MORE BIKE QUESTIONS

[VincentBikes]

 

My current bike' date=' which I have only recently discovered is about 18 years old, has a 52 chainring up front. Not sure what size the smaller of the two is, but I have never used the smaller one. As in never ever.

Doesn't it defeat the object if you replace an 11 23 with a 12 25 and then put on a bigger chain ring?. In my limited knowledge, you have smaller back gearing to increase top end, coupled with a bigger chain ring.

 

Correct me if I am wrong here, (for I am stil learning), but that seems like an exercise in futility. Put bigger cogs on the back, and then put bigger cogs on the front, because we have lost the top-end speed we used to have on the smaller one.

 

I understand that increasing the front by one tooth is not going to have as dramatic an effect as decreasing the back by one. The combination would be significant, but surely the 11 23 had sufficient gears for you to run on a twelve anyway.

 

Older bikes like mine are 13, 15, 17, 19, 21 and 23. The newer bike will have 9 rear cogs starting at 11 and probably only have tooth incriments of one tooth per cog for the high speed gears and then probably two teeth in the low spped cogs.

 

This is just my simple logic applied to a situation and as I said, I may have to stand corrected.

 

Just seems crazy to change a back cluster and then change the front as well because you lost some top end.

 

Shoot me down gently if you must.

[/quote']

 

Gentle Reply

 

I weighed about 107kg when I started cycling and I have to use the small chainring to climb ie: 39 - 23 which at an 11% gradient (not sure what roads you ride) is bloomin tough and hurt my knee in the process. So I changed to the 12-25 to get a 39-25 ratio which helped tremendously......the RC6000 is a 10 speed by the way.

 

Here is a gear calculator that you can see what the varios ratio's do

 

http://www.sportsdigest.co.za/gearcalc.shtml

 

[Slave]

Dude. My maths at school sucked and to be honest, I have no idea of gradients that I ride. I live in the south of JHB (Actually Alberton, and I train on some fairly heavy hills. I weigh around 100 kg and Butchers hill is quite steep. (Unknown gradient.)

 

I tackle that oneon my big chain ring (52) and the 19 tooth cog when I am battling but get to the 17 tooth as I get fitter. Suffice to say, that unless I am doing Fileds Hill in KZN, I cannot see myself using anything bigger that the 17 on any hill in and around the city of Gold and that's off the bigger chain ring.

 

Agree that doesn't make me superman, a helicopter pilot or anything fantastic, I just cannot "spin" uphill. I prefer heavier gears. So even  though my own frame and the frame of my bike are heavy, I still prefer to power uphill than spin.

 

Downhill of course, I run out of speed and gear very quickly and because I have no speed. I get frustrated.

 

If you know The Lido hill (between Mondeor and the Lido Hotel) or butchers, can you give me an incling of gradient?

 

What sort of speed do you get up such a hill in the gearing you use? I am very interested to know.

 

 

[VincentBikes]

 

Dude. My maths at school sucked and to be honest' date=' I have no idea of gradients that I ride. I live in the south of JHB (Actually Alberton, and I train on some fairly heavy hills. I weigh around 100 kg and Butchers hill is quite steep. (Unknown gradient.)

 

I tackle that oneon my big chain ring (52) and the 19 tooth cog when I am battling but get to the 17 tooth as I get fitter. Suffice to say, that unless I am doing Fileds Hill in KZN, I cannot see myself using anything bigger that the 17 on any hill in and around the city of Gold and that's off the bigger chain ring.

 

Try the suikerbos reserve near meyerton one day at the Karee Kloof entrance and go up the left side - there is an 11% grade and should give you a good idea. R20 entrance fee.

 

When you are at low leg rpm (cadence) you employ your fast twitch (high power) muscles which has a limited period of use at any given time while if you spin you use slow twitch muscles (low power) which can go on a lot longer. But this is similar to Ulrich and Armstrong the one goes up a hill at low cadence and the other at high cadence but they both get there. So dont fret about it too much it is personal choice at the end of the day.

 

Agree that doesn't make me superman, a helicopter pilot or anything fantastic, I just cannot "spin" uphill. I prefer heavier gears. So even  though my own frame and the frame of my bike are heavy, I still prefer to power uphill than spin.

