It seems for man years now I have avoided trying to determine the correct gearing for me on any bike I have owned.Its really been a case of pedaling as hard as necessary and when it got too hard changing to an easier gear but now I am that bit older I would like to set my bikes up to match my individual need.
Is it just a case of determining the gear I like to ride on the bike and then trying to get that across the three chain rings.If it is how do I ensure that I have an easy gear for steep hill climbing.
You can probably see from this measure that I do require some expert advice so if you can help please let me know your ideas. Thanks
Gearing...
Re: Gearing...
Provide your using a triple chainring at the moment, you should perhaps try and identify the top gear that you use comfortably the most for good smooth road conditions. Then determine what gear it is in inches using a gear calculator. From this identify the size of the large chainring you'd require to get this gear with the rear small sprocket. By looking around shops such as Spa Cycles (better still, call them - they won't bite. Well not usually!) identify what the most likely small chainring will be for that chainset combination. Matching that with your rear cassette large sprocket will determine what the lowest gear in inches will be. Then see what others here think of the numbers you come up with.
It may be cheaper and easier to just replace the cassette, though it's a more limited option for reducing the gearing.
It may be cheaper and easier to just replace the cassette, though it's a more limited option for reducing the gearing.
Re: Gearing...
Sorry if I'm teaching you things you already know but start with the CTC gear calculator page.
If it's a case of improving your riding efficiency, considering your cadence is a simple starting point.
If it's a case of working out whether different gears would suit your riding style better then take Crepello's route. Work out what you have, what you use and then buy parts to get what you want.
If it's a case of improving your riding efficiency, considering your cadence is a simple starting point.
If it's a case of working out whether different gears would suit your riding style better then take Crepello's route. Work out what you have, what you use and then buy parts to get what you want.
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
Re: Gearing...
The easiest gear is the smallest chain-ring and the largest sprocket that your bike will take.
This may be too low a gear for you and the terrain you normally ride but you will, at least, have the choice.
If you want to maintain your rear dérailleur that you have now, then there will be a maximum size cog that it will run.
Same with the existing front dérailleur, it will have a limit on how small / big you can go.
With the chain rings, if you have a double now and want to change to a triple then you will need a triple dérailleur as well. (Remember though you may need a triple left STI / Ergo as well.)
It would help if you could post the sizes of your current gears and the groupset.
Initially the easiest thing to change is the cassette. You can start with the cheaper models until you decide if that's a suitable gear range.
This may be too low a gear for you and the terrain you normally ride but you will, at least, have the choice.
If you want to maintain your rear dérailleur that you have now, then there will be a maximum size cog that it will run.
Same with the existing front dérailleur, it will have a limit on how small / big you can go.
With the chain rings, if you have a double now and want to change to a triple then you will need a triple dérailleur as well. (Remember though you may need a triple left STI / Ergo as well.)
It would help if you could post the sizes of your current gears and the groupset.
Initially the easiest thing to change is the cassette. You can start with the cheaper models until you decide if that's a suitable gear range.
You'll never know if you don't try it.
-
thirdcrank
- Posts: 36781
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Gearing...
hondated
You have the big advantage of knowing what suits you now. Take it from me that as you get older you are not going to need higher big gears.
As others have said, if you have not done so already, check your current favourite gears against a gear table (the CTC handbook used to publish a very useful one which instead of being in the form of numbers involved laying a ruler across a page - the advantage being you could see the different ways to get the same gear.) Think about anything else you are thinking of doing apart from growing older, such as going to live somewhere hilly. Think about how much lower you would like to go and have a look at how it might be achieved through the gear tables.
There are limits to what can be done, according to what type of equipment you have. Basically, mountain bike stuff gives the potential for much lower gears than road stuff. (You will hear people they have fitted all sorts but the manufacturers' specs say 27T max for a Shimano road cassette and 29T for Campag. MTB cogs go up to 34T. There is not as much flexibility in small sprockets as you might like because modern ones have to be so close to the frame.
As a general rule, if ageing is the issue, err on the low side, but trust your own experience.
You have the big advantage of knowing what suits you now. Take it from me that as you get older you are not going to need higher big gears.
As others have said, if you have not done so already, check your current favourite gears against a gear table (the CTC handbook used to publish a very useful one which instead of being in the form of numbers involved laying a ruler across a page - the advantage being you could see the different ways to get the same gear.) Think about anything else you are thinking of doing apart from growing older, such as going to live somewhere hilly. Think about how much lower you would like to go and have a look at how it might be achieved through the gear tables.
There are limits to what can be done, according to what type of equipment you have. Basically, mountain bike stuff gives the potential for much lower gears than road stuff. (You will hear people they have fitted all sorts but the manufacturers' specs say 27T max for a Shimano road cassette and 29T for Campag. MTB cogs go up to 34T. There is not as much flexibility in small sprockets as you might like because modern ones have to be so close to the frame.
