Is The Compact Chainset Dead? | Tech Q's | Cycling Weekly
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 кві 2018
- The death of a 50/34 compact chainset? | Subscribe to Cycling Weekly here: ua-cam.com/users/CyclingW...
More at:
Cycling Weekly: www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/
Facebook: / cyclingweekly
Instagram: / cyclingweeklymagazine
Google+: plus.google.com/1035528902685...
Twitter: / cyclingweekly
Email: cycling@timeinc.com - Спорт
A majority of race bike purchases are by people that don’t race. There’s a disparity in fitness level with the racer. A 50-34 compact chain set is definitely better for the average rider. Higher end race bikes usually come with a mid compact chain set, which seems to be a good compromise. Most endurance bikes I be seen come with a 50-34 which is good for the majority of the people that buy those bikes. I’m a fairly fit 64 year old. I ride a Giant Defy which comes with a 50-34 and an 11-32 cassette. I really appreciate the lower gears when grades reach double digits. Compact cassettes may be dead for elite racers but not for the average consumer. We are the ones who actually pay for our bikes!
I am a 62 year old fit Cyclist living in hilly Yorkshire, I could not do the rides I do without a 50/34 and an 11/32 on the back, on a fast decent I just stop pedaling !! so no spinning out, 35 to 40 mph down hill is fast enough for me.
i'm generally with you % of the time if i spin out a 50-11 down a hill it's probably fast enough, or i can do a better job tucking if i want to go faster.
I'm a 65 year old mad keen cyclist riding 5 times per week up the hills of Devon. My new bike was fitted with a 50/34 and a special 11/34 cassette. I only spin out when at around 38mph downhill which is fast enough thank you. Believe me up many of the hills around here an 11/34 is a blessing.
I live in near the North yorkshire moors national park. I'm 67 and use a 1X42t and 11-50 cassette on my revoux, Iv'e hit 40mph on steep descents (but normally try to keep below 35ish) but still struggle up hills.
Yep at 30mph+, you should be concentrating on braking & not spinning out. I think 1x1? will NOT be in my basket anytime soon. More likely 46/30 for Graveling. BTW: I smoke most riders with 50/30 anyway.
Steve Webber I also have the pleasure of cycling the Devon hills, I have 48-34, 34-11 cassette, that works for me, and to be honest, bombing down the hills at high speeds does not appeal to me with the condition of our roads
not only that 50/34 isn't dead but the industry needs more sub compact options for gravel and adventure bikes like 48-32 or 46-30
I agree 100%. I am 54 biking with friends up to 69 yrs old. We really go easy down hill and race up hills. We allways have hills where ever we go. Im on 50\34 with 11\40. Want to go to a 46\30 and back to my 11\34 cassette. Ive been biking 6 yrs @ 1500 mi\yr. Avg. I.couldnt even understand this video until I.realized we must have a lot of hills.
Agree. Even something wacky like 42t-32t oval chainring is very useful in Bogor, due to lot of hills and virtually no space to speed up.
Combine it with a large casette, 40t - 11t
(´｡• ω •｡`)
Sub compact in general should be an option that should be in road bike, not just gravel bikes, in general.
No average rider will ever need a gear combination bigger than 46x11 or 50x11 especially if they are not racing. If you want to go faster down a hill just tuck and hang on for the fun down hill.
Just because it might be falling out of favor for new trend chasers/pros, doesn't mean it's dead to a large amount of riders.
It's funny how the only people wondering if the 50/34 is dead are those with a 300 watt + FTP and weigh the same as my left nut! I went to the Alps for a week of cycling last September, I had 50/34 chainrings and an 11/34 cassette! I can assure you I was not spinning up anything! At the time I was 87 kilos and had an FTP of 220 watts (2.5 watts per kilo), frankly I found myself grinding my way up most climbs! While my watts per kilo has definitely improved since I still couldn't imagine myself being able to survive with a 52/36 on a long climb and I can only imagine there are plenty of people out there who would find it even tougher than me. Long live the 50/34!
I'm with you, long live the compact!!!
Yeah comact ftw, I did a long climb today over 1 hour avg watts 255 and I was grinding up many hills 73kg 50/34 11/32. It's all about where you are riding
I agree with you. I live in switzerland and i would like to see « normal » riders doing 5hrs rides in the mountains at 8% average grades on 52/36 11-28. I have 300 FTP 73kg and run on 50/34 11-28 and soon moving on to 11-30 and keeping my compact. I know quite afew stronger riders and all on compact. As it was said, all depends on the type of terrains you ride and your physical condition.
Quite simply, with a compact and 11/32 I can do hilly sportives, 2000m elevation in 100km sort of thing, I won't say it's easy but I can do them. But put me on a bike with harder gearing and I simply would not get up some of those climbs without getting off and walking. I ride for completion and finishing events, not racing. I also don't want to be doing more than 70kmh down a hill!
I love my compact and my 11/32 cassette, and it loves me.
Back when I was a younger chap, it wasn't uncommon to ride 52/42 with 12-17 or 13-18 at the back. This was the late 70s/early 80s before electricity had been invented, everyone had ricketts and infant mortality was around 99%. We rode up hills, but I cannot recall how.
Hilarious!
