New Shifters that Shift When You're Still

Elisa Francesca Roselli
wrote:

As you probably gathered I'm much more interested in the minimum development
than in the maximum. I'm not a speed freak at all and have never felt the
impulse to exceed 35 kph even on a clean downhill run. 2.4 meters sounds
viable, although I have no idea what I currently have - gotta get round to
counting those teeth!

If you have the common MTB low gear of 22t on the crank and 28t on the
large rear sprocket, then that gives a nominal 1.63 meters
development. It is also a more difficult way to climb a hill (for
this fat guy) than to gear a little higher and pedal a little slower.
I run out of breath easily, and pedaling a lower gear faster hurts
more than it helps.

The way Forrester, and some of the more advanced cyclists in this forum, talk,
it sounds as though a "build your own bicycle" approach is almost feasible...

Feasible, yes; preferable, yes; but it is more expensive to buy a bike
in this way.

Do people here decide on their components - such and such a frame, with these
brakes, this shifter with this number of cogs each having a specific number of
teeth - and pull it together the way one could build a computer from its
individual parts? I mean, is that common or is it advanced geekery?

This approach is very common among bike shop employees, long-time
enthusiasts, and others who for whatever reason already have many
necessary parts at their disposal. Some such riders can also obtain
wholesale pricing, which makes the cost difference between a complete
bike and individual parts much less.

Do you buy
a bike with most of the features you want and then diddle-and-tweak the
remaining ones? Does that come out very expensive?

The optimum approach for most riders is to buy a bike (at a fair
price) that most closely represents all the things that rider wants in
his or her bike. Then it is relatively simple to "trade up" and
install just those few components necessary to fit his or her
particular requirements vis-a-vis gearing, rider fit, etc. This is
most cost-effective, because the components that come equipped on a
bike often cost double that amount or more when purchased piecemeal.
The amount you pay for a complete bike is usually less than just the
cost of the individual components without the frame and fork!

Chalo Colina

Chalo wrote:

The optimum approach for most riders is to buy a bike (at a fair
price) that most closely represents all the things that rider wants in
his or her bike. Then it is relatively simple to "trade up" and
install just those few components necessary to fit his or her
particular requirements vis-a-vis gearing, rider fit, etc.

Then this too would be an argument for a "nice bike". Supermarket bikes like my
current one tend to be "non-modular", i.e. you can't easily mix and match parts.

Elisa Francesca Roselli
Ile de France