Gearing for touring

steck wrote:
snip

My question, differently phrased: Will 22.2 gear-inches be noticeably
easier than 23.6? Will 20.6
gear-inches be so absurdly low as to be useless?

-- Paul

20.6" gearing at a moderate 80 rpm will give you 4.9 mph (7.9 kph), a
very fast walk or very slow run. Balancing is still easy at this speed.
It's a low gear, but not useless for a loaded bike on steep hills.

Dave Lehnen

steck wrote:

The current setup is 48/38/28 in front.

I might want to swap out the whole set for, say, 46/36/26. *I almost
never use the
highest gears.

Once you've fitted a cassette with a 34t big end, I recommend changing
out only the inner ring for a 24t ring.

That will probably exceed the wrap capacity of your rear derailleur,
the vertical range of your front derailleur, or both. But if you have
the good sense to stay out of the small/small combinations, you'll be
fine.

Shimano now makes a 12-36 9-speed cassette, which would give you a
sightly more useful gear at both ends of the range.

Chalo

Mark J. wrote:
steck wrote:
I have a 2007 Bianchi Volpe. When touring, I pull a Burley Nomad
trailer. Recently, I used this
setup to do a ride of the east coast of Tasmania:
http://picasaweb.google.com/stecksoft/Tasmania2010.

It was a bit tough getting up some of those Tasmanian hills. I
confess to walking some of them.
The Volpe's smallest ring is 28T, and the cassette is 11-32.

In anticipation of my next tour, I've ordered a new 11-34 cassette.
Question: is it worthwhile to
put in a smaller ring, say 26T?

With the current setup, the small ring and the big cog gives me 23.6
gear-inches. The 34 cog would
take that down to 22.2. A 26T ring would make that 20.6.

My question, differently phrased: Will 22.2 gear-inches be noticeably
easier than 23.6? Will 20.6
gear-inches be so absurdly low as to be useless?

If you've got the balance to stay upright while spinning the 20.6, it's
not too low. I'd guess most experienced touring cyclists would. How
steady do you feel with the 23.6?

I don't see that 20.6 gear inches is a problem. I operate my Rohloff
hub-geared bike on a 38x16 setup which gives
19.5 22.1 25.2 28.6 32.5 36.9 42.0 47.7 54.1 61.6 69.9 79.4 90.4 102.6
Gear inches and
5.6 6.3 7.2 8.2 9.3 10.6 12.1 13.7 15.6 17.7 20.1 22.8 26.0 29.5 kph
at 60rpm (622x60mm tyres)
But 60rpm is for convenience in calculating. 40rpm is more my good
cadence on the flat, and on the hill in front of my house I slow down
so much that it is a common occurrence for those on foot to overtake
me. I don't find any problem with balance even at a low cadence in the
19.5 inch gear, and hauling half a dozen bottles of wine and a few of
aperitifs and spirits doesn't make any difference with such low
gearing. (It's an illusion of course, but careful choice of my Rohloff
gearing makes me feel powerful!) The OP will eat those Tassie hills.
And around 90 gear inches is also good once you're going on the flat.
However, he might find, as I do, that the bike runs out of pedal
irritatingly soon in top gear (mine is only 103 inches or 29.5kph) on
the downhills when one might want to help gravity a little for the
pure joy of speeding.

Andre Jute
You can ride only one bike at a time

"steck" wrote in message
...
I have a 2007 Bianchi Volpe. When touring, I pull a Burley Nomad
trailer. Recently, I used this
setup to do a ride of the east coast of Tasmania:
http://picasaweb.google.com/stecksoft/Tasmania2010.

It was a bit tough getting up some of those Tasmanian hills. I
confess to walking some of them.
The Volpe's smallest ring is 28T, and the cassette is 11-32.

In anticipation of my next tour, I've ordered a new 11-34 cassette.
Question: is it worthwhile to
put in a smaller ring, say 26T?

With the current setup, the small ring and the big cog gives me 23.6
gear-inches. The 34 cog would
take that down to 22.2. A 26T ring would make that 20.6.

My question, differently phrased: Will 22.2 gear-inches be noticeably
easier than 23.6? Will 20.6
gear-inches be so absurdly low as to be useless?

-- Paul

My touring bike has a low gear of 20.8". It is useful to me. Sometimes I
ride it in the mountains loaded with grear. Lower gearing than this would
not be useful to me. When it is so steep or the load is so big or both that
a 20.8" gear is not low enough, I am moving so slowly it is difficult to
keep balanced.

BobT

On 27 Apr, 19:49, "BobT"
wrote:
"steck" wrote in message

...



I have a 2007 Bianchi Volpe. *When touring, I pull a Burley Nomad
trailer. *Recently, I used this
setup to do a ride of the east coast of Tasmania:
http://picasaweb.google.com/stecksoft/Tasmania2010.

It was a bit tough getting up some of those Tasmanian hills. *I
confess to walking some of them.
The Volpe's smallest ring is 28T, and the cassette is 11-32.

In anticipation of my next tour, I've ordered a new 11-34 cassette.
Question: is it worthwhile to
put in a smaller ring, say 26T?

With the current setup, the small ring and the big cog gives me 23.6
gear-inches. *The 34 cog would
take that down to 22.2. *A 26T ring would make that 20.6.

