Switching from 12-27 to 11-32 cassette, advice wanted

[Evan Estern]

I've been setting up my Rawland Stag for the D2R2 180K ride that's coming up pretty soon.  I pulled the fenders and rack, installed 48mm tires and switched from my original Ultegra 12-27 9 speed cassette to a 9 speed Deore 11-32.  I had been using a Dura-Ace 9 speed  RD7700 GS (medium cage) rear derailleur which has performed flawlessly with the 12-27.  The 32 cog on the new cassette exceeds the max sprocket on my RD7700 by 5 teeth, but by reversing the B screw, I was able to get it to shift very well.

I'm wondering if maybe it would be a more reliable setup (not that I noticed any issues) if I switched to an RD that was actually designed to run an 11-32 cassette. So I got a new Deore 9 speed long cage RD and installed it.  It's about 90 grams heavier, doesn't shift as well as the Dura-Ace with B screw reversed (at least on the work stand), but it does keep the chain tension a bit more constant. 

Those of you who are more experienced with this stuff than I am--what do you think?  Run the lovely Dura-Ace beyond it's capabilities, or go with the heavier, cruder Deore that's designed to handle this cassette?  It's going to have to be reliable over 111 miles of rough gravel. 

[Michael Mann]

You don’t mention your front chainring(s) setup. The only time I personally run a long cage derailleur is when I’ve got a BIG cassette (11-46 or more) or a triple front. Otherwise you’ll probably get better shifting with a medium cage and an 11-32. I run an Ultegra on 9-speed 11-32 to 11-36 with a double chainring and the shifting is flawless.

Mike M

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 10, 2022, at 1:28 PM, Evan Estern <evane...@gmail.com> wrote:



I've been setting up my Rawland Stag for the D2R2 180K ride that's coming up pretty soon.  I pulled the fenders and rack, installed 48mm tires and switched from my original Ultegra 12-27 9 speed cassette to a 9 speed Deore 11-32.  I had been using a Dura-Ace 9 speed  RD7700 GS (medium cage) rear derailleur which has performed flawlessly with the 12-27.  The 32 cog on the new cassette exceeds the max sprocket on my RD7700 by 5 teeth, but by reversing the B screw, I was able to get it to shift very well.

I'm wondering if maybe it would be a more reliable setup (not that I noticed any issues) if I switched to an RD that was actually designed to run an 11-32 cassette. So I got a new Deore 9 speed long cage RD and installed it.  It's about 90 grams heavier, doesn't shift as well as the Dura-Ace with B screw reversed (at least on the work stand), but it does keep the chain tension a bit more constant. 

Those of you who are more experienced with this stuff than I am--what do you think?  Run the lovely Dura-Ace beyond it's capabilities, or go with the heavier, cruder Deore that's designed to handle this cassette?  It's going to have to be reliable over 111 miles of rough gravel. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "650b" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to 650b+uns...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/650b/0d200085-03e0-49b1-96c0-6e472b493ec7n%40googlegroups.com.

[Michael Mann]

Also, I’ve had good luck expanding the range on a vintage XT derailleur using a Wolftooth Roadlink. I’d be intrigued by what it would do for your DA derailleur. They say 10/11 speed but I don’t see any reason it wouldn’t be backward compatible.

https://www.wolftoothcomponents.com/collections/components/products/roadlink

Mike M

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 10, 2022, at 1:38 PM, Michael Mann <velo...@gmail.com> wrote:

You don’t mention your front chainring(s) setup. The only time I personally run a long cage derailleur is when I’ve got a BIG cassette (11-46 or more) or a triple front. Otherwise you’ll probably get better shifting with a medium cage and an 11-32. I run an Ultegra on 9-speed 11-32 to 11-36 with a double chainring and the shifting is flawless.

[Evan Estern]

I was considering the Wolf Tooth Road Link.  Probably should have gone that route.  Still might.

My front chain rings are 44/28.

I probably should have gone with Ultegra, but I couldn't source an Ultegra 9 speed and was hesitating to use the 10 speed version--just thought the 9 speed chain would maybe run slightly better over 9 speed pulleys. 

