What gears for climbing?
Lloyd
not talking about mild rollers, but real climbing like the through the
Rockies or Adirondacks, Appalachians, or even Cheaha? I'll be going
out west this year, and I've got a 50/34 on the front, with a 12/27
cassette on my steel bike. On my CF I've got a 50/39/30 crank with a
12/25 cassette. Maybe you could mention where you climb and what your
gear choice is. comments?
Don Perley
currently 12/25 rear. It would probably shift a little easier if the
middle front one was 39.
Dark Horse
I've got several passes within reach, and why skimp?
I run a standard road triple at 30/39/52, with a 12-27 stack. Cranks
are 175mm, at 5'11".
Most of the time I use it as a "normal" road double, and save the 30
for a bailout gear. But, when I want that bailout, I really want it.
A compact double isn't really an option for me. The gearing
reduction at the top end is not something I am willing to tolerate.
Larry Powers
> Subject: [Randon] What gears for climbing?
> From: ldle...@comcast.net
> To: ran...@googlegroups.com
Larry Powers
"just when you think that you've been gyped
the bearded lady comes and does a double back flip" - John Hiatt
Windows Live Hotmail is giving away Zunes. Enter for your chance to win.
Jim Bronson
few states out West with decent results. Although, I am still prone
to stopping once or twice on a long climb, especially on the third day
of a 1000K. I think I might like to switch the granny to a 24 for
this reason.
I weigh 255, by the way. (Currently shooting for sub-250 for the
Cascade 1200). I run 180 cranks, 6'7".
--
Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com
I ride my bike, to ride my bike.
russell...@yahoo.com
2007 I used a 30x23 as my lowest gear. This past weekend I was riding
around Fayetteville Arkansas and used a 42x23 as my lowest gear. Last
Chance 2006 I used a 42x26 as my lowest gear. Riding in the Rockies I
used a 30x23 as my lowest gear, except for a short stretch towards the
top of Mt. Evans when I used the 30x26.
If accepted into the Cascade 1200k I'll use 46-30 rings and 13-29
cassette. Doesn't hurt me to have a couple extra low gears I don't
use. And a lowly high gear of 46x13 won't cause me to lose any
sleep. At least not during the brevet. Maybe afterwards I'll figure
up how much time I could have gained if I could have pedaled down the
mountains in a higher gear.
Lesli
over to a 46-28 in the front, 13-28 cluster in the rear. The 28t
front chainring gives me a terrific range of low climbing gears--
including some super slow and steady bail out gears for long, ten plus
mile climbs.
Lesli Larson
Dave Pyle
may work for you, but only if you are as weak as I am :). All I can
say is that whatever your lowest gear is on a daily ride, or even a
century, will probably not be low enough after 600k.
Charles Lathe
Randonneuse and I've been happy with that in the Cascades. After just
two forays into the Blue Ridge Mountains, I think it will be alright
here in North Carolina. Actually, the 14/28 isn't getting much use,
but I can put it on pretty easily. I'm not a terribly strong climber
and the long and the steep climbs challenge me, but I'm still happy
with these gears. I'm not keen on triples.
Chuck Lathe
cohobicycles.com
Tim McNamara
38 x 28 got me up l'Alpe-d'Huez, Clo de la Croix de Fer, Col de
Telegraphe, almost up the Maurienne side of the Galibier, and another
10 or so Alpine passes in 2002. I'm a mediocre climber (6'4" and
210# then).
sfuller
On Mar 31, 5:40 pm, Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
> 38 x 28 got me up l'Alpe-d'Huez, Clo de la Croix de Fer, Col de
> Telegraphe, almost up the Maurienne side of the Galibier, and another
> 10 or so Alpine passes in 2002. I'm a mediocre climber (6'4" and
> 210# then).
to experience those climbs.
Steve
Tim McNamara
It was a good two weeks, probably the best vacation I've ever had.
Bob Kassel
the back, and it's got a fair bit of stuff, then I will need more help
on long climbs.
