Cycling UK Forum

cycle tramp wrote: ↑31 Aug 2024, 3:23pm One of the most important things anyone can ask before they pick up a spanner and start to build a bike is 'what do I want to do with it?' Its fundamental.

That's mostly what we're missing from this debate (and it's why much of it has gone off on tangents about what the respondents are using, not what the OP should do) because, fundamentally, they don't seem to know themselves and - for reasons that remain unclear - they seem to have decided to investigate building a bike out of semi-obsolete parts like freewheels and triple chainsets...

This started out (many threads ago) as a "how do I improve my bike?" and, on closer questioning of the bike, it was revealed to be a 20-year old British Eagle "full suspension" BSO running a knackered 3 x 5. One of those that, no matter what you do to it, it's unlikely ever to work particularly well and it's certainly not worth the financial outlay.

So then we evolved into a "what new/secondhand bike?" with the requirement that (for reasons not really specified) it should have super low gears. There were many excellent suggestions on that and then a worm hole of secondhand bikes, gear ratios and bike refurbishment was opened up from which there's been limited escape. Meanwhile the OP has dived off into the rareified world of Retrobike and the Sheldon Brown site which - while it has its useful bits - is relatively dated and also laced with a mix of SB's humour and entrenched opinion which doesn't always translate appropriately if you're new to it all.

What would help greatly is if the OP could start ONE thread setting out a list of requirements like:
I have x amount of money
I want a bike that can do [this], [that], and [the other]
I have the following experience / fitness and I plan on doing [gentle off-road / long distance touring / extreme DH / popping to the shops].

PH wrote: ↑31 Aug 2024, 1:55pm Lastly, the OP has posted the question in the Technical section of the forum, there are technical advantages and disadvantages to all gearing choices, but very few of the answers have even touched on those.

Many of the answers though are based solely on what that particular respondent has used / is used to. Since very few cyclists have the time, money, resources to go and try out every new innovation, you get a lot of people answering with what THEY use and why it's best.

Plus many people are quite (small c) conservative and don't want to be drawn into a world of constant upgrading and buying the Latest Shiny Thing so they'll instinctively go "huh 1x / disc brakes / tubeless / Di2 is all a fad, it's all pointless, I use 3x / cantilevers / tubes / proper cable gears and it's perfect". Which doesn't necessarily answer the question although it provides a valid opinion. If 3x is perfect for that particular person then that's great!

It might not be "the best system" (noting that there is a difference between "it works perfectly for me" and "the best system") but until they've used a 1x they won't ever know and they'll happily keep on using something that, for them, works just fine.

(quick edit for grammer/spelling)

rareposter wrote: ↑31 Aug 2024, 6:22pm ...
What would help greatly is if the OP could start ONE thread setting out a list of requirements like:
I have x amount of money
I want a bike that can do [this], [that], and [the other]
I have the following experience / fitness and I plan on doing [gentle off-road / long distance touring / extreme DH / popping to the shops].
...

Yes, that would be a much better approach. Plus how much experience he/she has on bike DIY.

It would also help if responders then tried to support convergence in solutions that addressed those requirements.

Jonathan

It's a very long thread that I haven't read through, so apologies if I'm straight repeating, but for me the sweet spot is 9x3. Price wise it's decent and you can get an 11-34 cassette with a reasonable spread of gears without too big gaps in between. A 7 speed cassette with that spacing would be probably 11-28, which is not enough for me if I am riding camping loaded up steep inclines. And a jump up to 34 on a 7 speed feels pretty nasty to me. I also prefer the shifter ergonomics on decent 9 speed groupsets and above.

Jdsk wrote: ↑31 Aug 2024, 6:47pm

rareposter wrote: ↑31 Aug 2024, 6:22pm ...
What would help greatly is if the OP could start ONE thread setting out a list of requirements like:
I have x amount of money
I want a bike that can do [this], [that], and [the other]
I have the following experience / fitness and I plan on doing [gentle off-road / long distance touring / extreme DH / popping to the shops].
...

Yes, that would be a much better approach. Plus how much experience he/she has on bike DIY.