Meanwhile I've got this Deore 9 speed Long Cage RD on the bike and adjusted.  It runs pretty well.  The DA version of medium cage, at least in the 7700 iteration, maxes out at 27 teeth, so it's well beyond it's parameters running 11-32.  

[Alex Israel]

I ran a 44/28 up front with a CX-70 and 11-32 cassette for a year, 9s also, using the Shimano 105 triple RD. Worked great, no issues that I noticed, B screw was most of the way in but not flipped. Was the chain tension something you noticed while riding? Across the range or mainly in cross chaining, like small/small combos? Do you have the short or longer cage (triple) DA RD? Wonder if the B screw being all the way in is forcing it a little far away from the smaller cogs (but you did say shifting was crisp)?

Alex, being shifty in CO

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/650b/72ed93e3-7304-4220-b242-0990f1abb148n%40googlegroups.com.

[Evan Estern]

Alex,

The Dura-Ace is the triple version, so it has the capacity (38).  It just won't clear the 32 cog without the B screw reversed.  It shifts very well, chain tension could be better, but no issues riding.  I've put about 30 rough road miles on it.  Maybe the Deore long cage was over doing it.  If I get some consensus here, I may go back to it.  It sure is prettier as well as much lighter and shifts about as well. 

[Evan Estern]

So my options are:

Dura-ace with B screw reversed

Dura-Ace with Wolf Tooth Road Link

Deore 9 Speed Long Cage

Shifting seemed slightly snappier with the Dura-Ace/B screw, but I have some concerns about pushing the derailleur so far beyond its design parameters. 

Have not tried the Wolf Tooth yet.  Might be the best option though.

Deore: 80 grams heavier, uglier, long cage seems like overkill for 32 cog.

[Steve Palincsar]

On 8/11/22 8:51 AM, Evan Estern wrote:
> So my options are:
> Dura-ace with B screw reversed
> Dura-Ace with Wolf Tooth Road Link
> Deore 9 Speed Long Cage
>
> Shifting seemed slightly snappier with the Dura-Ace/B screw, but I
> have some concerns about pushing the derailleur so far beyond its
> design parameters.
> Have not tried the Wolf Tooth yet.  Might be the best option though.
> Deore: 80 grams heavier, uglier, long cage seems like overkill for 32 cog.

"Best option?"  Really?  The Wolf Tooth generally has been known to
degrade shifting in the smallest sprockets, while a 9 speed MTB rear
derailleur has been the classic, standard solution to getting lower
gears on Shimano road drive trains.  You say it "seems" like overkill,
but what do you base that on?  That it works perfectly well?  I won't
argue about the value of 80 grams, but clearly, ugliness is in the eye
of the beholder.  Perhaps there's a fourth option that should be
considered: a Deore XT or an XTR 9 speed rear derailleur.


--
Steve Palincsar
Alexandria, Virginia
USA

[David Dye]

For normal use, I'd just run the Ultegra with a longer B screw; add a bigger lower jockey if you have enough capacity, it will help with keeping everything wrapped up tightly. 

Since this seems to be a special ride for you, and especially since it's rough gravel we're talking about, you're better off with a mountain derailleur. XTR would be great, but they're getting very hard to find in 9 speed that are still in excellent condition. (watch out for 953 and 96X versions, which are low-normal and will reverse your shifting direction) I'd grab a brand new XT medium cage and send it. The Deore you have is fine, but I expect most of the degradation in shift quality you've noticed is from the derailleur itself. 

Wolf tooth Road link doesn't work great, probably no better than using the Deore derailleur. 

Whatever you run, clean and lube your pulleys before the ride; nothing ends a gravel ride faster than a broken derailleur and slow pulleys are one of the biggest causes. Slick honey for real bearings; Dri-Slide for bushings.

[Evan Estern]

Thanks Steve and dye..., your reasoning is why I bought a Deore MTB derailleur in the first place.  I just have a bit of regret over switching to a lower grade component.  I started getting stressed since the event is getting close and eBay options for a top normal XTR/XT were pretty limited.  Whatever I go with, I want to have time to test it out.  I think I'll use the Deore MTB derailleur for the present, and just keep on the lookout for a 9 speed XTR or XT RD as an eventual upgrade.  

