#1
|
|||
|
|||
Happiness is 34/48
Swapped 39/52 and 13/23 for 36/48 and 12/23. It's good.
Same high gear, lower low, nice size big ring. And it all weighs less. And when I swap to 10 spd shortly I'll have 36/48 and 11/23 for the same top gear I normally race on (52x12) but keeping the same nice low. Just seems to work nicely when riding - keep it in the big ring most of the time and spin nicely up the steep stuff. Oh, and the TA Vega Light I bought has got some waaaay pimpy gold coloured chainring bolts. Bling bling! So, at least for me, this new "compact" trend is a good thing and not just a pointless marketing exercise. Ok, it's not earthshattering but it keeps me happy Arthur -- Arthur Clune http://www.clune.org "Technolibertarians make a philosophy out of a personality defect" - Paulina Borsook |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Happiness is 34/48
"Arthur Clune" wrote in message ...
Swapped 39/52 and 13/23 for 36/48 and 12/23. It's good. Same high gear, lower low, nice size big ring. And it all weighs less. And when I swap to 10 spd shortly I'll have 36/48 and 11/23 for the same top gear I normally race on (52x12) but keeping the same nice low. I'll probably have to go along the same route when I finally pluck up the courage to tackle the serious stuff on my road bike. I can't see me doing it with a 39/52. (They've beaten me before I've started!) -- Simon M. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Happiness is 34/48
Arthur Clune wrote:
Swapped 39/52 and 13/23 for 36/48 and 12/23. It's good. Same high gear, lower low, nice size big ring. And it all weighs less. And when I swap to 10 spd shortly I'll have 36/48 and 11/23 for the same top gear I normally race on (52x12) but keeping the same nice low. Just seems to work nicely when riding - keep it in the big ring most of the time and spin nicely up the steep stuff. Oh, and the TA Vega Light I bought has got some waaaay pimpy gold coloured chainring bolts. Bling bling! So, at least for me, this new "compact" trend is a good thing and not just a pointless marketing exercise. Ok, it's not earthshattering but it keeps me happy Arthur -- Arthur Clune http://www.clune.org/http://www.clune.org "Technolibertarians make a philosophy out of a personality defect" - Paulina Borsook Hi Arthur, I'm a newbie to road bikes and finding it a bit tough o 39/23 up here in the Lothians, some short but sharp hills.Do th "compact" chainrings raise issues with chain length / front mech. I this a better way to go than to stick with 53/39 chainrings and gettin a 13-29 cassette do you think ?, How much does the chainset option cos by the way as the new cassette can be got for £16 - |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Happiness is 34/48
toerag wrote:
Hi Arthur, I'm a newbie to road bikes and finding it a bit tough on 39/23 up here in the Lothians, some short but sharp hills.Do the "compact" chainrings raise issues with chain length / front mech. A link or two could possibly be removed if using a smaller big ring, otherwise no change to chain length required. Standard road double front mech should be ok (the rings aren't /that/ much smaller). You might have to be extra careful about avoiding the small-small gears if using a particularly small inner ring, with a large outer ring, with a short cage rear mech. A different BB might be required, depending on make/model of new cranks. Is this a better way to go than to stick with 53/39 chainrings and getting a 13-29 cassette do you think ? It comes down to personal preference/suitability. You have to decide what range you want (do the sums) and what jumps between gears are acceptable. Personally, after using a compact double for years, I now prefer triple chainsets. Lots of low gears, high gears and medium gears! Most usefully, the good chain angle from the middle ring means you can stay on it most of the time, and use the smaller, closer-spaced rear sprockets at the end without having to worry about cross-over. Note: A longer chain may be required if using larger rear sprockets with existing chainrings. With anything, chain needs to be long enough for the big-big. (Even if you don't intend to deliberately use that gear, you might accidentally ram it in one day). ~PB |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Happiness is 34/48
Pete Biggs wrote:
: A link or two could possibly be removed if using a smaller big ring, You will need to do this, at least if going from a 52 to a 48. Might get away with it with a 50. With a 34 inner you'll need a shorter chain though to avoid the small-small combo being too slack for the mech to handle. A couple of links shorter is easy to do though. Standard front mech works fine. I found I needed to tweak it carefully to deal with the gap between small and big ring since a normal road mech is curved to fit a larger ring. Not a serious problem though - just requires car. : Is this a better way to go than to stick with 53/39 chainrings and : getting a 13-29 cassette do you think ? It depends. If you are already on Campag 10 speed then just going 13-29 is cheaper (especially if you just stick with a short cage rear mech which will work with the 13-29). : Personally, after using a compact double for years, I now prefer triple : chainsets. Lots of low gears, high gears and medium gears! Most : usefully, the good chain angle from the middle ring means you can stay on : it most of the time, and use the smaller, closer-spaced rear sprockets at : the end without having to worry about cross-over. Or, to look at it the other way, using my 34/48 I can just spend all day in the 48 Arthur "the big ring is for crusing" -- Arthur Clune http://www.clune.org "Technolibertarians make a philosophy out of a personality defect" - Paulina Borsook |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Happiness is 34/48
"Arthur Clune" wrote in message ...
Or, to look at it the other way, using my 34/48 I can just spend all day in the 48 I've found this, too; whilst rebuilding my road bike (at long last), the only chainset I had to hand was a 39/48 Campag I'd previously used for 'cross. For gentler and/or shorter hills that can be tackled in the big ring, a 48 seems to make a world of difference compared to the 53 I used to ride on the road, but without affecting speed downhill or on the flat. You do find yourself pedalling at fractionally higher revs in the latter instances, but it helps to develop a more fluid pedalling style. David E. Belcher |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Happiness is 34/48
Arthur Clune wrote:
Swapped 39/52 and 13/23 for 36/48 and 12/23. It's good. Same high gear, lower low, nice size big ring. And it all weighs less. And when I swap to 10 spd shortly I'll have 36/48 and 11/23 for the same top gear I normally race on (52x12) but keeping the same nice low. Just seems to work nicely when riding - keep it in the big ring most of the time and spin nicely up the steep stuff. Oh, and the TA Vega Light I bought has got some waaaay pimpy gold coloured chainring bolts. Bling bling! So, at least for me, this new "compact" trend is a good thing and not just a pointless marketing exercise. Ok, it's not earthshattering but it keeps me happy Arthur -- Arthur Clune http://www.clune.org/http://www.clune.org "Technolibertarians make a philosophy out of a personality defect" - Paulina Borsook I don't know..there's just something ethereal about hammering along in 53/12..it seems right..totally classi - |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Happiness is 34/48
crystal_tears_ wrote:
: I don't know..there's just something ethereal about hammering along in a : 53/12..it seems right..totally classic Yeah, but personally I need a decent sized downhill to do that. And I'm not that slow. -- Arthur Clune http://www.clune.org "Technolibertarians make a philosophy out of a personality defect" - Paulina Borsook |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|