set.

So far I've only tackled low grade and shorter hills. Now I want to experiment with some more typical hills and want to keep riding without walking bike. Bike will carry only rider, bike and about 10-15 lbs of gear.

[ Yes, I know I have asked similar questions before. I am still trying to find a good compromise without having 2 bikes. ]

I'm leaning towards a 12..28 cassette or 12..32. Fall back would be an 12..34.

What do you think?

Not that I know of.


Probably about 6% to 8%. It's unlikely you'll encounter much more than about 15% in the US.


25% ... in Wales. I walked it.



That depends entirely on the grade, how much luggage you are carrying with you, and what your climbing technique is like.



I've got a triple chainring: 53/42/30 and I put an XT mtn bike cassette on the back: 34-11, I believe.

Before I knew how to climb hills I climbed everything in the 30T, and was often right into my granny (30x34). Then I learned how to climb, even with a load, and now I rarely get into my 30T ... only when I'm very tired or if the hill is a particularly difficult one.

I've always benefited in this area of bike riding by living in hilly places. My regular bike commute for years featured a mile long 12% grade near the end and a couple other lesser grades along the route (17-18 miles). Where I live now, there are roads up to 20% (short and steep, those).

Back in the "good old days" of a bike with two chain rings and a 5-speed freewheel, the lowest gear I could get was 27". We used that low gear to do many, many tours in the mountains of the western US (the long 7% grades of the Icefield Parkway in the Canadian Rockies, several times, for example).

We have modern bikes, now. We are also several decades older (I'm closing in on 60). With a 44-32-22 crank set and a 9-speed cassette of 11-32, that gives a low gear of 19" (or, so).

On recent tours (again, to places with mountains, the French Pyrenees, up some of those cols made famous by the Tour de France), I have usually not gone lower than the 25" gear. I still have 21" and 19" in reserve. My wife has make happy use of the 19" gear. I get to do a LOT more riding than she does, so have a much higher level of fitness.

Honestly, though, those (21" 19") are such low gears that you'd only be riding at about 3-4 mph, max.

Your fitness level, excess weight you might be carrying, how much "stuff" you plan to haul along, etc., will have a bearing on your low gears. But, really, a low of something in the 25-27" range should work for most roads. If you KNOW you'll face something much steeper than 8%, you might want something a bit lower.

A lot of hills have the percent of the grade marked on a road sign, especially for trucks on the downhill. By now, I know what it feels like to drive and ride a 7-8% grade. That is a common max on highways. That gradient max is out of considering of truck traffic. Smaller roads in the mountains of the western US are often at a higher gradient. But, you kind of have to hunt for those.

Why two bikes? Why not two cassettes, and change the chain, if necessary if there is a big difference in the max/min tooth count between the two?

Back in my "good old days" I would change out the freewheel (the old term for what we now call a cassette). Actually, what I would do was change the cogs. For touring, with only five cogs, I dumped the high gears and favored cogs that gave me a good spread of mid and low gears. When I am touring, I am not going to pedal down a hill fast enough to have any use for high gears over 85". If I am on a down hill, I will enjoy the coast.

From the criteria you are dithering over, I would suggest you want good shifting. I would also suggest not obsessing about it. You can probably get by with a low of 27-25". If you are afraid of finding grades steeper than 8%, or don't feel you are in very good shape, (etc), opt for a lower low. Dump higher gears, if you have to. They are basically useless for loaded touring.

One thing to mention about inclinometers. There is a bubble type, that I thought I'd try out. Seemed like a good idea. I found that is had a "flaw" in use. It gets bitten by physics. If one is climbing a hill, one is accelerating versus gravity. With a bubble inclinometer, when you accelerate the bubble/fluid, the bubble rises, being lighter than the oil. So, the bubble inclinometer will measure a higher gradient than is real -- unless you are standing still. I first realized this on a test ride as I was pedalling up a, oh maybe, 2% rise (I had accurately leveled the inclinometer before setting out) and it said the gradient was 4% -- as steep as another hill I ride, where I has used a tape measure and a carpenter's level to find that was 4%. This measured hill is visibly steeper than the little rise. The bubble inclinometer was measuring inaccurately because I was pushing up the ride. If I stopped pedalling and coasted, no longer accelerating, the bubble settled down to the real gradient.

Then riding up a steep hill, hear our house, I found that with each pedal stroke the bubble would ride and read a higher gradient. The gradient of that hill is too steep for me to try coasting, very much, but when I did, the bubble sank back toward the true gradient of that climb. The variability of the reading has nothing to do with steering (as I once saw someone suggest).

