My Easton carbon forks (pics added)

[Justayellowbadge]

Hmm, looks heavy, that Giant.

[Garlick]

Fortunately, mines not made of carbon so I have an excuse

[neilski]

Garlick said:

Some pics for you, comments welcome

Is that one of those "mountain bike" type chainsets I see there? The type with the extra ring?

[okgo]

Oh my, I hadn't even noticed it was a triple, how embarassing

I'm able to do richmond park both ways without coming off the big ring on my compact now

[Muzzlehatch]

okgo said:

Oh my, I hadn't even noticed it was a triple, how embarassing

I'm able to do richmond park both ways without coming off the big ring on my compact now

Oh my, I didn't know you had a compact. How embarrassing

[okgo]

Muzzlehatch said:

okgo said:

Oh my, I hadn't even noticed it was a triple, how embarassing

I'm able to do richmond park both ways without coming off the big ring on my compact now

Oh my, I didn't know you had a compact. How embarrassing

I didn't know what I was buying back then, I just heard that it would suit all situations.

What should I have?

Is it easy converting a compact to a double...?

[neilski]

okgo said:

Muzzlehatch said:

okgo said:

Oh my, I hadn't even noticed it was a triple, how embarassing

I'm able to do richmond park both ways without coming off the big ring on my compact now

Oh my, I didn't know you had a compact. How embarrassing

I didn't know what I was buying back then, I just heard that it would suit all situations.

What should I have?

Is it easy converting a compact to a double...?

42/53 up front and 12-21 at the rear will suit all UK situations where we don't have any hills to speak of.

If you're planning on going over to the continent to ride up some proper mountains, something like 39/53 up front and 12-25 at the back might be a better option.

Yes it should be easy, just swap the chainsets and you may need to move the front mech up slightly but that's about it.

[okgo]

This is what I have now :

Chainset:
Shimano 105 50-34 Teeth
Cassette:
Shimano 105 12-25 Teeth

So by swapping the front rings I can get a lot more range?

[Garlick]

I'm having a 'quad' made especially. The hills in Putney are quite something.

[okgo]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I guess, but I don't use the small ring at all as its too easy, I could put a bigger one on there and make use of it, or just continue to use the 50 ring all the time...

[neilski]

okgo said:

This is what I have now :

Chainset:
Shimano 105 50-34 Teeth
Cassette:
Shimano 105 12-25 Teeth

So by swapping the front rings I can get a lot more range?

You'd gain at the top end but lose at the lower end and overall you'd lose a bit of range.

You'd be forced to work that bit harder on the hills though and in theory would end up going faster because you're not sitting there at 1000rpm for 1mph of forward travel like you'd have in 34x25. Oh wait, I'm thinking of a triple....

[Muzzlehatch]

okgo said:

Muzzlehatch said:

okgo said:

Oh my, I hadn't even noticed it was a triple, how embarassing

I'm able to do richmond park both ways without coming off the big ring on my compact now

Oh my, I didn't know you had a compact. How embarrassing

I didn't know what I was buying back then, I just heard that it would suit all situations.

What should I have?

Is it easy converting a compact to a double...?

I was just teasing, each chainset has its relevant applications. But if you're not using the small ring, then a double might actually be more appropriate. I run a 38x53 double with 12/25 cassette, which is a perfect compromise for me covering time trials, road races and climbing up Alps.

Yes, it's an easy swap - just make sure you also add a couple of links to make the chain long enough.

[okgo]

Would it be madness to just get rid of the whole front mech and what not and just have one ring? Would save weight etc?

[Muzzlehatch]

okgo said:

Would it be madness to just get rid of the whole front mech and what not and just have one ring? Would save weight etc?

Yes it would be madness, as you won't have a wide enough spread of gears for a typical rolling ride. Sometimes single-event hillclimbers do this to save weight, but it's not really suitable for general use.

[okgo]

Well it looks like the cheapest option for me is to swap my 34t for a 39 and leave the 50 as it is.

[neilski]

It's up to you but I personally wouldn't want to only have a 50-tooth ring and nothing else as it's neither high enough or low enough to cope once you leave the millpond that is Richmond Park it starts to get hilly.

I don't think changing your gearing is as simple as just fitting new rings. I'm happy to be corrected but I'm pretty sure compact chainsets are exactly that - compact. They have a smaller bolt circle diameter for the obscure ring sizes they have and if you want to go to a 39/53 you'll need to buy a proper man's complete new chainset. Looking at my road bike at the moment, the 39 tooth ring just clears the bolts and there's no way anything smaller would fit.

[okgo]

Yeh, I know what you mean.

Think I'll leave it as is for now, I seem to be able to cope with most of Surrey on it, Box Hill etc, and I don't spin out on the flat in top gear so I guess its ok.

[okgo]

What day you thinking chap?

[jez-m]

Garlick said:

jez-m said:

Garlick - you mentioned you have an iPhone holder. Any more details? I've been looking for one but with not much success (OK, I've not been looking that hard...). Cheers.

Hi jez, have a look at this thread. It has some links and I posted a picture of mine fitted.

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Thanks for that chap, much appreciated.

[HundredthIdiot]

Muzzlehatch said:

The EC90SL is a very nice fork. Light, stiff and very good at absorbing road buzz. I've had the previous model (pre-2008 version), and I now have the current version, which is definitely a step up.

The lighter SLX is renowned to be rather floppy in comparison.

I have the latest SLX fork, beefed up over previous versions. It it not floppy. However, it is also 350g uncut (290g claimed on CRC, 325g on Easton site). 60mm of cut steerer weighs 16g. Very pretty though.

CRC obviously "forgot" to update the claimed weight.

I would be interested to know what the SL actually weighs.

Edited by HundredthIdiot on Monday 16th August 09:19