Re: [RBW] Re: Custom Appaloosa Update
On 08/22/2013 10:55 PM, William wrote: Regardless of the cassette in question, the big jump is due to the 53.8% difference between the chain rings. My jump is 47% between chainrings. That's much bigger than the 27% jump from your 36 to your 46, but it is smaller than the 50% jump from your 24 to your 36. I don't know if I should go mad or not! There's a difference between going from a rarely used small granny to middle ring, and a routine, do it all day long on every ride, shift from small to large chain ring. It takes a lot of drama to force me to shift to the granny, and I don't mind a little of the same getting off of it. It happens only in exceptional circumstances: I spend most of my time riding in rolling country, not the mountains, and in rolling country I don't have to use the granny.A wide range double, on the other hand, is shifted often. However, everyone has to find gearing that they're happy with. There are obviously some who can tolerate frequent wide-range crossovers, and -- especially with the new breed of ultra wide range cassettes like the 11-36 -- many whose needs are fully met by them. Personally, I think the standard Riv 110/74 compact triple is a better solution for most riders; but I'm not a STI user and I'm very familiar with this kind of triple and don't find them even slightly confusing. -- 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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Custom Appaloosa Update
There are more compromises available to riders than that between a triple on the one hand and a w r d with frequent crossover shifts, on the other. The whole point of switching to w r d's is, for some, precisely to avoid the annoying crossover shifts between large and middle on standard triples. My own choice was to give up the high end for an 85 high so that I can have close ratios in the middle of the 9 speed cassette while preserving the large cogs, so that the outer gives me more or less the range of the middle and the inner remains a granny. I find a 44/30 with 14-23 7 excellent for the Ram's pavement, and a 38/24 with 13-32 9 excellent for the Fargo's dirt. Ram on the outer: 85-79-74-70-64-60-50; inner: 45-40-35. Most of my riding in rolling terrain in the 60 to 74. Fargo (probably closer to Steve's triple): 85-73-69-65-61-55-48-42-34; inner 30-27-22. Most of my riding in dirt in the 42 to 65. On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 6:35 AM, Steve Palincsar palin...@his.com wrote: On 08/22/2013 10:55 PM, William wrote: Regardless of the cassette in question, the big jump is due to the 53.8% difference between the chain rings. My jump is 47% between chainrings. That's much bigger than the 27% jump from your 36 to your 46, but it is smaller than the 50% jump from your 24 to your 36. I don't know if I should go mad or not! There's a difference between going from a rarely used small granny to middle ring, and a routine, do it all day long on every ride, shift from small to large chain ring. It takes a lot of drama to force me to shift to the granny, and I don't mind a little of the same getting off of it. It happens only in exceptional circumstances: I spend most of my time riding in rolling country, not the mountains, and in rolling country I don't have to use the granny.A wide range double, on the other hand, is shifted often. However, everyone has to find gearing that they're happy with. There are obviously some who can tolerate frequent wide-range crossovers, and -- especially with the new breed of ultra wide range cassettes like the 11-36 -- many whose needs are fully met by them. Personally, I think the standard Riv 110/74 compact triple is a better solution for most riders; but I'm not a STI user and I'm very familiar with this kind of triple and don't find them even slightly confusing. -- 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+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.comrbw-owners-bunch%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.**comrbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com . Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**group/rbw-owners-bunchhttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch . For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_outhttps://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out . -- *RESUMES THAT GET YOU NOTICED!* Certified Resume Writer http://resumespecialties.com/index.html patrickmo...@resumespecialties.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/patrickmooreresumespec/ Albuquerque, NM -- 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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Custom Appaloosa Update
