Settle a bet ( v small )

listrybabe

Which gear is easier ? 50/28 or 54/32 ? And could someone explain how they come up with their answer ! Thanks.

rab!dmonkey

Were you out on the day they taught division in school?

quozl

50/28 = 1.78 means 1.78 rotations of the back wheel for every rotation of your pedal crank
54/32 = 1.68 means 1.68 rotations of the back wheel for every rotation of your pedal crank, ie less distance per rotation of pedal crank, ie easier.

The smaller the number the easier the gear. So 54/32 is an easier gear.

lennymc

depends on what you mean by easier

Rambling Man

Less difficult probably

lennymc

with the bigger gear it is easier to go faster down hill, so maybe the question should have been 'which is the bigger gear'

op - all you ever wanted to know and more, about gearing can be found at http://sheldonbrown.com/gears/

fat bloke

lennymc wrote: »

with the bigger gear it is easier to go faster down hill, so maybe the question should have been 'which is the bigger gear'

op - all you ever wanted to know and more, about gearing can be found at http://sheldonbrown.com/gears/

Depends on what you mean by faster.

And "bigger"

And "all"

:P

G1032

http://www.bikecalc.com/gear_ratios

victorcarrera

There is no difference. Both of you are unfit. All bets are off.

The Gram

First thought I had was would you ever combine a 32 cassette with a standard crank?

If you need that option on the back you probably should have a compact anyway (i.e not using bike for races)

lennymc

The Gram wrote: »

(i.e not using bike for races)

someone should tell alberto so - http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/contador-rides-srams-new-wifli-red-at-vuelta-35156/

The Gram

lennymc wrote: »

someone should tell alberto so - [/url]

Cheers! I'm sure I've seen mention of Alberto going "semi-compact" with something like a 52 34 up front as well.

Just how savage is the Vuelta?

lennymc

The Gram wrote: »

Cheers! I'm sure I've seen mention of Alberto going "semi-compact" with something like a 52 34 up front as well.

Just how savage is the Vuelta?

depending on the climbs, there are ramps in the 23%+ gradient range.

NeedMoreGears

I'm flirting with the idea of 34/32 for a trip to the Pyrenees next year. I reckon/hope it will allow me spin up some of those 10% gradients without actually dying. Damn my useless leg strength and power/weight ratio

lennymc

NeedMoreGears wrote: »

I'm flirting with the idea of 34/32 for a trip to the Pyrenees next year. I reckon/hope it will allow me spin up some of those 10% gradients without actually dying. Damn my useless leg strength and power/weight ratio

I used a 34/32 in the pyrenees two years ago. I would have used the 34/32 had I had it. I found it was more the length of the climbs than the gradient was ground me down.

Wishbone Ash

NeedMoreGears wrote: »

I'm flirting with the idea of 34/32 for a trip to the Pyrenees next year. I reckon/hope it will allow me spin up some of those 10% gradients without actually dying. Damn my useless leg strength and power/weight ratio

As lennymc has said it's the length of the climbs not the gradients. Most average in the 6%-9% bracket and it just a case of sitting back and grinding your way up - a 28 will suffice at the rear. You'll get occasional bits which ramp up above that but not for long.

listrybabe

Thanks for the replies. I lost my bet (a pint). One more question if I were to change from a compact to a standard crank what would that necessitate ? Is it easily done ? More links on chain ? Or anything else I would need to know ? Thanks again

Lemag

listrybabe wrote: »

One more question if I were to change from a compact to a standard crank what would that necessitate ? Is it easily done ?

The easiest way to do this would be to swap out the compact rings for standard rings. Make sure that the BCD is the same for the new rings as for the old. It's pretty easy to do. You'll just need the correct 'star' tool.

lennymc

I switched one of my bikes from a compact to a standard and didn't need to change anything apart from crankset. it was easy YMMV however.

Eamonnator

lennymc wrote: »

I switched one of my bikes from a compact to a standard and didn't need to change anything apart from crankset. it was easy YMMV however.

Did you not have to adjust the height of the front mech.?

lennymc

Eamonnator wrote: »

Did you not have to adjust the height of the front mech.?

surprisingly, no.

It was a SRAM groupset and, as everyone know, SRAM is way better than shimano or campag.

Eamonnator

lennymc wrote: »

surprisingly, no.

It was a SRAM groupset and, as everyone know, SRAM is way better than shimano or campag.

and it's not even Friday.

NeedMoreGears

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

As lennymc has said it's the length of the climbs not the gradients. Most average in the 6%-9% bracket and it just a case of sitting back and grinding your way up - a 28 will suffice at the rear. You'll get occasional bits which ramp up above that but not for long.

That's close enough to 10% for me ! AND I was exaggerating about the 10% - a long one at 8% is enough to kill me

More seriously, WBA you're quite right. I've only done one or two long climbs like that - I can plod away quite happily with a 28 up to about 7% or 8% for a good while. I'd only use the 32 for the 10% plus bits that tend to appear just as you're knackered - honest.