Just bought an aluminium framed raleigh pioneer venture - 700c, shimano sora levers, shimano truvativ cranks and chainwheels 28,38,48 with shimano alivio derailleur and 8 sprockets 11-30.
Being a wimp and tending to use the bike to carry a fair load I tried swapping chainwheels from a shimano XG crank set which I had had fitted to my last bike - 22,32,42 = much easier on hills!
Problem is that the front change no longer works with the middle and larger chainrings fitted - it is fine if I only swap the smallest ring (22,38,48) - and I will probably leave it like this.
Question is, however, how careful do you have to be in matching different chainwheels with indexed front changers? The pressings on the two sets of middle and outer chainwheels are different (the smallest chainring of each set has no pressings). Or is it just that I should have adjusted the front changer itself?
And why do manufacturers put such high gearing on load carrying, hill climbing bikes - or am I just feeble???
Grateful for any advice,
Steve
ps not sure why the smily face - I cant get rid of it! - the chainring set now is 22,38,48
Compatibility - chainwheels and front changer
And why do manufacturers put such high gearing on load carrying, hill climbing bikes - or am I just feeble???
SP: I will let others comment on the compatability problem but my answer to your question above is as follows:
(There was a long and at times heated thread on this topic which is now locked.)
My own view is that the gears generally supplied on bikes are quite adequate for general town use, reasonably flat countryside and the kind of loads that most people carry i.e. no load at all. With some gentle physical improvement (which most people don't mind), they are about right. More importantly they relate to the way most people ride a bicycle - slow, strong turns of the crank in a high gear to produce the highest speed. This is easy to sustain on short journeys. So no problem so far. (This is different from experienced cyclists who are using the high gears to maximum effect and have the muscle power to use them.) Ironically, beginners don't like low gears because they don't produce the high speed they expect and worse still, they don't have the flexible muscles to pedal quickly in a low gear - it's immensely tiring for them. Again so far so good, the bike makers have got it right.
The problem occurs when a more adventurous cyclist wants to go further for longer, up steeper hills, carrying a heavy load. To do this in a high gear requires immense muscle power - the simple answer is very low gears with rapid pedalling, a skill acquired with practice. The alternative is to walk up the hill. Mountain bike gears are designed for steep hills, though few MTBs in my view ever see a hill, let alone a mountain. The marriage made in heaven is of course MTB gears on a touring frame. Good touring bikes will come with these low gears but not quite as low as they could be! The answer, I believe, is to do exactly what you have done and change the chain set (or even better, specify it when you buy the bike).
One objection to lower gears is that it inevitably means losing the very high gears, but this is a price you will probably be happy to pay, though not everyone is. So, the final conclusion is that gears supplied with the bike reflect the probable user/use and that if you want an off the peg bike you will have to take what most people want in the way of gears and change them later.
SP: I will let others comment on the compatability problem but my answer to your question above is as follows:
(There was a long and at times heated thread on this topic which is now locked.)
My own view is that the gears generally supplied on bikes are quite adequate for general town use, reasonably flat countryside and the kind of loads that most people carry i.e. no load at all. With some gentle physical improvement (which most people don't mind), they are about right. More importantly they relate to the way most people ride a bicycle - slow, strong turns of the crank in a high gear to produce the highest speed. This is easy to sustain on short journeys. So no problem so far. (This is different from experienced cyclists who are using the high gears to maximum effect and have the muscle power to use them.) Ironically, beginners don't like low gears because they don't produce the high speed they expect and worse still, they don't have the flexible muscles to pedal quickly in a low gear - it's immensely tiring for them. Again so far so good, the bike makers have got it right.
The problem occurs when a more adventurous cyclist wants to go further for longer, up steeper hills, carrying a heavy load. To do this in a high gear requires immense muscle power - the simple answer is very low gears with rapid pedalling, a skill acquired with practice. The alternative is to walk up the hill. Mountain bike gears are designed for steep hills, though few MTBs in my view ever see a hill, let alone a mountain. The marriage made in heaven is of course MTB gears on a touring frame. Good touring bikes will come with these low gears but not quite as low as they could be! The answer, I believe, is to do exactly what you have done and change the chain set (or even better, specify it when you buy the bike).
One objection to lower gears is that it inevitably means losing the very high gears, but this is a price you will probably be happy to pay, though not everyone is. So, the final conclusion is that gears supplied with the bike reflect the probable user/use and that if you want an off the peg bike you will have to take what most people want in the way of gears and change them later.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
Horizon is correct. I'm sure manufacturers gear their low end of the range bikes for a very low cadence.
However not many casual cyclists will spend over £500 on a bike, yet at this level and above the manufacturers standard gearing remains high. I suspect this is influenced by top end of fittness cyclists who can and do use these gears at a very high cadence. You only need to look in the magazines for reviews to see what I mean. Not many fat fifty year olds writing reviews, yet I see a lot of us out and about our local lanes.
Our local road clubmen seem to ride high end bikes on the standard gearing but for every one of them there must be two or more like me who ride slower and need the gearing changed.
For those of us who are keen, past the first flush of youth and carrying extra baggage both in the form of body mass and luggage the standard gearing of more expensive bikes is too high. I think the reason is that manufacturers will react to a review stating the overall gearing is too low, but not to an after sales regearing by an owner.
Sadly style rather than practicality sells most things these days, bikes are no exception.
However not many casual cyclists will spend over £500 on a bike, yet at this level and above the manufacturers standard gearing remains high. I suspect this is influenced by top end of fittness cyclists who can and do use these gears at a very high cadence. You only need to look in the magazines for reviews to see what I mean. Not many fat fifty year olds writing reviews, yet I see a lot of us out and about our local lanes.
Our local road clubmen seem to ride high end bikes on the standard gearing but for every one of them there must be two or more like me who ride slower and need the gearing changed.
For those of us who are keen, past the first flush of youth and carrying extra baggage both in the form of body mass and luggage the standard gearing of more expensive bikes is too high. I think the reason is that manufacturers will react to a review stating the overall gearing is too low, but not to an after sales regearing by an owner.
Sadly style rather than practicality sells most things these days, bikes are no exception.
compatibility chainwheel and cranks
Just realised - Truvativ isn't a shimano brand! - derrr!! -- maybe part of my problem?
Compatibility - chainwheels and front changer
Thanks for the advice, especially that link gaz - I had missed that when I tried searching. So far 22,38,48 seems to work fine so I'll settle for that.
-
willem jongman
- Posts: 2750
- Joined: 7 Jan 2008, 4:16pm
Yes you should have adjusted the front derailler. You should have lowered it a bit, and maybe fiddled a bit with the angle and the settings for the stops.
But your current gearing is quite allright. It is outside the offical range, but that shows that the real range of deraillers is often greater.
Shimano front mtb deraillers (apart from the very cheap ones) prefer a 12 teeth step between middle and outer front chainwheel. If you need a greater range, you can also change to a 34 t max cassette, next time you change it.
Willem
But your current gearing is quite allright. It is outside the offical range, but that shows that the real range of deraillers is often greater.
Shimano front mtb deraillers (apart from the very cheap ones) prefer a 12 teeth step between middle and outer front chainwheel. If you need a greater range, you can also change to a 34 t max cassette, next time you change it.
Willem