|Chainring Question||HENRY K|
Mar 17, 2003 6:08 PM
|I run an Ultegra triple 53-42-30. I do not need all of that gear (53). What chainring could I downsize to without getting too involved with the front derailer. Could I go with an XT? Would I need to change just the rings or the cranks too?|
|Smaller should be no problem
Mar 18, 2003 5:38 AM
|I believe the Ultegra 3x big ring is 52. A 53 would be somewhat harder to shift than the stock 52. For your question, going smaller should be no problem all the way down to the 42. The XT wouldn't work because they have different bolt hole diameters and the newer ones only have 4 holes. Why do you want to go smaller on your big ring? The gear ratios overlap now so you wouldn't be gaining any more. If your looking at cyclocross, then it makes more sense and a lot of them do run doubles with something like a 39/44 or a 42/48. If your just thinking that you will never reach high enough speeds to use the 52, a better way would be to change the cassette on the rear. You could get a cassette with the small gear a 12 or even 13, if you can find one (assuming it is now 11). This would accomplish the same as making the front smaller and give you either a larger big cog or, generally better for a road bike, middle gears that are closer to the same size.
Hope this helps,
|Maybe not||Rusty Coggs|
Mar 18, 2003 6:29 AM
|There may be a minimum tooth dirrerence requiremnt (10 tooth difference minimum) I think with the triple derailers,and the deeper cage that causes interference if the rings are too close in size.With the 130 BCD you can go as small as a 38 ring.|
|re: Chainring Question||d-boy|
Mar 18, 2003 11:29 AM
|Ultegra has a 14-25 9-speed cassette. That should effectively lower your ratio using the 53 ring up front. The 53-14 would be like a 45-12 or a 42-11. Cheaper than getting a new XT crankset.
It is listed on the Shimano Europe web site. Beyondbikes.com carries it.