 

Downhill of course, I run out of speed and gear very quickly and because I have no speed. I get frustrated.

 

10 speed gives you those choices!!! You can change to a 11-54 but then you need the legs to go with.

 

If you know The Lido hill (between Mondeor and the Lido Hotel) or butchers, can you give me an incling of gradient?

 

You will have to measure it with a polar or garmin!!

 

Live in heidelberg so don't know those hills.

 

What sort of speed do you get up such a hill in the gearing you use? I am very interested to know.

 

It all depends on what level you get the heart rate up to and what cadence you can push but up a 11% grade 12-14 km/h in a 39-25

 

 

[/quote']

[Slave]

That means some pretty hectic cadence if my rithmetic is fair.

 

High cadence = high heart rate. Very basic logic applied.

 

Ahh yes, the good old GPS. Don't ahve one but I need to chat to my boet. He does. Maybe it can tell me what the gradients are.

 

Bellaires is another hill I do a lot of training on and I get up there between 13 and 17 depending on wind direction, at low cadence. I have tired lower gearing for higher cadence, but it just makes me tired and I still turn the legs over at the same speed, so my road speed goes down. 

 

I will spend some time trying to get up the same hills at higher cadence and improve my level of fitness.

[FlyingCheetah]

S2L, just remember...

 

You're tall - A compact frame will need a long seatpost. This tends to be used as a lever by your body and the seat tube or seatpost might break.

 

When a lot of power is exerted on a chain using low gears, it tends to stretch much faster than using a lighter gear and will wear the rest of your running gear. Also keep in mind that the chain might break....

 

Using your gears to your advantage is something you need to master yourself. Best is to use a gear ratio that you feel comfortable with.

 

When I started cycling again, I also did not believe that you can spin faster up a hill than using raw power. All have to be in balance.

 

Spinning does not mean you have to use the lightest gears. Aim to have a cadence of between 65 and 80 when going up a hill. Going slower than that means there are a lot of strain on the components as well as your knees. If you can go uphill with a 52-17 ratio and have a cadence of 80 you will be flying uphill.

 

What I understand is that you have a lot of power in your legs. You can use it to your advantage, but don't overdo it.

 

[Speed Devil]

 

I prefer fishing......less hassles on the fingers....

 

Much easier on the fingers' date=' but the smell man, the smell.

 

My main objective is simple.

 

(I did my 1st 94.7 several years ago in 3.35. Then I got really soft and lazy and went into last years challenge hopelessly unfit, undertrained and really stoopid and managed a 4.40 (4 hours 40 min)) It was a much tougher course but the whole thing was really painful.

 

I have not enetered this years 94.7 for a number of reasons (one of which is simple economics), but my thinking is, do a good deal of training and riding, build a good foundation and aim at a sub 3 hr challenge next year.

 

To do that I need to be enjoying my cycling and I need a half-way decent bike.

 

Moderate technology should suffice and do the job without going overboard. If I can get down a hill at 60 instead of 50 or do 45 on a flat instead of 35, and can go into a corner a fair bit faster, then this should be an achievable objective.

 

This is the plan, now I just need to get to grips with the technology to work it all out.

 

I looked at the Cannondale and Giant websites yesterday and everyone seems to have their own jargon to add to my new dictionary.

 

Considering that I can not afford ultra tech, the top of the range competition cycles are out. Do I go for an endurance bike or a sport bike (as defined by Cannondale) or do I just go and get a Raleigh? The only frame choice raleigh have are compact (according to the web site).

 

How will this effect me on a long ride such as the 94.7? Bear in mind, I am 1.9 m tall and weigh in at 95 to 100kg.

 

A size 60 frame has been recommended (or a large in todays terminology).

 

What would be a reasonable, middle of the road bike for me to consider.

 

Mercx. I like the look of the bike you have on offer and I am considering the purchase, but don't wait for me if you get another offer.

 

I am trying to get the ducks in a row before I make the final decision. It has taken a good deal of five years to get here. (Some of those was when the bike just collected dust).

[/quote']

 

Try Pantani's bike. He likes the white line