And thanks everyone else, for all the comments, this has really helped me put things into perspective.

As an aside, for last year's D2R2 I rode 42mm tires and 46/28 chain rings with a 10 speed 12-30 cassette (Norther-Lyon bike), fenders, front bag, etc.   That set up was amazing on the better roads, but not so great when things got really steep/rough/wet.  I'm looking forward to trying it with 48mm tires (RH Juniper Ridge) and lower gearing.

[satanas]

The worst option would IME be a Roadlink, for the reasons Steve mentioned; I had one briefly and found shifting intolerable. Normally, Shimano RDs will work well if the maximum capacity (both max cog and total capacity) is exceeded a bit, how much depending on hanger geometry, chainstay and chain length, etc. However, I'd normally expect short cage RDs to be okay with 30T, maybe 32T (just). A MTB RD should have a more appropriate parallelogram angle though, so keeping the jockey wheel a reasonable distance in both large and small cogs is likely to be more doable. Something like an M900 XTR or other short cage MTB RD (<10 speeds) should be fine, or else a suitable road RD up to 10 speeds (Tiagra 4700 excepted as these use different cable travel).

The issue here isn't so much the cage length as the maximum acceptable cog size, a different thing altogether.

As long as the chain isn't so stretched that the RD is likely to snap off I wouldn't stress too much about theoretical capacity, assuming things work acceptably.

Later,

Stephen

[Evan Estern]

The RD M900 looks great but the max capacity is 33.  With my gearing @ 44/28 + 11-32 the capacity is 37.  So probably not a good idea to exceed the capacity by that much.

[Stephen Poole]

Back in the day the M900 came on bikes with 46x36x26 XTR chainrings and either 12-28 or 12-32 XTR cassettes; it worked. If the chain was long enough that 46x32 was okay, typically one would not have chain tension in 26x12 & 14, maybe 16 - that depended on chain and chainstay length as these both affect capacity. (Those were redundant gears though.) If 46x32 (78T) and 26x16 (42T) both work, that gives a total capacity of 36T in practice.

44x28 + 11-32 should IME be fine, although maybe one or a few of the smaller cogs might not have tension with the 28T ring; no big deal, and I personally wouldn't want to use 28x11-14 (or 44x32) in any case. If you did use them nothing would be likely to break - however, some people are really good at breaking things so maybe keeping within the rated capacity might be a good idea, especially if one is paranoid.

Given M900 RDs are now becoming collectables maybe there is a better option, depending on your budget, etc.

Since it seems both your existing options work, the question is really which you might like better; we can't really answer that for you unless one of us is a psychic or clairvoyant...

Later,

Stephen

[Evan Estern]

Thanks Stephen.  I find I like the big/big gear combination, but yeah, I never use small chainring past the first 4 or 5 cogs.  The aesthetics of the early XTR is exactly what I have in mind--shouldn't matter, but combined with the performance and weight, that seems pretty ideal.  Just have to find one that's not to beat up or expensive.

[Michael Wong]

I used Roadlink with Hubbub routing, Campy dt shifters and a Shimano Ultegra9 RD. Shifting was fine until the link sheared completely off with a big ring downshift. Same thing happened with the replacement link

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "650b" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to 650b+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/650b/9c71acce-a349-4fac-a618-6b1cbb0de645n%40googlegroups.com.

[Brad]

What road are you thinkng you can't get up with 27?   There was a time when people in those parts went everywhere with a 14-28 and chainrings of 42 or 40 or sometimes 36.  (Campy, Sugino Maxy, whatever cottered crank was on the Peugeot UO-8)

[Stephen Poole]

Yeah, and back around 1930 derailleurs were banned in the TDF. That doesn't mean they're a bad idea or that Rule #5 always has to apply. The highest low gear one can currently get with non-pro-TT 12 speed road stuff is 40x30 for Shimano, 37x26 for SRAM, and 39x29 for Campag, rather different from the 42x18-21 that used to be the default ~40 years ago...