They were actually men
Same here. Found online, a catalogue page of my racing bike from the '80s and it came with Suntour Superb Pro 52/42 chainrings and a 13-21 6-speed at the back. How did I race up hills with that?!
Yep, 53/42 with a 12-19 cassette so you just ground up hills. Of course now 50/34 with 11/34 on new bike. I'm in N. Florida which is rolling steep hills so going to go to 53/39 with 11-34. The 53 just fells better than the 50, not sure why, just does.
What is missing at the moment from gearing options are cassettes that start with a 12 cog 12-30/32/34. The 11 is rarely used for most people and I would much rather get a 16 cog on a 12-30 to get closer mid ratios than an 11 that will be seldom used. The 11 is really only practical going down long descents. A 50-12 combination is plenty to go over 50kph without spinning out.
Haven't had the pleasure of spinning out a 50/11 so I'll stick to my 50/34-11/32
Anton Peterson Same. I’m going to say if you spin out on a flat BRAVO. If you need more than 50/11 on a descent, slow the fuck down you’re gonna hurt yourself 😂
I’ve been wondering if a 46 would let me spend more time in the big ring around town and just use the small ring for climbing. (I do most of my riding in the city)
Anton Peterson Next time you need to buy get a 12-30 cassette or 12-32.
Sweetosis FSA has a 46/30 crankset. That might suit you.
Alonso Martii I already have a 12-30 on my trainer wheel. To be honest for me the 11 and 12 teeth have very little difference when I'm in those gears.
Maybe that's the trend for the pro's!! Do you guys even ride in the real world... Compact is here to stay!!
I live in Devon and run a 50-34 with a 11-34 cassette , spinners are winners 😋
Keaton Johnson yeah same here, I currently run a 50/34 and 11-28 but used to have a 50/39/30 and 11-32. It was soooo good to go uphill at 110rpm on 10-15% hills
I also live in Devon and ride a 50-34 with an 11-28... A bigger cassette is on my birthday list as my commute takes me over Haldon Hill.
Another Devon rider here, I used to be a bit of a grinder, but have recently discovered, spinning works so much better for me
@@johnseabrook1703 I now use absolute black subcompact 30/46 chain ring's and a 11-32 cassette so nice going up hills
@@LomTong Beast of a hill
Probably the best summary of this topic that I've seen. I do get a little frustrated when arguments are based around the big ring. The reality is that 50 vs 52 is a 4% change when cassette steps are generally around 7%-14%. Big ring size is really just based on what the front derailleur can handle relative to the small ring that you need for your easy end of things. Yes, there are subtleties but they only really concern people who already know what they are. I'd contend that magazine articles do the majority of consumers a disservice by suggesting that they need anything other than a compact. Unless you're racing or riding chain-gangs then it's unlikely you actually care about the small speed benefit of a larger big ring on the occasions you spin out your 50-11 gear.
Man that rides bikes as a profession, an likely experiences greater physical fitness, claims compact dead. SRAM and Shimano are correct, gearing is a personal choice determined by the needs of the rider. If mid-compact is so great, what explains the availability and people buying aftermarket sub-compact? The only dead chain-set is full pro.
Completely agree that its all about personal choice, but you are missing the main argument. With 11 speed, you can have wider ranges at both ends of the spectrum which makes the benefits of compact chain sets largely redundant - regardless of the level you cycle at!
I think compacts are still as popular as they are because all the big manufacturers have tended to, and still do, offer compact chainsets at entry and mid level as default, so most people start out road cycling on compacts and go with what they know when they get new bikes or upgrade components.
I find that people go compact to get better climbing gears. Absolutely nobody is good at climbing. That 34/32 gear combo is what people want. The 11-34 ultegra cassette, the sub-compact chain sets, and the various offerings by wolf tooth components, shows evidence people even want 1:1 ratios or inverted ones.
The opposite is true! Among the gravel grinders, they are moving to super-compact (48/32), which I think will probably creep it's way into road bikes too.
53-39, may indeed make a come back with 12 speed road groupsets, you could run a 12-34/12-36 with the big rings and it would give you bigger tooth counts wrapping around the front and back gears which are more efficient and reduce chain and gear wear.
I find myself going smaller and smaller on my front chain rings as I'm a climber and prefer more choices when going uphill. My latest experiment is with a 42-28 up front and an 11-30 in the back so I have a lot of choices to spin uphill (I often ride routes that include tarmac, dirt, and gravel with grades over 25% on 35 mm tyres). With this setup I can go faster than most uphill, often passing younger guys on lighter bikes (and mid-compact or standard cranks) by virtue of gearing choices and efficiency when compared to their raw strength. Forget about pedaling downhill, but I'm 50 and don't feel the need to go faster in that direction. So, 'standard' road cranks are useless to me.
Totally agree. Lower gearing and spinning is the way forward, 48years, 188cm, 90kg
Rigid klein attitude 36/22 & 12-36
Full sus Spec FSR 34 & 11-46
Road bike 50/34 & 11-32
Gravel Bike 46/30 & 11-32
A systematic approach is to use power output and weight to predict your cadence on an incline. For example, a not very fit 70kg person putting out 210W on a 10% incline is going less than 9kph, which means less than 55 rpm cadence in a 36x28. That cadence seems too low, so that gearing is inappropriate if that person has to deal with long steep climbs.