I also use a compact 34-50. I put on a mountain bike derailleur so if
I am travelling light, I use a 12-28, but picked up a 13-34 from
Harris for PBP. If you have a 9 speed, you get to use easy to get
mountain bike cassettes, as long as you have the appropriate
derailleur. If you are using a 10 speed, then I don't think they have
that flexibility yet. If I did not have that option, I would use a
triple in front.
Ingle, Bruce
> gear choice is. comments?
We usually have a few riders who prefer to ride the Boston brevets on
fixed wheel. The rides go all over New England, and the 600km traverses
the Green Mountains in VT twice. All are hilly except for the 200km on
PBP years, and many rides have climbs in excess of 10%. The preferred
gearing for fixed wheel is usually around 70", although I know one rider
who typically uses gearing in excess of 81". The fixed wheel riders
generally prefer to walk grades in excess of 10% or so.
Given their skills, I've found that a Sturmey AW with a 70" (52/20)
normal gear is usually more than adequate for nearly all the climbing in
the area -- when I'm in shape, I'll normally only use the 52" bailout
for climbs in excess of 15%.
Since I've rarely needed the low gear, I've been using a higher 78"
(52/18) normal gear recently and enjoying the benefits of a higher top
end, which allows a lower cadence on slight downhills.
For 600km+, I normally use a derailleur bike for efficiency. I find
that a very small tread (Q-factor) is preferable for ergonomic
compatibility, so I rarely use a front derailleur or multiple
chainrings. I've used 42/11-34 9sp in the past, but I didn't need the
bottom end and often used the top on long rides, so my current
preference is 52 or 53x11-34. The lowest (42") gear has been sufficient
for a 25-30% grade (Smuggler's Notch in VT).
I also have a 20" wheel folding bike that I've been using for some
distance riding; It currently has a 60 tooth chainring and 11-32 custom
6sp cassette, but is geared a tad lower than I'd prefer. Larger
chainrings are available, but rather expensive.
- Bruce
littlecircles :: mikeb
> for a 25-30% grade (Smuggler's Notch in VT).
wow.
i couldn't keep the front wheel down with a 34-27 on lincoln gap (24%
+)
then i blew up and had to walk.
i've only ridden smuggs from the northwest. the twisties are fun going
down.
30% seems a bit high...
-mike
Ingle, Bruce
> i couldn't keep the front wheel down with a 34-27
> on lincoln gap (24%+) then i blew up and had to walk.
I've been over Lincoln Gap eastbound a couple of times, but only with
the 42/34 (33"). I don't think I'd want to try a larger gear, because
the rear wheel would spin in the gravel when I'd try to stand. My
recollection is that a half-standing position is required to keep
adequate weight on both wheels.
Fortunately, this climb is atypical of those in randonneuring events.
- Bruce
Mike Biswell
To get back to the original idea (I'd rather be getting back to the Alps,
but...)
One general comment would be that for climbing, a rider should have such a
size gear that they can spin easily, no matter what the grade. Talking about
using a small enough gear that doesn't require maximum rider effort, and
that the rider hopefully would still be able to easily accelerate just a
little by jumping up a gear now and then, or spinning faster.
So many people miss the boat on this because their bikes are not set up for
this when new. Putting aside what he typically did in June, in July Lance
never 'geared out' on the TDF climbs, he just kept spinning away. Ivan Basso
copied this style to great success too, for a while. Why shouldn't the
average biker just naturally emulate this spinning riding style?
For rando, getting down to your last gear on a longer climb, where one is
just struggling to keep the bike going forward is an energy waster, and is
asking one's body to offer up some of it's energy reserves, and use a higher
heart rate than needed. Not wise, but so many do it because that's the way
the bikes come and no one wants to be a 'granny.'
If you can't spin in a 30-25, then get a 30-27, or a 30-34, and save your
energy by limiting your output on climbs, regardless of speed, and maybe
help protect yourself from injury too.
Regards!
Mike
Mike Biswell
>From: Jan H
>Subject: [Randon] What gears for climbing?
>Above about 30-35 mph, you go faster in a full aero tuck... (than if you
>are in the drops pedaling furiously.