My question, differently phrased: Will 22.2 gear-inches be noticeably
easier than 23.6? *Will 20.6
gear-inches be so absurdly low as to be useless?

-- Paul

My touring bike has a low gear of 20.8". *It is useful to me. Sometimes I
ride it in the mountains loaded with grear. *Lower gearing than this would
not be useful to me. *When it is so steep or the load is so big or both that
a 20.8" gear is not low enough, I am moving so slowly it is difficult to
keep balanced.

BobT

How about a tricycle? As long as you are not intending to travel
along pony trails along hillsides, you have loads of luggage space
between the rear wheels. You can go as slow as you like then.

On Apr 26, 6:49*pm, steck wrote:
I have a 2007 Bianchi Volpe. *When touring, I pull a Burley Nomad
trailer. *Recently, I used this
setup to do a ride of the east coast of Tasmania:http://picasaweb.google.com/stecksoft/Tasmania2010.

It was a bit tough getting up some of those Tasmanian hills. *I
confess to walking some of them.
The Volpe's smallest ring is 28T, and the cassette is 11-32.

In anticipation of my next tour, I've ordered a new 11-34 cassette.
Question: is it worthwhile to
put in a smaller ring, say 26T?

With the current setup, the small ring and the big cog gives me 23.6
gear-inches. *The 34 cog would
take that down to 22.2. *A 26T ring would make that 20.6.

My question, differently phrased: Will 22.2 gear-inches be noticeably
easier than 23.6? *Will 20.6
gear-inches be so absurdly low as to be useless?

-- Paul

I recommend a 26-36-48 triple with a 9 speed 11-34. I've done
mountains in new england with that gearing and it gets it done.
-Joe

Jay Beattie wrote:

For me, the big question for the OP is did you see any of these?
http://www.cartoonspot.net/looney-tunes/taz.php -- Jay Beattie

Sleeping with the tent door open one night in the Tasmanian
highlands, I woke to find one trying to drag me out of the tent
by the hair.

John

On Apr 27, 12:56*pm, Chalo wrote:
steck wrote:

The current setup is 48/38/28 in front.

I might want to swap out the whole set for, say, 46/36/26. *I almost
never use the
highest gears.

Once you've fitted a cassette with a 34t big end, I recommend changing
out only the inner ring for a 24t ring.

That will probably exceed the wrap capacity of your rear derailleur,
the vertical range of your front derailleur, or both. *But if you have
the good sense to stay out of the small/small combinations, you'll be
fine.

Shimano now makes a 12-36 9-speed cassette, which would give you a
sightly more useful gear at both ends of the range.

Chalo

This sounds pretty reasonable.
There isn't any reason to change out the whole crank to get a lower
gear, just dropping down to 26/38/48 sounds viable.
Do you use the 48:11 much with the trailer? - Trying to out run it on
the down hills perhapsedly.
But you're still riding this bike even on days that you're not pulling
the load too?

On Apr 27, 3:31*pm, Joe Tindal wrote:
On Apr 26, 6:49*pm, steck wrote:





I have a 2007 Bianchi Volpe. *When touring, I pull a Burley Nomad
trailer. *Recently, I used this
setup to do a ride of the east coast of Tasmania:http://picasaweb.google.com/stecksoft/Tasmania2010.

It was a bit tough getting up some of those Tasmanian hills. *I
confess to walking some of them.
The Volpe's smallest ring is 28T, and the cassette is 11-32.

In anticipation of my next tour, I've ordered a new 11-34 cassette.
Question: is it worthwhile to
put in a smaller ring, say 26T?

With the current setup, the small ring and the big cog gives me 23.6
gear-inches. *The 34 cog would
take that down to 22.2. *A 26T ring would make that 20.6.

My question, differently phrased: Will 22.2 gear-inches be noticeably
easier than 23.6? *Will 20.6
gear-inches be so absurdly low as to be useless?

-- Paul

I recommend a 26-36-48 triple with a 9 speed 11-34. *I've done
mountains in new england with that gearing and it gets it done.
-Joe-

what rear der are you using with that setup? I've thought about doing
the exact same on my bike for more utility but a) I barely use the 26
as it is and b) my long cage Ultegra rear der isn't rated for that
setup (although I'm sure it would work OK just as long as I didn't try
to use the top of the cassette in the big ring)

Right now I am running a 12-26? I think? would have to look (I would
have known for sure a year ago when I put it together, it's a SRAM
cassette)

nate

In article ,
Mike Elliott wrote:

steck wrote:
On Apr 27, 10:13 am, bcdrums wrote:
Sorry can't tell: do you have a double or a triple chainring
setup?

The current setup is 48/38/28 in front.

I might want to swap out the whole set for, say, 46/36/26. I
almost never use the highest gears.

Being one of your lazier cyclists, I feel that the tallest gears are
suitable only for going downhill when gravity provides a nice assist
anyway, and are therefore useless. I spend 95% of the time on the
middle chainring. I confess that on my bikes, all with triples, I
don't use the largest chainring at all.

The bikes I ride most have either a 46 x 34 up front (700C wheels) or a
48 x 34 (26" wheels). On the back are a 12-28 cassette and a 12-27
freewheel, respectively.

Since I stopped racing on 2000, I just have no need for a 53 x 12 or 53
x 11- in fact, I didn't even have a use for them when I did race,
virtually every finish line around here being set up to minimize the
possibilities of an actual sprint happening.