Gear Choice For touring etc.; what suits you and why?

[Brucey]

Maybe this has been extensively addressed already elsewhere, but it occurs to me that there are so many choices these days with both gearing types as well as strategy variants that someone approaching the subject cold might benefit for a few examples and comments/comparisons from users. I'm thinking that the info could be presented thus;

Gearing type, intended purpose.
Sprockets and/or ratios acheived.
Comments; pros and cons.

Some examples from my own bikes;

Variant A1.
Alpine double variant; general use, light touring.
46-32, 14-16-18-21-24-28 block.
Pros. Good range, small gaps, simple/cheap parts, large sprockets for high efficiency/low wear, can use almost any derailleurs, nice chainline on JTA (just tapping along) gear.
Cons. Not many high gears, not enough low gears for heavy loads, double shift occurs at an inconvenient point?.

Variant A2. As above but with 12 and/or 32T cogs added, using long-arm rear mech; this addresses some of the cons with little penalty.

Variant B.
'Duplication' triple; general road use, touring.
50-44-30, 13-15-17-19-21-24-28 -(32)block
Pros. Best thought of as an alpine double with a few more (efficient) high gears with nice chainlines, courtesy of an 'extra' big ring. 'Extra chainring' weight is ~100g typically. Very simple shift pattern on big rings (many gears duplicated) with no doubleshift between big rings, smallish ratio gaps, middle and small ring work like an alpine double, nice JTA chainline, choice of double-shift location, enough high/low gears for most situations. Nice shifts on triple courtesy of 'big' middle ring. Scheme can be further expanded using 3x9 if necessary. Also 'compact 8' possibilities using other shimano x9 cassettes e.g. see Variant E.
Cons. Fewer different ratios than 3x21 or 3x24 might suggest. Need wide range front and rear mechs. Still have a double-shift to contend with. Can still run out of gears in extremis. No standard Shimano cassettes (I think) without modification.

Variant C.
'racing double' with extended range; unladen day rides in not-too-hilly territory.
53-39, 13-14-15-16-17-19-21-23-25
Pros; No pointlessly huge gears, lots of close ratios where you want them on a racing bike, enough low gears for modest climbs. Uses standard racing mechs. Choice of doubleshift location. 2x9 system give slick shifts.
Cons. Not enough high gears for real racing, not enough low gears for real hills (not without a bit of a struggle, anyway). Big double shift. JTA chainlines poor unless going rather slowly or rather quickly.

Variant D.
Triple (Racing Double with bail-out); unladen day rides (on modifed roadbike) in hilly territory.
52-42-30, 13-15-(16)-17-19-21-24-28
Pros; 52-42 doubleshift very familiar for some of us. Enough efficient high and medium gears for spirited unladen riding, plus bail-out ring for more serious climbs. Miniscule weight penalty of small chainring etc vs double; chainline biased to big rings. Choice of 1-2 and 2-3 doubleshift location. Triple shifts mostly OK (with right parts fitted). Runs well as 3x7 or 3x8, can be extended/filled in using 3x9 etc.
Cons; gears not all close enough by roadie standards, two doubleshifts to figure out, JTA chainlines won't suit everyone. No standard Shimano cassette available. Need wide range mechs. Can still run out of gears in extremis. Selecting front mech to run close enough to seat tube for desired chainline was problematic; small ring will clash with chainstay using this chainline on some frames.

Variant E.
MTB triple 3x8 or 3x9; general MTB riding, some touring applications.
44-32-22, 11-12-14-16-18-21-24-28-(32)
Pros. Wide range (think of it as an alpine double with an additional extra-low range), Choice of doubleshift position (important offroad). JTA gears typically run good chainlines on road and offroad (big and middle rings respectively). Doubleshifts are vaguely similar. 11-28 will run OK (apart from some small-small combos which are more or less duplicated where the chain runs slack) using a medium length GS mech. Some 12T cogs will work as top cogs, so can build 9s-based 'compact 8' 12-32 (or 11-28 with same cassette) on dishless rear wheel with modified 7s freehub body. Widely available MTB parts. Shimano 9x MTB rear mechs work with road 9x STis if required.
Cons. Two doubleshifts. 11-12 pairing is pretty pointless. If using 11-28 (8s) setup low gears are not low enough for every offroad situation. Not enough efficient high ratios for unladen road use with smooth tyres, (or perhaps touring use). Need wide range mechs if running 32T especially. Shimano MTB front mech doesn't play well with road STis without cable mount adjustment.

well that'll do for starters, pitch in with others....

cheers

[Ayesha]

One of the most talked about bicycle subjects for the last 100 years.