Personally, I think the standard Riv 110/74 compact triple is a better solution for most riders; but I'm not a STI user and I'm very familiar with this kind of triple and don't find them even slightly confusing. I totally agree with you there. Very useful and very non-confusing. That's why I have that setup, with bar-con shifters on both my touring bike and my tandem. It's fantastic! Furthermore, I'm glad we completely agree about compact doubles. You run your bike like a compact double -PLUS- a granny bail out for extraordinary circumstances that you practically never use. That's precisely how I use my touring bike and my tandem. A close range 46/36 compact double would be fine for you, just like it is with most people, but like a lot of people, you also choose to be prepared for extraordinary circumstances. I have no problem with any of that. Also, it doesn't surprise me much that when you tried a 44/30 and a 40/26 that you found the enormous jump troublesome, particularly on rollers. As you correctly pointed out, people have to find what they like on the terrain they will be riding. I end up using my 44/30 as a 1x9 (or 1x10 on one bike) PLUS a climbing range. If my riding was more on the Pacific coast, where there are a ton of rollers, I would probably swap my 30 tooth ring for a 32 or a 34, because the terrain would dictate far more frequent front shifts, as you correctly pointed out. On Friday, August 23, 2013 5:35:44 AM UTC-7, Steve Palincsar wrote: On 08/22/2013 10:55 PM, William wrote: Regardless of the cassette in question, the big jump is due to the 53.8% difference between the chain rings. My jump is 47% between chainrings. That's much bigger than the 27% jump from your 36 to your 46, but it is smaller than the 50% jump from your 24 to your 36. I don't know if I should go mad or not! There's a difference between going from a rarely used small granny to middle ring, and a routine, do it all day long on every ride, shift from small to large chain ring. It takes a lot of drama to force me to shift to the granny, and I don't mind a little of the same getting off of it. It happens only in exceptional circumstances: I spend most of my time riding in rolling country, not the mountains, and in rolling country I don't have to use the granny.A wide range double, on the other hand, is shifted often. However, everyone has to find gearing that they're happy with. There are obviously some who can tolerate frequent wide-range crossovers, and -- especially with the new breed of ultra wide range cassettes like the 11-36 -- many whose needs are fully met by them. Personally, I think the standard Riv 110/74 compact triple is a better solution for most riders; but I'm not a STI user and I'm very familiar with this kind of triple and don't find them even slightly confusing. -- 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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Custom Appaloosa Update
Living in Chicago with most of my riding thereabouts and in the upper Midwest makes all this easy. My primary bike is a single speed. My tour bike is a 1x5. Up front is a 46. In back a Suntour Winner with 14-34 cogs. (thanks to Patrick Moore who pointed out a new cottage business in New Hampshire that repairs and preps freewheels) While my plan had been to stick with two bikes, I could not resist the temptation to get what will be my third Retrotec. More of a rough stuff cross type bike. This will also be a 1x. Plan to start with a 44 up front. The rear hub is a King single speed. I can either use a variety of King cogs, or, if gears seem necessary, the Jeff Jones (modified Shimano) 6 speed cassette - 16-36. (currently not offered on his site. Hope Mr. Jones starts making these again as I would like to have a couple more.) On Friday, August 23, 2013 11:57:58 AM UTC-5, William wrote: Personally, I think the standard Riv 110/74 compact triple is a better solution for most riders; but I'm not a STI user and I'm very familiar with this kind of triple and don't find them even slightly confusing. I totally agree with you there. Very useful and very non-confusing. That's why I have that setup, with bar-con shifters on both my touring bike and my tandem. It's fantastic! Furthermore, I'm glad we completely agree about compact doubles. You run your bike like a compact double -PLUS- a granny bail out for extraordinary circumstances that you practically never use. That's precisely how I use my touring