10 speed triple 48-36-26 ?

[reohn2]

Can I get this discussion back on track rather than continue the pre-historical cycling theme please

Which was to discourage negative opinions of ST BB's,which are long lasting and perfect for touring bikes.

For those of you running a 9 speed crankset (e.g. 48-36-26)/FD with 10 speed 105 STIs - could I ask if there's a problem with adjusting the front derailleur to overcome chain rubbing for the extreme gears of the rear cassette (I'm thinking 11-32 to give a bottom gear of 21 inches)?

My LBS is suggesting 10 speed 105 STI/RD with 9 speed LX FD and crankset though they have warned there may be some chain rubbing (on up to 3 gears). They don't seem too keen on the Stronglight route (perhaps they've read the Neanderthal descriptions in this thread ) Incidentally, the BB on the VN Yukon is a standard 68mm English thread.

The alternative is to keep to 9 speed as some of you have suggested.

Thanks again for your responses.

My advice would be to keep 9sp,11-32 or34*,ST BB and Spa chainset.Your only problem(if indeed it is a problem in reality)would be that 9sp Shimano STI's are no longer available above the Claris groupset,you will have chain rub on extreme chain angles with any STI set up above 7sp,unless using the half click trim on STI's.I don't know if the lefthand Claris 9sp STI have this feature though I'm sure some one will let us know.
BTW you must use 9sp rear mechs(MTB or road) with 9sp cassettes and STI's.
I think I'm right in saying,MTB 10sp mechs only work with 10sp MTB STI's and 10sp road mechs with road STI's,due to differing cable pull between the systems.
Road Front mech cable pull is same for 9&10sp

*FWIW as we're getting older we no longer need high gears that aren't use,so I split two 9sp cassettes a 14-25 Tiagra and a 11-34 Deore and make up a custom 14-34 cassette,this gives close ratios in the cruising gears and with a 46/34/24 provides a sensible range for our tandem riding
I also do the same with 8sp solos but using 8sp spacers between the sprockets but a 1mm steel spacer is used between 14(9sp with integral steel spacer)top cog and the next so the lockring doesn't bottom out on the threads without tightening up the cassette on the freehub body.

[mrjemm]

If you can track some down, or find a friendly dealer who's able to talk to Ison, the 'Dimension' crankset is what I use-

http://www.ison-distribution.com/englis ... t=CKDIX70K

It doesn't have the name on it, and I think they're actually the ones fitted to some Surlys inc. LHT- Andel? I am doing triple 10spd on my bike with them, but not with STIs, which makes life easier.

I'd love to say 9 speed is the way to go, but for the life of me, it is getting as hard as 10 to get hold of bits- pretty much only Sora for a 9 speed triple front mech, road anyway. But the guys here know a lot more than me, so I'll shut up... (for a while anyway ).

P.s. Yes, they're more pricey than the Stronglight ones, but still square taper, but, well, they work ten speed, and they're black! Hehehe. Yes, I am shallow.

[Manc33]

I have successfully used a 9 speed deore xt 44/32/22 chainset with ultegra 6703 front mech and 6603 sti, 9 speed xt sgs rear mech and 11-36 cassette. The front mech sat a lot higher than recommended by shimano to avoid hitting the chainstay when on the inner chainring.

Sorry this is old news I know, but what if that FD was setup on a 48-36-22?

With 4 more teeth on the outer than the quote above, would that possibly take the FD up high enough to not hit the chainstay, while being in the right place a few millimeters above the outer chainring?

(say yes)

Whether a road triple will actually shift on that (when it's expecting 53-39-30) I don't know, but I like tinkering.

[ANTONISH]

I'm currently running 44/34/26 10sp with 105 shifters and a road triple ultegra front mech . Rings are TA on the aforementioned Stronglight impact.
Mountain bike rear mech 11to 36 rear cassette. I could do without the ludicrous 11t sprocket. The set up works fine - has to be fine tuned though.

[fausto99]

With an eye to the future, I'm always on on the look out for a triple chainset with a 22 (or lower) inner. But if I restrict it to Hollowtech BB (which I like) and add in the requirement for 165mm cranks for my short thighs, the search becomes fruitless .

[Brucey]

With an eye to the future, I'm always on on the look out for a triple chainset with a 22 (or lower) inner. But if I restrict it to Hollowtech BB (which I like) and add in the requirement for 165mm cranks for my short thighs, the search becomes fruitless .

If you are to use 7/8/9s stuff for touring then I can understand why you might want a tiny chainring; you can't easily get a wide gear range and closely spaced gears if you choose a cassette with widely spaced ratios.

But beyond that there is much to be said for using very large sprockets if you want to get low gears. Using small chainrings (and smaller sprockets) only has a couple of advantages;

1) it is easier to get what looks like a wider percentage range, using mechs of limited capacity and
2) the net result can be a bit lighter in weight.

The downsides to using small sprockets/chainrings are that

a) the loads on all the parts are a good deal higher; they wear out more quickly
b) the transmission is more sensitive to wear, and will run rougher, sooner
c) the transmission is less efficient due to higher chordal losses
d) the wear rate of the smallest chainrings can be absurdly high; many chainrings (in materials that seem OK in larger sizes)just aren't up to the job in the smallest sizes.