There is a German made cyclometer I am thinking about that has an altimeter and inclinometer feature. It may work more accurately than a bubble type inclinometer on a moving bike. Pricey, though.

Cheers

Mike -- good points. I was gonna try to write something similar, but you said it best. I, too, would suggest to HiYo to dump the high gears and not worry about 19" vs. 21", etc. on the low end. In my mind, a 46/36/26 triple with a 12-32 cassette seems ideal for touring (in the US). Don't even know the gear inches, and I'm sure there's a hill or two where I'd trade my soul for a lower gear. But I'm currently riding a "worse" setup (28x28 for low gear, I think), and I've never had a problem.

The physics phenomenom you mention is the same one that makes helium balloons end up in the front seat of your car when you accelerate (assuming they were in the back seat when you started ). Strange, that.

-- Mark

I think your being way too complicated.
US hills do not generally have extreme grades but you may want to venture off road or go to SF.
MTB style gearing will cope with most gradients.
You can't say which gear or gear inches you will need for a particular gradient, it depends on to many variable, the drag forces (surface/wind/load) and how you are feeling.
In my experience, steep starts at about 13% and killer climbs start at 18%.

Well said! There's no such thing as a "perfect" gear set-up. The best most people get is a "good" compromise that serves well under most conditions.

Experience with riding helps me refine my gearing every time I change it, but there is always something I wish could be different. The "perfect" gear set-up exists in the imagination, but probably not in real life.

And what is this secret?

THANK YOU

Ok, now I feel comfortable with the what's needed on the low end advice. I was afraid of chaning to get too low.



It seems like the range is between 25..29 GI. Any lower is overkill unless really loading up, then you would need 20GI.

This is great news for me. It looks like the 12..32 would be the best match. The 3rd gear hardness can be beat by double shifting. So I still need to check:

1. is a compatible 12..32 available for my bike, if now what's next best.

2. while in shop, should I swap out one of the triple rings, like a 29 for the 30 or a 53 for the 52.

So again thanks, finally making progress. Yes there is no ideal but there is definitely better all around than the level ground setup I have now.

Machka-- nice teaser, ok what is the secret in technique in hill climbing, besides the sliding back in the sadde ?

Interesting thread, and an issue that I think about from time to time. This is my second season, and I'm finding that hills are easier (a relative term!) than they were last year - so I'm definitely getting stronger and have dropped a few lbs. But, I have a double (53-39) w 12-25 cassette, and for the most part, I've avoided extreme climbs. My driveway (about 1/3-1/2 mile) is about a 10% grade, and I can make it up that, but I'm not sure that I could crank up that kind of grade for a more extended distance. (By the way, the town would not take this on as a public street because the gradient is too steep).

I've been thinking that a 12-27 cassette might be a reasonable compromise unless I get into more mountainous terrain, although I am managing well so far.

Steepest I have climbed is 19%. I currently have a 22-32-42 crankset with a 11-28 7s cassette and since I'll be hitting a few 15-19% this fall, I'll change my cassette for a 13-34. I got over 40km/h on this morning commute and I was still in the 42/13. I don't see the point of having a 52 chainring with a 11 tooth sprocket. Road bikes usually don't even have such a high gear! I can deal with having to stop pedaling going downhill but I don't want to feel miserable because I don't have a low enough gear going uphill. Pushing the bike is not option as it's even more difficult.

Eventually, I might get a tighter cassette for the day rides I do around here (it's all flat) and keep the wide range for touring. The 2-3 tooth jump does break rythm on the flats.

Just my $.02 - I think there's a few aspects to climbing, I focus on gearing and cadence.

Gearing: My road bike has 24/42/52 on the triple crank and a 13-34 cassette, my commuter / trail bike has a 24-36-36 front crank and a 13-34 cassette. I live in Western PA and I can climb about anything, just not fast. (I weight 230 lbs).

Cadence: I've drank the KoolAid on this, focusing on my cadence and staying on my number (90 on the road bike, 85 on the heavier commuter bike) lets me successfully climb hills I could never climb otherwise. Pre-Cadence I'd burn out halfway up the hill due to poor technique, but if I stay on my numbers and train to ride on my cadence it's a lot more fun.

If I could suggest a path, try a cadence computer (it's a relatively inexpensive tool) and then look at your gearing.