bike and my tandem. A close range 46/36 compact double would be fine for you, just like it is with most people, but like a lot of people, you also choose to be prepared for extraordinary circumstances. I have no problem with any of that. Also, it doesn't surprise me much that when you tried a 44/30 and a 40/26 that you found the enormous jump troublesome, particularly on rollers. As you correctly pointed out, people have to find what they like on the terrain they will be riding. I end up using my 44/30 as a 1x9 (or 1x10 on one bike) PLUS a climbing range. If my riding was more on the Pacific coast, where there are a ton of rollers, I would probably swap my 30 tooth ring for a 32 or a 34, because the terrain would dictate far more frequent front shifts, as you correctly pointed out. On Friday, August 23, 2013 5:35:44 AM UTC-7, Steve Palincsar wrote: On 08/22/2013 10:55 PM, William wrote: Regardless of the cassette in question, the big jump is due to the 53.8% difference between the chain rings. My jump is 47% between chainrings. That's much bigger than the 27% jump from your 36 to your 46, but it is smaller than the 50% jump from your 24 to your 36. I don't know if I should go mad or not! There's a difference between going from a rarely used small granny to middle ring, and a routine, do it all day long on every ride, shift from small to large chain ring. It takes a lot of drama to force me to shift to the granny, and I don't mind a little of the same getting off of it. It happens only in exceptional circumstances: I spend most of my time riding in rolling country, not the mountains, and in rolling country I don't have to use the granny.A wide range double, on the other hand, is shifted often. However, everyone has to find gearing that they're happy with. There are obviously some who can tolerate frequent wide-range crossovers, and -- especially with the new breed of ultra wide range cassettes like the 11-36 -- many whose needs are fully met by them. Personally, I think the standard Riv 110/74 compact triple is a better solution for most riders; but I'm not a STI user and I'm very familiar with this kind of triple and don't find them even slightly confusing. -- 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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Custom Appaloosa Update
FWIW, you can make your own cassettes with Miche Shimano compatible outer cogs which go as high as 16 t. I used to run a cobbled 7 speed 16-18-20-23-26-34 or somesuch with the stock 46/36/24 X2D chainset set up for most of my riding in the 46. QBP has the Miches and they aren't very expensive. On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Matthew J matthewj...@gmail.com wrote: Living in Chicago with most of my riding thereabouts and in the upper Midwest makes all this easy. My primary bike is a single speed. My tour bike is a 1x5. Up front is a 46. In back a Suntour Winner with 14-34 cogs. (thanks to Patrick Moore who pointed out a new cottage business in New Hampshire that repairs and preps freewheels) While my plan had been to stick with two bikes, I could not resist the temptation to get what will be my third Retrotec. More of a rough stuff cross type bike. This will also be a 1x. Plan to start with a 44 up front. The rear hub is a King single speed. I can either use a variety of King cogs, or, if gears seem necessary, the Jeff Jones (modified Shimano) 6 speed cassette - 16-36. (currently not offered on his site. Hope Mr. Jones starts making these again as I would like to have a couple more.) On Friday, August 23, 2013 11:57:58 AM UTC-5, William wrote: Personally, I think the standard Riv 110/74 compact triple is a better solution for most riders; but I'm not a STI user and I'm very familiar with this kind of triple and don't find them even slightly confusing. I totally agree with you there. Very useful and very non-confusing. That's why I have that setup, with bar-con shifters on both my touring bike and my tandem. It's fantastic! Furthermore, I'm glad we completely agree about compact doubles. You run your bike like a compact double -PLUS- a granny bail out for extraordinary circumstances that you practically never use. That's precisely how I use my touring bike and my tandem. A close range 46/36 compact double would be fine for you, just like it is with most people, but like a lot of people, you also choose to be prepared for extraordinary circumstances. I have no problem with any of that. Also, it doesn't surprise me much that when you tried a 44/30 and a 40/26 that you found the enormous jump troublesome, particularly