Re: [RBW] Gearing question -

[Patrick Moore]

Even quads! -- very briefly; Mountain Tamer Quad. Too finicky, IME.

On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 2:58 PM Patrick Moore  wrote:

> ... , but I've used singles, doubles, and triples on various 26" wheel
> bikes.)
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CALuTfgvhemkt94eiXGumVrxRPbnVKC3PD9PEUSOq0j-MnYar4Q%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [RBW] Gearing question -

[Patrick Moore]

If your current cogset is a freewheel it probably has no more than 7 cogs
which limits the number of different gears.

How many gears you need depends on your own preferences: how high a high --
you've said you want a higher one and yes, 70" is pretty low; how low a low
-- with the 24/34 I assume you want to keep a similar low gear of <20"; and
how close you want the gaps between gears.

The possibilities also depend on how often you shift between chainrings and
how much you like quick, smooth shifts.

The easiest option would be to swap the 38 for a 46 which would give a
still pretty low 85" gear, assuming a more or less 26" tall wheel. The gap
between this and the 24 is pretty big but it has been done, and it would be
more doable if you don't use the 24 very much.

The next option is a triple with 46/36/24 which is pretty typical 7 speed
triple chainring, tho' still on the low side with 26" wheels. Or -- my
preference were I to use a triple with 5, 6, or 7 sp fw -- would be
something like a 46/42/24 halfstep plus granny for closer ratios with
higher top and same low.

But my overall preference would be to go whole hog and swap the hub for a
modern cassette hub with 10 or 11 gears; yes, you'd probably have to spread
the rear but it's not hard to spread a 126 mm OL rear to 130; in fact, I've
often used 130 hubs in 126 steel frames, tho' it's a pain. With 3 or 4 more
cogs you can (1) mix and match much more easily, (2) get a much higher top
gear with the same 38 t ring, (3) get a similar or even lower low, and (4)
get closer intermediate gears, *and* (5) do this without adding another
chainring.

I personally like "1X + granny" using 10 sp cassettes (might one day try
11) with something like a (note: this is for 700C wheels with fat tires, so
about 29" tall, 3" taller than 559 wheels) 44/28 and a 14-28 10 sp (easy to
customize cogs with a freehub) giving a high of ~90" and a low about 29",
but with very close intermediate gears. Abandon 1-cog differences in the
cruising gears and you can get just about any reasonable high and
reasonable low with this sort of setup.

Patrick Moore, who has owned umpteen gadzillion 26" wheel road,
all-rounder, and mountain bikes each with customized gearing. (My 2 current
26-ers are road bikes -- 29" for off road -- one fixed or with 2-speed IGH
fixed hubs, 76" and either 68", 66", or 57" depending on hub) and the other
with 3 speed fixed: 72", 65", 54" or 3 speed fw: 75", 65", 56"; 24.5" 559
 X 28mm  and 25.6" 559 X 42 mm wheels respectively, but I've used singles,
doubles, and triples on various 26" wheel bikes.)

On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 9:20 AM Stephen Durfee  wrote:

> Another list member recently asked a question "Which Front Derailleur
> option is best for a 38/24 front, 11-36 rear". At the time, I commented
> that my AR has a 38/24 front, that I often spin out on level ground and can
> only coast down hills, and that I have been planning to remove the chain
> guard and swap in a 46T front ring, to turn my double into a triple. But
> then I got to wondering, would I actually be better off making a switch in
> the back...
>
> My 26" rear wheel is built around a Bullseye hub, with a 14-34 freewheel.
> The front wheel is brand new - a Rich-built dynamo with a Shimano hub.
>
> My questionwould I be better off making a change in the front, going
> with a triple and the current rear wheel? Or, should I upgrade to a new
> rear wheel, with a hub cassette at 11-36? Here is my stab at basic math,
> which may or may not provide useful information
> My current "big gear"  38÷14 = 2.71
> with the added triple,   46÷14 = 3.28
> with a new cassette and existing chainrings 38 ÷ 11= 3.45
>
> I understand, of course, a new rear wheel would be a more expensive
> solution. My existing FD is a Shimano 105. I think it could handle the
> triple, but I haven't yet put it to the test.   Are there other factors to
> consider?
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/121edcd6-c2ae-4513-8f05-e37684b27c1cn%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>


-- 

Patrick Moore
Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum
---

Executive resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, letters, and other writing
services

---

*When thou didst not, savage, k**now thine own meaning,*

*But wouldst gabble like a** thing most brutish,*

*I endowed thy purposes w**ith words that made them 

[RBW] Gearing question -

[Stephen Durfee]

Another list member recently asked a question "Which Front Derailleur 
option is best for a 38/24 front, 11-36 rear". At the time, I commented 
that my AR has a 38/24 front, that I often spin out on level ground and can 
only coast down hills, and that I have been planning to remove the chain 
guard and swap in a 46T front ring, to turn my double into a triple. But 
then I got to wondering, would I actually be better off making a switch in 
the back...