Gravel stuff hasn't (IMHO) got sufficiently far with low gear options yet, aiming more at racer types and big gear pushers, but maybe it'll get there one day. Terrain varies, as do loads carried; the available gears need to reflect this more than they do.  :-(

One could always ride SS and/or walk, but that's not necessarily either efficient or fun.

Later,

Stephen

[Steve Palincsar]

On 8/12/22 9:52 AM, Stephen Poole wrote:

 The highest low gear one can currently get with non-pro-TT 12 speed road stuff is 40x30 for Shimano, 37x26 for SRAM, and 39x29 for Campag, rather different from the 42x18-21 that used to be the default ~40 years ago...

That is absolutely not so.  SRAM X-Range gearing will let you pair a 30/43 crank with a 10-36 cassette, that would be a low gear of 30x36, not 37x26.  That's a 22.5" low gear and a 116.1" top gear.

https://www.sram.com/en/life/stories/x-range-gearing

And this isn't vaporware, either.  A friend of mine just got a Kelly Bedford Ti custom equipped with SRAM x-range.  Not the 30/43 or the 10-36, but you can match any of the cranks with any of the available cassettes.  She did wait almost 9 months for it, but it's definitely available now.

Gravel stuff hasn't (IMHO) got sufficiently far with low gear options yet, aiming more at racer types and big gear pushers, but maybe it'll get there one day. Terrain varies, as do loads carried; the available gears need to reflect this more than they do.  :-(

One could always ride SS and/or walk, but that's not necessarily either efficient or fun.

Later,

Stephen

On Fri, 12 Aug. 2022, 23:37 Brad, <riendeau...@gmail.com> wrote:

What road are you thinkng you can't get up with 27?

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "650b" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to 650b+uns...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/650b/CAEqY5rf_6FXoJ%2BoBbEHnrEv_JkuXLKsDUx2rpRcs-psYjXeysw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Stephen Poole]

Note that I said the *highest* low gear, not the lowest low gear; they are not the same thing! And getting the 43x30 rings requires either using the SRAM Wide cranks and matching FD (150mm Q factor versus 145mm), or else buying the rings and smaller spider as spares and swapping them out, not so easy given the current supply chain, and not cheap either. Gearoop in Taiwan theoretically make 44x28 one piece rings to fit AXS cranks, FWIW:

https://www.gearoop-intl.com/product-KOM-Challenger---44t-28t-ChainRing-for-Sram-Direct-Mount-BCD-EDU-AXS4428.html

My point was that wider gear ranges have appeared over time, even for road racing. Back in the 1930s one had two gears, swappable by reversing the rear wheel, then came derailleurs, at first with 3 and 4 speed freewheels, then 5, 6 and 7, cassettes, etc. Front rings have changed from 52x49 or similar in the early days to 52x42, then 53x39, etc, and at the rear from 13-18, 13-21 or maybe 13-24 for mountain stages circa 1980 to current gearing. There's a lot more sitting and spinning versus standing and grinding in races nowadays, and it's possible to get "racing" gearing that doesn't necessarily require non-pros to obey Rule #5...

Even with 8 speed Dura-Ace, at first the only cassettes were 12-21 & 13-23, with 12-23, 12-25 & 13-26 coming later, and the default rings were 53x42, with 39T the smallest from Shimano (or 38T from TA et al). With 12 speed Dura-Ace, the two cassettes currently available are 11-30 & 11-34, which would have been seen as suitable only for touring or MTBs until quite recently; one can get rings down to 34T too (or 33T from TA). In fact 50x34 + 11-34 is the only option for 12 speed 105 at present. Gear ranges on road bikes have expanded massively, in both directions, gravel bikes not so much. (Not that I care about high gears off-road, particularly with luggage.)