Note that the above gives a power to weight ratio of 3.0, so almost exactly half of top professionals, so it is logical to use half the gear size of professionals. This generalizes to other power to weight ratios.
I therefore propose that the solution is for an amateur rider to estimate his power to weight ratio A and use an A/P proportion of top professional gearing, where P is the power to weight ratio of top professionals.
-ilan
Thats why you don't push such low wattage on a 10% climb, 50/34's just make for lazy riders, man up and push that 39/25 it'll make you stronger. 😝
I appreciate your approach and wholly agree. However, it takes knowledge above the typical early or less committed rider’s understanding to think through cadence at speeds based on power-to-weight and how that plays out at grades. Has anyone ever heard a salesperson at the local bike shop advising an amateur on such things prior to a purchase? Kind of doubting it happens even a fraction of a percent of the time. Darn math.
Ilan Vardi what site did u use for those calculations?
Hello, the power estimate comes from bikecalculator.com. I wrote my own code for cadence estimate, but there is an online resource here:www.bikecalc.com/speed_at_cadence
Ilan Vardi cheers man. Have to say it rings true 👍
Moved from compact to semi compact with 11 32 rear cassette....great improvement and range...love it 🙂
34x30 at 90 rpm is 13.00km/h
36x30 at 90 rpm is 13.80km/h
so compact chainset is not dead yet...
That's not a massive difference to be fair
Love spinning, not grinding. Currently looking at sub compact!
just got one. 48/32 with tiagra 11-34. really like it so far.
Karl Knight where from? I’m looking around at the moment!
+Matt Hoffbrand it came with the bike, felt vr40. I had a look around before just for the crank set and struggled to find one though. it's an FSA if that's any help.
AbsoluteBlack do sub compact rings in a choice of 46-30 or 48-32, I use the later & yes if you do a lot of steep climbs Oval chain rings rule! #absoluteBLACK absoluteblack.cc/road-chainrings/
We were using 52/42 chainsets back in 1987. Nice to see the 52 back again
6:40 - Attention World Tour teams: big shot here can spin out a 50x11. Here is your leadout man.
I run 11/28 with a 52/34. Never dropped a chain. Although I do have a catcher.
On my 10-speed Cannondale Synapse Carbon I've swapped to the *OPPOSITE* riding 46/34 11-40 from the stock 50/34 11-28. Spin spin spin for two reasons: 1) I simply don't have the knees to grind going up the numerous short, honest 15-22% grades I have around me 2) I have rarely needed even 50 x 11. I neither have long enough mountains, nor do I typically ride group rides where I would ever use 50 x 11, let alone SPIN OUT 50 x 11 at 70kph needing LARGER chainrings!). By dropping from a 50t to 46t chainring (near identical to a 50 x 12); I now have USE of my upper 11t cog! Before, I my has well have been riding a 9-speed 50/34 x 12-28t. The combination of 46t chainring with an 11-40t cassette I now have gained both a 40t bail-out gear for extreme grades (No more walking or grinding! Yay! and spinning is still far faster than walking!) and I can actually ride & get use on 24t, 28t & 34t gear on long/hard rides where I'm gassed or simply need to cruise around on. No worries about cross-chaining, no worries about having to drop out of the larger chainring or simply not having the gearing.
Sure! Having a huge efficient 56t front with a 12-49t rear would be more "ideal" for me in an efficiency point of view, but nobody MAKES that combination!? Meanwhile, anyone can drop on any number of smaller chainrings from cyclocross and multiple companies make wide range cyclo/MTB cassettes that will work just fine on road bikes now. Even older 10-speed ones! (Praxis works 10-40/42 is my favorite because of the better spread in smaller cogs than Sunrace's 11-40/42t version. You can do your own hybrids also). At best you simply pop on a roadlink so you can clear your rear derailleur, at worst you combine a roadlink with a 9-speed mountain bike long-cage derailleur (Shimano) which has the same pull as the 10-spd.
Did I *need* to drop compact for sub-compact + wide ratio rear cassette? No, I was fairly happy with 50/34 11-28, but now I get full use of my available gears & by doing so have an easier time riding longer & harder! (FWIW I have some left knee damage and no amount of "bike fitting" or "get stronger" is EVER going to allow any form of grinding up hills.)
Frankly, the entire industry would be much more beginner friendly if sub-compact chainrings and wide(r) range cassettes were the normal option most road bikes shipped with. Get that 46/30 rocking on road bike drivetrains! That's the easiest solution, but getting a 30t to fit on modern BB's is impractical! Not everyone has amazing physical attributes or perfect competition fitness combined with riding at the beaches in Florida with endless flat roads & tailwinds where someone would likely get a some use out of a huge chainring & 12-23 or 11-25 corncob!
I moved from a compact to 52/36 on a friend's recommendation as my form was improving, but soon went back to 50/34. I'm a fairly fit 54 yr old, ftp when in shape 280W, but live at the top of a 1000m climb in the Alps, and the 36 just felt laborious on the climbs with an 11-29. I way prefer to spin a gear on a long climb. I liked the 52 on the flat, but 50 is fine, just tuck it if you're spinning out on the 11. I've now put on an 11-32 for training so I don't have to overdo it every time out - it's a long slog back home, and I find it's better to have a gear in hand just in case.