on rollers. As you correctly pointed out, people have to find what they like on the terrain they will be riding. I end up using my 44/30 as a 1x9 (or 1x10 on one bike) PLUS a climbing range. If my riding was more on the Pacific coast, where there are a ton of rollers, I would probably swap my 30 tooth ring for a 32 or a 34, because the terrain would dictate far more frequent front shifts, as you correctly pointed out. On Friday, August 23, 2013 5:35:44 AM UTC-7, Steve Palincsar wrote: On 08/22/2013 10:55 PM, William wrote: Regardless of the cassette in question, the big jump is due to the 53.8% difference between the chain rings. My jump is 47% between chainrings. That's much bigger than the 27% jump from your 36 to your 46, but it is smaller than the 50% jump from your 24 to your 36. I don't know if I should go mad or not! There's a difference between going from a rarely used small granny to middle ring, and a routine, do it all day long on every ride, shift from small to large chain ring. It takes a lot of drama to force me to shift to the granny, and I don't mind a little of the same getting off of it. It happens only in exceptional circumstances: I spend most of my time riding in rolling country, not the mountains, and in rolling country I don't have to use the granny.A wide range double, on the other hand, is shifted often. However, everyone has to find gearing that they're happy with. There are obviously some who can tolerate frequent wide-range crossovers, and -- especially with the new breed of ultra wide range cassettes like the 11-36 -- many whose needs are fully met by them. Personally, I think the standard Riv 110/74 compact triple is a better solution for most riders; but I'm not a STI user and I'm very familiar with this kind of triple and don't find them even slightly confusing. -- 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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- *RESUMES THAT GET YOU NOTICED!* Certified Resume Writer http://resumespecialties.com/index.html patrickmo...@resumespecialties.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/patrickmooreresumespec/ Albuquerque, NM -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW Owners Bunch group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving
Re: [RBW] Re: Custom Appaloosa Update
if you're patient for slow delivery, Outside Outfitters has great prices on the Miche components - put my daughter's cassette together there. On Friday, August 23, 2013 6:16:05 PM UTC-5, Patrick Moore wrote: FWIW, you can make your own cassettes with Miche Shimano compatible outer cogs which go as high as 16 t. I used to run a cobbled 7 speed 16-18-20-23-26-34 or somesuch with the stock 46/36/24 X2D chainset set up for most of my riding in the 46. QBP has the Miches and they aren't very expensive. On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Matthew J matth...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: Living in Chicago with most of my riding thereabouts and in the upper Midwest makes all this easy. My primary bike is a single speed. My tour bike is a 1x5. Up front is a 46. In back a Suntour Winner with 14-34 cogs. (thanks to Patrick Moore who pointed out a new cottage business in New Hampshire that repairs and preps freewheels) While my plan had been to stick with two bikes, I could not resist the temptation to get what will be my third Retrotec. More of a rough stuff cross type bike. This will also be a 1x. Plan to start with a 44 up front. The rear hub is a King single speed. I can either use a variety of King cogs, or, if gears seem necessary, the Jeff Jones (modified Shimano) 6 speed cassette - 16-36. (currently not offered on his site. Hope Mr. Jones starts making these again as I would like to have a couple more.) On Friday, August 23, 2013 11:57:58 AM UTC-5, William wrote: Personally, I think the standard Riv 110/74 compact triple is a better solution for most riders; but I'm not a STI user and I'm very familiar with this kind of triple and don't find them even slightly confusing. I totally agree with you there. Very useful and very non-confusing. That's why I have that setup, with bar-con shifters on both my touring bike and my tandem. It's fantastic! Furthermore, I'm glad we completely agree about compact doubles. You run your bike like a compact double -PLUS- a granny bail out for extraordinary circumstances that you practically never use. That's precisely how I use my touring bike and my tandem. A close range 46/36 compact double would be fine for you, just like it is with most people, but