|Whoo uses a customized crankset?||PEDDLEFOOT|
Dec 12, 2003 11:00 AM
|How many of you use a crankset with chainrings different than the standard double 53/39 or triple 52/42/30.What do you have and why did you change them.I'm thinking of doing this and would like some opinions and advice.Thanks.|
|Ultegra arms, Salsa rings||PmbH|
Dec 12, 2003 11:06 AM
|One of my bikes has Ultegra crankarms with Salsa chainrings (130 BCD). I run 38/50 chainrings. I'm very happy with the Salsa rings. They shift just fine, despite having no ramps or pins. If you go to a smaller big-ring, don't forget to lower your ft der or else you'll shift the chain off constantly.|
|At least three at my house...||Cory|
Dec 12, 2003 11:30 AM
|My Atlantis, which I use for most of my pavement riding and some light offroad, has a Sugino XD crank with 46-36-26 Shimano rings. I love it--I just flat don't need a 53-tooth chainring, and the standard 30-tooth granny is insufficent for me in the mountains.
I liked that so much that I swapped the rings on another road bike, an old Allez beater, from 52-42-30 to 50-39-24 (had 'em in the parts bin). No shifting or other probs with either one, but I'm using barcons in friction mode, so there wouldn't be.
I can't overemphasize how much better the low gearing on the Atlantis works than the standard gears, at least for me. 53-11 is just silly, for most riders.
And my wife's old Bstone mountain bike, which came with Biopace rings (I said it was old...) has generic round rings on it now. Don't remember what kind; they came off another old MB that I crashed. No problems w/that, either.
|How do you like Sugino...||PEDDLEFOOT|
Dec 12, 2003 11:44 AM
|...I am thinking of the XD 46/36/26 crank .Do they hold up ?|
|Great so far, maybe 4-5000mi at 220-plus pounds.||Cory|
Dec 12, 2003 11:55 AM
|I've had it a little over two years, but I ride a lot of different bikes, so I don't know the mileage. At least 4,000, though. I've weighed 220-230 for most of that time, and we have serious mountains here. Looks fine, works fine, cost something like $100. I'd buy another one in a second.|
|re: Whoo uses a customized crankset?||TimePedal|
Dec 12, 2003 11:38 AM
|I use a TA specialties Zephyr Lite...48/34...perfect for spinning up climbs...|
|All of 'em are||Ray Sachs|
Dec 12, 2003 11:42 AM
|I currently have 110 bcd cranks on all of my bikes except the fixie. It didn't take me long to realize that I like low gears. My road bikes have 48-34 cranks and my touring, cross, and mountain bikes have 46-36-24 triples. I can spin real well and can get up pretty close to 40 mph on a descent with a 48x12 gear and beyond that I'm more than happy to tuck and coast. On the low end, I sometimes stick a 12-34 cassette on my road bikes and then have doubles that go down to a 1-1 gear (34x34). I don't use those gears very often, but I do occasionally and I'm never sorry to have them.
|For cross and winter....||TNSquared|
Dec 12, 2003 11:47 AM
|I'm running 48/38 Vuelta USA chainrings with Ultegra cranks on my bianchi right now. Did this intially for 'cross, but after a few road rides in freezing temps, I will probably leave it this way through the winter - 'cuz I don't really want to go any faster than what a 48x12 gear will give me anyway. :)|
|50-39 on my race bike||Qubeley|
Dec 12, 2003 12:13 PM
|In my first year riding, I used stock 53-39. Never felt comfortable using 53, I rare used any cogs smaller than 13.
Swtiched to 50 teeth last year, what a difference, I am using the big ring a lot more.
This is how I thought when I switched: 53 is what the pros use, and they probably are twice as powerful as I am, why am I pushing the same gear these guys are pushing? It just did not make sense to me. If you look back thirty years, the biggest gears pro have in the front is 48,49 and they don't have 11 in the back. The big gear is useless when you can't push them efficiently.