Rando full aero tuck = Chin to handlebar bag? Nose to GPS? Feet hooked up
over the Carradice? :-), sorry.
>Big gears are useful in a sprint when you have a very strong lead-out.
>(Back in the old days when stages were>longer and bunch finishes rare, Tour
>de France racers rarely used gears >larger than 48-14. And Fausto Coppi &
>Co. were no slackers.)
>Of course, if you enjoy pedaling on downhills, then that is a good
>and totally legitimate reason to have large gears.
What hasn't been mentioned so far is the benefit of having a bigger gear for
better handling on descents.
Also, the idea of a long gradual or very gradual descent makes the larger
gears appealing. Big tailwind too.
Regards!
Mike
Dark Horse
>and totally legitimate reason to have large gears.
Hurricane Ridge, and even more at Paradise and Sunrise.
>For rando, getting down to your last gear on a longer climb, where one is
>just struggling to keep the bike going forward is an energy waster, and is
>asking one's body to offer up some of it's energy reserves, and use a higher
>heart rate than needed. Not wise, but so many do it because that's the way
>the bikes come and no one wants to be a 'granny.'
just idiotic. That is a simple prescription for suffering beyond the
necessary, and the possibility of serious injury. Blowing up halfway
up a pass many miles from home is not fun, and usually avoidable.
Steve Palincsar
>> Of course, if you enjoy pedaling on downhills, then that is a good
>> and totally legitimate reason to have large gears.
>>
>
> That would be a "yes". I've been into the lower 50's descending
> Hurricane Ridge, and even more at Paradise and Sunrise.
>
You mean 50+ mph?
According to Sheldon's gear calculator, if you had a 54x11 on a 27"
wheel at 120 rpm you'd have been going 47.3 mph. A 53x12's more common;
that would have you doing 42.6 mph at the same 120 rpm.
Wouldn't it have made a lot of sense to simply coast?
Jim Bronson
the aero tuck as Jan describes.
Last time I was in Colorado, I hit 55.1 on the back side of Wolf Creek
Pass. It would have been faster but I ran up on some cars doing 35 so
I had to slow down.
--
sfuller
> If you can't spin in a 30-25, then get a 30-27, or a 30-34, and save your
> energy by limiting your output on climbs, regardless of speed, and maybe
> help protect yourself from injury too.
more people would realize the above when riding in general. Grinding
big gears at a slow RPM isn't going let you ride for a long time. I
rode 115 miles on hilly (for this area) gravel roads this weekend
(6100 feet of climb over the 115 miles). I rode the entire ride making
sure I spun up the hills in such a way that my HR never exceeded 165.
Other than the bonk, my legs felt good at the end of the ride.
Steve
Ingle, Bruce
> spinning away. Ivan Basso copied this style to great success too,
> for a while. Why shouldn't the average biker just naturally
> emulate this spinning riding style?
Because racers seek to maximize their power, whereas many distance
riders naturally gravitate toward maximizing efficiency; a high cadence
is better for maximizing power, whereas a lower cadence is more
efficient. A plot of average cadence vs overall distance traveled from
Bicycling Science clearly shows how cadence decreases over distance
traveled for record-setting efforts. It is said that nearly all solo
RAAM racers finish with a cadence around 60 RPM, and I personally find
that I naturally gravitate toward higher gears as distance progresses on
a 1200k, even though my speed certainly has not increased.
Limiting my low gear range also forces me to get out of the saddle on
climbs, which gives some relief from saddle pressure and causes me to
use different muscle groups. Of course, I could always artificially
limit my minimum gearing to force myself to get out of the saddle when
tired, and I've done this, but I don't see much point in carrying around
extra gears that I'm not going to use when I can use a simpler
drivetrain instead.
My personal experience with knee pain is that it's much more likely to
be caused by improper ergonomics than high gearing; In fact, I'm
usually more likely to experience knee pain when spinning up hills than
when turning a higher gear.