Imo spinning out on a decent is problematic if you are racing. Regular cyclists should worry more about getting up that hill or especially that mountain.
So many reasons 'yes'!
If I earn that view I want to enjoy it... descents are always over too fast anyway, why expedite the matter :)
On mountain roads you also have to be prepared for animals, broken road, crosswind gusts, traffic badly overtaking slow vehicles coming up... without closed roads or one hell of a long descent in perfect conditions, I've only been gapped by mates maybe a minute or two before they come to a junction or traffic and I'm only on 40x11 top gear (it's really only missing 2 gears compared to my last 53x12 racer). Usually 50-60 km/h is the range where I cross between spinning and tucking.
right! for me it would be better to improve braking than alway thinking of getting faster and faster! I guess I am not alone, gravel bikes are a good example! bigger tires disc brakes and low gears!
I've seen road bikes with 46/30 cranksets, 11-40T cassettes, and 32c tires where I live.
saying that 50/34 is dead is like saying 100 mm stem is dead or endurance frame, not every cyclist can copy the exact same tooth number and position of a pro cyclist and although we all love bling and expensive stuff if it doesn't fit you then you loose the fun of it
Your comment makes the most sense. I use 50/34 and 11-25 on my Litespeed in hilly Washington state. I weigh 190 lb. because I was heavily into lifting/body building. I ride rec. only.
No mention of sub-compact 48/32, just throwing that into the mix :)
Bring back the Triple.
Running an old 9 spd DuraAce triple (Utlegra cranks) with 50/40/28 and 11-27 cassette. Perfect gearing. Great range and small steps. The 50/40 step in the front is spot on. 50/34 is just too big of a difference.
Well back on the day(1984) I had 52-42 with 14-23, And I climb every hill.....but I was 15 years old. Now I'm happy and grateful for 50-34 and 11-32...and I have no problem using 11-34 in my flat bar road bike.
I run 52/34 at the front and 11/32 at the back on all my bikes one on Previois Ultegra and the other on the latest Dura-Ace and it works well without a prob. Great for sprints and long climbs
11-32 with a 50/34 is perfect for me. As someone who’s never gonna race I love having the range to tackle any climb in my area yet still be able to ride at a decent speed on the flats and descents.
Hi guys!
I really enjoyed this new kind of video series of you guys. I really like your videos, keep it up, congratulations for the content !!!
Currently struggling with this topic in preparation for the south of France in a few weeks. Might go medium cage & 11-34x36-52.
I just went to a 52/36 up from a 50/34 on my primary road bike, with an 11-34 cassette in back. Gives me the same low range as with my 50/34 and 11-32, but now I have more top end for long mountain descents and with a 36/34 low gear, I can still keep it in zone 2 on easier days up moderate gradients/mountain climbs. For those insanely hilly rides with steep gradients, I can throw the 50/34 chainrings back on if I want for a 1:1 climbing gear. I'm still running a 50/34 on my gravel bikes though and have no need for a 52/36 on those.
Just ride a 52x36 chainset with11-32 casette. Supreme range and versatility.
bloke who puts out a consistent 300W declares 50-34 dead. There are a lot of people who are far less fit buying the 50-34 and will continue to do so because it provides the most adequate gear ratios for their fitness. 50-34 is here to stay methinks. It may even get smaller- 48-34 perhaps?
I'm not claiming it's dead. I'm asking the question and inviting debate. I say in the video that I still still think compacts are useful, however, I personally opt for a mid compact most of the time.
I'm 58 kilos putting out 300W for a 10min climb 7% grade with a compact and 32 in back at 95 cadence. I would need a micro compact If I want to be able to climb at tempo on steeper climbs and keep a good cadence. I think it's funny how people will grind a hill yet keep a cadence around 100 on the flats during an effort.
They'll have to take my compact and 11/32 away from my cold dead scrawny legs :-D
Thank you for this very timely video. My new bike (2017 Specialized Venge Vias) comes with a 52/36 chainring. If anything you have put my mind at ease. Thank you.
54/39 is def dying. I don't know why any novice cyclist would ride it. I guess maybe the A grade crits. But I'll stick with compact or mid compact every day for riding with my mates.
Is 54/39 (as opposed to 53/39) even a thing? The only people I've heard using 54-tooth big dogs are big, powerful TT riders (though I can imagine crit riders using them too). Me, I use a 50/34 with an 11-32; I've got some nasty hills around my home area and the occasional bit of spinning out on long descents is worth putting up with for the teensy-weensy granny gear for the 30% gradients.
Every single time I see people in pain, struggling to climb a 10 km long 7% climb on an expensive bike, they're using 53/39 cranksets. I wonder if there's a connection...
well, I have a trek from early 90´s that came with 53/42 and 13-23 cassete. It was stupid!! Today I ride a 12-28 cassete, but the worn chainrings will soon get out and I´ll mount a brand new 50/34 to play in our hilly neighbourhood!