like a lot of people, you also choose to be prepared for extraordinary circumstances. I have no problem with any of that. Also, it doesn't surprise me much that when you tried a 44/30 and a 40/26 that you found the enormous jump troublesome, particularly on rollers. As you correctly pointed out, people have to find what they like on the terrain they will be riding. I end up using my 44/30 as a 1x9 (or 1x10 on one bike) PLUS a climbing range. If my riding was more on the Pacific coast, where there are a ton of rollers, I would probably swap my 30 tooth ring for a 32 or a 34, because the terrain would dictate far more frequent front shifts, as you correctly pointed out. On Friday, August 23, 2013 5:35:44 AM UTC-7, Steve Palincsar wrote: On 08/22/2013 10:55 PM, William wrote: Regardless of the cassette in question, the big jump is due to the 53.8% difference between the chain rings. My jump is 47% between chainrings. That's much bigger than the 27% jump from your 36 to your 46, but it is smaller than the 50% jump from your 24 to your 36. I don't know if I should go mad or not! There's a difference between going from a rarely used small granny to middle ring, and a routine, do it all day long on every ride, shift from small to large chain ring. It takes a lot of drama to force me to shift to the granny, and I don't mind a little of the same getting off of it. It happens only in exceptional circumstances: I spend most of my time riding in rolling country, not the mountains, and in rolling country I don't have to use the granny.A wide range double, on the other hand, is shifted often. However, everyone has to find gearing that they're happy with. There are obviously some who can tolerate frequent wide-range crossovers, and -- especially with the new breed of ultra wide range cassettes like the 11-36 -- many whose needs are fully met by them. Personally, I think the standard Riv 110/74 compact triple is a better solution for most riders; but I'm not a STI user and I'm very familiar with this kind of triple and don't find them even slightly confusing. -- 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-bun...@googlegroups.com javascript:. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.comjavascript: . Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- *RESUMES THAT GET YOU NOTICED!*
Re: [RBW] Re: Custom Appaloosa Update
Steve writes: In the terrain I ride most, I'd stay on the big ring all the way down the block until I was forced to shift -- and I would be forced to shift every time it got steep, ... I'll be looking for a gear lower than 38 inches, something in the mid to low 30s. In which case I am surprised you are happy with that 36 tooth middle ring. With that, only your two biggest cogs (w/ 32.4 and 36) meet your criteria. Were I in your shoes, I would drop the middle ring size by 4 teeth thereby moving that 36 gear down a cog to the 24t. But of course I am not you, and the great thing is we all get to ride what we like. On Thursday, August 22, 2013 4:02:18 PM UTC-7, Steve Palincsar wrote: On 08/22/2013 06:41 PM, William wrote: 40 x 26 is plenty. Run the numbers with any normal cassette. Compact double is all most people need. You need a triple carrying or hauling lots of weight, and maybe need it for serious off road riding. But if you lay out the numbers, an intelligently selected compact double gives you everything you need and nothing you don't need. On Thursday, August 22, 2013 3:32:06 PM UTC-7, Michael wrote: Would it take a triple crank? I am just thinking that a 40t x 26t. double crank seems like it needs a middle ring. 40 53.8 % 26 11 98.2 63.8 18.2 % 13 83.1 54.0 15.4 % 15 72.0 46.8 13.3 % 17 63.5 41.3 11.8 % 19 56.8 36.9 10.5 % 21 51.4 33.4 9.5 % 23 47.0 30.5 8.7 % 25 43.2 28.1 12.0 % 28 38.6 25.1 14.3 % 32 33.8 21.9 OK, here's the 40/26 with an 11-32 10 speed cassette. The range is just fine: 22 low, 98 high. Can't be bettered. But what happens inside the range? In the terrain I ride most, I'd stay on the big ring all the way down the block until I was forced to shift -- and I would be forced to shift every time it got steep, because 39 is not enough for me on 9-10% grades. What happens then? Let's say I go from the 40 to the 28T chain ring. Now I'm in a 25 gear, and that's so low I'm going to think I dropped the chain. I'll be looking for a gear lower than 38 inches, something in the mid to low 30s. Whatcha got? Upshift 4 and you get a 37, just about the same as where I was. Upshift 3 in back and I get a 33. I can live with a 33 -- but can I live with having to upshift 3 each time I cross