Gearing snobbery?

[bondirob]

I've read a lot of bike reviews and if a bike has a 32 cassette why is the reviewer always at pains to point out the the 32 is a "bail out gear" or like I read the other day "the 32 cassette will let you ride up the side of a house"?
I'd suggest the vast majority of us could well use a 32 or larger with a compact crank (unless grinding out of the saddle is your thing or you live somewhere flat).
I'm comfortably in the top half of most of the climbs in my area on Strava yet people seem almost embarrassed to admit the need a 32.
I use mine a lot and I'm looking at going to a 34 or 36.
Surely the gearing on road bikes is putting newbies off sticking with cycling if they can't get up their local climbs?

 

[Ajax Bay]

I think it's more to do with the capacity of current road rear derailleurs and the implied %age steps between gears if you're going from 11 to 32+. Perhaps there should be more 48-32 cranksets (let's face it 48/11 is long enough for mortals). I'm not sure this is snobbery, more retailers trying to reassure prospective buyers that the gears offered will allow them to climb the hills, bearing in mind many will have ridden an MTB or 'hybrid' with gears in the shorter range while growing up.

 

[bondirob]

Good point I just think manufacturers aren't up to the needs of new cyclist a 48/32 would be great and surely would be better for newbies.
I was focusing on the cassette because it's more economical to increase the size then swapping out cranks.

 

[Yellow Saddle]

Because reviewers are tossers. Bike magazines are the cradle of snobbery, stupidity. gonzo lunatics, posers, wanna be's, idiots and pseudo scientist. Their staff can distinguish the subtle differences of down to 0,3 degrees of seat post angle, tell you with closed eyes whether they've just ridden over a sheet of paper or not, find differences in acceleration between two frames by intuition and predict the grip of a tyre just by hearing it's name.
They eat, drink and wear bike industry swarf, move from junket to junket and pepper their sentences with technology, stiffer, lighter, faster, carbon, fast-rolling, bomb-proof and dude.

Blah!

 

[MichaelW2]

Magazine kit reviewers generally are a pain in the butt for ordinary users. The kit manufacturers love to get good reviews so tailor their kit to the specific needs of the reviewers, who tend to be at the more athletic and extreme end of the spectrum.
If you look at hiking gear, reviewers are mainly people who do mountain marathons and prefer kit compliant with the rules of MM organisations and with the ethos of MM. Lightweight rainproofs must be ultralight and sacrifice durability for weight. All hoods must be attached (it is in the rules). This makes it almost impossible to find a general purpose, multisport rainproof suitable for everyday cycling and weekend hiking, to last a few years.

The bicycle gearing situation today is much better than a decade or so ago. Shimano resisted compact chainsets for some reason but the independent smaller manufacturers started to make inroads and they relented. Now unfortunately, compact chainsets have all but replaced road triples. You can have you cake or eat it.

 

[bondirob]

Love it
Must admit I feel the same

 

[Hugh Manatee]

I stopped buying magazines when they all went sportive crazy. They just seem to assume that is all anyone wants to do. I feel no desire to do one so why bother?

Gears really depend on where you live and ride. Here I would get your 32 and swap the numbers and use that as my bail out gear. Especially since I went all compact with a 38 small ring. I have travelled and struggled to turn the pedals up some proper hills though!

 

[bondirob]

Magazine kit reviewers generally are a pain in the butt for ordinary users. The kit manufacturers love to get good reviews so tailor their kit to the specific needs of the reviewers, who tend to be at the more athletic and extreme end of the spectrum.
If you look at hiking gear, reviewers are mainly people who do mountain marathons and prefer kit compliant with the rules of MM organisations and with the ethos of MM. Lightweight rainproofs must be ultralight and sacrifice durability for weight. All hoods must be attached (it is in the rules). This makes it almost impossible to find a general purpose, multisport rainproof suitable for everyday cycling and weekend hiking, to last a few years.

The bicycle gearing situation today is much better than a decade or so ago. Shimano resisted compact chainsets for some reason but the independent smaller manufacturers started to make inroads and they relented. Now unfortunately, compact chainsets have all but replaced road triples. You can have you cake or eat it.

That Warren guy from cycleplus certainly isn't the most athletic type but even he's got the same spiel.
Don't mind him tho

 

[fossyant]

My 2 road bike mech's won't take over a 24T, but they are old school, when even a 21T was considered big.

These days, with 10-11 speed you have a huge choice without the big gaps between the ratios, so why not add a few bigger sprockets.

Over my 8 speeds that have a 24T max, you could nicely add 27, 30, 34 to that ! It's not difficult to have a few cassettes that you can swap to suit particular rides either. If you are going to be in the saddle for many miles, with lots of hills, having the bigger cassette is a bonus towards the end of the rides.

 

[bondirob]

I stopped buying magazines when they all went sportive crazy. They just seem to assume that is all anyone wants to do. I feel no desire to do one so why bother?

It would be good if manufacturers gave you a choice of gearing it's surely not beyond their means.

Gears really depend on where you live and ride. Here I would get your 32 and swap the numbers and use that as my bail out gear. Especially since I went all compact with a 38 small ring. I have travelled and struggled to turn the pedals up some proper hills though!

 

[winjim]

My 2 road bike mech's won't take over a 24T, but they are old school, when even a 21T was considered big.

These days, with 10-11 speed you have a huge choice without the big gaps between the ratios, so why not add a few bigger sprockets.

Over my 8 speeds that have a 24T max, you could nicely add 27, 30, 34 to that ! It's not difficult to have a few cassettes that you can swap to suit particular rides either. If you are going to be in the saddle for many miles, with lots of hills, having the bigger cassette is a bonus towards the end of the rides.

What have you done with the real fossy?

 

[kiriyama]

I've currently got an 11-28 on the back and a compact at the front. I live in a very hill place and there is nothing I can't ride up. But then I'm quite light and pretty fit at the moment. My dad's cassette goes up to 32 on the back. I find the ratios between his gears more noticeable and less smooth BUT it makes road cycling more accessible to him (hes heavier and less fit!) where as he previously struggled on an 11-25. Ride what's comfortable/ENJOYABLE to your ability and sod the gear snobs.

A lot of the snobs tend to be less fit anyway, too worried about getting there £200 bibs mucky in the rain, tend to be the guys who shout "I'm on a recovery ride!" as you go past them on a climb.

 

[winjim]

True gear snobbery would involve pointing out that Campagnolo cassettes only go up to 29...

 

[bondirob]

True gear snobbery would involve pointing out that Campagnolo cassettes only go up to 29...

Good reason not to buy Campag

 

[mustang1]

I've always at pains to point out the the 32 is a "bail out gear" or like I read the other day " (stuff deleted)

Surely the gearing on road bikes is putting newbies off sticking with cycling if they can't get up their local climbs?

That.