Cycling UK Forum

I was told by an experience cyclist that a lot of bicycles with Eddie Mercx's gearing were sold because people wanted what Eddy Mercx had. The problem was that few could ride them so they were rarely used.
None of us is an Eddie Mercx.
jonty

In the 1980s I bought a Raleigh 10 speed. 40 5o up front and 13-25IIRC rear. It was so over geared it was useless in County Durham for my fitness level. As it has a Suntour Screw on rear cluster and you could get individual sprockets I soon changed it to 14-34 which was a lot more practical.

These days you can see many a road bike on sale with a similar range as the old Raleigh had, albeit with more steps between top and bottom, and most are too high geared for all but fit young men with more muscle than respect for their knees.

52, 42, 30 and 11-32 MTB cassette. Fitted the MTB cassette a while ago and have never regretted it. The canard about 'gaps between gears being too big ' has never bothered me at all: I suspect it's only something that would concern a racing cyclist. Have done many audaxes and sportives here and abroad with it and have never had to walk. I occasionally get filthy looks when I overtake someone who's barely able to turn their 42/26 or whatever, but I can live with that...

There comes a point at which lower gears cease to help, in my view. I'm a really poor climber. In my teens I used a 40" to almost get up the Bwlch-y-Groes near Bala. I'm not sure it was gears that made the difference. Now I'm older, heavier and slower, and I used a 28" on Hardknott. I was pedalling fast enough when I was pedalling...

If you're stalling, lower gears may help. If you're just running out of puff, they won't.

Don't know what gear this guy was using, but he managed to talk all the way up

If you are running out of puff, then dropping to a lower gear means that you can go slower and still get up with what little puff you have.
I am a "good" hill climber in that I can get up every hill I meet, even with a trailer (providing there isnt too much gravel) yet I am a poor hill climber because I do it VERY slowly with my low, low gears.

zoxed wrote:

JennyAdcock wrote:...52-39-30 triple on the front and a 12-25 on the back

IMHO you are overgeared: to my mind 52*12 is a monster gear: do you use it much ?

Yes, overgeared, but at the bottom-end only. 52/12 is fine at the top. I use my 53/12 quite a bit, but go down to 30/29 for the Westcounty hills.

meic wrote:If you are running out of puff, then dropping to a lower gear means that you can go slower and still get up with what little puff you have.

That was my point really. I agre, but think that there is a limit. Like you, I drop down the gears and grind up, getting left behind by everyone else. Even as a poor climber, though, I rather suspect that, if I'm not going to get up it in 27", I'm not going to get up it in any gear. I see 32" as moderately low.

JennyAdcock wrote:I was cycling with a colleague and he just zoomed past me in the middle section just before I stopped. He has several lower gears to switch into on his tourer.

Do you know what gears he actually used to get up the hill? Obviously this would depend on his fitness and climbing ability as well, but does he have several gears lower than your 32"?

One tip if you are having trouble with a hill is to go and try something steeper

You may not get all the way up the steeper one but, when you come back to the first hill, you won't think it's so big

You haven't said which hills the sportive goes over but, as long as Streatley Hill is worse, you should be in a good place to ride them for this reason

drossall wrote:

meic wrote:If you are running out of puff, then dropping to a lower gear means that you can go slower and still get up with what little puff you have.

That was my point really. I agre, but think that there is a limit. Like you, I drop down the gears and grind up, getting left behind by everyone else. Even as a poor climber, though, I rather suspect that, if I'm not going to get up it in 27", I'm not going to get up it in any gear. I see 32" as moderately low.

I still get benefit going down to at or below 20". At somewhere about 17-19" I can no longer control the bike. Wheel jumping in the air and the bike falling sideways.

Just had a play on Sheldon Brown's gear calculator. Looks to me like Jenny could get a significant improvement by just going for a mid range cassette, eg. 11-28, which would give her a bottom gear of 25" instead of the current 32". My touring bike had a similar bottom gear and as I think drossal was implying, below that you would wonder whether you would be better off walking. Anything lower is only of use for getting a load up the hill that would be hard to push, IMO.

