Upgrading my gears ... is it possible?

[mkbutters]

Hi
I am pretty 'green' when it comes to technical issues on bikes. I recently changed my old Trek 7500 Hybrid and got a Trek Crossrip 3 to do LEJOG. I am now really struggling on hills!

The Crossrip
CASSETTE: Shimano 105, 11-32, 11-speed
CRANK: Shimano 105 50/34 Compact Crankset
SHIFTERS: Shimano RS685, 11-speed

Is it possible to change this to make hills easier?

Please help

Mike

[roubaixtuesday]

It's possible to go to at least 36 and maybe more on the cassette as a relatively easy first step.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=113182

[531colin]

Unless you actually have a use for a 50/11 top gear, I would fit one of these....https://spacycles.co.uk/m2b0s109p3383/SPA-CYCLES-TD-2-Super-Compact-Chainset-with-Zicral-Rings, maybe with 26/42 chainrings. (you will need the matching bottom bracket unit)
Have a look and a think about which ratios you actually used on the previous bike.

[pwa]

Unless you actually have a use for a 50/11 top gear, I would fit one of these....https://spacycles.co.uk/m2b0s109p3383/SPA-CYCLES-TD-2-Super-Compact-Chainset-with-Zicral-Rings, maybe with 26/42 chainrings. (you will need the matching bottom bracket unit)
Have a look and a think about which ratios you actually used on the previous bike.

+1

So called "compact" chainsets just aren't compact enough for many of us. Colin's solution will give you the possibility of gears that feel a lot easier on steep hills.

[whoof]

Comparing the two options above then changing the cassette you can lower your gearing from the current 34/32 which is 28.6" to 34/36 which is 25.4" so it would be about 11% 'easier'. The cost could be £40 for the cassette (SRAM one from CRC if the link doesn't work) plus fitting by a local shop say £10-£15* or it's something with a couple of tools and a quick look on Youtube you could do yourself. Total £55

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/sram ... 0425385087)&ptaid=pla-188341741996&utm_source=google&utm_term=&utm_campaign=Chain+Reaction-UK-PLA-PLA-All-DT-SE-Shopping+QLB+Generic+Desktop&utm_medium=base&utm_content=mkwid|s5I7vkBJI_dc|pcrid|161855055965|pkw||pmt||prd|444314UK

Changing the chainset to the Spa Cycles super compact you could theoretically opt for something as low as a 24 tooth inner ring giving you 24/32 or a 20.3" which is 29% easier

£60 for the chainset + £10 for a JP400 bottom bracket and £15 for a sleeve to convert the shell from a press fit to square tapered bracket. Labour costs I would estimate about £50*. Total £135.

The cheapest option is get fitter and loose weight but I know I'm not going to get much fitter or lighter in the next few years.

*Labour costs are just guessimates but you can check with your local shop

[Phileas]

I know I'm not going to get much fitter or lighter in the next few years

That's a bit pessimistic.

[mkbutters]

Thank you all for your replies . I spoke to the shop I purchased it from an they have suggested 48/32 and a 11/34 cassette ?!? As I said Im new to all this but that doesn't sound like a huge difference?

Thanks
Mike

[Brucey]

Thank you all for your replies . I spoke to the shop I purchased it from an they have suggested 48/32 and a 11/34 cassette ?!? As I said Im new to all this but that doesn't sound like a huge difference?

it isn't. Compared here;

http://www.gear-calculator.com/?GR=DERS&KB=34,50&RZ=11,12,13,14,16,18,20,22,25,28,32&UF=2240&TF=90&SL=2.6&UN=MPH&GR2=DERS&KB2=32,48&RZ2=11,12,13,14,16,18,20,23,26,30,34&UF2=2240

In fact it is about the same as the (much cheaper) option of going for a 36T big sprocket, in terms of reducing the bottom gear ratio.

http://www.gear-calculator.com/?GR=DERS&KB=34,50&RZ=11,12,13,14,16,18,20,22,25,28,32&UF=2240&TF=90&SL=2.6&UN=MPH&GR2=DERS&KB2=34,50&RZ2=11,12,13,15,17,19,22,25,28,32,36&UF2=2240

BTW the 36T sprocket may cause problems, because the rear mech officially/theoretically won't accept that size, but in practice it often does, without making the shifting completely hopeless.

cheers

[rmurphy195]

There may be a restriction on the chainring size - if you fit smaller chainrings, the front changer will have to be fitted slightly lower down on the frame. There can be 2 issues with this that I am aware of (having done something similar!)

1) The tail of the front changer may foul the chainstay

2) If the front changer is fitted to a bracket that is part of the frame, rather than being clamped around the tube, the bracket may not allow enough adjustment.