I ride a 53/34 on one bike and a 52/34 on another, the first one is ideal but i am not as efficient with 50 as suppose to a 53, i get cramps with a 50 its weird so i reverted back to a 53 and a 52, but anybody who says compact is dead is a nutter
I let you climb the "col du coq" pass near Grenoble in France and decide if 34 is too small ;) 1000md+ per hour at 9kph
I surely hope it's not dead, and even if it is, I hope sub-compact cranks will become more and more popular. To me, the ideal crankset is a 46/30, paired with something like an 11-26 cassette for everyday riding and an 11-32 for dealing with proper mountains (which is definitely the main reason I ride my bike, in spite of being far from lightweight at my 86 kg). But those cranksets are still quite a niche product, are hard to find and usually bloody expensive compared to equivalent compact cranksets. I hope they become more popular, so that I won't care anymore what happens to the compact crank.
I rebuilt my '90's road bike, which had 52/42 with 13/26 Shimano 600 short cage, over to 40/26 (no joke!) and kept the 13/26 and now use it as my commuter bike. In my half hour commute, I spend 15 minutes in the lowest couple gears climbing 8%-12% hills, and I spin out at 28MPH for less than five minutes, and when the downhills are into a significant head wind, I don't spin out at all.
I love bombing downhills and on group rides, I often get surprised by people jamming the brakes just when I'm ready to have some fun. Being able to pedal over 40MPH just isn't a major consideration for most people.
Being able to pedal at over 40 MPH isn't a consideration for me either, I usually stop pedalling downhill at around 30 MPH simply because I cannot properly control my bike at those speeds while pedalling. On top of that, my all-time maximum downhill speed is around 43 MPH. I don't feel (mentally) confortable at all going at those speeds because of what would happen in case of a crash.
I’m very much with Durianrider here. I live in Wales with loads of really steep hills, if you’re an ordinary club cyclist, you want as wide a range of gears as possible. It would be great if the ‘experts stopped dictating the development of bikes and listen to ordinary riders.
I agree. young pro cyclist and Industry want to dictate us what to buy. New bikes every second year. I even know people who love the older systems of 3x9 or 3x10.
Great new series. Really enjoyed that. Different enough from the GCN Tech Show to watch both for sure. Thanks Ollie! (and CW)
MORE LIKE 130 BCD IS DEAD
I run a campy 50-36, why? Because the problem with a full compact is the 16 tooth gap, it is a pain, it feels rough to change into the big dog. A 50-36 give a smoother change and the same tooth gap as a standard, it is really nice. The campy rings work incredibly well together, i do believe shimano doesn’t play so nicely
wayne proud i, n most people, dont find problem shifting 16 tooth gap
The only ratios that are dead are the ones that don’t sell. There’s a great market for compacts since makers want riders to enjoy at the entry and mid-levels, regardless of the amount of climbing those riders may be facing. With experience, training and learning, some will move to ratios that favor descents when the getting up isn’t as much a factor. Even stronger older riders appreciate higher cadence instead of pounding their joints into dust (and probably equally less concerned with boiling speed on descents). On the pro side, yeah, ratios over the long haul favor spinning instead of grinding, but those large rings also won’t be going away even for the smaller demand among elite and pro cyclists. So, the compact is quite far from death even with mid-compacts serving as a great compromise for those not constantly pounding the mountain.
I agree with you, I have a semi compact 52/36 and a 11/32 cassette. I think personally it gives me the perfect ratios for climbing these crazy hills in Spain, also don't tend to spin out when on descents, just perfect for long tough rides AND saving legs, AND saving your back!!! Tougher gears will strip your gas tank/energy for the day, and strip your lower back right off you!!! Thx great info :-) :-) :-)
I recommend swapping out your 50T/53T with a 46T chainring.
My bike has 53/39 x 12-25 on it and I do struggle with any long climbs over 4%. My next bike will definitely have 52/36 and a wider cassette so I can have higher top end and lower bottom end. I also see the need for the compact for really hilly terrain, and also standard for really flat terrain.
Great topic, I’m getting ready to build up from a frameset and I’m torn between 52/36 with 11-28 like my current bike or 50/34.
I currently run an old 8 speed 53/39 with a 12-25 and it has been fine up to now. However, with more riding in hills I've bought a replacement 52/36 with an 11-28. My brother has this setup and I can easily (relative term) get up 20% hills on his bike, I would currently probably get off and walk them after 200m on mine. Everybody's different, try em out and see which you like, there's no wrong choice. Don't let machoism sway how you feel comfortable.
I have the 105 12-25, can I swap that cassette out for an 11-28 without modifications?
@@carl8568 You'll probably have to fiddle with the adjustment screws a bit to make sure the rear mech indexes correctly. And I'm not sure about the chain, you may be ok but then it may be a couple of links short.
@@jonburnell532
Ok thanks.
Great show! Question: which setup is faster on aero wheels, narrower 23mm tires on front 28mm on the back or faster rolling 28mm front and back?
53-39 front and 11-36 back here, with a short cage and dérailleur extender, living in a very steep area. Would probably swap for 52-36 and 11-32 at some point.
At hilly Gran Fondos the majority of riders coast above 50 km/h, so 46/11 is still more than adequate. At the same time, they would definitely benefit from a 34/32 bottom gear, as they struggle riding up inclines above 10 % with 34/28 or 36/28. Bottom line: Road bikes in their stock setup are rather overgeared more often than undergeared.