Like this Shimano Deore: http://www.shimano.com/publish/content/ ... ype-..html

Sold here: http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Mode ... elID=31059

Only thing to check is whether the current rear mech will work with a larger rear cassette, borderline with 28T from what I can gather?

EDIT: I got that a bit wrong, the 28T only gets you down to 28", the ideal is about 32T, which would actually get you a 25" gear, my mistake Unfortunately I am fairly sure you would need a new MTB type rear mech as well to run 11-32T.

Mick F wrote:

zoxed wrote:

JennyAdcock wrote:...52-39-30 triple on the front and a 12-25 on the back

IMHO you are overgeared: to my mind 52*12 is a monster gear: do you use it much ?

Yes, overgeared, but at the bottom-end only. 52/12 is fine at the top. I use my 53/12 quite a bit, but go down to 30/29 for the Westcounty hills.

Mick that statement is just plain wrong,if this lady can't climb the hills she encounters on 30x25 she's hardly likely to be batting a along on a 52x12.
I can barely turn over 53x12 at anything like a sensible cadence ie; upwards of 60rpm,it is of no use to most,I've said on hear before,in my top rear of 48x13 I spin out at 28 to 30mph and is something thats seldom used unless in a group,I'm for the most part on the flat turn 48x21 at 18to20mph which is a comfortable gear.I do how ever a lot of bikes with big gearing and no evidence of any wear or chain oil on the big (53t) ring,the ego is something better to let slip into obscurity rather ther than limit a 20speed (2X10) to just 10 gears.

Ericonabike up thread mentioned that he thought close ratio cassettes were only for racers,Wrong!.
If he's happy with wide ratios then alls well for him,but it doesn't mean it suits everyone.
Personally I like no more than two tooth gaps, widening to three for the bottom two ratios,anything more than that and things become unpleasent.
We find closer ratios particularly helpful on the tandem where small increments help with undulating terrain where big gaps get us out of our optimum cadence.There was a time when we rode any terrain on 48/38/26 with a 13-28 cassette,but since Mrs R2's illness she isn't as strong as she was so 48/38/26 and a made up 14-34 cass,with the small steps in the middle,we find a boon .

I think that I for one have been looking at this slightly wrong. Most of what I say about hill climbing ratios is true for me as an individual but the actual ratio needed is more to do with your power to weight ratio than the steepness of the hills.
So we all are having to get off and walk on the same hill in the end, my friend on his 32" gear or me on my 25" gear or me on my 21" gear pulling the trailer. It is the steepness of the hill that defeats us and the higher your power to weight then the higher gear you can be using when you lose control.
The trikes of course can gear down to whatever they like and never lose control.
Those that have to get off sooner than the rest could benefit from lowering their gear ratios.

meic wrote:I think that I for one have been looking at this slightly wrong. Most of what I say about hill climbing ratios is true for me as an individual but the actual ratio needed is more to do with your power to weight ratio than the steepness of the hills.
So we all are having to get off and walk on the same hill in the end, my friend on his 32" gear or me on my 25" gear or me on my 21" gear pulling the trailer. It is the steepness of the hill that defeats us and the higher your power to weight then the higher gear you can be using when you lose control.
The trikes of course can gear down to whatever they like and never lose control.
Those that have to get off sooner than the rest could benefit from lowering their gear ratios.

Which is most obvious to the individual when climbing the same hill when loaded compared to unloaded on the same bike,ie;same power just more weight.

meic wrote:The trikes of course can gear down to whatever they like and never lose control.

Except of course, as you pointed out before, for the front wheel lifting off - which is what was happening a bit, even to me, on Hardknott.

drossall wrote:

meic wrote:The trikes of course can gear down to whatever they like and never lose control.

Except of course, as you pointed out before, for the front wheel lifting off - which is what was happening a bit, even to me, on Hardknott.

A riding companion has a two wheel 'bent with drive to the front wheel, so not an issue for him ever. He has very low gears and can crawl slower than on an upright, due to his low C of G I suppose, and the fact that if he stalls he can just put a hand down before unclipping (though getting off the bike might be a bit tricky and pushing it up hill must be hard work due to it being so low). He is the slowest of us up hill, but the fastest downhill or into the wind.