over? I don't think so. That 54% difference in the chain rings means you can't ever just shift the front and keep on truckin', the jump is just too much. Unlike, for example, the 10-tooth difference between my 36 and 46T chain rings. There, if I'm feeling lazy or the terrain is steepening fast, I just shift the front and go from a 52 gear to a 40.5 -- something you can live with -- or I can upshift 1 and get a 46, next in sequence. What about up at the top end? 98 is a nice top end, in fact it's what I have now. But where's that 88.7 I have? Missing. Next gear is 2 teeth down, an 83. That's a hole I'd trip on often. For reference, here's my gearing with a 9 speed 13-30 cassette: 46 3624 95.5 74.8 49.8 88.7 69.4 46.3 82.8 64.8 43.2 73.1 57.2 38.1 65.4 51.2 34.1 59.1 46.3 30.9 51.8 40.5 27.0 46.0 36.0 24.0 41.4 32.4 21.6 -- 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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Custom Appaloosa Update
On 08/22/2013 06:41 PM, William wrote: 40 x 26 is plenty. Run the numbers with any normal cassette. Compact double is all most people need. You need a triple carrying or hauling lots of weight, and maybe need it for serious off road riding. But if you lay out the numbers, an intelligently selected compact double gives you everything you need and nothing you don't need. On Thursday, August 22, 2013 3:32:06 PM UTC-7, Michael wrote: Would it take a triple crank? I am just thinking that a 40t x 26t. double crank seems like it needs a middle ring. 40 53.8 % 26 11 98.2 63.8 18.2 % 13 83.1 54.0 15.4 % 15 72.0 46.8 13.3 % 17 63.5 41.3 11.8 % 19 56.8 36.9 10.5 % 21 51.4 33.4 9.5 % 23 47.0 30.5 8.7 % 25 43.2 28.1 12.0 % 28 38.6 25.1 14.3 % 32 33.8 21.9 OK, here's the 40/26 with an 11-32 10 speed cassette. The range is just fine: 22 low, 98 high. Can't be bettered. But what happens inside the range? In the terrain I ride most, I'd stay on the big ring all the way down the block until I was forced to shift -- and I would be forced to shift every time it got steep, because 39 is not enough for me on 9-10% grades. What happens then? Let's say I go from the 40 to the 28T chain ring. Now I'm in a 25 gear, and that's so low I'm going to think I dropped the chain. I'll be looking for a gear lower than 38 inches, something in the mid to low 30s. Whatcha got? Upshift 4 and you get a 37, just about the same as where I was. Upshift 3 in back and I get a 33. I can live with a 33 -- but can I live with having to upshift 3 each time I cross over? I don't think so. That 54% difference in the chain rings means you can't ever just shift the front and keep on truckin', the jump is just too much. Unlike, for example, the 10-tooth difference between my 36 and 46T chain rings. There, if I'm feeling lazy or the terrain is steepening fast, I just shift the front and go from a 52 gear to a 40.5 -- something you can live with -- or I can upshift 1 and get a 46, next in sequence. What about up at the top end? 98 is a nice top end, in fact it's what I have now. But where's that 88.7 I have? Missing. Next gear is 2 teeth down, an 83. That's a hole I'd trip on often. For reference, here's my gearing with a 9 speed 13-30 cassette: 46 3624 95.574.849.8 88.769.446.3 82.864.843.2 73.157.238.1 65.451.234.1 59.146.330.9 51.840.527.0 46.036.024.0 41.432.421.6 -- 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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Custom Appaloosa Update
Steve buddy 1. I would never categorize you in most people, so you can be totally right about your gearing choices without disproving my assertion that most people can do just fine with a compact double. :-) 2. This is another datapoint proving that you've been unfairly maligned as a Jan Heine disciple. You like cantilever brakes and triples. If you were a true Jan-zealot you'd be on centerpulls and compact doubles. Steve learns from many, but makes up his own mind, people! 