Thus given that (esp in your case as you want an HTII chainset?) larger sprockets are now more widely available as are mechs/conversions that shift them, and chains/ramping is now so sophisticated that shifts are pretty slick, there is something to be said for running a transmission with larger rear sprockets and getting your low gears that way, keeping the chainrings a more reasonable size. Ratios can be reasonably closely spaced provided you use 10 or 11s stuff, and (sadly) that might be all you can buy in a few year's time, in kit that has any quality to it...

For example using a 13-42 10s cassette and a 28-38-48 chainset

http://ritzelrechner.de/?GR=DERS&KB=28,48,38&RZ=22,42,13,15,17,19,25,28,32,36&UF=2185&TF=90&SL=2.3&UN=MPH&DV=gearInches

plenty of gears and lots of wriggle room in the setup if a different range is desired.

cheers

[NetworkMan]

d) the wear rate of the smallest chainrings can be absurdly high; many chainrings (in materials that seem OK in larger sizes)just aren't up to the job in the smallest sizes.

But a 24T ring in steel probably weighs less than a 34T sprocket and costs little to replace after what's probably a pretty decent life.

[Brucey]

I've seen them fail in just a few hundred miles. Even the best ones appear not made in steel that is as hard as, say, a sprocket is.

[BTW I already mentioned the potential weight discrepancy; however I don't think it is of great significance on this type of bike.]

cheers

[meic]

I have had to remove and dress the 24t steel rings after less than a thousand miles and repeatedly there after.
The steel was plastically deforming under the loads. The 26t stainless steel and T6 alloy rings do stand up to the loads though.

So it is an issue but it can be largely overcome.

[NetworkMan]

Mines a TA in alloy and it's years old, but doesn't get all that much use compared with the 38T, even around here. Why can't they be as hard as sprockets I wonder?

[NetworkMan]

hipvelo,
I have a suggestion. Spa cycles who supply the square taper chainsets so many of us like sell many touring bikes built up with this chainset but using 9 speed. AFAIK they don't advertise this chainset with 10 speed but they do builds to order and may well have built up a 10 speed one so could advise on suitable FD and chainrings which work with it. You could give them a ring (email can be unreliable) and ask. Actually if you are not set on a Yukon their Ti Audax is similar, less expensive and very popular. In fact I'm building one up myself at the moment but that will be 9 speed not 10.

[mikeymo]

Your only problem(if indeed it is a problem in reality)would be that 9sp Shimano STI's are no longer available above the Claris groupset...

Are you sure? I just built a bike up (in July) using 9 x 3 Sora STI's, Sora FD and Sora RD. Current Sora is the 3000 range, or some numbers a bit like that.

Here's the groupset, including STIs:

https://bike.shimano.com/en-EU/product/component/sora-r3000.html

I used the shifters, FD and RD from that groupset.

I'm pretty sure it's a current product, as they've just changed from the old Sora (3500) to the new one with cables under the bar wrap.

[NetworkMan]

Your only problem(if indeed it is a problem in reality)would be that 9sp Shimano STI's are no longer available above the Claris groupset...

Are you sure? I just built a bike up (in July) using 9 x 3 Sora STI's, Sora FD and Sora RD. Current Sora is the 3000 range, or some numbers a bit like that.

Here's the groupset, including STIs:

https://bike.shimano.com/en-EU/product/component/sora-r3000.html

I used the shifters, FD and RD from that groupset.

I'm pretty sure it's a current product, as they've just changed from the old Sora (3500) to the new one with cables under the bar wrap.

Yes I agree. I've just bought a Sora 9-speed FD (the older 3503 one at discount!). Shimano site says Claris is still 8 speed, I used that on my 8-speed tourer.

[Paul Smith SRCC]

I use a TA Carmina, I get exactly the ratios I am after but at a cost, both financially and how well the set up works.

Deciding what ratios you want is a large enough topic in itself. To highlight what I referenced in my own review of that chain set with Campagnolo 10 speed, all fitted back in 2007 and what was a specification available at the time "I have chosen 26/36/46 with a 13-29 cassette as it gave me a reasonably high top gear as well as a set of useable low gears that should get even an unfit me up most climbs (mid 90” top with most wheel tyre combinations and high 20” low). It was not just about how low and high the extremes were, just as important is that the most often used gear ratios are available where chain line is as straight and therefore as smooth as possible, making the whole transmission also last longer as a result".

Financially yes I treated myself, but I also had trouble getting the front mech' to work efficiently as the radius of the mech' follows a larger chainring radius, it works well enough for me personally, but that maybe not well enough for others.

[m-gineering]

Can I get this discussion back on track rather than continue the pre-historical cycling theme please

For those of you running a 9 speed crankset (e.g. 48-36-26)/FD with 10 speed 105 STIs - could I ask if there's a problem with adjusting the front derailleur to overcome chain rubbing for the extreme gears of the rear cassette (I'm thinking 11-32 to give a bottom gear of 21 inches)?

I mill the spiders down to 10sp spec if the bike has sti's, otherwise shifting will be poor after a little bit of use