crank double or compact

Back by popular demand, the general all-things Road forum!

Moderator: robbosmans

User avatar
luckypuncheur
Posts: 254
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 7:26 pm
Location: Germany

by luckypuncheur

kgt wrote:Nope, I just like to ride more efficiently at a lower cadence.


As already mentioned by someone else in this thread: 50-11 is a bigger gear than 53-12. It's big enough to win WT sprints. But not big enough for you?

In my opinion there's no reason for a non-pro to even look at 53-39. 52-36 and even 50-34, given the correct cassette choice, just work better for us mortals. Gear ratio calculator doesn't lie. ;)
Get a bicycle. You will certainly not regret it, if you live.

Briscoelab
Posts: 1513
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 6:01 pm

by Briscoelab

50x11 isn't enough? That's laughable.

You go from one extreme of saying "average" cyclists don't need a compact... but they do need a 53 or 52x11?

a 50x11 at even 100rpm (a middle of the road cadence) is about 37mph. How often are you riding that fast when not descending?

52x11 at 100rpm gets you up to... wait for it... 38mph.

WOW... that's certainly a game changer.

You should stop talking, because it's clear to everyone that you don't have a leg to stand on for this discussion.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



User avatar
Rick
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 4:30 pm

by Rick

Really silly to argue about this point.
Go out and ride. If you can spin your lowest gear up all the climbs in your area, you don't need any lower.
If you can't, you need to go lower.

But I agree that 50-11 seems like it ought to be big enough for anyone except world class sprinters or people who do large-pack road races with heavy tailwinds. :beerchug:

That being said, there were a couple times when I have been on the edge of "spinning out" a 50-11 when in a pack that was really hammering. But you have to select your gears based on the PROBABILITY of them being useful. I would always prefer finer steps in the mid-range and of course some really low gears for climbing the Utah mountains.

User avatar
kgt
Posts: 8749
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece

by kgt

Relax Briscoelab...
Just ride what you like and let other people ride what they like. Where I ride and according to my riding style a standard is better. I 've tried both standard and compact for many years.
Although this is not the reason I don't like compacts 50-11 is not enough in some cases, even rarely, as Rick admitted.
My 20 years experience tells me a road cyclist can get used to ride both cranksets. It is just a matter of personal preference. One will not be faster on a standard neither climb better on a compact. It depends. There are many articles online to read and understand what is the case with ratios, speed, cadence, efficiency etc. My advice to a relatively fit cyclist is to not get used to a compact crankset. Just my advice, just my opinion, just my experience... Anyway the standard crankset still exist for a reason. It is not a pro-riders-only product.

Post Reply