As a general rule, if ageing is the issue, err on the low side, but trust your own experience.
Re: Gearing...
Honestly, only you can decide what's comfortable for you! For example, do you like to sit and spin up hills, or stand up and 'honk'. Likewise, do you want to pedal down steep hills? Use your experience and a gear calculator to work out your ideal min / max gear inches, then see what hardware's available to get that range.
HTH
HTH
"42"
Re: Gearing...
Another thing you may want to think about is having the rear cluster fairly tightly spaced - so that when you change gear, you don't lose momentum. Depending on whether you have a 7, 8 or 9 speed cluster, you might want to go for something like a 12-24 and then have maybe 28-38-48 on the front. So you would spend most of your time on the middle ring, and then use the small ring for inclines. This is what I tend to do and I like to change gear almost constantly to keep myself pedalling at the same cadence, particulary on flattish ground. I am not by any means an expert, this is just based on my own experience.
Taffy
Taffy
Re: Gearing...
Yes, I change gear a lot too. I wouldn't say I spend more time in the middle ring, I expect I spend equal times in each.
Pick your ratios by deciding what you want at each extreme to fit in with the terrain you ride on.
We have hills here and I'm a strong rider - not fast, just strong!
My bottom ratio is 27" achieved by a 30t front and a 29t rear. My top is 108" with a 53t front and a 13t rear. Middle ring is 42t and I have a 10 speed cassette. This works perfectly for me considering what is available in the Campagnolo line.
I love the way the gears change and how the drive-train is almost silent. Perhaps I need a higher top end, but the bottom end is just right.
Get the bottom ratio right, the top ratio right, then stack up the middle bits with as many ratios as you can afford.
Pick your ratios by deciding what you want at each extreme to fit in with the terrain you ride on.
We have hills here and I'm a strong rider - not fast, just strong!
My bottom ratio is 27" achieved by a 30t front and a 29t rear. My top is 108" with a 53t front and a 13t rear. Middle ring is 42t and I have a 10 speed cassette. This works perfectly for me considering what is available in the Campagnolo line.
I love the way the gears change and how the drive-train is almost silent. Perhaps I need a higher top end, but the bottom end is just right.
Get the bottom ratio right, the top ratio right, then stack up the middle bits with as many ratios as you can afford.
Mick F. Cornwall
Re: Gearing...
Gearing is about trading off some things. I am happy to trade off closely spaced gears in order to get a very low bottom and a reasonably high top.
I have a Shimano/Stronglight set-up which allows me to have a 24T chainring and a 34T rear sprocket. This gives me a 19" bottom gear. I'm a reasonably strong rider, and this very low gear allows me to spin up big hills while others might be standing on their pedals or working their knees harder at low cadence. It worked for me on a recent tour of the Pyrenees, where I noticed that my set-up allowed me to climb faster on the steeper sections than those without such a low gear. It has also worked for me on shorter but steeper UK hills, where the 19" gear allows me to ride at speeds of below 2.5mph (at which point my computer thinks the bike has stopped and reads 0.0mph!). Some people say that they would find it hard to pedal a bike that slowly without falling off, or could not re-start in such a low gear. All I can say is that I don't think my balancing skills are particularly special and I manage it ok even with a fully loaded bike. If I remember I might change up before stopping to make the re-start easier, but I can still start in that 19" gear if need be.
At the top end I have a 48 front and 11 rear, which gives me something well over 100". This is enough for pushing on the flat or down moderate inclines at up to 30mph.
If I were to lose any of that gear range I would give away the top gears to keep the low ones.
I have a Shimano/Stronglight set-up which allows me to have a 24T chainring and a 34T rear sprocket. This gives me a 19" bottom gear. I'm a reasonably strong rider, and this very low gear allows me to spin up big hills while others might be standing on their pedals or working their knees harder at low cadence. It worked for me on a recent tour of the Pyrenees, where I noticed that my set-up allowed me to climb faster on the steeper sections than those without such a low gear. It has also worked for me on shorter but steeper UK hills, where the 19" gear allows me to ride at speeds of below 2.5mph (at which point my computer thinks the bike has stopped and reads 0.0mph!). Some people say that they would find it hard to pedal a bike that slowly without falling off, or could not re-start in such a low gear. All I can say is that I don't think my balancing skills are particularly special and I manage it ok even with a fully loaded bike. If I remember I might change up before stopping to make the re-start easier, but I can still start in that 19" gear if need be.
At the top end I have a 48 front and 11 rear, which gives me something well over 100". This is enough for pushing on the flat or down moderate inclines at up to 30mph.
If I were to lose any of that gear range I would give away the top gears to keep the low ones.
Re: Gearing...
I agree with Frank.
