Cycling UK Forum

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

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

Mick F wrote: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.

reohn2 wrote: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.

Not wrong IMHO.

Hills are one thing, and flat and downhill are another.

Hills require a gear low enough for the power available. I like a 30/29 for the hills - not found one I can't get up yet - and I like a high gear for the flat and downhill. I'm sure I'm not the only one like this.

Someone on this forum once said that one should gear a bike low enough for all the hills one would encounter with a heavy load and a hangover(!) and fit a gear high enough for flying along downwind, then stick as many ratios as one could afford in between.

Therefore a nice 52/12 at the top and a 30/30(ish) at the bottom would be good. Triple 10sp is perfect IMHO.

A perpetual subject whose answer is entirely individual.

On other websites you will see people proclaiming "if you cannot get up Alpe D'Huez on 39 by 25 then you are useless". The writer probably rode it once, as his only climb of the day, on a featherweight carbon fibre machine with no luggage. Now ask him to do the same when it is his 3rd climb of the day on a tourer with camping kit. Hence gear range is individual to the person and the application.

I use a bottom gear of 24 by 30 and a top of 48 by 14 on the basis that I am a pedaller not a pusher (personal riding style) and above 35mph I'm likely to be freewheeling anyway. Mick's top gear is very much higher than gearing I used for racing and is so big I would have trouble using it ever, but obviously he does not (again, personal riding style). Like him, I live in a hilly part of the country.

So it sounds to me as if you can USE lower gears and should drop the high gears if you do not USE them.

boink in "lower gearing on a triple but keeping the 52 tooth ring" on this forum page uses and wants to keep a 52/11 gear (128") despite looking for a really low bottom gear! Each to his own.

I agree with "tatanab" unless you are in a road race those higher gears aren't really useful. "Powering" downhill will in practice produce very little increased speed. Adopting a lower top gear enables you to have a closer range of lower gears.
In my twenties I comfortably rode some pyreneen climbs with a bottom gear of 45 x 25. In my sixties I was glad to have a 24 x 30.
I think many people attack a climb at the bottom , get into the red, and struggle further up the climb.
I would suggest a moderate even slow pace at the bottom until your respiration is comfortable . As you advance up the climb you can get a feel for how hard is comfortable. Be advised by your breathing and don't allow yourself to get into that red zone- ease off if necessary. Don't take any notice of how others are climbing - you may find that others that leave you at the bottom of the climb slow noticeably. Always ride within yourself. After a while you will gain some worthwhile experience.

I have a lower gear that I currently need because I'm thinking ahead and know that as I get even older lung function and fitness can only deteriorate.
The best gearing I have is on my Hewitt SE which has a 22/32/44 triple and a 11 34 cassette, giving me a range of about 17.5 to 108 inches.
I can go up anything without a lot of effort even if only at 3 mph.
jonty

Mick F wrote:

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

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

Mick F wrote: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.

reohn2 wrote: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.

Not wrong IMHO.

Hills are one thing, and flat and downhill are another.

Hills require a gear low enough for the power available. I like a 30/29 for the hills - not found one I can't get up yet - and I like a high gear for the flat and downhill. I'm sure I'm not the only one like this.

Someone on this forum once said that one should gear a bike low enough for all the hills one would encounter with a heavy load and a hangover(!) and fit a gear high enough for flying along downwind, then stick as many ratios as one could afford in between.

Therefore a nice 52/12 at the top and a 30/30(ish) at the bottom would be good. Triple 10sp is perfect IMHO.

Yep...........for Mick!

ANTONISH wrote:I agree with "tatanab" unless you are in a road race those higher gears aren't really useful. "Powering" downhill will in practice produce very little increased speed. Adopting a lower top gear enables you to have a closer range of lower gears.

I'm with Mick actually, but maybe that is partly because we ride similar terrain. I also find it useful to have that tall top gear for riding downhill because longer periods of freewheeling at speed can let my leg muscles cool down too much, particularly in winter, so even being able to pedal gently as I go down a hill helps to offset the tendency to tighten up.

At somewhere about 17-19" I can no longer control the bike. Wheel jumping in the air and the bike falling sideways.

As stated upthread the answer is a trike.

