How many teeth do you use?

thebouldwhacker

Hey all, Ive been looking (not very successfully) for threads about gears, ratios etc which cogs people use for different spins . Just wondering what people use day to day or when climbing, flat, sportives etc

Cheers

Murph100

Compact 50/34 with 11-25, and yes Tunney, I know its not a 'real cyclist's ' setup .... but I'm damn glad of it at times on the Conor Pass, however I am working up to using a standard.

BTW Bouldwhacker, are you based in Bantry ?

tunney

Murph100 wrote: »

Compact 50/34 with 11-25, and yes Tunney, I know its not a 'real cyclist's ' setup .... but I'm damn glad of it at times on the Conor Pass, however I am working up to using a standard.

A compact is often a sensible choice and often the best choice. Just depends on where you live and what type of riding you do.

peterako

Well...I tend to use my molars a lot so I guess all 32.....

Oh! Bicycle!

Slowly getting back to fitness so have gone from max of 39x25 around here in Feb to having a 39x23 but usually only using the 39x21

So now have 53/39 x 13/23.

It's not TOO hilly around here but there are some STEEP short climbs.

Last time I was on the Connor Pass (when I was not so fit in 2006) I used a 39x28 most of the way. Hoping to do the climb again this year with a bail out 39x26.

The Mountain bike has 22/32/44 x 11/34.

Peter

Lumen

tunney wrote: »

A compact is often a sensible choice and often the best choice. Just depends on where you live and what type of riding you do.

Aside from the lower gearing which allows use of a closer spaced rear cassette, I think the other advantage of a compact is the greater choice of chainrings on 110BCD. I'm considering a "semi" setup for my new compact crankset using 52/38 or 50/36, and an 11-25 cassette, which should combine decent front shifting with tolerably close spacing on the rear, and more front mech clearance for fitting Q-rings.

If I do something nutty like the Marmotte I can just throw the 34 back on and stick a 12-28 on the rear without having to change crankset.

Not sure I'll be fast enough in the near future to need 11-53 anyway.

If anyone can suggest a more gimmicky setup I'm all ears. :pac:

Chips Lovell

53/39, with 12/27 for my regular wheels and 11/23 on my race wheels.

Lumen wrote: »

I'm considering a "semi" setup for my new compact crankset...

So, you'll be sporting a semi?

Lumen

el tonto wrote: »

So, you'll be sporting a semi?

Yes, all that garbage about sprockets is just cover for the opportunity to make lame knob gags.

blorg

tunney wrote: »

A compact is often a sensible choice and often the best choice. Just depends on where you live and what type of riding you do.

And how WEAK you are :pac: IIRC you said before it is a sensible choice only if you happen to live in the Alps...

Murph100

Yeah Tunney, whats with the mellow attitude ? Godammit man, pull yerself together !! :pac:

blorg wrote: »

And how WEAK you are :pac: IIRC you said before it is a sensible choice only if you happen to live in the Alps...

blorg

As for me, I have two cranksets for my road bike, 53/39 and 50/34, and two cassettes, 12-27 and 11-23. So I have a fair range there. Have a triple 52/39/30 on my tourer with 12-27 on the back. Fixed gear is a 46 on the front with a choice of 17 or 14 on the back.

Murph100

Blorg, is the shifting really better on the Standard compared to the Compact, or is it all a load of BS ?

Lumen

Some of this is interesting.

Murph100

Yeah, explains the rare but freaky chainsuck and why I slip the odd chain, thank feck for the Dog Fang !!

http://www.competitivecyclist.com/road-bikes/product-components/2009-deda-elementi-dog-fang-chain-guide-4180.1902.0.html

So the 50/36 looks like the best/easiest solution apart from going to a standard with a huge cassette !!

Lumen wrote: »

Some of this is interesting.

E@gle.

39/ 23 on my regular wheels

39/21 on my race wheels

I used a 34/27 for the marmotte and i needed every gear i had

tunney

blorg wrote: »

And how WEAK you are :pac: IIRC you said before it is a sensible choice only if you happen to live in the Alps...

And this comment is consistent with my previous ones

tunney

Murph100 wrote: »

Yeah Tunney, whats with the mellow attitude ? Godammit man, pull yerself together !! :pac:

Sorry, didn't meant to disappoint. I'll try to be more of a d!ckhead in future.

blorg

Murph100 wrote: »

Blorg, is the shifting really better on the Standard compared to the Compact, or is it all a load of BS ?

The shifting is a bit better, yes, but the main difference is that you don't have the big change in cadence when you move between rings. To a certain extent you can counter this by simultaneously shifting at the back, but shifting on a standard is definitely "nicer" overall than on a compact.

I have never dropped a chain on a standard or compact but it is was/is an infrequent but occuring occurence on my triples.

Lumen

blorg wrote: »

you can counter this [big chainring size jump] by simultaneously shifting at the back....I have never dropped a chain on a standard or compact but it is was/is an infrequent but occuring occurence on my triples.

For me, dropping a chain is usually caused by simultaneous shifting front and back (smaller cogs both ends = big drop in chain tension), to the extent that I generally shift up at the back before shifting down at the front.

Maybe this is why compacts have this reputation.

Jumpy

Being new to this, I have no idea. The front cog has "50-F" written on it if that is any help.

blorg

Lumen wrote: »

For me, dropping a chain is usually caused by simultaneous shifting front and back (smaller cogs both ends = big drop in chain tension), to the extent that I generally shift up at the back before shifting down at the front.

Maybe this is why compacts have this reputation.

In my experience chain drop doesn't happen outside triples. I had had (relatively rare) instances of chain drop on every triple I have owned and never on the doubles. I think anything that extends the total range makes it more likely all right. Compacts are probably more likely but substantially less so than a triple (in my experience.)

I don't think this is a big problem with triples BTW (outside a race scenario) - it is not that frequent and generally easily fixed.