Personally, on a hilly solo ride with 1500 - 2000m of climbing per 100 km, I can still maintain an average speed well above 30 km/h. I'm happy with 50/34, 11-30; it gives me all the range I need to tackle gradients of 20 % and still put some pressure on the pedals at 65 km/h (A proper aero tuck is the choice for descents). 52/36 chainrings will be mounted for occassional racing.
I have a compact and live in a hilly area and changed my cassette from 11-25 to 11-32. What a great change! However, as I get stronger I begin to want a higher gear, and feel I could probably live without the lowest. I wonder how great a difference going to 52-36 would make?
Great video guys! Can you address cross chaining and how bad it really is for your drivetrain next? I run a Tiagra compact chain set and often find my self spinning on the big ring in the 25 or 28 tooth cog on the short punchy climbs around Denver. How bad is that for my gears?
I live in a hilly area so to get home I've got many 10%+ pinches. On one 12 to 13% stretch I need to put out 300W to maintain 80rpm's in my 34x28. If I shift to my 34x32 I only need to put out 250W to maintain the same 80rpm cadence. A god send when I'm tired. On a 3km 10% average climb if I'm tired, or on an easy recovery day even in my 34x32 I'm down to a cadence in the high 60's at around 200W(~3W/kg for me).
Most recreational cyclists can only ride at about 3 to 3.5W/kg for any length of time so in my opinion the vast majority should be on a compact unless they live in a flat area. That 34x32 ratio makes steep climbs so much easier and enjoyable. You don't need to use that smallest gear but its great to have the option. I could get away with a mid-compact but would need at least a 30 on the back for the climbs around here.
I ride a 52-36 but at times I wish I had a compact, for the really steep stuff, 15% + climbs. I guess it just depends what type of rider you are (spinner or grinder) and what type of terrain you ride most.
I ride both a standard compact + 11-28 cassette on my Lapierre Xelius (light bike) & a sub compact (48-32) + 11-32 for touring on my Kinesis Racelight GF-Ti Disc (heavier bike, especially loaded for a bike packing tour!), different horses for different courses. I am 62 years old, 95kg & live in South West Cornwall where the terrain is let’s say challenging. As for going to mid compact on my Lapierre, yes if I lived in an area with less lumpy terrain &/or lost 15kgs off body weight it would be ideal for some but not me. The key here is that I don’t race & my reason for riding is not to go as fast as possible, hence I very rarely ride in the 50-11 if at all so going up to a 52 big ring would serve no purpose, in fact I’ll probably end up riding 11-32 on both bikes and enjoy the climbs, even the 20% - 25% ones! That’s just the way I role. BTW I ride around 100+ miles a week & love it.
I think it’s missing the point a little. The idea behind the compact was that the 110bcd gave you more choice with a min 34t small ring vs the 39t min on a traditional 130bcd crank. You can always fit larger chainrings than minimum size, but not the other way round. Thus you can fit 53/39, 52/36 and 50/34 all on a 110bcd crank. It’s about choice to match riding style, terrain etc.
Great video... Question; would a 54/36 be to big of a gap for front rings? Would this cause shifting problems? I currently use a 52/36 with a 11-32 rear cassette, looking for more top-end speed..
The real trouble with any of these compacts is that the 'just riding along' gears are cross-chained in either chainring = inefficient and lots of front shifting. A 39-42 chainring is perfect for 80% of riding... hence the middle ring of triples or the inner ring of racing doubles for powerful riders who spent more time at high speed... or the front ring on many 1x setups. While I welcome the new 30/46 chainsets I think this will still be somewhat of an issue for 700c bikes.
I took a punt when building my do-it-all 700c 38mm bike and put a 28/40 mtb crank on it... 1x with a granny gear for light touring in hills or 15%-30% climbs. Just because I could potentially pedal faster down a big hill doesn't mean I need to. The free-hub is a great invention.
Amen Craig! You've explained it perfectly. 50-34 compromises the gearing we ride in 80% of the time. 34 tooth is too small for the flats and 50 tooth is too big for the flats. When I'm riding my favorite rolling terrain I have to constantly perform front shifts that has a too large a spread. Yes lets not forget what a great invention the free-hub is. My dream crankset in the Rene Hearse 42-26.
One by with Granny.
Do they do XD driver body on road bikes? The 10-42 on my enduro would give a good range or is it 100g too heavy for roadies in general?
When I started riding in the late 70's the standard crankset was 42/52 or 42/53 and only a 7 speed cassette in the rear. I rode a 12-22 back then and only weighed 145-150lbs and I was able to climb everything that I came upon. Now many years and many extra pounds later a 50/34 with an 11-29 suits me much better. I do have 11-25's on a couple of wheelsets for when I'm riding near the coast on flatter routes.
i got a 50/34 with a 11-25 setup like mentioned in the video. My problem is that im a really bad case of "spin to win". 110rpm in a TT-effort is nothing too extraordinary to me. But this means that i really have to have a low gear for the climbs(i simply am bad at putting down torque). on my mtb is got a 32t and a massive 11-46t cassette and still find quite some hills where it would be nice to have a easier gear.
