Why do so many people not change gear?

[mchammer89]

Slightly OT, but 50x15 won't be doing your knees any good, especially over longer distances.

[anonymous-user]

mchammer89 said:

Slightly OT, but 50x15 won't be doing your knees any good, especially over longer distances.

You'd think so, wouldn't you (and you're not the first person to tell me that)? But I've commuting on that, and 53x16 before it for about 15 years. And 53x15 before that.

When I ride longer rides, I move all over the cassette. But for (relatively) short stuff - 30 mins - even with a lot of stop starts, it has been ok. The track guys must be pushing a lot more - closer to 100 gear inches I reckon, and a lot more explosive off the line. I think your knees take the pain if your quads are overloaded or tire. Or your fit on the bike isn't quite right. Guess I'm lucky there. Genetics plus good feel for fit.

Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 8th July 21:07

[anonymous-user]

Tbh, i prefer laughing at people who don't really seem to understand that they can "changedown" if the road goes uphill a bit. These same people are almost certainyl riding a Mountain bike with at least 20 gears, but they just sit in one gear, and you see them start to struggle and slow right down, wobbling all over the road as they get jelly legs!! ;-)

[Markp13]

Great thread.

I've just noticed from this that my front cogs are 50/34.

I never use the front small ring and I often need more cogs for a better top speed.

To sort this out do I just need to change the front cogs?

I have a caad9 with shimano 105 set up?

And what would you recommend?

[Mr E]

Bloody roadies.

I run up an down the rear cassette like a f1 driver.

I've even been known to make engine noises while I'm doing it...

[okgo]

I have 20 sets of on my route, and for the ones where it matters to pull away well otherwise you'll get abused I drop to small ring. Otherwise just keep it in the big one.

I don't really try that hard on the commute though, just a nice pace, full gas and nice pace can at the maximum be ten mins different, not really worth the effort.

[anonymous-user]

Markp13 said:

Great thread.

I've just noticed from this that my front cogs are 50/34.

I never use the front small ring and I often need more cogs for a better top speed.

To sort this out do I just need to change the front cogs?

I have a caad9 with shimano 105 set up?

And what would you recommend?

First question is what sprockets do you have on the back. You may be able to see a number stamped on the smallest, otherwise it is counting time.

If you are spinning out (which means your legs are able to turn the pedals faster than you can react so as to transmit power effectively on each pedal stroke) on the flat at 50x your smallest sprocket (which let's say is 12 or 13, then I seriously recommend that you get yourself to the nearest velodrome or bike club and ask about racing.

As for adjusting the bike, 11 is the smallest sprocket you'll get on the rear. Unless you already have that, that will have to go on as part of a new cassette, and most likely a new chain (the chain and cassette bed in together).

At the front, you can change your 50/34 to a 53/39. That requires a new crankset (google). You will have to adjust your front derailleur or get a bike shop to do the whole thing.

Take a look on sheldonbrown at gear inches. 50x15 is very similar to 53x16 (for example). IIRC 50x11 is a higher gear than 53x12.

If you're really spinning out on the flat in 50x11 or 50x12, you probably aren't going to get enough headroom in putting a 53 on the front. Maybe you should look for a 56/42, which is a bit more specialised as it is generally the preserve of powerful time triallers.

Good luck, and try not to knock any of us mortals off with your wake vortex!

[Rocksteadyeddie]

They're all riding fixies?

Seriously though I don't change gear a huge amount on the commute - maybe just using 3 gears in total.

However, while racing I am changing all the time to maintain optimum cadence whilst going out the back.

[okgo]

Whilst going out the back?

[Markp13]

Haha, very good, I'm laughing.

I've just nipped into the garage and the biggest cog on the back is a 22 and the smallest a 12.

There are a few straights where I cycle just now that I am flat out on the highest gear (wind permitting, without cycling looking like I've stole the bike) and more than a few downhills where a higher gear would be handy.

I'm never on the small cog on the front although have been close a couple of times and certainly nowhere near the lowest gear so I hoped there was maybe a compromise somewhere.

It may be the case I just live with it?

Greg66 said:

First question is what sprockets do you have on the back. You may be able to see a number stamped on the smallest, otherwise it is counting time.

If you are spinning out (which means your legs are able to turn the pedals faster than you can react so as to transmit power effectively on each pedal stroke) on the flat at 50x your smallest sprocket (which let's say is 12 or 13, then I seriously recommend that you get yourself to the nearest velodrome or bike club and ask about racing.

As for adjusting the bike, 11 is the smallest sprocket you'll get on the rear. Unless you already have that, that will have to go on as part of a new cassette, and most likely a new chain (the chain and cassette bed in together).

At the front, you can change your 50/34 to a 53/39. That requires a new crankset (google). You will have to adjust your front derailleur or get a bike shop to do the whole thing.

