GrasB said:Forget about the chain line argument, it doesn't actually work. Most of the time if you look at people riding doubles they'll be on the smallest 3 sprockets of the cassette for the flats if they prefer the bottom chainring or spend a lot of time in the the bottom half of the cassette when climbing shallow inclines if they prefer the top chainring, result is the chain line is just as bad as a rider on a compact but they don't have the ratio range at the bottom end.
shows a complete lack of imagination as to how one can use the chainrings given a choice cassettes.tundragumski said:I'm not so against the 50T ring as for a lot of normal riders the 53T is too large, but the 34T ........
If you need low gears, get a triple - simple!
Only if you don't understand the use of gears and why different types of rider and different terrains need their gear ratios taylored to their own needs.tundragumski said:A compact is simply 'a waste of time' go for a normal double, or a triple.
Many people (particularly men) have this macho-thing about being strong enough to climb a hill without the help of so-called granny gears (a semi-derisive phrase for triple cranksets). There’s not much you can do about this type of attitude…the only "cure" is a pair of busted knees, and that "cure" usually ends the cyclists' riding career.
tundragumski said:A compact is simply 'a waste of time' go for a normal double, or a triple.
zacklaws said:Why bust a gut trying to turn a big gear with a low cadence crawling, when you can turn a very low gear with a fast cadence and fly up hills, that is till you start gasping for air, but you simply pedal slower and just crank yourself up, but still faster than a double.