My 26" rear wheel is built around a Bullseye hub, with a 14-34 freewheel. 
The front wheel is brand new - a Rich-built dynamo with a Shimano hub. 

My questionwould I be better off making a change in the front, going 
with a triple and the current rear wheel? Or, should I upgrade to a new 
rear wheel, with a hub cassette at 11-36? Here is my stab at basic math, 
which may or may not provide useful information
My current "big gear"  38÷14 = 2.71
with the added triple,   46÷14 = 3.28
with a new cassette and existing chainrings 38 ÷ 11= 3.45

I understand, of course, a new rear wheel would be a more expensive 
solution. My existing FD is a Shimano 105. I think it could handle the 
triple, but I haven't yet put it to the test.   Are there other factors to 
consider? 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/121edcd6-c2ae-4513-8f05-e37684b27c1cn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Gearing question

[PATRICK MOORE]

In a frantic attempt to make the perfectly accessible into something
more complicated, I ask whether the 2X9 gearing below I propose for my
(very Rivish in philosophy if not Rivendellianly lugged) has any
drawbacks compared to the current 3X7 setup.

Current:

(Big Apple wheelset, 29 diameter.) 
46  36  24
16  83  65  
18  74  58  
20  67  52  
23  58  45  30
26  51  40  27
30  44  35  23
34  31  20

Proposed:

36  24
12  87  58
13  80  54
14  75  50
16  65  33
18  58  33
21  50  33
24  44  29
28  37  25
34  31  20

Thanks.

-- 
Patrick Moore
Albuquerque, NM
For professional resumes, contact
Patrick Moore, ACRW
http://resumespecialties.com/index.html

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Re: [RBW] Gearing question

[robert zeidler]

Got a lotta 33's.

On Thursday, March 29, 2012, Joe Broach wrote:

 Looks good to me! I tried something similar for a while with a 34/22.
 Front derailer setup was fiddly. There was a fine line between getting
 it to shift to the big ring and shifting off to the outside of the
 big ring. I ended up switching to manual front shifting, then removed
 the rear derailer to make a sweet 2x3 setup (3 usable gears).

 Best,
 joe broach
 portland, or

 --
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
 RBW Owners Bunch group.
 To post to this group, send email to 
 rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.comjavascript:;
 .
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
 rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com javascript:;.
 For more options, visit this group at
 http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Re: [RBW] Gearing question

[Steve Palincsar]

On Thu, 2012-03-29 at 08:39 -0600, PATRICK MOORE wrote:
 In a frantic attempt to make the perfectly accessible into something
 more complicated, I ask whether the 2X9 gearing below I propose for my
 (very Rivish in philosophy if not Rivendellianly lugged) has any
 drawbacks compared to the current 3X7 setup.

1. Chain, chain ring and sprocket life is going to be less.

2. You are never going to use that 24 with anything smaller than a 21T
sprocket, so you might as well plot the chart reflecting how you're
going to use it, the way you did with the triple.  It will make the true
shifting pattern more obvious; the current chart obfuscates it, and
makes it seem as though you're going to be using the two rings equally
when in reality you will be using it as a 1x9 + granny.



 
 Current:
 
 (Big Apple wheelset, 29 diameter.)   
   46  36  24
 1683  65  
 1874  58  
 2067  52  
 2358  45  30
 2651  40  27
 3044  35  23
 3431  20
 
 Proposed:
 
   36  24
 1287  58
 1380  54
 1475  50
 1665  33
 1858  33
 2150  33
 2444  29
 2837  25
 3431  20
 
 Thanks.
 
 -- 
 Patrick Moore
 Albuquerque, NM
 For professional resumes, contact
 Patrick Moore, ACRW
 http://resumespecialties.com/index.html
 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

Re: [RBW] Gearing question

[PATRICK MOORE]

Thanks for the commentary. I like the fact that the 36 will handle
9/10 of the work with the 24 just as an occasional bailout.

Do those of you who use such small rings find that the rings, cogs and
chain wear much more quickly?

Now I need to pick up some cogsets for disassembly and re-arrangement.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.