On the day after Sturmey and Archer launched their hub box, cyclists argued about the best rings and sprockets to use for riding.

Serious studies on the subject started quite early with 'volunteers' riding a rudimentary 'ergometer' and having their pulse recorded.

Rumour has it that William Froude, who invented the 'water brake dynamometer' had cyclists on his invention. The fabled results were 100 Watts at 12 mph was a good output and this should be performed at 80 rpm crank speed.

Bring this into the modern era and with bike and clothing developments, 100 Watts will get an AVERAGE bloke along at 14 mph.
So, one of the multitude of gears on the bike should get you along at 14 mph at 80 rpm... a 60 inch gear.

You can have, if you wish, high gears up to over 125 inches, but can you muster the power to push them? They do come in handy down a long descent tho'

At the bottom end, a measure of one's strength and endurance is a wise move.
If the trip is short, power can be applied at will and quite high gears can be used, even up hills.

If the trip is lengthy, well over 10 hours, muscular fatigue sets in and strength deteriorates with duration. Relatively strong short term cyclists fall below that 100 Watt point after eight hours of pedaling. Note: fatigue can be delayed by NOT 'Going barmy' in the first 10 hours of riding.

When this happens, the bike needs a gear which will get up a 10% using 100 Watts. In my case its at 2 mph and that's a 21 inch gear at 30 rpm.

There is a 21 inch gear on the bike, but I rarely use it.

I have Brucey's Variant E with a 22T, a 36T ring in place of the 32T, and no big ring. 12 - 27 cassette.

[PW]

Having been around as a touring camper since the late 70s I think I've evolved through all of 'em.
52/42 X 6 speed 14-26 was horrific, then it was the 52/36 with the 5 speed 14-34 soup plate, better but you needed to get down the block fast if there was a hill coming - GRAUNCH!
The longest lived system we settled on was 52/40/30 with a 6 speed 13-32. That was a good general set up for day rides in the Peak or camping trips around N France when the kids were little. 2 tooth gaps at the high end up to 4 in the granny gears where you don't want to be jumping 3 changes and a chainring at the same time - (anyone know why that big double change was nicknamed a "Flying Camel"? it always puzzled me!)
When 6 speed screw on blocks started to head towards obsolescence it coincided with the family fleet mostly being worn out, so I did a bit of homework and decided that 9 speed triple was probably the way to go. The 11t small sprocket looked as though it would wear out fast so I calculated the gearing to get a "normal" - for us - 108" top off the 8th gear with the other one as a toy. These days I'd be lost without it when in a hurry.
I'm normally happy with a touring set up of 48/38/24 X 11-34, which will give useful gears into a headwind at the top end, without losing the Warp Drive downhill when it's near pub closing time and there's still plenty left to get the camping gear over the Bealach Na Ba for anyone who's daft enough to try it.
The fun bike is a lot lighter and doesn't have much carrying capacity, so that one I keep the ratios closer together. The chainset is still 48/38/24, but the back end is a 10 speed 11-28, so it has the top end and most of the racing gears of a competition machine from maybe 10 years ago with a more civilised set of middle ratios and enough to cope with the moorland roads at the end of a tiring day.

[tatanab]

Most of my current machines are set up with triples typically 46/36/24 with 13/15/16/17/19/21/24/28 on the back - not a standard cassette at all. I use this set up because I do not need big gears, the 90 inch top gear is ample since I have always been a pedaller not a pusher; the 19/21 in the middle are my two usual gears; and the lower end are close enough together that I can change up when needed. Some years ago, in the mountains, I had a bottom gear of 24 with the next gear of 32. Should be ok I thought, only 8". But it is a change of 30% which I found I could not cope with so was stuck in 24 when really I wanted a little bigger. My gears are now spaced at something like 7% intervals. There are of course duplications, which I can use to my benefit by changing into the middle ring on a long climb and using the smaller sprockets on the back to avoid double shifting when the climb kicks up. Note that this arrangement uses the big ring as the normal ring whereas a lot of people seem to use the middle as normal and big ring for going down hill with a tail wind.

Current experiment is with modern 10 speed using 40/24 on the front and 12/13/14/15/16/17/19/21/24/28. This gives me the same (near enough) range of gears as on the triple but with 90 to 40 inches available on the big ring which will cover 75% of my riding. This gets away from double shifts entirely in practical use, or so I reckon. I will have to see how it works out.

