Crankset 53/39 vs 52/36

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
Post Reply
pesto13
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:55 am

by pesto13

Hi there,

I ride mostly in flat areas and bought a Sram red BB30 52/36 crankset instead of a 53/39. I am looking for suggestions if I should get the 53/39 or if the difference between the cranks would be minimal as I prefer to avoid the hassle of selling the 52/36 to get the 53/39.


Thanks in advanced to everyone.

glepore
Posts: 1100
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 4:42 pm
Location: Pa USA

by glepore

You will be fine. My only issue with the mid was the near duplicate ratios which I solved with a 34 ring. On the flats you will be ok.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Cysco Ti custom Campy SR mechanical (6.9);Cannondale SS Evo Di2 7970 (5.79); Willier Cento Uno Air Di2 9070 (7.0); C40 Mk2 DA 7800 ; Anvil Custom steel Etap;1996 Colnago Technos Record

kulivontot
Posts: 1170
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 7:28 pm

by kulivontot

You'll be just fine

victorduraace
Posts: 247
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 10:10 pm

by victorduraace

Get 11 cog to have bit harder top gear. I would not like 52/13, too spinny to my liking

Briscoelab
Posts: 1730
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 6:01 pm

by Briscoelab

I think there is a lot to be said for a 50/36 combo actually. Especially if you run an 11T cassette.

Kurets
Posts: 140
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 9:55 pm

by Kurets

It depends on how you ride. Essentially, a 52 or 53 big ring makes no difference in gear ratios. But, there is some difference in stiffness if your crankset is a regular five arm type.
What does make a difference is the usefullness of the small ring. A 36 is almost useless if you live in a flat area. At least if your level of fitness is decent.
Therefore I'd suggest either a full compact or a race chainset for the flats. A full compact will give you about half a gear lower ratios on the big ring, which allows you to stay in the 50. Or a race chainset where riding the 39 is ok for slow days without constantly running out of gears like you'd do on a 36 or 34.
I also live in a vertically challenged area, and plan on riding a 52/38 combo this year.

AZR3
Posts: 673
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 9:00 pm
Location: Az USA

by AZR3

I'm running all three (53/39 52/36 and 50/34) and all have their place. The standard is on my TT bike, the mid compact is on my 2011 Cervelo S3 with deep wheels and is my go to bike with an 11-26, the compact is on my 2015 Cannondale SS Evo lightweight climbing rig with and 11-28.

I really like the 52/36, pretty much all you'd need for the flats with an 11 or 12 and the 36 comes in handy more so than a 39 or 38 for climbing without needing to run a large cassette that typically comes with big jumps in gearing.

fromtrektocolnago
Posts: 1001
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 10:15 pm

by fromtrektocolnago

if my terrain was mostly flat and/or had only mild climbs 53-39 is a slam dunk. makes the lower gears more usable. also its subtle but more teeth up front makes for a smoother ride.
Colnago C-59 (Dura Ace)
Firefly(Ultegra)
Trek 5200(ultegra)

RyanH
Moderator
Posts: 1953
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 4:01 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

by RyanH

It depends on your type of riding, fitness and preference for cadence. I live in a very hilly area and I run a 52/36 even though I'm just fine with 53/39 and 11-25. If I lived in a flat area I'd probably run a 52 1x but then again I'm also fine cruising around at 70 rpm. 52x11 is good for nearly every realistic need to be spinning. We have one sprint where we can hit 44 to 46 mph and 52x11 handles that just fine. On the other end, 36 feels more similar to 39 and can handle most cruising speeds.

A few of the two stronger Cat 1/2 guys I know use 50/34 with a 11-32 in the back. Why? Cause they can big ring almost everything with that combo. Personally, I dislike the feel of a 34,it doesn't feel as smooth and is totally useless on flats.
Strava
Current Stable. The Snob Machine
The Ex's. LS Siena: 6.21kg | Parlee Z5 SLi: 5.9kg | LS Xicon: 5.76kg | C59: 5.7kg | Cervelo R5ca: 5.09kg | Fuji Altamira SE - 6.2kg | Scott Foil - 6.2kg | Evo - 5.18kg | LS Classic - 6.7kg | The Crumpton - 5.9kg

fromtrektocolnago
Posts: 1001
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 10:15 pm

by fromtrektocolnago

i run a 53-39 / 12-25 set-up on my Trek. I can do any local climb in the area with it, but i can't do the 20% grades with it. i'm a bit slower on it, but believe it makes me work harder and stay stronger. It's a terrible option on the longer European style climbs.
Colnago C-59 (Dura Ace)
Firefly(Ultegra)
Trek 5200(ultegra)

em3
Posts: 888
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 2:57 pm
Location: NYC

by em3

This should answer ur questions: http://www.bikecalc.com/gear_ratios
______________

steelbikerider
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 11:31 pm

by steelbikerider

I've been running 52/39 or 52/38 for the last few years and switched to a 36 for the steep stuff.

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 6011
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

I'm fortunate enough to have several bikes and lots of options when it comes to gearing. For most stuff I always prefer standard 39/53 cranks and an 11/27 or 12/27 cassette. I like the spacing and the 39 to 53 jump up and down is nice and manageable... shift the front and shift the back two cogs simultaneously usually gets me to where I want to be. If I'm going to be a doing a lot of climbing or going on a multi day trip somewhere I'll take the 36/52 chainrings and an 11/29 cassette. As for the 34/50 crankset, I just don't like it and never have. Always seemed like I was jumping back and forth between small and big rings way more frequently than with either the 36/52 or the 39/53. And I'm quite convinced that chain catchers became more of a necessity than a "nice to have" accessory as a result of the far more frequent chaindrops that potentially occur with a compact 34/50 crank than the others. I also don't like the idea of mixing chainrings that are not meant to go together since the timing of the shift ramps is not spot on. The whole chain ring ramps and tooth profiles and timing has gotten very sophisticated over the years, and makes having matching chainrings (timing wise) quite important imo.

But to the OP's original question, I would stick with the 36/52 that you just purchased, unless you could just simply exchange it for the 39/53. Splitting hairs at that point. The 36 tooth chainring will get you one lower climbing gear than the 39 all else equal, and the loss of one tooth in the big ring at the top end you probably won't notice in the least.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

mike
Resident Pro
Posts: 2453
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 9:42 pm

by mike

go for 52/38, you won't be disappointed. a 36 is too easy to spin, unless you are in the mtns.

pesto13
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:55 am

by pesto13

After viewing all the post from everyone I am going to keep my 52/36 with a cassette 11-23t and I should be fine for flats. for a future bike build I will get for sure a 53/39 crank.

I want to thank again everyone in this post for the useful inputs.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post