So - talk to your LBS, maybe that's the reason for the suggestion that they have made. It's why I settled for the "traditional" triple chainset (old-fashioned 3 x 8, with the square-taper BB) on my Heritage, rather than the later, up-to-date gubbins.

Somewhere on the CTC site there was a gear chart that was easily understood - if someone can find the link to this (I can't under either CTC or cycling UK, very frustrating) the OP may find it useful to gain some understanding. I've tried to attach my copy, but this system does not allow exel files to be attached.

PS - I've pasted below the chart for the gears on my bike as they currently stand, using 26.69" as the wheel diameter (closest I can get to 700c as far as I know) You will see from this that my lowest gear of 22" comes from the 26 tooth chainwheel and the 32 tooth rear sprocket, my top gear is 112" which is using the 46/11 combination.

Condor revised hg41(£13) or hg50(£17) 11-32 + Spa triple 46/36/26
Sprocket: 11 13 15 18 21 24 28 32

46 112 94 82 68 58 51 44 38
36 87 74 64 53 46 40 34 30
26 63 53 46 39 33 29 25 22

Yours is currently 28" to 121", similar to my 26 chainwheel / 24 sprocket at the bottom end.I do use those extra 2 bottom gears when I'm tired, going uphill, against a headwind!

[whoof]

I know I'm not going to get much fitter or lighter in the next few years

That's a bit pessimistic.

No, just realistic. I'm not currently heavy and I am already pretty fit. To get significantly lighter or fitter would take a lot of effort and doing intervals or keeping one eye on the scales every time I eat isn't worth it IMO to do some commuting/touring/leisure riding. One thing I am confident about is I am going to get older in the next few, years.

[Phileas]

@whoof

I mistook you for the OP so I misinterpreted your post.

[Tigerbiten]

Now that I've learnt a lot more about gears in general,I think you need to set up 3 gear ranges.

The most important are your flatland gears as these will be the common ones used.
Depending on your cadence, they will be in the 60"-70" range.
Get this wrong on a double and you'll either be running bad chain angles (big-big or small-small) or even worse changing up front a lot.
A triple is easier as it's the middle ring.

The next is the low gears.
I've always thought that a good rule of thumb if you want/need to climb steep hills is the sprocket is 4 teeth bigger than the chainring.
You don't need to go that low if you're not going to hit silly steep stuff.

Lastly are the high end 'fun' gears.
How much above 100" is a matter of taste.
Another rule of thumb is 4:1 chainring:sprocket size.
If you can go bigger then good, but don't get silly high gears at the expense of the low end gears.

The trouble is that big gears sell due to marketing hype.
So I think most modern bikes are overgeared by around 10%-20%.
Which is fine if you're mainly doing sub 50 mile a day rides a couple of times a week in rolling terrain.
Suddenly do 2-3 long days in the mountains and you'll suddenly think they're not so clever.

YMMV, Luck ........

[RickH]

There may be a restriction on the chainring size - if you fit smaller chainrings, the front changer will have to be fitted slightly lower down on the frame. There can be 2 issues with this that I am aware of (having done something similar!)

1) The tail of the front changer may foul the chainstay

2) If the front changer is fitted to a bracket that is part of the frame, rather than being clamped around the tube, the bracket may not allow enough adjustment.

There is also

3) you can't get the front mech in the right place because of the positioning of bottle bosses on the seat tube getting in the way of the mech clamp.

to the OP - Unless you are a real masher (turn the pedals really slowly) gears much above 100" are really superfluous. I can wind a 103" gear up to above 35mph & generally find at those speeds I can generally gain more from a good aerodynamic position than I can from pedalling.

I'd give a +1 to the Spa 42/26 that Colin suggested. Will it work? I've found a rough guide is that for every tooth you take away (or add), the mech will need to move by 2mm, so changing from 50 to 42 means you will, ideally, need to move the mech about 16mm down. Is that likely to cause a problem in the 3 situations above.

[mkbutters]

Again thank you all for your replies .... its like learning a new language!

[531colin]

I had the prototype Spa Elan built up with a 24/40 double chainset, to get this old man gears as low as possible, and to test the limits of the system.
It was a 105 hydraulic disc setup, so from memory that's 11 speed?
Anyway, try as I might, I couldn't get the thing to misbehave in any way, shape, or form.
I'm an inveterate triple chainset user, and shunner of STIs, so this is all a bit foreign to me.
Although the down and top tubes of the Elan are ovalised, we deliberately kept the seat tube round so that the front mech. can go as low as you like, and the bottle cage is above the mech..
24/40 is a big difference in ratios, going either up or down.....if you rode it for long, you would get good at shifting front and back at the same time to minimise the step.