My first one was a Holdsworth conversion with a fixed wheel which I rode for the first time on a Sunday. Monday morning I used it for my 16 mile commute that included a 1 in 5 hill. Standing up and pulling hard on the bars the front wheel came up and I finished on my back with the trike on top of me. Fortunately no witnesses to my embarrasment.

I found my way back to Streatley today and feeling quite mad I tried the hill 4 times. On the 1st attempt I was just over half the way up. On the 4th attempt I was 90% of the way up. I was too tired and too hot for another attempt and came home. I'll save completing the hill for next week

There are no hills quite as steep as Streatley close to me. For my first attempt a while ago I was surprised at how it changed gradient on the second left to something so steep Now I'm used to that, and expecting it, and knowing I can grind my way through it - it has become easier.

I think its fair to say that I will adore that little extra on the hills that an 11-28 rear cassette will give me. Checking with my local bike shop they can order one in and fit it. I think I'll treat myself next month as a pre-sportive present and continue to train on the 12-25. It will only make me stronger, right?

niggle wrote:

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.

I'm not your 'riding companion' (obviously) but IME with my FWD 'bent (laden weight distribution roughly 65/35 F/R), wheelspin, mostly due to wheel hop on uneven surfaces) is a noticeable, and rather unwelcome, 'feature' . Also low 'bents fall over faster (roll) than 'safeties', which reputedly fall over faster than 'standards' (think pendulum effect) though I've yet to experience the giddy heights of the latter

squeaker wrote:

niggle wrote: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.

I'm not your 'riding companion' (obviously) but IME with my FWD 'bent (laden weight distribution roughly 65/35 F/R), wheelspin, mostly due to wheel hop on uneven surfaces) is a noticeable, and rather unwelcome, 'feature' . Also low 'bents fall over faster (roll) than 'safeties', which reputedly fall over faster than 'standards' (think pendulum effect) though I've yet to experience the giddy heights of the latter

Not sure about my friend's weight distribution on his 'bent, it does not look bad and I have not noticed him struggling for grip, but judge for yourself:

Amazing machine that he designed and built himself, as well as his scaled down Pedersen copy with Rohloff hub (he is very small, circa 5'4" or less) and the space frame tandem with F frame Moulton suspension and wheels which he rides with his other half. The other thing that happens with a low C of G is that you have to lean more to take a certain bend at a certain speed, I know this from riding motorcycles and a low slung 400cc scooter. However, as you can see my friend has no trouble just putting a hand down to steady himself when he stops.

JennyAdcock wrote:I found my way back to Streatley today and feeling quite mad I tried the hill 4 times. On the 1st attempt I was just over half the way up. On the 4th attempt I was 90% of the way up. I was too tired and too hot for another attempt and came home. I'll save completing the hill for next week

There are no hills quite as steep as Streatley close to me. For my first attempt a while ago I was surprised at how it changed gradient on the second left to something so steep Now I'm used to that, and expecting it, and knowing I can grind my way through it - it has become easier.

I think its fair to say that I will adore that little extra on the hills that an 11-28 rear cassette will give me. Checking with my local bike shop they can order one in and fit it. I think I'll treat myself next month as a pre-sportive present and continue to train on the 12-25. It will only make me stronger, right?

Sounds like a very sound plan all round, you should soon feel the benefits of the work you have put in.

Jonty wrote:

I can go up anything without a lot of effort even if only at 3 mph.
jonty

I dream of being able to climb at 3 mph

niggle wrote:Not sure about my friend's weight distribution on his 'bent, it does not look bad and I have not noticed him struggling for grip, but judge for yourself:

Dave Tigwell (spelling?) on Cuckoo Spit IIRC ? Definitely a very inventive chappie - I love his frame construction method.
It's not so much a struggle for grip but brief wheelspin over bumps which upsets my spin no end

squeaker wrote:

niggle wrote:Not sure about my friend's weight distribution on his 'bent, it does not look bad and I have not noticed him struggling for grip, but judge for yourself:

Dave Tigwell (spelling?) on Cuckoo Spit IIRC ? Definitely a very inventive chappie - I love his frame construction method.
It's not so much a struggle for grip but brief wheelspin over bumps which upsets my spin no end

That is him. Only time I have seen him in difficulty on the 'bent was trying to cross a ford, when unseen rocks unseated him, but as he pointed out he did not fall far, just got a bit damp.