to compact or not to compact

polariz

Hi all,

I'm considering moving to a compact chainset to make hill climbing easier. I'm currently using a 53-39, 11-28 (i think) and while I can get around the wicklow hills I could probably do with one or two lower gears to maintain a decent cadence. I'm wondering is there a huge difference between the compact and the double? Will I use these new lower gears or should I stick with the double and just train more!?

niceonetom

polariz wrote: »

Hi all,

I'm considering moving to a compact chainset to make hill climbing easier. I'm currently using a 53-39, 11-28 (i think) and while I can get around the wicklow hills I could probably do with one or two lower gears to maintain a decent cadence. I'm wondering is there a huge difference between the compact and the double? Will I use these new lower gears or should I stick with the double and just train more!?

Definitely go compact.

Lumen

If you're struggling with 39-28, get a compact.

When you get fitter, stick an 11-23 or 11-25 on it.

When you get fitter still, stick the standard double back on.

cdaly_

How often do you spin out in 53x11? How about in 53x12? Your existing 53x12 is about the same as a 50x11 which would be the top gear you would get out of a compact so, unless you really really need the 53x11, a compact will only be better for you...

As for the lower gears, your current lowest (39x28) is just a bit lower than your compact second lowest (34x24) and your new compact lowest (34x28) would be 13% lower than your current lowest. You'll notice that...

blorg

Definitely get a compact. A standard double is only useful racing or if you live in a very flat area IMO.

ROK ON

blorg wrote: »

Definitely get a compact. A standard double is only useful racing or if you live in a very flat area IMO.

There was a very interesting article on Irish cycling recently from a coach (Doran ?). He was examining the relatively easy gearing being pushed at high cadence by Dan Martin at the Crit versus the fast gear low cadence by most Irish cyclists he encountered. He was unequivocal in his opinion that many Irish cyclists have a very poor technique and try to mash too high a gear to a poor effect.

FFS a lot of top pros train on compacts (and sometimes race on them). That being the case why would leisure cyclists or low ranked racers try to push a big with very little power output and lower cadence.

I have gradually learned that spinning is simply a more effective way of cycling.

Go compact.

Hermy

ROK ON wrote: »

I have gradually learned that spinning is simply a more effective way of cycling.

+1

Murph100

Just to throw in one lil' counter point.


I've switched from a Compact with 11-25 to a Standard with a 12-29 ( Campy 11 speed only ) and I really prefer it. I've actually now got a slightly lower climbing gear if I need it, but for me the biggest benefit is the really smooth chainring shift, no more spinning like mad after a front downshift whilst trying to dump a few cogs in the back, or the reverse, changing up and thinking the brakes have jammed !

Yes I completely agree with high cadence climbing and I'm a spinner myself, I'm far from a well trained cyclist but I can spin away quite happily at 90 rpm on nearly all the main climbs here in Kerry with a standard and a pie plate at the back ( No ROK that does not include Priests Leap )

Having said that, for mountains on the Continent I would definitely put on a compact with my pie plate !!

cython

niceonetom wrote: »

Definitely go compact.

+1

I made this decision a while ago, having struggled terribly with 52-39, 11-26 on the Sally and Wicklow Gaps on the couple of previous attempts I had (never cleared either without taking at least one break on the way up each of them), and haven't looked back. I was out for the Twin Peaks challenge a couple of weeks ago and made it up the Sally Gap and on up and over Luggala with no need to take a break, and would have done the Wicklow Gap in one fell swoop but for the headwind that forced 3 out of our group of 4 to walk a stretch or risk a crosswind toppling us. As it was, I was the second of our group to the top, by a few minutes, and only behind the guy training for an Ironman tri. The difference it made was ridiculous, so I'd happily recommend it to anyone in a similar situation, which you seem to be, OP.

Vélo

Yep, I'd advise compact also. It'll make your cycling that bit easier and maybe more enjoyable. As already mentioned, when you get stronger/fitter you can always change back.


I changed from standard to compact a while ago and much prefer it.