It would also help if responders then tried to support convergence in solutions that addressed those requirements.

Jonathan

Eh? We can't even decide between ourselves what braking system, what gear system, what frame material and what wheel size is best...?
What we have is the equivalent of someone who earnestly wants to join a religion asking all the faith leaders in the world, which one is the one true way to enlightenment, inner peace and spiritual clarity...

rareposter wrote: ↑31 Aug 2024, 6:22pm

cycle tramp wrote: ↑31 Aug 2024, 3:23pm One of the most important things anyone can ask before they pick up a spanner and start to build a bike is 'what do I want to do with it?' Its fundamental.

That's mostly what we're missing from this debate (and it's why much of it has gone off on tangents about what the respondents are using, not what the OP should do)...

.....many people are quite (small c) conservative and don't want to be drawn into a world of constant upgrading and buying the Latest Shiny Thing so they'll instinctively go "huh 1x / disc brakes / tubeless / Di2 is all a fad, it's all pointless, I use 3x / cantilevers / tubes / proper cable gears and it's perfect". Which doesn't necessarily answer the question although it provides a valid opinion. If 3x is perfect for that particular person then that's great!

It might not be "the best system" (noting that there is a difference between "it works perfectly for me" and "the best system") but until they've used a 1x they won't ever know and they'll happily keep on using something that, for them, works just fine.

Worryingly I'm agreeing with Rareposter, here...
..its like the parable of three blind men feeling an elephant and then describing it to each other... one gets the trunk so he thinks the elephant is a giant snake, one gets a leg and believes the elephant is like a tree, one gets the side and believes the elephant is a massive leather wall..
And that's what cycling is, it's too big... we can only say what works for us, the way we ride, how we maintain it, and what we get from it..
..its gonna be a different perspective for each one of us.

TrevA wrote: ↑31 Aug 2024, 1:43pm

Cowsham wrote: ↑31 Aug 2024, 1:08pm

Manc33 wrote: ↑30 Aug 2024, 8:39pm I think 9-Speed is the sweet spot. All the parts are cheaper than 11s.

Sheldon Brown was probably referring to cassettes that didn't have very low gearing, like 32t or more on the cassette. He could have also written that article a long time ago. There might have been a time when 8-Speed was all fancy, but not in 2024.

Having more sprockets only has one benefit - smaller gaps between gears. There is only one cassette I know of on 9-Speed that starts with 11t, ends with 32t and doesn't have a gap of 3 teeth from 17 to 20 or from 18 to 21 - the cheap Shimano Altus CS-HG200-9 that has 11/13/15/17/19/21/24/28/32. This to me is the perfect cassette.

If your triple chainset has a 22t or 24t then there is no real point having a cassette sprocket bigger than 32t, even if you were touring with a load. I went to 11-Speed a while back (and went back to 9-Speed again). Beyond 22x40t it became impossible for me to balance, because I had to pedal like mad, going 3 MPH or less. Not to mention the strain that must put on the chain and the spokes of the rear wheel.

I even had 22x51t at one point, but that was short lived because it's a bridge too far with how low the gearing is.

Another vote for 3 x 9

--- I have had 2x10 ( tiagra -- not fussed cos of shifting problems when they wear a bit ) and I still have 2x11 ( 105 ) and 2x11 XT and yes they are good but the price of spares is scary. £70 a few years ago for a cassette !

3x9 shifts perfectly and has enough range.

Where are you buying your cassettes? My last 11speed Shimano 105 11-32 cassette cost £42, about a year ago.

Ah no that was the XT / deore / SLX setup on my cube acid

https://www.tredz.co.uk/.Shimano-CS-M70 ... UcEALw_wcB

Down a bit in price now but note its rrp once upon a time -- like all this stuff sometimes it goes a bit out of fashion and therefore the price drops. It went to a 1x single chain ring the next year sadly.

rareposter wrote: ↑31 Aug 2024, 6:22pm

cycle tramp wrote: ↑31 Aug 2024, 3:23pm One of the most important things anyone can ask before they pick up a spanner and start to build a bike is 'what do I want to do with it?' Its fundamental.