Later,

Stephen

[Steve Palincsar]

On 8/12/22 2:44 PM, Stephen Poole wrote:

Note that I said the *highest* low gear, not the lowest low gear; they are not the same thing! And getting the 43x30 rings requires either using the SRAM Wide cranks and matching FD (150mm Q factor versus 145mm), or else buying the rings and smaller spider as spares and swapping them out, not so easy given the current supply chain, and not cheap either. Gearoop in Taiwan theoretically make 44x28 one piece rings to fit AXS cranks, FWIW:

https://www.gearoop-intl.com/product-KOM-Challenger---44t-28t-ChainRing-for-Sram-Direct-Mount-BCD-EDU-AXS4428.html

Yes, I thought that was a typo, since it seemed that the discussion was about the lowest low gears available in 12 speed.  Maybe I missed the entire point of the discussion.  It's certainly possible.

As for availability, I did say:

And this isn't vaporware, either.  A friend of mine just got a Kelly Bedford Ti custom equipped with SRAM x-range.  Not the 30/43 or the 10-36, but you can match any of the cranks with any of the available cassettes.  She did wait almost 9 months for it, but it's definitely available now.

Sure, it takes special SRAM stuff.  But then, so too do the cassettes.  Those 10-whatever cassettes don't fit on standard Shimano style freehubs.  It's just one more thing to pick between now when you're buying wheels.

My point was that wider gear ranges have appeared over time, even for road racing. Back in the 1930s one had two gears, swappable by reversing the rear wheel, then came derailleurs, at first with 3 and 4 speed freewheels, then 5, 6 and 7, cassettes, etc. Front rings have changed from 52x49 or similar in the early days to 52x42, then 53x39, etc, and at the rear from 13-18, 13-21 or maybe 13-24 for mountain stages circa 1980 to current gearing. There's a lot more sitting and spinning versus standing and grinding in races nowadays, and it's possible to get "racing" gearing that doesn't necessarily require non-pros to obey Rule #5...

Back in the day, 42x21, 24 or 26 was considered a low gear.  At one time in a rec.bicycles.tech discussion, noted bicycle guru Jobst Brandt even went so far as to say anyone who couldn't do the Alps with a 42x26 low gear should find another sport. 

I offered that next time he was in my neighborhood, he should stop by and let me slam him across the knee with a crow bar, and then let's talk about what an appropriate low gear is, being a little touchy on the subject since my knee had been destroyed in a soccer accident in 1962, and I lived with that bad knee for 50 years until it was replaced.

Even with 8 speed Dura-Ace, at first the only cassettes were 12-21 & 13-23, with 12-23, 12-25 & 13-26 coming later,

If you are suggesting low gears were not available in the 1970s, that's just not so.  My 1972 Paramount came with a Regina Oro freewheel with a 31T large sprocket, and after the shop destroyed it trying to take it off for its first service, I replaced it with a Sun Tour freewheen that had a 32T large sprocket.  If memory serves, I recall a Shimano freewheel from the 70s that had a 34T large sprocket, with every other tooth missing.  Racers might not have used them because the Nuovo Record rear derailleur couldn't handle them, but they were definitely around.

and the default rings were 53x42, with 39T the smallest from Shimano (or 38T from TA et al). With 12 speed Dura-Ace, the two cassettes currently available are 11-30 & 11-34, which would have been seen as suitable only for touring or MTBs until quite recently;

Yes, it's curious, sometime in the first few years of 11 speed there must have been a secret meeting where it was voted that the standard 11 speed cassette would be an 11-32, and that standard road derailleurs would all have the range to handle an 11-34.  Only a year before, I recall helping a friend who couldn't handle the 27 or 28T standard large sprocket get lower gears by using a MTB cassette and a TanPan device (that never worked right, was recalled and still didn't work right). 

one can get rings down to 34T too (or 33T from TA). In fact 50x34 + 11-34 is the only option for 12 speed 105 at present. Gear ranges on road bikes have expanded massively, in both directions, gravel bikes not so much. (Not that I care about high gears off-road, particularly with luggage.)

Gravel bikes not so much?  Well, let's see.  SRAM XPLR cassette is 10-44.  With a 40T chain ring that gives you a range of 26.3" - 115.8.  Sounds like a pretty wide range to me.  SRAM says the cassette has a 440% range, and some might call that "massive."  Then, there are Shimano 10-45 and 10-51 cassettes: range even more massive than the XPLR. But staying with XPLR, with a 35T ring you get a range of 23" - 101.3".  That's better than a lot of touring triples.