3. I agree that a compact double with an ultrawide cassette has big jumps. What I meant by a normal cassette was more like an 11-26 or an 11-28 with a 44/30. If you cannot possibly live without a sub 22 gear then I agree that a triple provides better coverage. On my touring bike I happily run a 3x8 where I need really low gears. In general I agree 300% with your approach: Pick your high gear and your low gear and design it to cover the space with acceptable jumps, keeping an eye peeled for chain line. Double shifts are a lot less troublesome to me than you make it sound when my left side shifter never has to trim. Slam it against the stop for the big ring. Slam it against the stop for the small ring. On Thursday, August 22, 2013 4:02:18 PM UTC-7, Steve Palincsar wrote: On 08/22/2013 06:41 PM, William wrote: 40 x 26 is plenty. Run the numbers with any normal cassette. Compact double is all most people need. You need a triple carrying or hauling lots of weight, and maybe need it for serious off road riding. But if you lay out the numbers, an intelligently selected compact double gives you everything you need and nothing you don't need. On Thursday, August 22, 2013 3:32:06 PM UTC-7, Michael wrote: Would it take a triple crank? I am just thinking that a 40t x 26t. double crank seems like it needs a middle ring. 40 53.8 % 26 11 98.2 63.8 18.2 % 13 83.1 54.0 15.4 % 15 72.0 46.8 13.3 % 17 63.5 41.3 11.8 % 19 56.8 36.9 10.5 % 21 51.4 33.4 9.5 % 23 47.0 30.5 8.7 % 25 43.2 28.1 12.0 % 28 38.6 25.1 14.3 % 32 33.8 21.9 OK, here's the 40/26 with an 11-32 10 speed cassette. The range is just fine: 22 low, 98 high. Can't be bettered. But what happens inside the range? In the terrain I ride most, I'd stay on the big ring all the way down the block until I was forced to shift -- and I would be forced to shift every time it got steep, because 39 is not enough for me on 9-10% grades. What happens then? Let's say I go from the 40 to the 28T chain ring. Now I'm in a 25 gear, and that's so low I'm going to think I dropped the chain. I'll be looking for a gear lower than 38 inches, something in the mid to low 30s. Whatcha got? Upshift 4 and you get a 37, just about the same as where I was. Upshift 3 in back and I get a 33. I can live with a 33 -- but can I live with having to upshift 3 each time I cross over? I don't think so. That 54% difference in the chain rings means you can't ever just shift the front and keep on truckin', the jump is just too much. Unlike, for example, the 10-tooth difference between my 36 and 46T chain rings. There, if I'm feeling lazy or the terrain is steepening fast, I just shift the front and go from a 52 gear to a 40.5 -- something you can live with -- or I can upshift 1 and get a 46, next in sequence. What about up at the top end? 98 is a nice top end, in fact it's what I have now. But where's that 88.7 I have? Missing. Next gear is 2 teeth down, an 83. That's a hole I'd trip on often. For reference, here's my gearing with a 9 speed 13-30 cassette: 46 3624 95.5 74.8 49.8 88.7 69.4 46.3 82.8 64.8 43.2 73.1 57.2 38.1 65.4 51.2 34.1 59.1 46.3 30.9 51.8 40.5 27.0 46.0 36.0 24.0 41.4 32.4 21.6 -- 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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Custom Appaloosa Update
On 08/22/2013 07:25 PM, William wrote: Steve buddy 1. I would never categorize you in most people, so you can be totally right about your gearing choices without disproving my assertion that most people can do just fine with a compact double. :-) I make no comment about most people. I've not done any sort of quantitative comparison and have no data. Every one has their individual gearing needs, and it pays to figure out what you need given your body, your fitness and the terrain in which you ride. 2. This is another datapoint proving that you've been unfairly maligned as a Jan Heine disciple. You like cantilever brakes and triples. If you were a true Jan-zealot you'd be on centerpulls and compact doubles. Steve learns from many, but makes up his own mind, people! I like centerpulls, too. One of my bikes has Mafac Raids, another has brazed on Paul Racers. I also like dual pivot sidepulls, in the right situation. 3. I agree that a compact double with an ultrawide cassette has big jumps. What I meant by a normal cassette was more like an 11-26 or an 11-28 with a 44/30. If you cannot possibly live without a sub 22 gear then I agree that a triple provides better coverage. On my touring bike I happily run a 3x8 where I need really low gears. Regardless of the cassette in question, the big jump is due to the 53.8% difference between the chain rings. That insures that regardless of the cassette, when you do a front shift you will have a big, big difference between gears compared to a more typical 10 or 12 tooth shift.You also have to decide how large spacing between gears is good for you, and where in the range you like it close, vs where you like it wider (Patrick has written extensively on his preferences here, as has Jan; I couldn't live with either Patrick's or Jan's.) In general I agree 300% with your approach: Pick your high gear and your low gear and design it to cover the space with acceptable jumps, keeping an eye peeled for chain line. Double