That's mostly what we're missing from this debate (and it's why much of it has gone off on tangents about what the respondents are using, not what the OP should do) because, fundamentally, they don't seem to know themselves and - for reasons that remain unclear - they seem to have decided to investigate building a bike out of semi-obsolete parts like freewheels and triple chainsets...

This started out (many threads ago) as a "how do I improve my bike?" and, on closer questioning of the bike, it was revealed to be a 20-year old British Eagle "full suspension" BSO running a knackered 3 x 5. One of those that, no matter what you do to it, it's unlikely ever to work particularly well and it's certainly not worth the financial outlay.

So then we evolved into a "what new/secondhand bike?" with the requirement that (for reasons not really specified) it should have super low gears. There were many excellent suggestions on that and then a worm hole of secondhand bikes, gear ratios and bike refurbishment was opened up from which there's been limited escape. Meanwhile the OP has dived off into the rareified world of Retrobike and the Sheldon Brown site which - while it has its useful bits - is relatively dated and also laced with a mix of SB's humour and entrenched opinion which doesn't always translate appropriately if you're new to it all.

What would help greatly is if the OP could start ONE thread setting out a list of requirements like:
I have x amount of money
I want a bike that can do [this], [that], and [the other]
I have the following experience / fitness and I plan on doing [gentle off-road / long distance touring / extreme DH / popping to the shops].

This has been a great thread with lots of information plus contrasting but equally valid (and good) answers. However the OP starts from the wrong point; he’d be best served by doing simple stuff to get the best out of what he has and by recognising that what he has is something of limited capability - well that and that it’s not worth plowing money into expensive upgrades. There’s nothing wrong with limited capabilities, all my bikes - and indeed I - have limited capabilities, but what’s important is to have some idea what those capabilities are and then get on with doing what you can. Folk have ridden around the world on just one gear, the OP could go a very long way on his old British Eagle and learn a lot on the journey(s).

Manc33 wrote: ↑31 Aug 2024, 3:59pm I've said this several times in the past on here but my favourite triple ever was 52/38/24. It was the Spa Cycles Zicral square taper cranks. That can't take an inner smaller than 24t. The front mech was an Ultegra R773-2 and I was using flat bar "road" shifters.

Now back on MTB again I'm on 48/36/24 and it's nearly as good, but that 52t outer downhill was great. This was at a time when I had 11-speed and 11-40t at the cassette. 33 gears Best gearing I ever used, but overkill perhaps hence going back to 9s. The 38t middle was also more suited to the road than the current 36t is but whatever.

I'm on an eBike now so the inner and middle barely get used. The only reason I have lower gears is if the motor decides to pack in while miles away. eBikes are suited to close ratio cassettes though because you're on the outer most of the time so you don't really want any big gaps at the cassette. I think I had a 11-21t as a 9-speed at one point on that. 11/12/13/14/15/16/17/19/21. Then I found I was changing gears all the time so, that's a bit overkill too.

Now that is interesting that you had that king of low gearing on a road bike as I find them really rare with most of them being huge chainrings, as mentioned earlier. I know there are some offerings like sub-compact and microdrive but they are the exceptions.

It was suggested some time ago in another thread that if I am riding mostly roads why not go for a road bike and the super high gearing, for me, is one of the main reasons but another is that I do occasionally do light off roading so want to be able to handle that too. I remember on the bike before the one I have now and was a MTB but had road tyres and recall spinning out at the first sign of mud or grass.

I think all the talk of 'don't overthink' is disingenuous. They keep ignoring the fact I have a bike and am riding it regularly so my questions are informed by my riding. It is more their extreme prejudice that I am riding a 'BSO' that somehow they feel any riding on that is worthless and no kind of representation of riding at all, as akin to drawing inferences of cycling from horse riding.

Having done more research of bikes for sale on retrobike mostly, loads of great bikes both restromod and original I am settling down as to my wants. There are some great restomods but each one would have this or that taken off from the classic that I was not happy about. As such I am settling on a fairly good nick classic bike. It is not 100% about function since new bikes probably are better in many parts now but also about nostalgia since mid 90s mtbs are what I grew up with.

