Is 8 gears enough?
- Perpetual Tourist
- Posts: 6
- Joined: 5 Mar 2008, 7:41pm
- Location: London
Is 8 gears enough?
Hi there, what do people on this forum think of touring on a bike with 8 gears only? I would initially tour across Western Europe but then move on to travel further afield if I take a liking to it.
I get slightly cross with myself when I think of people who have cycled the world on fixed gear bikes, and here I am over-analysing frames and gear types.
On the other hand... the technical stuff is getting better all the time, so why not take advantage of modern bicycle technology?
So my question is - would you consider touring on a bike with 8 gears or not? Will I end up pushing the bike over most hills?!
I get slightly cross with myself when I think of people who have cycled the world on fixed gear bikes, and here I am over-analysing frames and gear types.
On the other hand... the technical stuff is getting better all the time, so why not take advantage of modern bicycle technology?
So my question is - would you consider touring on a bike with 8 gears or not? Will I end up pushing the bike over most hills?!
-
- Posts: 36780
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
The number of gears and the range they cover are not directly linked. By varying the size of chainwheels and sprockets you can have just about any gears you want, be it on a single speed or 30 speed set up. All you really get with more gears is the possibility of smaller steps beteween gears over any given range.
-
- Posts: 23
- Joined: 28 May 2007, 5:51pm
-
- Posts: 8399
- Joined: 31 Jan 2007, 6:46pm
- Location: Horwich Which is Lancs :-)
On the whole does it matter, as has already been said if the range is adequate, ie lowest low enough and highest high enough.
However the bigger the range the bigger the jumps with fewer sprockets.
More sprockets gives smaller increments and might mean the difference between not quite having that right gear and finding the right one for that slight incline into a headwind, rather than twiddling or pushing.
However the bigger the range the bigger the jumps with fewer sprockets.
More sprockets gives smaller increments and might mean the difference between not quite having that right gear and finding the right one for that slight incline into a headwind, rather than twiddling or pushing.
eileithyia wrote:On the whole does it matter, as has already been said if the range is adequate, ie lowest low enough and highest high enough.
However the bigger the range the bigger the jumps with fewer sprockets.
More sprockets gives smaller increments and might mean the difference between not quite having that right gear and finding the right one for that slight incline into a headwind, rather than twiddling or pushing.
Utterly agree.
Not wishing to get lost in yet another argument, gear range and steps is a purely personal thing. 14sp Rohloffs don't cut it for me - far too wide and too big steps. Derailleurs OTOH can be custom built to suit. I'll stay with my 30sp.
Mick F. Cornwall
PT, I've toured with the usual touring bike gear set-up (3x5,6,7 etc), a Nexus 7 hub gear,fixed gear and lately a Moulton FX8.
Personally I like to tour light' and hostel overnight.
The way I look at touring now is that the simpler the bike is,the better. It's too easy to get bogged down with having the lataest groupset, luggage, frame material or whatever. Cycles are ostensibly simple machines. It's best to keep it that way if we can.
Touring for me is about the scenery and people I meet. As long as the bike is well maintained it'll do the job.
I'll bet if you ever tour on a bike with "few" gears,you'll find that you enjoy it just as much as on a multi-geared dream machine.
Personally I like to tour light' and hostel overnight.
The way I look at touring now is that the simpler the bike is,the better. It's too easy to get bogged down with having the lataest groupset, luggage, frame material or whatever. Cycles are ostensibly simple machines. It's best to keep it that way if we can.
Touring for me is about the scenery and people I meet. As long as the bike is well maintained it'll do the job.
I'll bet if you ever tour on a bike with "few" gears,you'll find that you enjoy it just as much as on a multi-geared dream machine.
pioneer wrote:I'll bet if you ever tour on a bike with "few" gears,you'll find that you enjoy it just as much as on a multi-geared dream machine.
Agree.
Me and my mate Paul toured Snowdonia in '67. I had a 3sp SA and he had 5sp derailleur.
The thing is, once you've tasted multi-gears, it's difficult to go back!
Mick F. Cornwall
- Perpetual Tourist
- Posts: 6
- Joined: 5 Mar 2008, 7:41pm
- Location: London
Very helpful replies, and of course I completely disregarded the fact that I need to consider gear range, rather than the amount of gears. Still learning!
Pioneer - I think I share your sentiments on touring, and am currently looking for a used Moulton for my travels. I am not looking to go fast, but to be able to have time to see things as I cycle.
Pioneer - I think I share your sentiments on touring, and am currently looking for a used Moulton for my travels. I am not looking to go fast, but to be able to have time to see things as I cycle.
Mick F wrote:eileithyia wrote:On the whole does it matter, as has already been said if the range is adequate, ie lowest low enough and highest high enough.
However the bigger the range the bigger the jumps with fewer sprockets.
More sprockets gives smaller increments and might mean the difference between not quite having that right gear and finding the right one for that slight incline into a headwind, rather than twiddling or pushing.
Utterly agree.
Not wishing to get lost in yet another argument, gear range and steps is a purely personal thing. 14sp Rohloffs don't cut it for me - far too wide and too big steps. Derailleurs OTOH can be custom built to suit. I'll stay with my 30sp.
A rohloff is as customizable as a derailleur!
-
- Posts: 36780
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
My thought is this. Work out your bottom gear - the one you want on a long climb, fully laden, in the rain, hungover, with the wind in your face. Work out your top gear - I'd have thought a 53/12 would be good enough for most of us. Stuff the interval between the two with as many ratios as you can muster.
Mick F is right, as ever. Why give yourself the grief of clunky steps between ratios? And - before even thinking about a Rohloff take heed...
http://www.anothercyclingforum.com/inde ... ic=48384.0
Mick F is right, as ever. Why give yourself the grief of clunky steps between ratios? And - before even thinking about a Rohloff take heed...
http://www.anothercyclingforum.com/inde ... ic=48384.0
30"- 87" is plenty enough.
10 gears at the back,why? They'll only wear out quicker (not as much meat' on the sprockets) and the chains are weedy to.
When is all this multi-gear nonsense going to stop?
Oh, I know. When Mr. Shimano and Mr. Campag' say it is and in the meantime,just keep buying what they give us.
I'd never be suprised to find that one of them puts out a four ring chainset because "thier research says that people want it".
I don't think so.
10 gears at the back,why? They'll only wear out quicker (not as much meat' on the sprockets) and the chains are weedy to.
When is all this multi-gear nonsense going to stop?
Oh, I know. When Mr. Shimano and Mr. Campag' say it is and in the meantime,just keep buying what they give us.
I'd never be suprised to find that one of them puts out a four ring chainset because "thier research says that people want it".
I don't think so.