Close ratios are nice to have, you can tune the gear to get the most efficient gear and so cover more ground at a slightly higher speed for slightly less work.
BUT, one hill where you are flogging a too big gear will ruin all of that. So a granny that gets you to the top of that hill fresh and able to go on will offset any advantage of close ratios.
As a personal thing I like to keep pedalling down a hill rather than coasting as it is faster (More gains for wide ratios here!) and warmer in cold weather.
Close ratios are nice to have, you can tune the gear to get the most efficient gear and so cover more ground at a slightly higher speed for slightly less work.
BUT, one hill where you are flogging a too big gear will ruin all of that. So a granny that gets you to the top of that hill fresh and able to go on will offset any advantage of close ratios.
As a personal thing I like to keep pedalling down a hill rather than coasting as it is faster (More gains for wide ratios here!) and warmer in cold weather.
"I thought of that while riding my bike." -Albert Einstein, on the Theory of Relativity
2007 ICE QNT
2008 Hase Kettwiesel AL27
2011 Catrike Trail
1951 engine
2007 ICE QNT
2008 Hase Kettwiesel AL27
2011 Catrike Trail
1951 engine
Re: Gearing...
Thank you everyone for your words of wisdom.And please do not think that you are patronising me at all because I can really be thick at times.To digest this information I will print it off and sit and do an analysis wover a nice cuppa.How lucky we all are to have this Forum.
Re: Gearing...
I'm with Frank too. I currently have 2 machines running, the tourer is a 9 speed triple, 48/38/24 X 11-34 with a range of 19" - 118" (ish), the Other One 
is 48/38/26 X 11-26 ten speed, but doesn't need that compound low granny gear because it's much lighter and has a far more aggressive riding position. If I run out of cogs I change UP 2 gears and stand up.
Horses for courses, design the bike to suit your type of riding and the landscape you ride in.
is 48/38/26 X 11-26 ten speed, but doesn't need that compound low granny gear because it's much lighter and has a far more aggressive riding position. If I run out of cogs I change UP 2 gears and stand up. Horses for courses, design the bike to suit your type of riding and the landscape you ride in.
If at first you don't succeed - cheat!!
Re: Gearing...
Not trying to hijack the thread, but PW how do you find changing from the 38 to 24 tooth on your tourer and what mech and shifter are you using?
Just Rob please.
Re: Gearing...
I did warn you I coukld be a little bit thick at times so please bear with me. Went out on the bike today and determined that the most comfortable combination for me is 19 sprocket - 48 Chain Ring which if I am correct looking at the table gives me 67" of travel. Is that correct. Given those gear sizes I am probably making myself sound a bit of a wimp but that s the most comfortable to me.
Given this 67" should I now be looking to obtain that at the smaller chain rings as well.
All comments greatly received.Oh before I go given I have a long type re deralieur does that mean I can increase the size of the rear sprocket from 27 if necessary.
Given this 67" should I now be looking to obtain that at the smaller chain rings as well.
All comments greatly received.Oh before I go given I have a long type re deralieur does that mean I can increase the size of the rear sprocket from 27 if necessary.
-
thirdcrank
- Posts: 36781
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Gearing...
hondated
67" isn't the distance you travel, it's the theoretical size of the wheel you would need to get that gear with directly attached pedals, eg a 'penny farthing'. I think a lot of people would regard that as quite a reasonable gear for riding around in on the flat. How much you need above or below that, especially below that, depends on the steepness of the hills you intend tackling and what you might be carrying.
The only way you can be certain what sprockets a gear mech will cope with are by checking the manufacturer's spec, which a lot of people feel will be on the conservative side. If you have no instructions for your own mech contining the info, manufacturers' catalogues and websites are a good source of info. Also, it's not just a question of what's the biggest sprocket it will accommodate, but also the total difference in teeth front and back i.e. sum of teeth on smallest chain ring and on smallest cog, subtracted from the sum of the teeth on big chain ring and teeth on biggest cog eg (52 + 28) - (42 + 13) = 25 (I hope)
67" isn't the distance you travel, it's the theoretical size of the wheel you would need to get that gear with directly attached pedals, eg a 'penny farthing'. I think a lot of people would regard that as quite a reasonable gear for riding around in on the flat. How much you need above or below that, especially below that, depends on the steepness of the hills you intend tackling and what you might be carrying.
The only way you can be certain what sprockets a gear mech will cope with are by checking the manufacturer's spec, which a lot of people feel will be on the conservative side. If you have no instructions for your own mech contining the info, manufacturers' catalogues and websites are a good source of info. Also, it's not just a question of what's the biggest sprocket it will accommodate, but also the total difference in teeth front and back i.e. sum of teeth on smallest chain ring and on smallest cog, subtracted from the sum of the teeth on big chain ring and teeth on biggest cog eg (52 + 28) - (42 + 13) = 25 (I hope)