Did I hear somewhere before that you can't race on a compact?

polariz

An unequivocal response! Thinking about it now, it's true, I rarely use 53x11/12 so I've nothing to loose and everything to gain.
Think I'll grab one of the new Shimano 105 compacts so, slightly cheaper than the previous model for some reason? http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=50444

Thanks for your comments..

niceonetom

Murph100 wrote: »

I've switched from a Compact with 11-25 to a Standard with a 12-29 ( Campy 11 speed only ) and I really prefer it. I've actually now got a slightly lower climbing gear if I need it, but for me the biggest benefit is the really smooth chainring shift, no more spinning like mad after a front downshift whilst trying to dump a few cogs in the back, or the reverse, changing up and thinking the brakes have jammed !

I think prioritising shifting at the front over shifting at the rear makes no sense to me at all. Which do you do more of? On a climb I use my front shifter precisely twice, once at the bottom and once at the top. I change gear at the back all the time, if only to distract myself.

I've been using an 11-28 for the Alps recently and while I've become convinced it is the right choice for most riders in that terrain, I have to say the gaps in the rear cassette are too much. In Ireland there's no way I could live with it. Maybe campy shifts more smoothly across big cassettes, but the 3 and 4 tooth differences between cogs is awful regardless.

A smaller ring and more tightly spaced cogs just makes life more pleasant.

Paul Kiernan

polariz wrote: »

An unequivocal response! Thinking about it now, it's true, I rarely use 53x11/12 so I've nothing to loose and everything to gain.
Think I'll grab one of the new Shimano 105 compacts so, slightly cheaper than the previous model for some reason? http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=50444

Thanks for your comments..

Is it not possible to just the change the inner chainring to something like this?

Reason I ask is that I'm thinking of doing the same thing myself:).

Plastik

How hard is it to fit the compact chainset to a bike that has a standard double, as a matter of interest? Is it simply bolt off/bolt on, is a new chain required also?

niceonetom

Paul Kiernan wrote: »

Is it not possible to just the change the inner chainring to something like this?

Reason I ask is that I'm thinking of doing the same thing myself:).

The spider that holds the chainrings are different sizes for compact and standard so the bolt holes are differently spaced.

Plastik wrote: »

How hard is it to fit the compact chainset to a bike that has a standard double, as a matter of interest? Is it simply bolt off/bolt on, is a new chain required also?

Not hard. For shimano hollowtech it should require no more than undoing the pinchbolts on the non-drive-side crank, removing them and fitting the new cranks. You need a special tool for the end cap that loads the bearings and you'd need to move the front dérailleur and check chain-length too, but it's not rocket science.

cdaly_

niceonetom wrote: »

I think prioritising shifting at the front over shifting at the rear makes no sense to me at all. Which do you do more of? On a climb I use my front shifter precisely twice, once at the bottom and once at the top. I change gear at the back all the time, if only to distract myself.

I've been using an 11-28 for the Alps recently and while I've become convinced it is the right choice for most riders in that terrain, I have to say the gaps in the rear cassette are too much. In Ireland there's no way I could live with it. Maybe campy shifts more smoothly across big cassettes, but the 3 and 4 tooth differences between cogs is awful regardless.

A smaller ring and more tightly spaced cogs just makes life more pleasant.

When I came up against the gaps in the cassette, I ended up building myself a 13-28t custom cassette just by chopping and changing between two standard cassettes (11-28t and 13-25t). I'm now running a 13-28t and have a spare 11-25t against the day when I finally take up racing...

Murph100

You cant put Compact chainrings on a Standard due to the bolt holes being 130mm diameter, the smallest inner chainring you can fit on a standard is a 38, so yeah you can run a 50/38 but thats hardly worth it.

However you can do it the other way round, ie put a 53/39 on a compact spider, dont know if and how flexy it would be though. WOUld be a cheap way to have both options though.

Murph100

niceonetom wrote: »

In Ireland there's no way I could live with it. Maybe campy shifts more smoothly across big cassettes, but the 3 and 4 tooth differences between cogs is awful regardless.

With the 11s its only on the last 2 sprockets you get the 3 tooth jump, so never an really an issue..

12,13,14,15,16,17,19,21,23,26,29

I find the 16 tooth jump in front way more annoying.


TUNNEY WHERE ARE YA ????

blorg

cython wrote: »

As it was, I was the second of our group to the top, by a few minutes, and only behind the guy training for an Ironman tri.

Beaten by a triathlete. The shame. Was he wearing a sleeveless top? If so he was disqualified and you won.

niceonetom

Murph100 wrote: »

With the 11s its only on the last 2 sprockets you get the 3 tooth jump, so never an really an issue..