Take a look on sheldonbrown at gear inches. 50x15 is very similar to 53x16 (for example). IIRC 50x11 is a higher gear than 53x12.

If you're really spinning out on the flat in 50x11 or 50x12, you probably aren't going to get enough headroom in putting a 53 on the front. Maybe you should look for a 56/42, which is a bit more specialised as it is generally the preserve of powerful time triallers.

Good luck, and try not to knock any of us mortals off with your wake vortex!

[Rocksteadyeddie]

okgo said:

Whilst going out the back?

Getting dropped.

[okgo]

[anonymous-user]

Markp13 said:

I've just nipped into the garage and the biggest cog on the back is a 22 and the smallest a 12.

There are a few straights where I cycle just now that I am flat out on the highest gear (wind permitting, without cycling looking like I've stole the bike) and more than a few downhills where a higher gear would be handy.

I'm never on the small cog on the front although have been close a couple of times and certainly nowhere near the lowest gear so I hoped there was maybe a compromise somewhere.

It may be the case I just live with it?

You'll always spin out whilst descending a hill. So don't worry about that too much. If you're spinning out in 50x12 on the flat, then maybe you should consider moving to a 53/39 front set up, and possibly a 11/21 rear cassette.

If you never use the small ring on the front, even to go uphill, then I really do suggest you look at joining a club and getting into some bike racing.

[Rocksteadyeddie]

Greg66 said:

Markp13 said:

I've just nipped into the garage and the biggest cog on the back is a 22 and the smallest a 12.

There are a few straights where I cycle just now that I am flat out on the highest gear (wind permitting, without cycling looking like I've stole the bike) and more than a few downhills where a higher gear would be handy.

I'm never on the small cog on the front although have been close a couple of times and certainly nowhere near the lowest gear so I hoped there was maybe a compromise somewhere.

It may be the case I just live with it?

You'll always spin out whilst descending a hill. So don't worry about that too much. If you're spinning out in 50x12 on the flat, then maybe you should consider moving to a 53/39 front set up, and possibly a 11/21 rear cassette.

If you never use the small ring on the front, even to go uphill, then I really do suggest you look at joining a club and getting into some bike racing.

Have a look at your cadence - you should be aiming for 90/100rpm. I will often ride entire rides in the little ring (34 on my training bike) and still average over 20mph.

[Markp13]

Do I need a cycle computer for that?

Rocksteadyeddie said:

Have a look at your cadence - you should be aiming for 90/100rpm. I will often ride entire rides in the little ring (34 on my training bike) and still average over 20mph.

[Rocksteadyeddie]

Rocksteadyeddie said:

Markp13 said:

Have a look at your cadence - you should be aiming for 90/100rpm. I will often ride entire rides in the little ring (34 on my training bike) and still average over 20mph.

Do I need a cycle computer for that?

You should be able to get a rough idea by counting. Obviously it's a lot easier with a computer with cadence function though.

[NLB]

All very arcane, this 15-50 stuff... and not something I have to worry about now, as I have one of those nifty Shimano Nexus 8-speed hub gears on my bike (with a belt drive too... mmmm), and I do use every one of them routinely - my bit of north London is far from pancake flat, I am not very fit, not at all powerfully built, and am very idle indeed.

I only fairly recently returned to bicycling after a long lay off, and partly I like the technology involved in my bike, but also, in my old more serious riding days (I used to commute every day from Brentford to Shoreditch on a bike in the late '70s/early 80s - about 12.5 miles each way across central London), I came to hate chain rings and Derailleur changers - always slightly out of adjustment, dirty, greasy, yuck. The hub gear can be shifted when stationary, so even if one forgets/can't be bothered to change before stopping, it is easy to drop into first for a quick getaway (well, not very quick in my case...).

[shalmaneser]

cos i ride a singlespeed.

[mchammer89]

All you guys talking about spinning out, make sure you're actually spinning out before making any changes. Quite a few people think 100rpm is a very fast cadence, best to increase your cadence to the point where you're perfectly happy at higher cadences first of all.

[Kermit power]

I tried experimenting with higher cadence on the way home this evening. Not accurate, as I've not got a cadence computer yet, but from counting off, I was able to maintain around 90-100rpm for pretty much the whole way home, apart from the hill right near the end which slowed me down, and downhill into Balham, where I'd have frankly been insane to do the sort of speed which would've resulted.

Very interesting! I was definitely running at a far higher heart rate than usual, and breathing a lot harder, but my legs felt like they were putting in less effort. I only used the big ring on the front twice on downhill stretches, as opposed to previously using it all the time on the flat and most light inclines, but still shaved 6 minutes of my previous fastest time home.

I think I shall be doing rather more of this!