I would venture to say that our fixed gear riders, who also use a rather
high minimum gear, lose the most amount of time to geared riders on
uphills so steep they're forced to walk and downhills, not inclines in
the 0-10% range; the fact that the latter gradient range nearly always
constitutes the majority of riding time spent on any brevet allows them
to minimize their time differential to geared riders. I have seen
results from some fixed gear riders that I would be proud to achieve on
a mere geared bike, e.g. a 7:01 200km brevet.
- Bruce
RUSA2691
bicycle science I've read this thread with interest.
I take it that having a wide range of gears (say, 30/42/50 with 11-34)
results in bigger jumps between gears, decreasing the efficiency of
maintaining an exact cadence with the same effort as slope changes (at
least I think that's one reason people like small steps between
gears), and the larger cassette and triple chain ring are added weight
(and unnecessary weight, at that, if you're not going to use them).
But, given the long distances and lack of support on brevets, wouldn't
one want to prepare for as many contingencies as possible? You may
never use that 30-34 but you most likely won't benefit from the added
weight of that spoke wrench or link extractor either. There have been
times when I've totally bonked and found myself having to pedal
(slightly faster than walking) up a 7% grade in a gear I would
normally save for spinning up a 20% one.
So, I'm wondering: "Why not carry the biggest range possible because,
you never know?"
Thanks.
-Paul
Peter Noris
Otherwise, I agree. Better to have and not need than need and not have.
Jake Kassen
> I would venture to say that our fixed gear riders, who also use a rather
> high minimum gear, lose the most amount of time to geared riders on
> uphills so steep they're forced to walk and downhills, not inclines in
> the 0-10% range; the fact that the latter gradient range nearly always
> constitutes the majority of riding time spent on any brevet allows them
> to minimize their time differential to geared riders. I have seen
> results from some fixed gear riders that I would be proud to achieve on
> a mere geared bike, e.g. a 7:01 200km brevet.
I find that I lose time on downhills and flats, not uphills, when I ride
fixed. If a hill is so steep that I'm walking then I'm really not going
much slower then someone spinning with very low gears. I don't mind the
short walk and would prefer this to low-speed fast spinning.
This Saturday will be my first Brevet with gears. I'm interested in
seeing if I can increase my downhill/flat speeds for an overall faster
time. If the entire course was uphill, I'd get a better time on a fixed
gear.
Jake
RUSA2691
skews my thinking; I see your point. Thanks.
NickBull
Total weight of an Ultegra 9-spd cassette plus suitable Ultegra rear
derailleur = 419 grams
Total weight of a Deore XT 11/34 plus a suitable Deore XT rear
derailleur = 536 grams
You'd also need a slightly longer chain on the Deore setup.
So for a weight penalty of about 5 ounces, you get a much-wider gear
range. To me, it's worth hauling around that bit of extra weight,
because sometimes I end up totally bonked and down in the lowest gear
on a hill that would be embarassing to admit to it, and other times
I'm on a very steep hill and am standing up even in my lowest gear,
and other times I just want to be able to alternate between sitting
and spinning versus standing and grinding, and finally, there have
been times when an ankle or knee is hurting, and standing on a climb
is not an option, but sitting and spinning is. My setup may be a bit
heavier than most, since I pretty-much always carry most of what I'd
need on a 1200, on the principle that the shorter brevets are training
rides for randonees, where a wider range of equipment must be carried,
and where weather conditions cannot be predicted with certainty, so a
wider range of clothing must be carried.
Harry Spatz
option as long as you are willing to give up gears on the high end. That
option is to use a mountain bike crank set. On my 'bent I use 24-34-44
chainrings and 12/28 cassette. This is more user friendly than the usual
28-39-52 with 11/34 that most bentriders use. You just have to decide that
you will coast when you run out of gears and on brevets that is a small
price to pay for having the right gear.
Keep in mind that gear ratios are affected by several factors besides how
strong you are and what cadence you prefer. Riding style, crank length, and
wheel diameter are important too. Keep in mind that the hills start getting
hillier after you have a couple hundred miles on your legs.
Harry Spatz
Emily O'Brien
Here's another way of looking at gearing though, for what it's worth, and for which I'll yet again recommend one of my favorite sites: www.analyticcycling.com . It has speed/cadence calculations in both directions as well as gear charts. Everything you need.