12,13,14,15,16,17,19,21,23,26,29

I find the 16 tooth jump in front way more annoying.


TUNNEY WHERE ARE YA ????

Yes, I'm sure tunney would be right behind you in your call for a 29 tooth rear cassette.

If you don't think 23, 26, 29 is gappy and awful then fair enough. I've used 23, 25, 28 and hated it.

Straight block ftw.

ROK ON

Murph. While you will have smoother shifting with your solution, it doesn't help the larger cyclist struggling in the hills.

39/29 equates to a gear inch if 35.3inches, versus 33 for 34/27. Your solution is exactly equivalent to compact gearing of 34/25.

Unless one spins out regularly at 50/11, there is very little reason for the average cyclist to gear at 53/39 on the front.

Just saying.

blorg

Vélo wrote: »

Did I hear somewhere before that you can't race on a compact?

There is no rule against it and it is perfectly possible to race on a compact if that is what you have on your bike.

If building a bike specifically for race use I would however go for a standard. You will never need the lower gears in a race; if you do need them you have been dropped already. The front shifting is smoother and there is less of the big cadence difference.

If you only have the one bike and are going to both race it and go up mountains, compact.

If it is mostly racing and only the occasional jaunt up mountains you may get up the latter OK with a standard.

niceonetom wrote: »

Not hard. For shimano hollowtech it should require no more than undoing the pinchbolts on the non-drive-side crank, removing them and fitting the new cranks. You need a special tool for the end cap that loads the bearings and you'd need to move the front dérailleur and check chain-length too, but it's not rocket science.

As Tom says it is quite easy although a torque wrench is often recommended when redoing the pinch bolts.

niceonetom wrote:

If you don't think 23, 26, 29 is gappy and awful then fair enough. I've used 23, 25, 28 and hated it.

The other way to think of it though is a 10speed 12-26 with a bail-out gear as the extra 11th sprocket.

Spacing on Shimano 12-25 and 12-27 is otherwise very similar with 12-27 going 21-24-27 and 12-25 going 21-23-25. His cassette is identical and then goes 21-23-26-29.

I agree with you that the spacing on the end of 11-28 is annoying, 28 was sometimes too spinny but 25 too hard. I am fine with a 12-27 though.

Hermy

blorg wrote: »

If you only have the one bike and are going to both race it and go up mountains, compact.

Never a triple?

IM0

Hermy wrote: »

Never a triple?

Nevar!! no rule against it, but the ribbing can be demoralising for a n00b

blorg

Hermy wrote: »

Never a triple?

Not racing; there is too high a risk of the chain dropping IMO. Has happened to me (in a triathlon :eek:) and probably cost me a top 5 bike split (although I would have been demolished on the run anyway.)

For leisure cycles a triple is fine but I think a compact is compelling and offers the best of both worlds. You only lose 1 climbing gear from the back and most people can live with this. If you can't, a triple is a good idea and absolutely fine. They are very popular in places with proper mountains like the Alps where even "serious" roadies use the things. If you are sensitive to gear progression and your cadence a triple can also be a good idea.

I have a triple on my touring bike and would not be with anything else there.

cdaly_

me@ucd wrote:

Nevar!! no rule against it, but the ribbing can be demoralising for a n00b

Interesting. Nobody ever ribbed me over having a triple.



They just left me standing as they floated away up the hill...

niceonetom

blorg wrote: »

Has happened to me (in a triathlon :eek:)

So, while you were racing on a triple in this triathlon, um, was there sleevelessness? And sandals? We may have a new record for most wrongness ever seen on a bike here.

Hermy

niceonetom wrote: »

So, while you were racing on a triple in this triathlon, um, was there sleevelessness? And sandals? We may have a new record for most wrongness ever seen on a bike here.

Made me lol:D:D:D

blorg

niceonetom wrote: »

So, while you were racing on a triple in this triathlon, um, was there sleevelessness? And sandals? We may have a new record for most wrongness ever seen on a bike here.

There were sandals. There wasn't sleevelessness in that one but there was a sleeveless tri suit in the next one. To be honest having done the run in a cycling jersey in one and then a tri suit in the other I can certainly see why they use the latter; they are very comfortable for both cycling and running; technically certainly the best thing for the job.