holy moley rear sprockets bigger than the front now

[pigman]

Re:

You're right about that 120rpm spinning up hills. How does anyone do that? And it can't be the most effective method (is it?) and it just don't look right.

I'm not sure about the Robert millar anecdote. One thing I've noticed over the years, is that the lightest, leanest, least muscled riders tend to be able to push bigger gears up hills. I notice it when I go mtb'ing with my sons. They are not hobbyist cyclists, they just go along with it. Me and eldest are of bigger, muscly build and have to find a gear to winch us up hills. Youngest with bandy legs and arms and someone I can pick up one-handed just seems to ride effortlessly up climbs in what seems a massive gear. Pantani did that too, as did millar

But he can't descend for shit, which is where I get my own back lol

 

[Pionir]

Maybe it's the best method on EPO

 

[james_from_stoke]

Re:

As someone who should still be using youth gearing (pffttt!...) I find the whole spin and grin thing rather tiresome. My first road bike had a 39/26 bottom gear, and that was plenty. Then my next bike went down to 34/28. I put up with that until I got my first proper bike, with 42/24. I smashed most of my Strava PRs despite the bike being almost double the weight, and the gearing soon became 42/23 instead. It forced a change on my modern bike, but just before buying a proper chainset I made the fateful decision to get a faux-pro instead. That leaves me with a bottom gear of 36/27, which is just too low for most things. I have found that it is better to suffer up all but the steepest of climbs in the big ring, because its no more painful and at least its over quicker that way. I now want to swap for a 39t inner ring at the least - 42 might be a bit limiting for longer rides through the peak district etc, and 39/27 is plenty small enough. I could get the same ratios by clicking up a couple of gears on the 36t, but when it hurts it is just too hard to resist the temptation to keep changing down another gear, when all it does is prolong the agony.
Admittedly, I don't live in the hilliest area, but there are plenty of short sharp climbs, and longer ones can be sought out if needed within a 50 mile radius.
To me, a compact is brilliant for people who perhaps are not as young as they once were, or who have had an injury, but I think for new cyclists they delay progress. If every hill requires the 34/32, it is never hard enough to build muscle or get any faster. I noticed a marked improvement in my strength and all round speed once I had started riding harder gears.
For short climbs a standard is certainly better. I took my rourke (42/23) on holiday to anglesey, and the lane past our cottage went to 30% in places, but was quite short. I ended up with the KoM without trying to - It was a case of staying upright more than going fast, yet I knocked about 15 seconds off the best carbon fibre time on 1970s steel, and I'm no climber.
Also - big ring/big ring just feels so much better than small ring/small ring.

 

[bm0p700f]

Re:

I use 52 42 chainrings and 12 27T cassete on the race bike. I have a 53/41T chainset on anotherand 53/39T chainset on all other hike except the alan which has 52/44T with a 13 18t freewheel.

You can guess i am not a spinner and the only thing thatnslows me down on hills is my weight. I find 50 to 60rpm on a10% gradient quite o.k

If i spin up a hill i am normally slower.

So i also dont get the new sram eagle cassette unless i could have a 48t chain ring but the biggest you can buy for a mtb chainset is 38t.

I get disc brakes for road bikes though. My commutor has them. No more rim wear.

 

[The History Man]

I'll take all the help I can afford. It keeps me out there rather than in here.

 

[Mercianbloke]

I can understand the attraction of climbing in high gears but most of my climbing is around the edges of the Peak District or in the Forest of Bowland, and believe me half a day spent around there is enough to make you throw a small cog into the nearest reservoir. For bombing around Cheshire they're fine, but the minute you find yourself in terrain that doesn't know the word "flat", you're going to be in pain.

 

[Woz]

.....and there we have it. Design your gearing for your fitness, your riding style, and your environment rather than take what's fashion or what others are using.

Out of curiosity I plugged that SRAM cassette in the Sheldon Brown 'Meters Development' calculator with a 28T chain ring, the
range is one thing which they are raving on about, but the linearity is utterly dreadfull. OK, it's for a MTB where depending
on terrain you may not be in an ideal cadance for a long period, but still it's something SRAM don't mention about the set-up.

PS: From an old fart who won't embrace new things, prefers mauling and man handling a bike up the climbs and thinks Hinault is a god!

 

[pigman]

Re:

Yeh, agreed Hinault is a god. Only yesterday, I was out all day pretending to be Bernie in my Renault Elf jersey. Everyone was in agreement, that was the best jersey design ever, but that's another thread

 

[Pionir]

Nope, Super U

 

[JSH]

Re:

horses for courses. That is designed for a 1x setup and would be great on a gravel/adventure bike.

I just don't get the perceived kudos in being able to muscle over climbs on a 42x24 - it's not big and it's not clever ;-). The sport has evolved and the accepted logic is that higher cadence/lower gear climbing is better for you and certainly more sustainable for most of us mortals. Take a look at the changing shape of GT riders - the skinny legs are usually first to the top of Alpe D'Huez. I rode last years Eroica Brit on a 42x24 and it was unpleasant compared to this year which I rode on a 39x26.

I've been riding proper bikes since the mid seventies (when I realised a Chopper had its limitations) and these days I usually ride a compact setup 34/50x27 and its easy to see why more people are riding bikes - it makes it so much more accessible. Today, I have commuted on a semi compact (or faux pro as they are disparagingly known) and these are, I think, a good compromise.