holy moley rear sprockets bigger than the front now

[legrandefromage]

These are for MTB to make you pay more for something you dont really need

Its now all about losing the front mech as if its some sort of weird device that only weird people have.

The XTR cassettes are very light, very nice but will clog up in any sticky mud very quickly and feel quite flimsy too.

Its all gone weird!

 

[Pionir]

I know MTBs are going single chainring on the front. Maybe the dinner plate is meant for those setups?

Edit: doh didn't see your post

 

[Pionir]

The world had gone mad!

https://www.specialized.com/gb/gb/bikes ... boy/106560

 

[legrandefromage]

Its why I have kind of switched off to it all even after being an avid follower of fashion. I got fed up and now am happy wallowing in the old unfashionable stuff.

 

[Pionir]

Its why I have kind of switched off to it all even after being an avid follower of fashion. I got fed up and now am happy wallowing in the old unfashionable stuff.

Me too. Back in the day I jumped on every new thing, but now even STI levers leave me cold. Better to upgrade your legs first!

I now see people having to change their 10sp chains twice a year, bottom bracket shells corroding to nothing in 3 years (bonded into the frame so new frame needed) and cracked carbon forks after a couple of years and it's clear "they don't make them like they used to". Old may be unfashionable but it's a lot less bother.

 

[Mercianbloke]

We used to call the big chainring "the racing ring" - only to be used I races or time trials and anyone who didn't have a polished ring (fnarr) was ribbed for it "did you win the tour then?" etx

39x24 is all you need (unless you're scaling an alpine pass)

Compact chainsets just don't make sense to me, especially now you can have 24-14 straight through on the back and 39x53 up front to give you pretty much every gear you'll ever need, on an old non compact spider.

I'd like to see you get up here on a 39:14 - https://goo.gl/maps/nE79vxh9ATs

Removing the front derailleur is useful for mtb'ers, especially on rough trails where it's easy to completely derail the chain and cause significant damage. It's why those guys use chain catchers, while road bikers don't. If you can design a simpler system, then why not? I couldn't care less about the size of the rear cassette, what matters to me is if I can comfortably ride whatever route I've chosen. If 1x11 drivetrains can do that as well as 2x11, then I'm in.

 

[Pionir]

What gradient is that Lane? (it's hard to tell from the photos). I've done 20% on 42x24 before... And if that's not enough then 39x28 or 32 is possible and still not compact and will give you less than walking speed.

IMHO if you're cycling slower than walking you're doing it wrong.

 

[Mercianbloke]

http://veloviewer.com/segment/3822213/H ... Lane+Climb

Although I'm not sure that graph does it justice, since it's one of only a small number of hills that has my front wheel lifting.

When I was in my early 20s I regularly went up Rawsons Rake (25% steepest) in Ramsbottom on a 42:21, but it was never a good idea. Better to glide up a hill spinning the pedals than strain and sweat while the bike hardly moves. I don't think there's anything particularly manly about going up big inclines on a high gear. Put it this way, if I was cycling with a friend—who had a 39:14—up any number of my favourite climbs, I'd reach the top way, way before they did - having used much less energy along the way.

 

[pigman]

Re:

I'm with mercianbloke.

It was only a couple of years ago that my lowest gear on any bike was 39/25. Anything easier I termed children's gears. As I got older/fatter/slower, I still got up them there hills, but slower and more knackered.

Then I hired a bike in Majorca with compact 34/28 and found I could climb faster and feel fresher and it was an enlightenment. All my modern bikes now have compacts and my carbon has a 30 up back. Yesterday a club stalwart jokingly told me I had 'gay gears' but who gives a shit.

The way I look at it now (and its a personal view) is that those who can climb on old-skool road gears either
- are properly fit and not average joes
- live in 'easy land', where there are no proper hills - there may be one token hill that local riders fear (you suvvenors with box hill?) where you can take that one and survive the day. I can show you 50 box hills within riding distance from home and do several every ride.
- just old farts who won't change and embrace improvements - 'Hinault rode tours on 42/21, so a 24 will do me fine' types

Remember small cogs only existed bitd because with so few sprockets, you'd have massive jumps between each one, which is no good for racing. With 10 or 11 speed, you can effectively have a 7 or 8 racing cluster and 2 or 3 soft bale out cogs as an added bonus.


Still, 50 is a big cog and £350 is piss taking

 

[Pionir]

I agree that you don't need a 21 anymore, but do you really need to spin up that hill at 120rpm and 3mph?

As for Box Hill, that's the ultimate demonstration of everything bad about compact chainsets. Apart from the properly fit people you mention above, most average Joe's use their granny gear and go up spinning like fury, puffing and blowing because they're out of breath from moving their limbs so fast, when a steady pace in the equivalent of 42x18 will do (and I regard myself as an unfit average Joe).

I remember reading in cycling weekly advice from Robert Miller was to use a bigger gear than everyone else on the hills so you're not so out of breath, although I'm not sure if that was about racing up pyrenean passes or tootling up short hills.