On Sat, 13 Aug. 2022, 04:04 Steve Palincsar, <pali...@his.com> wrote:

On 8/12/22 9:52 AM, Stephen Poole wrote:

 The highest low gear one can currently get with non-pro-TT 12 speed road stuff is 40x30 for Shimano, 37x26 for SRAM, and 39x29 for Campag, rather different from the 42x18-21 that used to be the default ~40 years ago...

That is absolutely not so.  SRAM X-Range gearing will let you pair a 30/43 crank with a 10-36 cassette, that would be a low gear of 30x36, not 37x26.  That's a 22.5" low gear and a 116.1" top gear.

[Stephen Poole]

Yes, we know low gears have been possible for a long time, via triple chainrings, etc, however it's only been since Contador and Froome that there's been much take up on road bikes; HTFU has been the default option until recently, and still is for many.

Some of SRAM's gravel options do give a wide range, but a lot of that - especially without resorting to third party chainrings - is at the high end, and does not IME yield low enough gears at the other end; the smallest XPLR chainring has 38T, and the smallest officially Flat Top chain compatible ring I've seen to fit any crankset has 34T. Eagle has more range but bigger gaps, starting higher up...

What suits will of course depend on where and how one rides and what if any luggage is carried. If you're a big gear pusher racing on flat, smooth gravel roads in a drafting pack - or have an e-bike - that will be very different to the gearing suitable for a spinner in an area with rough, rarely maintained fire trails with frequent 20-30% gradients and/or carrying camping gear - like me. Even on bitumen 20-30+% gradients are common in the UK, and can be found on back roads in the Alps, Pyrenees, Himalayas, etc, so the "low gear problem" isn't new.

With 1x there are still large gaps in many parts of the range, which I for one dislike - especially on bitumen - plus I'm not convinced 440-520% range is enough for both slogging up fire roads *and* descending in the Alps.

With 2x one can reduce the gaps considerably, but the available stock chainrings (RH possibly excepted) still err on the side of providing high gears, and not enough low gears for climbing steep stuff. Given average 700 gravel tyres have a diameter >28", 48/46x11 gives a top gear higher than 53x12 with a 25mm tyre, overkill IME.   :-(

Of course, everyone's mileage will vary with gearing, but it would be nice if lower gearing *including reasonably close ratios* was available from the larger manufacturers. All the relevant parts more or less exist (from multiple sources), but nobody has packaged them suitably IMHO, and there are still various compatibility problems.

Disclaimer: I am not a fanboy for any manufacturer(s) so my opinions may offend those who are - tough!  ;-)

Later,

Stephen (who'd prefer to avoid both 1x and 3x for touring/gravel use)

[Steve Palincsar]

Absolutely no argument there.  Some of those high gears are about right
for a tandem, but almost impossible for an ordinary rider of a single to
actually use.

>
> Of course, everyone's mileage will vary with gearing, but it would be
> nice if lower gearing *including reasonably close ratios* was
> available from the larger manufacturers. All the relevant parts more
> or less exist (from multiple sources), but nobody has packaged them
> suitably IMHO, and there are still various compatibility problems.

We are definitely on the same page here.

>
> Disclaimer: I am not a fanboy for any manufacturer(s) so my opinions
> may offend those who are - tough!  ;-)
>
> Later,
> Stephen (who'd prefer to avoid both 1x and 3x for touring/gravel use)

[Evan Estern]

Hi Brad,

For my normal riding, which is probably averages 80/20% pavement/gravel I use a 46/30 up front and a 12-30 cassette.  The D2R2 180k has 13,000 feet of elevation over 111 miles, 70 miles of that are are unpaved.  This will be my first time doing the 180, but I've done the D2R2 160k route with that setup and yes there were some places where I would have appreciated lower gearing. 

[Evan Estern]

Tire size is a factor, too.  28 chainring and 32 cog on 48mm is pretty close,  in gear inches to 28/30 on 42mm. 