Here's one way to figure out your minimum gear: The first question is, how slow do you figure you're ever going to go? Let's say when you go up a steep hill, you're doing it at 2mph with about as much effort as you want to be expending, but your cadence is painfully low because your gear is too high. The next question is, what's the minimum cadence you find comfortable? Do you want to be riding 2mph at 90 RPM? 120 RPM? 50 RPM? 10 RPM? Use the button "Speed, Cadence" and try different gear combinations to see what will give you your desired speed at your desired cadence. You'd need a 11t chainring and a 50t cog to do 120 RPM at 2mph (good luck with that). If you were happy at 10 RPM, you'd only need a 44X18 minimum gear to ride at 2mph. 10 RPM ain't no fun, by the way. I get off and walk at about 13 RPM. To go 2mph at 50 RPM you'll need to find yourself a 20t chainring and a 38t cog.
If your lowest speed is 1 mph, but you're happy pedalling once every 30 seconds, the lowest gear you need is 56X11. ;)
If you've figured out a low gear that works for you, try playing around with the gear charts. There's more than one way of getting the same thing: 38X20, 40X21, 42X22, 34X18, 53X28 all give you basically the same gear.
So figure out what range you need and what combinations of cranksets and cassettes will give you that overall range. Some will have closer spacing but less overlap between chainrings; some will have wider spacing and more overlap. It's just a matter of what's more important to you.
Also, I'll put forth the hypothesis that closer spacing between gears is less useful with downtube shifters than with STI's or ergo levers because integrated shifters make it easy to shift to a slightly different gear every time there's a slight change in speed, grade, wind, etc; you end up shifting much more often with STI's than you do if you have to move your hand to do it. I'm not saying either way is bad, but keep in mind that the benefit of closely spaced gears is allowing you to micromanage your gearing to respond to smaller changes, allowing you to keep closer to your ideal cadence. So on a slightly undulating road, you can shift back and forth between two or three gears, where a rider with wider spacing or slightly harder-to-reach shifters would just pick a gear and stick with it. That matters a lot more if you're in a race or an aggressive club ride when you need to worry about maximizing your acceleration than it does on a brevet, and if you don't really like shifting very often, sacrificing close spacing for a wider range isn't really a big sacrifice to make at all.
Incidentally, looks like I'll be trying my first brevet with gears this weekend, too!
Emily
> -------Original Message-------
> From: Jake Kassen <li...@jkassen.org>
> Subject: [Randon] Re: What gears for climbing?
Tim McNamara
On Apr 2, 2008, at 2:45 PM, Harry Spatz wrote:
> If you want close ratios, low gears, and light weight, there is
> another
> option as long as you are willing to give up gears on the high
> end. That
> option is to use a mountain bike crank set. On my 'bent I use
> 24-34-44
> chainrings and 12/28 cassette. This is more user friendly than the
> usual
> 28-39-52 with 11/34 that most bentriders use. You just have to
> decide that
> you will coast when you run out of gears and on brevets that is a
> small
> price to pay for having the right gear.
This is a very good and practical point.
On my bikes I use a relatively low top gear (46T x 12 on my 700C bike
and 48 x 12 on my 559 bike) but that's only relatively low compared
to racing gears. I still don't run out of gears below about 32 mph,
and how often am I sprinting that fast in a brevet? The 35 x 11 that
comes standard on most "road" bikes nowadays is just nuts. The small
ring is a 34 on both bikes (110 mm BCD); on the 700C bike the
cassette is 12-28 and on the 559er the freewheel is 12-24. I've not
had to walk either bike up a hill (except for 100 meters or so of the
Galibier, but since PBP doesn't go up the Galibier who cares?).
I'd probably use a 44 x 28 or a 46 x 28 if that was convenient with
my selection of drivetrain components. I'd skip the triple.
Ingle, Bruce
> Incidentally, looks like I'll be trying my first
> brevet with gears this weekend, too!
Emily, Jake - what drivetrains did you use, and how'd it go?
- Bruce