Shimano 105 11 speed work with 11-36 rear cassette?- Update 17th April

[Deleted member 121159]

Also don't forget you need a cassette spacer if going from 11-30 to 11-34 or bigger.

 

[Alex321]

I've got 36/26 chainrings and 11-40 cassette. Even with 11-34 cassette I can climb up 20% gradient easy. Top speed is capped at about 27mph on the flat with 36-11 which is absolutely fine with me. I don't have the power to maintain that speed for more than a few minutes. Going down, it gets up to 40mph easy so I don't need to pedal.

That is a cadence of about 107 to get 27mph out of a 36x11. Much too high for me to maintain for more than a few seconds.

 

[Alex321]

Also don't forget you need a cassette spacer if going from 11-30 to 11-34 or bigger.

Why?

Surely the cassette spacer is only needed when changing between number of cogs?

 

[Ajax Bay]

Why? Surely the cassette spacer is only needed when changing between number of cogs?

Because, as we explored on @I like Skol 's recent thread, the 11-34 is an MTB cassette and needs a 1.8mm spacer to fit onto a road 11sp freehub (cf the 11-30 road cassette).
I, too, would find an 88" gear frustratingly short however low on power I am.

 

[Alex321]

Because, as we explored on @I like Skol 's recent thread, the 11-34 is an MTB cassette and needs a 1.8mm spacer to fit onto a road 11sp freehub (cf the 11-30 road cassette).
I, too, would find an 88" gear frustratingly short however low on power I am.

I haven't seen the thread in question, but why would you buy an MTB one? There are 11speed 11-34 cassettes available in both Ultegra and 105, both road cassettes?

According to Shimano, you need the spacer if you are going to use the road cassette on an MTB hub, rather than the other way around

https://bike.shimano.com/en-EU/product/component/shimano105-r7000/CS-HG700-11.html

[EDIT]
Ok, I was misreading that. The spacer is needed when installing on a road hub, and should be removed if installing on an MTB hub.

 

[Deleted member 121159]

I know my setup isn't everyone's cup of tea. But my point is it's much more logical to go from 52/36 to 50/34 and keep existing cassette & derailleur than use 11-36 which will work but not recommended, unless 52/11 is absolutely needed. It's a 10 min job to change the chainrings.

 

[Deleted member 121159]

I haven't seen the thread in question, but why would you buy an MTB one? There are 11speed 11-34 cassettes available in both Ultegra and 105, both road cassettes?

According to Shimano, you need the spacer if you are going to use the road cassette on an MTB hub, rather than the other way around

https://bike.shimano.com/en-EU/product/component/shimano105-r7000/CS-HG700-11.html

[EDIT]
Ok, I was misreading that. The spacer is needed when installing on a road hub, and should be removed if installing on an MTB hub.

11-34 is apparently an 'MTB' cassette. If you look at Shimano 11-34 cassettes, they won't have a 105 or Ultegra logo on them but instead a generic model number. I've tried using it with a road RD without a spacer, it doesn't work.

Obviously with the new 12 speed stuff, 11-34 and 11-36 are now part of standard road groupsets. So the above only applies to 11 spd.

 

[Ajax Bay]

I've got 36/26 chainrings and 11-40 cassette. Even with 11-34 cassette I can climb up 20% gradient easy. Top speed is capped at about 27mph on the flat with 36-11 which is absolutely fine with me

I know my setup isn't everyone's cup of tea.

I agree with you and others that the OP's intent (shorter low gears) is best achieved by smaller rings (given they already have an 11-30 on) and they'd end up with the 'same' range and better shifting (no 'dropped' RD).
But your setup is not just "not everyone's cup of tea"; with respect (and as a discussion point), it's almost noone's cup of tea.
Very few cyclists feel the need for a gear range from 17"-88". Those rings also mean an extended overlap and only 13/14 usable gears.
I appreciate this might be on a loaded touring bike, but still! And the 11-40 cassette means larger steps than 'normal' between each gear: a disadvantage in any cycling environment where gearing is used.
https://www.gear-calculator.com/?GR...2,36,40&UF=2150&TF=100&SL=2.6&UN=KMH&DV=teeth

 

[All uphill]