So latest plan is to buy pretty good nick mtb of the era with original parts or minor upgrades with era faithful parts then make my own drivetrain changes with same era parts, which, from looking at the parts for sale, is easy and cost effective.

I have an eye on a bike at the moment which is looking like what I want and just going to change the cassette and maybe the crankset too. Purported to be 24/36/46 up front currently and 28 at back. So back cassette seems good first port of call then see about front after. I am thinking I would prefer a smaller middle ring because that 36 is barely different to my current 38 ring which I don't like. I am interested in 22/32/42 crankset which is an option available to me which is for sale.

As it is 7 speed freehub that is what spurred this post as I could either take a 7 cassette or do an x-1 for the 7 speed hub. I have my eye on this 34t, 7 speed I found. Now you may immediately shout "cheap chinese tatt" however when I did some investigation in to the company they are apparently x S-ram employees so one would hope the quality may reflect that rather than some nameless fly by nights. Look at the tooth progression too. It looks steadier than the Shimano/other megarange offerings.

There are a couple of really nice restromods which are probably much more bang for the buck but in their additions they lose some of the charm by taking off some of the classic parts. Example, removing thumb shifters for new trigger ones (not the proper term I guess but the clicky under brake ones) and riser bars instead of the classic straight bars.

Like Nearholmer said, I think the journey is as much about recreating the image of my ideal bike of my youth than the most efficient bike.

cycle tramp wrote: ↑31 Aug 2024, 8:14pm

Jdsk wrote: ↑31 Aug 2024, 6:47pm

rareposter wrote: ↑31 Aug 2024, 6:22pm ...
What would help greatly is if the OP could start ONE thread setting out a list of requirements like:
I have x amount of money
I want a bike that can do [this], [that], and [the other]
I have the following experience / fitness and I plan on doing [gentle off-road / long distance touring / extreme DH / popping to the shops].
...

Yes, that would be a much better approach. Plus how much experience he/she has on bike DIY.

It would also help if responders then tried to support convergence in solutions that addressed those requirements.

Jonathan

Eh? We can't even decide between ourselves what braking system, what gear system, what frame material and what wheel size is best...?
What we have is the equivalent of someone who earnestly wants to join a religion asking all the faith leaders in the world, which one is the one true way to enlightenment, inner peace and spiritual clarity...

Ah but some are thoroughly convinced that there is always "the right answer" to not just cycling questions but to all questions. All we have to do is apply logic, rationality or other infallible method of discovering The Truth!

Just commission "a study" as laid out above and everything will turn out tickety-boo, whether its choosing the right bike or governing the world or anything in between.

In reality, confused humans will continue to be confused and to promulgate our confusion here, there and everywhere. Best to regard the process as, fundamentally, entertainment. On the other hand, some confused matters are as entertaining as a bear baiting and perhaps should not be encouraged as a matter for discussion. The trick is to note that:

The question usually contains embedded answers.

..... so avoid asking the sort of questions to which the answer is untenable, utterly destructive or even the beginning of the road to hell. For example, I never ask anyone if they would like a fight and avoid those who do ask this question - a lesson learned in my early yoof and never forgot.

But I digress.

The answer to the OP's question is: yes & no. You just have to sort out what turns out to be advantages and disadvantages for you personally. This is best done via personal experience, although others might suggest how to structure this experience. (But that might be confusing).

Carlton green wrote: ↑1 Sep 2024, 2:14am
This has been a great thread with lots of information plus contrasting but equally valid (and good) answers. However the OP starts from the wrong point; he’d be best served by doing simple stuff to get the best out of what he has and by recognising that what he has is something of limited capability - well that and that it’s not worth plowing money into expensive upgrades. There’s nothing wrong with limited capabilities, all my bikes - and indeed I - have limited capabilities, but what’s important is to have some idea what those capabilities are and then get on with doing what you can. Folk have ridden around the world on just one gear, the OP could go a very long way on his old British Eagle and learn a lot on the journey(s).