Cheers,
Ed

Ed,

Your GI is 21, no wonder you don't have much trouble. Yes my cyclometer has cadence. When I started, comfortable cadence was 72. I'm now able to ride in the mid 80's, but 90's are still too hard for me. I'm trying to focus on keeping cadence above 82 and then will focus on raising so I can ride the 90's. Thanks for the suggestion.

My current problem is I have a tight cassette, 12..23, so it's very very smooth but 35GI is just a tad high for a couple hills here. I think I could handle them in the fall by conditioning, but I would like to both condition and increase gear ranges.

FOUND THE ANSWER SITE

https://www.analyticcycling.com/GearS...ring_Page.html

I lost this before when I didn't understand watts at all.

Rough guide:
100 watts == new rider, or tired rider
200 watts == average cyclists
450 watts == lance armstrong coasting

Example:
speed- default
cadence- 60
chainring- 30 to 52
cog- 12 to 23
altitude- 1.05
weight- 100 [illustration only.] 1 kilogram is 2.2 lbs
slope- .15 [guestimate of 15% slope, steep bike path ]
rest default

answer is 265 watts. right now even 200 is a struggle for me. But here you go, just keep trying other numbers until you find the level you want.

ENJOY

Wait, the numbers aren't changing much. More research needed.

Pedal slowly.

Make sure your heart rate does not rise, and breathing rate does not increase. If your heart rate starts to rise or your breathing rate starts to increase ... pedal slower.

You can stay upright at about 4-5 km/h.

Once you've gotten better at going really, really, really slowly ... then you can start working on picking up your speed a bit.


At least that's what worked for me!

Everything I've ever read by Machka is spot on target, but may I offer another secret of climbing? The secret of climbing for me (47 years old, 230 pounds) is: pedal fast.

At the flat before the hill, I'm pedaling at 85 rpm in my highest gear. As I begin to climb, I'm focusing on maintaining my pedal speed, and shifting gears to allow me to continue pedaling at 85 rpm, plus / minus 2.

As the climb steepens and I can't maintain my 85 rpm, I progressively switch into a lower gear that allows me to maintain 85 rpm. Just keep shifting into lower gears so I can maintain 85 rpm.

If the slope drops and pedalling becomes easier and I see my rpms tending to climb, I decide to either 1) pedal slower to stay on target or 2)shift to a higher gear to go at a faster speed and drop the rpm to 85.

I often climb at 85rpm/4mph, and I know I've been at 85rpm/3.5 mph, but for me it's not the speed, it's the rpm. And at higher rpms you're not going to blow out your knees or your lungs, you're just using the mechanical advantage you've invested in. And climbing at 85rpm, with a 19 gear-inch combination, just isn't that much hard work- it's sustainable, moderate effort.

So I suppose the Unified Theory of Climbing accomodates alternative techniques.
As long as you're riding up the hill, it's all good.
Cheers,
Ed

I do as edtrek does. I keep a sustainable cadence. I don't understand Machka's technique. Going slow at a slow rpm (high gear) doesn't work for me. It's the legs that give up.

See, I found the "pedal fast" thing to work just fine if the hill was short (less than a kilometer). In fact on those ones, I will often stand and power over them.

But when the hill is like one I encountered in Queensland ... and 8% grade that went on for 20 kilometers ... that's when the pedal slowly trick came into play.

Before when I tried to climb long hills by pedalling fast, my heart rate soared, and I was breathing like a steam train, and by about 1/8th of the way up the hill I was spent and had to get off and walk. When I eased everything back, and just chugged along slowly ... I could make it all the way up even very long hills without any walking at all.

It's almost like riding into a headwind ... you just shift into a comfortable gear that you can maintain for the next 100 kms of headwind ... and go.

I agree with Machka, there are times when you have to back down on the cadence or burn your cardio system out. We have a lot of 10-12% grades out here in northern calif that are several miles long, and I like the 21" low gear I have with the mtn crankset (24-30). Just putt up the hill at a nice sightseeing pace.

The Vetta V100A has an altimeter and does a really nice job. It will compute the current altitude, max alt, total gain for the ride and % grade as you are climbing or descending. I am often suprised to find I have several thousand feet total gain on a couple hour ride that did not even involve any major climbs, just a lot of rolling hills and smaller 3-500' grades adds up. It is also wireless and has temp which I find interesting if not particularly enlightening.

Interesting, I'll have to relook at the Vetta. In general, I like the axiom/cateye/polar display layout better. But maybe I can learn. Having total gain and % grade is good. I hope it has cadence as well, as I use that number more than speed.