[Brad]

When you get to 30 x 30 gearing you are awfully close to walking.  My reference point is Old Deerfield past Eaglebrook on Pine Nook Road.

The development of one crank rotation is the controlling factor. The circumference of a 650b x 38 wheel, for example, is (584 +38+38)xPi which is somewhere around 2 meters.  You can't step that far.

[Alex Wetmore]

Standard mountain bike gearing these days is a 30t chainring with 51t or 52t cog.  That is 1.37 meters development or a little over 16 gear inches with a 60-622 tire.

It seems low, but I also seem to end up in that gear on almost every ride.

Alex

---

From: 65...@googlegroups.com <65...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Brad <riendeau...@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2022 3:23 PM
To: 650b <65...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [650B] Re: Switching from 12-27 to 11-32 cassette, advice wanted

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "650b" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to 650b+uns...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/650b/9d5659c3-860c-419f-be99-df43c17e134dn%40googlegroups.com.

[Stephen Poole]

Whilst one can sometimes get away with a 20" gear on a MTB, like Alex I often find myself using something lower, especially if carrying luggage. And then there are the many ridiculously steep paved roads in the UK, where 20-25% is pretty common; there are also a few 33% gradients, and at least two that are allegedly 40%, though short.

Eventually it becomes difficult to roll over even small lumps as one has so little momentum, but that happens closer to a 16" gear than 20" IME; it's also difficult or impossible to stand and climb below ~20", for me at least.

Gearing will also depend on where one rides - there's not much point to a 16" gear in the Netherlands - and one's cadence, this being extremely variable.

And no matter what gear one might have walls are not climbable, despite pejorative comments from roadies!

Later,

Stephen

[Brad]

One has to wonder why we continue to use gear inches instead of gain ratios and metric development.

[Steve Palincsar]

Because we are used to it and understand it.  There's no advantage to metric development -- same difference, only unfamiliar units of measurement -- and as for gain ratios, I'm not sure anybody either uses them or understands them, regardless of Sheldon's efforts to promote that measurement.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/650b/c36880c8-1a4c-4bf6-88f3-d547e0d0b5f2n%40googlegroups.com.

[Stephen Poole]

Probably because gear inches are widely understood, and gain ratios mean nothing to most people, myself included. Metric development makes sense, but when literally nobody you've ever known has used it, it's not so helpful. If I'd grown up in Continental Europe, I'm sure I'd have it down pat, but that's not the case.

Later,

Stephen

[Alex Wetmore]

Because they map to a nice and useful 0-100 range that human brains do a good job of thinking in.

Alex

---

From: 65...@googlegroups.com <65...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Brad <riendeau...@gmail.com>

Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2022 4:53 AM

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/650b/c36880c8-1a4c-4bf6-88f3-d547e0d0b5f2n%40googlegroups.com.

[Evan Estern]

With my 28 chainring, 32 rear cog and 650Bx48 wheels I'll be around 24 gear inches.  That's about the what I used for last year's D2R2 (on my fendered Norther Lyon w/42mm tires) and that went ok.  I'd hate to go any taller though, not for 13,000' over 111 miles. 

[Joe Bernard]

You've gotten oodles of info and advice so I just want to add I think you're making the wise decision with that Deore. They work great and I think look ok, too. 

Joe Bernard 

[ericni...@gmail.com]

Multiple D2R2 finisher here: 180/150/mystery courses at least 8x. 

Choose whatever shifts best in the low range, and go with the lowest gearing you can feasibly fit on your bike. You’ll be desperately grabbing those low gears as you make sharp turns onto steep loose ramps. You will spend at least 25% of a long day in your lowest gear, whatever it is. In my experience, a 1:1 gear is the threshold for D2R2, lower is even better. 

The first year I rode D2R2, I did it on 26 mm tubulars and a 39x30 low gear. I managed, but the climbs were tough and I had to walk several times. The descents were even tougher.  Each year I have returned with lower gearing and wider tires, and each year I have enjoyed it more. The last several have been on 650b 48mm tires and 24x30 low gearing. 