A very entertaining thread.

Good advice you give there. "Try it, you'll like it" (and learn lots about how you might like it more with a tweak of this and a purchase of that).

22/32/42 or 22/32/44?
I think (Shimano) MTB F. mechs. are designed for a 10T gap between small/middle rings, and a 12T gap middle/big.

And I still think you should buy an at least half-way decent bike of some sort (almost any sort, really) and just ride the damned thing.
Once you have ridden something half-way decent for a while, it will begin to dawn on you what you really want.
.....My half crown says it won'y be anything like you think you want now, because now you have no relevant experience.

I said 3x9 up thread but meant 2x9 46/30 and cassette
Shimano HG201, 9 speed, 11-36t -- plenty of gears and what's most impressive is how precise the shifting is for such a cheap Altus groupset. Robust too.

biker38109 wrote: ↑1 Sep 2024, 7:03am It is more their extreme prejudice that I am riding a 'BSO'

It's not prejudice to point out the facts - in many ways, blunt though it might be, it has potentially saved you from going down an expensive and unworkable journey of trying to adapt that existing bike with bigger cassettes, more gears and so on.

As an aside, while many on here lament "the bike industry" forever pushing new tech, more expensive parts, the Latest Thing and so on, where they actually make their money is not the £10,000 superbikes or the £4000 wheels, it's bikes like yours which can be churned out by robots for literal peanuts and sold in catalogues and warehouse stores for £129.99. They're almost designed to fail and be scrapped and you come back for a new one. But then most people buying such things will only ever take it down the park, ride it to a mate's house or the pub or it'll be kids who skid it round for a bit, abandon it in the garden for a week and so on and they wont know or care about any aspect of it until it finally breaks or something wears out, they take it to a shop and the mechanic says "yes, that'll be £75 to fix it" and they're horrified because the bike only cost £130.

biker38109 wrote: ↑1 Sep 2024, 7:03am Like Nearholmer said, I think the journey is as much about recreating the image of my ideal bike of my youth than the most efficient bike.

That single sentence is super helpful because it'll stop the suggestions of new bikes, of 1x and so on. If you want a 90's bike to restore / work on / relive your youth, that has narrowed the options considerably - for you as well as us!

531colin wrote: ↑1 Sep 2024, 9:12am 22/32/42 or 22/32/44?
I think (Shimano) MTB F. mechs. are designed for a 10T gap between small/middle rings, and a 12T gap middle/big.

And I still think you should buy an at least half-way decent bike of some sort (almost any sort, really) and just ride the damned thing.
Once you have ridden something half-way decent for a while, it will begin to dawn on you what you really want.
.....My half crown says it won'y be anything like you think you want now, because now you have no relevant experience.

Yes maybe. I don't pay attention to the big cog statistics as it is something I never use since I just coast if going fast enough that it could be relevant. Why would they go 44 rather than 42? When 42 seems logical? Not that is matters, since, as said, I am not using that big one!

rareposter wrote: ↑1 Sep 2024, 9:40am That single sentence is super helpful because it'll stop the suggestions of new bikes, of 1x and so on. If you want a 90's bike to restore / work on / relive your youth, that has narrowed the options considerably - for you as well as us!

Good, perhaps we can be on the same page then.

Check out this one I am in discussions with seller on, for £120 asking price. 1993 Kona Fire Mountain. Apparently these were highly regarded bikes in their time:











It is a bit scruffy but it has everything I want in the base bike. There are some other restomods that look much cleaner with modern kit but they didn't have all the classic gear I was looking for. I have done the calcutions and think can add new cassette and smaller crankset for under £100 and that would be my goal achieved.

Apparently that is 24 upfront already but the 36 sounds too big for a middle ring. I like the sounds of 22/32/42(/4). Thinking get this, give a whirl and try bigger back cassette first then crankset up front if still not sufficient.

If you click on the crankset image (number 4) for a zoomed image it looks like the crankset has somehow rubbed against the frame and taken the paint off. Any ideas how that has happened?