Cyclists - do you really need so many gears?

[Somewhatfoolish]

As anyone who has looked at my other cycling thread will know, I know nuffing about bikes. I see that many have zillions of gears. Is this a marketing gimmick or do you really find it useful? And if you do find it useful, do you keep on moving the, er, "big and little gear" (i.e. one at pedal and one at read wheel) to hunt for your ideal gear, or are you more methodical, choosing a big gear, and then using the little gear to tweak things.

Am I so off the mark I am talking crap?

[Doofus]

Nobody uses the full range, but depending upon use, the highest and lowest can be necessary. Once those are established, the others are used to fill in, to ensure there are no big gaps between ratios.

[Gizmo!]

A car can vary its power output easily by revving harder.

Humans have a narrow torque band and therefore need a greater range of gears with closer spacing to smooth the power output.

[anonymous-user]

its about maintaining a sensible cadence (rpm). for most people, this is about 75-80 rpm and is the most efficient way of making progress. having 20/30 gears means that you can adjust the ratio to the terrain frequently and maintain that cadence.

of course when it comes to big hills its just a case of hauling your sorry ass up there whichever way you can....

[Lord Pikey]

After years of having 21 (3x7) and then 27 (3x9) my latest bike is a 2x10. It used to be a selling point to give you more and more ratios so you could easily find one you were comfortable on.. Now with modern tech enabling chains to be narrower they had so many duplicated ratios that 2x10 gave a wider range and cut down on the duplicates.

charts below show the ratio's achieved with each setup

Edited by Lord on Thursday 19th April 08:39

[Zaxxon]

swerni said:

Can we have an IQ (see troll) test before people can post in this forum?

I can see it getting flooded with retarded questions.

Maybe op is best left posting in the lounge.

Quite a fair question from a cycling novice. There have been some interesting replies from people who took time to advise him.

Your reply however.....

[Zaxxon]

Just read it.
Blimey, i see what you mean.
He didn't take your advice then, mopeds only have one gear.

[TonyHetherington]

I can confirm that, if the hill is steep enough and my legs are dead enough, I don't have enough gears

[Mr E]

TonyHetherington said:

I can confirm that, if the hill is steep enough and my legs are dead enough, I don't have enough gears

Aaah. The horrible feeling of thumbing the button for an easier gear and there not being one....

[TonyHetherington]

That's the one. "WHAT? ? There's no more gears?!! Uh oh..."

[anonymous-user]

Lord said:

After years of having 21 (3x7) and then 27 (3x9) my latest bike is a 2x10. It used to be a selling point to give you more and more ratios so you could easily find one you were comfortable on.. Now with modern tech enabling chains to be narrower they had so many duplicated ratios that 2x10 gave a wider range and cut down on the duplicates.

charts below show the ratio's achieved with each setup

Edited by Lord on Thursday 19th April 08:39

OK, what am i missing??


1.50 to 0.29 (2x10) isn't "wider" than 1.55 to 0.25 (3x9) is it???

And i have a 3x10 and i use all of them! ;-)

[ewenm]

Max_Torque said:

Lord said:

After years of having 21 (3x7) and then 27 (3x9) my latest bike is a 2x10. It used to be a selling point to give you more and more ratios so you could easily find one you were comfortable on.. Now with modern tech enabling chains to be narrower they had so many duplicated ratios that 2x10 gave a wider range and cut down on the duplicates.

charts below show the ratio's achieved with each setup

Edited by Lord on Thursday 19th April 08:39

OK, what am i missing??


1.50 to 0.29 (2x10) isn't "wider" than 1.55 to 0.25 (3x9) is it???

And i have a 3x10 and i use all of them! ;-)

You're missing that the full range is almost the same, but there are fewer overlaps on the 2x10 so no need for a third chainring at all. Of course gears in the small-small or big-big combinations should really be greyed out if you have any mechanical sympathy

[Pablo16v]

Mr E said:

TonyHetherington said:

I can confirm that, if the hill is steep enough and my legs are dead enough, I don't have enough gears

Aaah. The horrible feeling of thumbing the button for an easier gear and there not being one....

[shouldbworking]

I'm not sure if thats the worst or the remount following rest / push / unconciousness. Hop on bike, pedal down and straight off again as not enough momentum gained through the low gear. Repeat and pedal like mad just to get it into a sensible gear again, then discover the initial rapid spin has destroyed your legs again. Get back off for another push / rest .. repeat.

[Torquey]

Lord said:

After years of having 21 (3x7) and then 27 (3x9) my latest bike is a 2x10. It used to be a selling point to give you more and more ratios so you could easily find one you were comfortable on.. Now with modern tech enabling chains to be narrower they had so many duplicated ratios that 2x10 gave a wider range and cut down on the duplicates.

charts below show the ratio's achieved with each setup

Edited by Lord on Thursday 19th April 08:39

Thats and interesting chart. My personal opionion is bikes could do with a lower ratio that 0.25 (for high speed hills) and there is very little use for a ratio more than 1.

[ewenm]

Torquey said:

Thats and interesting chart. My personal opionion is bikes could do with a lower ratio that 0.25 (for high speed hills) and there is very little use for a ratio more than 1.

On a road bike or a mountain bike?

[Roman]

Lord said:

After years of having 21 (3x7) and then 27 (3x9) my latest bike is a 2x10. It used to be a selling point to give you more and more ratios so you could easily find one you were comfortable on.. Now with modern tech enabling chains to be narrower they had so many duplicated ratios that 2x10 gave a wider range and cut down on the duplicates.

charts below show the ratio's achieved with each setup

Edited by Lord on Thursday 19th April 08:39

That 2x10 option is pretty much the same range as the common triple set up of 42/32/22 x 11-32.

I tend to use an 11-36 cassette with either a single 42t chainring for a 700c hybrid or single 34t or 36t for a 26" mtb - plenty of range for the vast majority of riding, lighter, cheaper, simpler and 9 or 10 well spaced ratios with no overlaps.

[Torquey]

ewenm said:

Torquey said:

Thats and interesting chart. My personal opionion is bikes could do with a lower ratio that 0.25 (for high speed hills) and there is very little use for a ratio more than 1.

On a road bike or a mountain bike?

Mountain bike.

[ewenm]

Torquey said:

ewenm said:

Torquey said:

Thats and interesting chart. My personal opionion is bikes could do with a lower ratio that 0.25 (for high speed hills) and there is very little use for a ratio more than 1.

On a road bike or a mountain bike?

Mountain bike.

Interesting. I guess it depends on the type of riding you do. I use the granny gears quite often on steep, slippery, rocky/rooty climbs.

[MiseryStreak]

ewenm said:

You're missing that the full range is almost the same, but there are fewer overlaps on the 2x10 so no need for a third chainring at all. Of course gears in the small-small or big-big combinations should really be greyed out if you have any mechanical sympathy

I love the fact that you worked out the ratios and provided a chart, very useful, but I can't agree with you either. You say nearly the same, but it's not is it? You're losing out at the top end (0.29 instead of 0.25 is a 14% reduction in top speed) and the important end in my mind for doing a bit of fast downhill. I would happily have a less efficient set up if it meant a better range. I've got 27 gears, don't use more than maybe 6 or 7 of them, very rarely use the granny ring (so don't care about 1.5 instead of 1.55) but I run out of gears at the top all the time. Want to get an afterburner crank for a fast, hybrid bike.

2x10 would be great for me if it produced a ratio of nearer 0.20 -0.25 at the top. I understand that this would mean jumping from 24 to 44 teeth on the chainring would probably not work.

I agree that the overlaps are reduced and the loss of an inner chainring is great for having a bit more space around the pedals.