Archambo Road is a 27% loose gravel wall. Hillman, Patten, and other climbs aren’t much easier. It’s a fantastic ride, whichever course you choose. To borrow from Mark Twain, “You won’t regret it, if you live.”

Eric in NH

[Evan Estern]

Thanks, Eric.  I've done a few D2R2s myself, but yesterday was my first 180k.  It was incredible! I'd agree that Mark Twain's comment is petty apt.  I rode the bike discussed here--my old Rawland Stag w/Jeff Lyon fork, 48mm Rene Herse knobbies and 44/28 chainrings X 11-32 cassette.  This was my best D2R2 experience so far, and that mostly has to do with the tires and gearing.  I was able to keep my cadence between 60 and 80 for most of the climbs and there were only a few places that were so steep I had to walk.  I'd consider going to an even bigger cassette next time around. 

[Evan Estern]

Joe, the Deore worked out pretty well.  The only real issue I had with it was the new shifter cable stretching.

[Joseph Bernard]

This is good to hear (except for cable stretch). I used to be an 'expensive derailleur' snob (I had a Dura-Ace triple), now I have much respect for basic ok-looking parts that work. It worked! 

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "650b" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/650b/S4cJk-q7Z9w/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 650b+uns...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/650b/e66df8ce-ee5b-4f94-b328-44b5ccfe484fn%40googlegroups.com.

[Steve Palincsar]

Cables don't really stretch anymore.  Housings collapse a bit, and not so tight connections slip, however.

[Joseph Bernard]

Something slipped, that's way I got from his description. I don't think he was specifying inner wire over housing. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "650b" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/650b/S4cJk-q7Z9w/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 650b+uns...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/650b/92a082ed-df07-3638-a288-7d7700f08df0%40his.com.

[Ken Freeman]

Outer cable ends which are not dressed smooth and square, and well-supported with ferrules that fit, can collapse and start moving laterally as the brake lever is pulled.  It feels like stretching, and can be repaired with good craftsmanship. File this under your "housings collapse a bit."

Ken Freeman, Ann Arbor, MI USA

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "650b" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to 650b+uns...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/650b/92a082ed-df07-3638-a288-7d7700f08df0%40his.com.

--

Ken Freeman
Ann Arbor, MI USA

[Steve Palincsar]

Yes precisely.  And since the cure depends on understanding where the craftsmanship needs to be applied, this is why a bit of pedantry regarding "cables stretch" is warranted.   Thanks for spelling it out with such actionable detail, much more useful than my casual reference to housings vs cables.

On 8/22/22 9:37 AM, Ken Freeman wrote:

Outer cable ends which are not dressed smooth and square, and well-supported with ferrules that fit, can collapse and start moving laterally as the brake lever is pulled.  It feels like stretching, and can be repaired with good craftsmanship. File this under your "housings collapse a bit."

Ken Freeman, Ann Arbor, MI USA

On Sun, Aug 21, 2022 at 6:29 PM Steve Palincsar <pali...@his.com> wrote:

Cables don't really stretch anymore.  Housings collapse a bit, and not so tight connections slip, however.

On 8/21/22 4:37 PM, Joseph Bernard wrote:

This is good to hear (except for cable stretch). I used to be an 'expensive derailleur' snob (I had a Dura-Ace triple), now I have much respect for basic ok-looking parts that work. It worked! 

On Sun, Aug 21, 2022, 1:33 PM Evan Estern <evane...@gmail.com> wrote:

Joe, the Deore worked out pretty well.  The only real issue I had with it was the new shifter cable stretching.

-- 
Steve Palincsar
Alexandria, Virginia 
USA

[Evan Estern]

These are derailleur cables for downtube shifters.  Only 2 ferrules and about 8" of housing involved.  I routed through the existing housing, ferrules, etc but I suppose there could have been some settling in going on.  A lot of factors at play, however this particular batch of derailleur cables, which I unfortunately bought in bulk some 20 years ago, does seem to stretch, or at least need to be tightened, after the first 30 miles or so.  These days I only use them for last minute projects, and I'm glad that this was the last of them.