Chainrings

[DODDY]

Hi,

On my new FSA chainring it states 50/34T. Can I use this with a 36 ring? Why does it state the smaller ring teeth on the large chainring anyway?

Cheers

 

[PpPete]

I can't think of any technical issues preventing a change from 50/34 to 50/36.
But I'm not why you would want to?

 

[dan_bo]

I changed up on my FSA chainset and it worked fine.

 

[gbb]

You can fit up to a 40T no problem (i have on mine)...i assume 100bcd.

You may need to adjust the dogfang position on the downtube if ones fitted.

You're right doddy, mine says 50/34 origionally...cant imagine why.

 

[gbb]

I can't think of any technical issues preventing a change from 50/34 to 50/36.
But I'm not why you would want to?

Why ?...i live in a comparatively flat part of the UK, but they still selll compacts Its wholly innapropriate to have a compact.

Its a quick easy fix to get appropriate gearing for your terrain.(speaking for myself, not the OP )

 

[jimboalee]

Draw up a gear chart to see what advantages the 36 ring gives.

None, I would expect.

 

[02GF74]

Hi,

On my new FSA chainring it states 50/34T. Can I use this with a 36 ring? Why does it state the smaller ring teeth on the large chainring anyway?

Cheers

I suspect it is the smallest ring that will work with the shifter in conjunction with big ring.

 

[PpPete]

Why ?...i live in a comparatively flat part of the UK, but they still selll compacts Its wholly innapropriate to have a compact.

Its a quick easy fix to get appropriate gearing for your terrain.(speaking for myself, not the OP )

I can see that a compact isnt necessarily the best choice for flat terrain, but how does a 2T difference to the small ring change make it that much more appropriate?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing against it....I'm just interested in why?

I don't run a compact myself** but I though thought the point of them was to spend most of time on the big ring but to have the little one there as a "bail-out" option for the occasional hill/strong headwind/knackered legs at end of a long run.


[[[** OK - I admit I run a girlie triple ]]]]

 

[Pottsy]

I had a 50/34 and changed the 34 to a 36. The difference in bottom gear isn't that great but I appreciate the 'gap' between chainset rings being reduced from 16 to 14 teeth on front mech changes. I'm considering another slight increase.

 

[gbb]

I can see that a compact isnt necessarily the best choice for flat terrain, but how does a 2T difference to the small ring change make it that much more appropriate?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing against it....I'm just interested in why?

I don't run a compact myself** but I though thought the point of them was to spend most of time on the big ring but to have the little one there as a "bail-out" option for the occasional hill/strong headwind/knackered legs at end of a long run.


[[[** OK - I admit I run a girlie triple ]]]]

Ah' I see what you're getting at now

 

[Smokin Joe]

I had a 50/34 and changed the 34 to a 36. The difference in bottom gear isn't that great but I appreciate the 'gap' between chainset rings being reduced from 16 to 14 teeth on front mech changes. I'm considering another slight increase.

Same here. I hated 50/34 and the change to 36 made the bike much nicer to use.

 

[HLaB]

My Bianchi has a 36/50 with a 12-25 on the back, I much prefer that ratio to as oppose the 34/50 with a 11-23. My last bike goes a bit further a 38/52 but again its got a 12-25 at the back.

 

[Tynan]

I suspect I must use the gears wrong on mine, it's a double but I've only ever used the smaller ring on Ditching Beacon, once

granted I live in London and have a flatish route, 10 gears is plenty for day to day riding surely, granted the other for serious hills