[Si]

For touring I my ideal would be a 22-34-44 up front with a 12-34 megarange style back end. Megarange because with normal cassettes I find little difference between the bigger 2 or 3 sprockets in the granny, hence I may as well have one bigg'un and a set of 7 more comfortably spaced little ones. Top gear is relatively small but it's touring so no need for a monster.

[Brucey]

..... with triples ...... with 13/15/16/17/19/21/24/28 on the back - not a standard cassette at all.....

spooky its the exact same set of cogs as my variant D... what are the chances?

Great minds thinking alike? .....or the other one...?

cheers

[tatanab]

Great minds thinking alike? .....or the other one...?

This also shows people's different experiences. I have gears quite close together at the low end of the gear range whereas Si does not like that and has large gaps that I would not live with. I was used to gaps since I've been cycle touring since the late 60s when I used 48/36 (long before it became a trendy "compact") and 5 speed 14/16/18/21/26 on the back. Maybe I'm not strong enough these days to cope with the big change.

[Si]

Great minds thinking alike? .....or the other one...?

This also shows people's different experiences. I have gears quite close together at the low end of the gear range whereas Si does not like that and has large gaps that I would not live with. I was used to gaps since I've been cycle touring since the late 60s when I used 48/36 (long before it became a trendy "compact") and 5 speed 14/16/18/21/26 on the back.

Well, technically I have close together gears in the middle and at the low end with a big gap at the really low end. I don't bother having a high end at all.

It's strange how much I feel the gaps because I'm perfectly happy on a single/fixed or 99% of the time.

Maybe I'm not strong enough these days to cope with the big change.

Yes, I seem to remember being perfectly happy with a low gear of 42-25. I like to think that although age brings less speed, it gives you more stamina and an appreciation of riding slowly and enjoying the scenery (or better excuses).

[hamster]

22/32/44 on the front, and 11-28 7-speed on the back, on 26" (ETRTO 559mm) MTB rims and 1.3" / 32mm tyres.

[meic]

I started off with a megarange but I soon found that it left me with a gap in the gearing exactly where I didnt need a gap.

Even now I find my 8 speed has too large a step with 32-26-21 at the bottom end. The nine speed has 32-28-24-21 with the rest of the cassette being identical. As I spend most of my time at this end of the cassette, I dont care so much about the other sprockets.

So in future the 8 speed will have a 30-26-23-20 tooth rear and if I cant pull that with my 26tooth front ring then I will drop to 24 teeth. I will have slightly larger gaps in the mid-range then.

If I was starting from new, I would give up on large rear cassettes and concentrate on smaller front chainrings. Sacrificing the highest gears for the sake of closer ratios on the flat and climbing.

[700c]

46-32-22
32-28-24-21-18-16-14-12-11

Hasn't failed me yet!

[Brucey]

11-34 comes in different flavours;

11-12-14-16-18-21-24-28-34

or

11-13-15-17-20-23-26-30-34

is it just me that wants

11-13-15-17-19-21-24-28-34....?

cheers

[MacBludgeon]

Touring/General Riding = Rohloff geared at 38x16 on 700c wheels with 700x40 tyres - this gives me 18.3 to 96.3 gear inches with bottom 7 at 18.3 to 39.4 and top 7 44.8 to 96.3. My theory being that it works for unladen riding staying in the top 7 and I have, hopefully, more than I'll ever need at the bottom end...bit of a security blanket.

Road/Audax/Cross bike = 26/36/48 and 11-25 10 speed cassette - general pootling in the 36t, harder riding in the 48t and the security blanket of the 26t if things get really hard.

Offroad - 9 speed hub gear giving me 25 to 86 gear inches - I may lower this at some point

[Mick F]

I'm not really fussed about all this, and TBH, it leaves me cold.

All I want out of gearing, is one low enough, one high enough, and as many as I can get in the middle.

10sp Triple does me ok, but if I had the dosh, it would be an 11sp Triple by fitting an 11sp 12-29 cassette and 11sp Ergos. If they came out with 12sp, I'd go for that too.

The more ratios to chose from, the better, especially if there is some overlap so you can get to the "right gear" from a variety of directions.

[Ayesha]

I'm not really fussed about all this, and TBH, it leaves me cold.

All I want out of gearing, is one low enough, one high enough, and as many as I can get in the middle.

10sp Triple does me ok, but if I had the dosh, it would be an 11sp Triple by fitting an 11sp 12-29 cassette and 11sp Ergos. If they came out with 12sp, I'd go for that too.

The more ratios to chose from, the better, especially if there is some overlap so you can get to the "right gear" from a variety of directions.

The question is, Mick, how low is 'low enough'?