shifts are a lot less troublesome to me than you make it sound when my left side shifter never has to trim. Slam it against the stop for the big ring. Slam it against the stop for the small ring. Trimming isn't a problem for me (as a bar end shifter user). If/when I do it, I hardly even pay it any conscious attention. What you have to go through to do a double shift and stay reasonably in sequence is important to me. I would go mad if every time I needed a gear below 40 inches I'd have to cross over and upshift 3 or 4 at the same time, and I'd go mad if every time I shifted to the small ring it felt like I'd dropped the chain, or if every time I shifted from the small to the large chain ring it dropped my RPMs by half and doubled the pedal effort. -- 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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Custom Appaloosa Update
I have the 40/26 on my Sam with an 11-32? 8 speed in the back. In the 1000 miles I've ridden I have stick shifted into the granny only once, so I haven't put on a front derailer yet. If you are going to be using the 26 more than occasionally, the detailed analysis from Steve seems important. Edwin, living 1 by 8 almost all the time. -- 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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [RBW] Re: Custom Appaloosa Update
Regardless of the cassette in question, the big jump is due to the 53.8% difference between the chain rings. My jump is 47% between chainrings. That's much bigger than the 27% jump from your 36 to your 46, but it is smaller than the 50% jump from your 24 to your 36. I don't know if I should go mad or not! On Thursday, August 22, 2013 7:07:26 PM UTC-7, Steve Palincsar wrote: On 08/22/2013 07:25 PM, William wrote: Steve buddy 1. I would never categorize you in most people, so you can be totally right about your gearing choices without disproving my assertion that most people can do just fine with a compact double. :-) I make no comment about most people. I've not done any sort of quantitative comparison and have no data. Every one has their individual gearing needs, and it pays to figure out what you need given your body, your fitness and the terrain in which you ride. 2. This is another datapoint proving that you've been unfairly maligned as a Jan Heine disciple. You like cantilever brakes and triples. If you were a true Jan-zealot you'd be on centerpulls and compact doubles. Steve learns from many, but makes up his own mind, people! I like centerpulls, too. One of my bikes has Mafac Raids, another has brazed on Paul Racers. I also like dual pivot sidepulls, in the right situation. 3. I agree that a compact double with an ultrawide cassette has big jumps. What I meant by a normal cassette was more like an 11-26 or an 11-28 with a 44/30. If you cannot possibly live without a sub 22 gear then I agree that a triple provides better coverage. On my touring bike I happily run a 3x8 where I need really low gears. Regardless of the cassette in question, the big jump is due to the 53.8% difference between the chain rings. That insures that regardless of the cassette, when you do a front shift you will have a big, big difference between gears compared to a more typical 10 or 12 tooth shift.You also have to decide how large spacing between gears is good for you, and where in the range you like it close, vs where you like it wider (Patrick has written extensively on his preferences here, as has Jan; I couldn't live with either Patrick's or Jan's.) In general I agree 300% with your approach: Pick your high gear and your low gear and design it to cover the space with acceptable jumps, keeping an eye peeled for chain line. Double shifts are a lot less troublesome to me than you make it sound when my left side shifter never has to trim. Slam it against the stop for the big ring. Slam it against the stop for the small ring. Trimming isn't a problem for me (as a bar end shifter user). If/when I do it, I hardly even pay it any conscious attention. What you have to go through to do a double shift and stay reasonably in sequence is important to me. I would go mad if every time I needed a gear below 40 inches I'd have to cross over and upshift 3 or 4 at the same time, and I'd go mad if every time I shifted to the small ring it felt like I'd dropped the chain, or if every time I shifted from the small to the large chain ring it dropped my RPMs by half and doubled the pedal effort. -- 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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