Soon i will slap on a 11-32 on my roadbike, but descending is quite...strange. Since i spin out at 84km/h donwhill, i can at most maintain a cadence of 120rpm for descending. This results in 68km/h without blowing up immediately. Unfortunately many parts of my favorite descent are much faster than that.
i will consider a 52/36 in the future, but with my cadence type i can't convert that simple to mid-compact
72 year old cyclist here who regularly climbs steep hills here in Cambodia. I use a Giant FastRoad flat bar road bike with 50/34 compact in front, and 11/42 11 speed casette for the hills. It's like having a 10 speed cassette with an extra climbing gear the size of a small dinner plate. The cassette works with an XT shifter and derailleur.
In my flat country I always rode 53-39, getting older 52-39…,though. I climbed with 50-34. Nowadays with 52-36 (and 11-34) climbing is superb, and for the flat country I only change the 36 for a 39. More practical than a whole compact investment…
Having a compact alongside an 11-42t fitted to My bike this week :)
Spinning for the climb baby ,,,
I like the 50/36 or 50/38 combos for easy shifting on rolling roads~ I use the 50/34 too which is great for long climbs~ it seems there are endless options these days (:
My bike started with a triple and a 12/25 on the back. Swapped the back out for an 11/32 and it is great, my fitness is flying forward and I still have the top end.
Just completed a self-build with Potenza running gear with one exception: bought a used Campag Centaur Carbon chainset. The gear ratios: front 52/39, rear 12-32. Yes, the Centaur was 10 speed but I swapped out the old rings for new Stronglight 11 speed rings. Only one issue: had to buy new bolts as the new small front ring uses threaded holes instead of a cup/bolt sandwich. Saved nearly 200g compared to Potenza chainset and nearly £200 for a similiar weight Campag Chorus chainset.
I run a 50/36 it's great for climbing and my shifts in the front are a lot smoother as gears run closer but yes on downhills or flats I do spin out with only a 50 tooth I always have to push a bit harder to stay in the group
Nice to see you (no offense) consulted the experts. I enjoyed the in-depth discussion as opposed to 12 questions in 8 minutes.
One tech question benefits of Cross baking the FD and RD vs standard straight cabling ?
Great new drinking game: throw on Cycling Weekly, let auto play go, and take a shot when Oliver says "Lake District" = success
Ollie, what about having a second set of chainrings for my Shimano 9100 crankset. I could have 52x36 for flat/hilly rides and 50x34 for when I go to the mountains?
Loved this video short informative, concise. I look forward to what else you come up with. What about are deep ( ie 80mm sort of deep) section wheels dying out? ✌️🤙
I ride 36 52 with 11-28 on my canyon aeroroad and on my climbing bike which I built from scratch 2009 focus Cayo I ride 50-34 with 11-32 and rode some crazy stuff with no problems at all
Can you do a 53/39 for top end as I spin out on the down hills, but a 11-32 cassette to counter the bigger front small cog. Will it work and give best of both worlds?
i run both 52/36-11/32 and 50/34 11/29 thanks to living in hilly Cornwall .The difference in the top gear is so marginal in fact 50-11 is higher than a 52-12 . anyway a compact is lighter especially when you take in the larger cassettes and rear mech and longer chain i also run a old Bianchi on 52/42 13/24 - grind away
hi
1q: what do you call those cranksets with only 1 chainring?
Its a funny old world. I'm thinking of going for a sub compact 48/32! I don't need to worry about spinning out as I approach 40mph but I'm always up for another gear when gong up hill!
Used to ride a 50/34 and 11-30 10 speed as well as a 50/34 and 12-28 9 speed and I’ve ridden up Alpe Du Zwift. Then I got a 52/36 and made the same climb with 11-30. But it was kinda tough. I fitted an 11-25 for road riding with moderate hills. Just ordered a 52/36 and 11-34 for all day adventure riding. Can’t wait!
50 x 34 and a 11 speed 11-25 cassette on the rear .. gets me up almost all the grades here in Chiang Mai, Thailand, though there are still a few climbs I wished for a 29...!
I'll keep my compact and 11-32, it happens less that I spin out on a descent than I climb on steep hills and love the 34-32 combo!
I wish SRAM would offer a 38T inner ring option for the 52/36 11 speed.. 52/38 would be perfect for me.
I did a few calculations relating to gearing before I decided to add a longer cage derailleur to my kit so I could run a 32 tooth cassette with a 53-39. The cost to me to achieve that gear ratio versus switching to a different crankset was much lower. Personally I feel like what we really need is a common BCD for the front where we can run different chainrings from 54 39 down to a mid compact or even compact.. I think Shimano might do this now? There is no one answer. So for us that are mechanically inclined having all the options is good but making the changeover from one to the other a simple process would be fantastic.
Talk about 1x setups and what’s needed to convert from 2x to 1x. I’m debating on switching to it next. Where I live with rollers and mostly flats, I almost never use the small ring. Worst case there’s 2 min climbs and I cross chain in 52x28 for a short period.