Do not worry about your top speed, with 50 in the front, I can still hit 40mph in the sprint on a good day.
|I replaced 30 t granny with 26 t great-granny||Continental|
Dec 12, 2003 1:25 PM
|Yes, I'm a wimp, but we do have some steep hills west of St. Louis, and I need the lower gear when I'm trying to stay within a target heart rate while climbing some of the nasty hills. My derailleur won't take up enough slack to use the 26 tooth great-granny and the two smallest cogs on the cassette, but I'd never do that anyway.|
|46/38 on Steelman EC525; 45/38 on Kona Jake||Dale Brigham|
Dec 12, 2003 1:31 PM
|The Steelman has a Ritchey (Sugino) 110 BCD crank, so I can go down to a 36 or 34 tooth on the inner (I have 'em -- just have not yet put them on). The Jake has a 130 BCD Sugino crank, so 38 teeth is it on the inner ring. The 45 tooth outer is a special Salsa (AKA Engagement Ring) ring made for juniors (a 45/12 is within junior gearing rollout specs).
I'm using 11-28 and 11-32 cogsets on the Steelman and Jake, respectively. With an 11 tooth cog, a 45 or 46 are plenty big. I like being able to use more of the cogs while on the outer ring, which having a smallish outer ring allows.
Just for comparison, a 46 tooth ring is exactly halfway between a 39 and a 53. Think of it as the small-and-a-half chainring. All of the look and feel of riding in the big ring, without the pain!
|For years..............||Mike Tea|
Dec 12, 2003 2:08 PM
|......I raced with a 48t big ring and never got dropped because I didn't have a big enough gear. Heck with 48/13 I could hit 36mph no problem. No race ever hit that on the flat and I can freewheel if I need to go faster downhill.
I bought a new bike last month and it came with....wait for it.....53/11! That's a SuperMario-sized gear. That's like me having a 500lb barbell in the basement. What a joke.
They swapped the D/A cassette for the biggest sprocket they could - a 12 - and I swapped the big ring for a beautiful TA ring of 50t.
Sure it's a way bigger high gear than I've ever had but I'll just let my ego soak that one up.
I always used a 42 inner but the new bike came with a 39. I'll keep that one and my aging bod will be grateful I think.
Fit the gears YOU need, not what the pros use or the bike companies think we should use.
Isn't it funny that 50t chainrings are all the rage since Tyler showed us that it was just ok to use them? Back in the 1960s I used a 50 and it was normal then.
Dec 12, 2003 5:42 PM
|50-34 setup. I am not all that powerful, so I figured the 50 would be plenty at the top end and the 34 would make it a great climber on the steeps, while being a much lighter, better shifting setup than a triple. So far, so good.|
|Is there another kind?||The Walrus|
Dec 12, 2003 6:00 PM
|I still have the original 53/39 rings on the Catalyst, but everything else is all over the place--48/34, 48/38, 48/36, 48/38/26, 46/34/22.... Ever since I first got a 'cross bike, I've never gone bigger than 48 on anything. Even a 48/12 combination is bigger than I'm likely to push on the flats for any length of time, and if I spin out in that combo on the downhills, I just coast and grin. At my age, whatever's easier on my knees gets the nod from me.|
|I was going to say that...||satanas|
Dec 14, 2003 7:11 AM
|Let's see, I've got 57x44 (17" wheels), 49x38x26, 48x38, 46x36x26, 46x36x24, 42x32x20 (2 of these), 44single, oh yes and 53x41 on the Super Record bike.
The highest top gear is 104" - I like to spin. I notice that Trek are using 53x39 + 11-23 on all the DA 10 speed bikes - what drugs are these guys on? Most posts I've seen are saying that anything bigger than 53x12 is totally unusable for mere mortals.... Surely 12-23 or 25 would be more sensible?
|Five bikes in household, 48/38/24 on all of 'em||Trent in WA|
Dec 12, 2003 10:15 PM
|The 48/38/24 combination gives us great cruising gears and stump-pulling lows, particularly on my 26" wheeled tourer. It's good for touring and for long unsupported rides (brevets, etc.), and can be realized on either 130 or 110 bcd triples with a 74 inner bcd. The crank collection includes two TA Alizes, a couple of clapped-out old Shimano Deore triples, and a vintage Suntour XC Comp.