I agree with you and others that the OP's intent (shorter low gears) is best achieved by smaller rings (given they already have an 11-30 on) and they'd end up with the 'same' range and better shifting (no 'dropped' RD).
But your setup is not just "not everyone's cup of tea"; with respect (and as a discussion point), it's almost noone's cup of tea.
Very few cyclists feel the need for a gear range from 17"-88". Those rings also mean an extended overlap and only 13/14 usable gears.
I appreciate this might be on a loaded touring bike, but still! And the 11-40 cassette means larger steps than 'normal' between each gear: a disadvantage in any cycling environment where gearing is used.
https://www.gear-calculator.com/?GR...2,36,40&UF=2150&TF=100&SL=2.6&UN=KMH&DV=teeth
View attachment 685027

Each to their own, of course, but I have not felt any disadvantage in the steps between cogs on my 9 speed 11-40 cassette. There is always a suitable gear for any road situation.

I understand if I was racing, collecting Strava points or whatever I might want to chase marginal speed gains, but my remaining life is much too short for that.

 

[Deleted member 121159]

I agree with you and others that the OP's intent (shorter low gears) is best achieved by smaller rings (given they already have an 11-30 on) and they'd end up with the 'same' range and better shifting (no 'dropped' RD).
But your setup is not just "not everyone's cup of tea"; with respect (and as a discussion point), it's almost noone's cup of tea.
Very few cyclists feel the need for a gear range from 17"-88". Those rings also mean an extended overlap and only 13/14 usable gears.
I appreciate this might be on a loaded touring bike, but still! And the 11-40 cassette means larger steps than 'normal' between each gear: a disadvantage in any cycling environment where gearing is used.
https://www.gear-calculator.com/?GR...2,36,40&UF=2150&TF=100&SL=2.6&UN=KMH&DV=teeth
View attachment 685027

Like I said, I was just giving my setup as an example, not suggesting that the OP should try it.

Indeed it's very few people's cup of tea which I find interesting. I look around and most 'serious' cyclists in the UK are interested in investing in time and money in becoming faster. But I'm a serious cyclist in most people's eyes, too, but my recent goal has been to slow down so I can see more, be more relaxed, etc. If you want to train and get faster, there's nothing wrong with that. But slow leisurely cycling is also a legitimate way of enjoying this and my gearing is ideal for it.

11-40 is really not that bad. In the cruising range, it's still got 11-13-15-17-21. I need very small gears where I live. If I lived in Lincolnshire or somewhere like that I'd switch to 11-28.

 

[All uphill]

Like I said, I was just giving my setup as an example, not suggesting that the OP should try it.

Indeed it's very few people's cup of tea which I find interesting. I look around and most 'serious' cyclists in the UK are interested in investing in time and money in becoming faster. But I'm a serious cyclist in most people's eyes, too, but my recent goal has been to slow down so I can see more, be more relaxed, etc. If you want to train and get faster, there's nothing wrong with that. But slow leisurely cycling is also a legitimate way of enjoying this and my gearing is ideal for it.

11-40 is really not that bad. In the cruising range, it's still got 11-13-15-17-21. I need very small gears where I live. If I lived in Lincolnshire or somewhere like that I'd switch to 11-28.

You are not alone!
It's my cup of tea, too.

 

[Ajax Bay]

You are not alone!
It's my cup of tea, too.

You have a 26t/36t chainset as well? Amazing coincidence.

 

[Deleted member 121159]

You are not alone!
It's my cup of tea, too.

Good to cyber meet a fellow slow cyclist!

 

[roubaixtuesday]

26/36 and 11-40 seems like a reasonable combo to me for heavy touring if you're limited to a double, but if you want gears that low, you really benefit from a triple IMO.

We run 24/36/46 and 11-36 on our tandem, for instance. If I *had* to lose a ring it would definitely be the 46, but I'd rather not!

 

[Deleted member 121159]

26/36 and 11-40 seems like a reasonable combo to me for heavy touring if you're limited to a double, but if you want gears that low, you really benefit from a triple IMO.

We run 24/36/46 and 11-36 on our tandem, for instance. If I *had* to lose a ring it would definitely be the 46, but I'd rather not!

Agree, but I stupidly bought a pressfit 86 frame so can't fit a triple. I would otherwise have fitted a triple in a heartbeat.