Currently on my 3rd road bike since taking up cycling in the early 2000's , my first two bikes had 53/39 on the front and 11/23 on the back originally, later 12/27. Current bike is now 11 speed and 11/28 originally compact cranks ( 50 / 34) but I found I was spinning out on the flats, so I went to the mid compact 52/36 to give me a best of both worlds scenario / it was a compromise I loved the 34 for the hills ( I am no climber) , So although I can still push a 53 I went mid compact to give me a better chance climbing with the 36. If I was just to ride flat roads I would go back to a 53/39 but that is not going to happen.
Andrew, will 52-36 11-30 work as smooth as 52-36 11-28? I need more speed thats why i chose 52-36 over compact. Im only afraid of climbs 9-12% so im not sure 11-28 or 11-30 maybe 11-32...
Depending on your group set with an 11-30 or 11-32 you may need to get a different rear derailleur, to cope with a 30 or 32 tooth rear cassette. I have only been a couple of hills where I live that I have not coped with
11-28; .. My advice is how often are you hitting these 9+ % climbs ?, if not often stick with an 11-28 which will see you cope with most of your riding. If still not sure ask questions of your Local bike shop
I feel like this was an excellent video to watch (not sure why it's got 10% thumbs down...). The topic was discussed intelligently and a case presented from several different perspectives. Also great to get the opinion of industry experts. Preferred this style to the GCN Tech channel offerings. Nice one Ollie, look forward to more like this!
Descending at 40mph doing 110 rpm in the 50/11 is fine by me and I am sure a lot of other riders out there too. The difference in speed between a 50t and a 52t in the 11 cog at 110 rpm is roughly 1mph. Riding at 90rpm in the 50/12 will see you flying along on the flat at almost 30mph and I can only assume for a rider of my weight that must be in the region of 400 watts plus.
The real difference between the two is the rate in which you build up fatigue metabolites, especially over undulating terrain on a full day out. I cannot see the advantages a mid has over a full compact. We must not forget pro riders other than them being super human athletes and fearless descenders have the benefit of drafting all day which conserves energy, increases the average speeds and the need for a standard chainset. Something a lot of us normal humans don't experience. We are normally riding on our own into a headwind.
I simply cannot believe a cycling channel of this scale would be spouting such nonsense. How on earth would a chainset ratio ever die when a vast number of beginner to high level riders have been using them for years?
I fear that this is when cycling begins to cross in to the realms of promoting what is trendy. Manufacturers dictating what cyclists should be riding to their customers, rather than the other way around!
There should be no gear snobbery, this is where road cycling lets itself down, I am glad that the gear manufacturers themselves have the right philosophy, It's just a shame a lot of the bike manufacturers haven't caught on yet, they assume anybody wanting to ride an aero or high level carbon bike is a racer and this is why we see a lot of after sale customisation.
I don't want to have to go to a bike shop and think well I'm not going to buy that bike because it doesn't have the gears that I want straight off the shelf. There should be an option to select the gears you want on YOUR bike when you are purchasing online or in store. (imagine if I was a noobie to cycling weighing 100kg and had a 100w ftp). There is this almost blanket one size fits all approach to riders and their fitness coupled with the style of terrain they might be riding.
"You can't ride a mid compact?'
"No, why?"
"You'll just need get stronger then!"
WHO CARES!?
I foind this video helpful. Can a granny gear be added to a 53/39 chain ring? I have an 1984 cannondale rs400.. Thx.
How many times a week do you wear this Rapha top ?
If your group rides trend to be on the fast side, the 53-39 is the best option, and deppending on the route, you can switch, freehubs from 11-25, 11-28, or 11-32, that extra tooth, can make a big difference if you have the power on the legs, if not, yes, stick to 52-36. And for the new bike riders, the 50-34 is a must, ride those chain rings for the first 8 to 10 months, then think if it really is worthy change to 52-36, deppending on the terrain you ride, the speeds of your group rides, and your fitness.
I’ve got 34 chainring and 34 cassette on my winter bike. My venge has a 36 smallest ring and currently a 11-28 on the back. Been really grinding the last few weeks. Think I’m going to get a long cage mech and a 11-34 and just keep the chain set as is. Don’t intend on going super slow, but also don’t want to be struck grinding away hurting my knees while I’m not at my fittest!
ideas for future videos? crank length. how big a difference does it make?
My Specialized S-Works Tarmac has a 53/39 chain ring and a 10 speed 12/28 Cassette. I'm surrounded by hills and I'm no pro cyclist. In some climbs i really struggle to maintain cadence. I guess i will be changing my Cassette for a 12/30 or 11/32?
i use a compact chainring and an 11-23 cassette on my Trek Speed Concept.
i find it plenty fast and flexible for hills too. if the grade is steep enough i go 11-28
I think a 50-34 is also a good option for a lighter rider as well. I'm 64kg and hate having to move down to the 34 on small inclines of 3-4% preferring to cross chain a little down to third biggest cog before conceding (I find it more efficient staying in the big ring). Therefore, if I were on a 52 I would need to drop down more often.
I ride a Shimano 2x10 system with a 53/39 crank set. I will always want as big a front gear as I can get, as it allows me to go fast. Smaller chain rings means your not going to have the gear ratio to go faster, as after a certain point your only going to be able to pedal so fast. I stay as far away as I can from cycling fads. The old adage rings true "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". Thanks.