So many gears, pointless?

[a.twiddler]

Yep, I think the scientists have proven that once over a certain speed, it's quicker to adopt an aero/tuck position, rather than trying to pedal.

Actually, in my case, over a certain speed, it's quicker to sit there like a blob, rather than trying to pedal.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

This is the bit that I don't get with a lot of cyclists. They are obsessed with having gears that allow them to pedal at their max cadence downhill! The way I look at it, unless you ride a fixed gear, there's no such thing as spinning out. If you get to an uncomfortably fast cadence you simply slow down a bit, or in the case of descending, you stop pedalling altogether and let gravity do the work not your legs.

Yes!

Boo to enjoying blasting down hills on a bike!

Down with this sort of thing!

 

[roley poley]

This is the bit that I don't get with a lot of cyclists. They are obsessed with having gears that allow them to pedal at their max cadence downhill! The way I look at it, unless you ride a fixed gear, there's no such thing as spinning out. If you get to an uncomfortably fast cadence you simply slow down a bit, or in the case of descending, you stop pedalling altogether and let gravity do the work not your legs.

In MY style of cycling I have worked hard uphill and invested that potential energy to enjoy later in a downhill,this for me is a joy when I sit up, freewheel, air the arm-pits and admire the view I don't need to race or time myself .LOW and easy up is where I need my gears and find a HIGH top of 90" ample. Too fast also scares the poop outa me cause its outside MY flight envelope

 

[Ming the Merciless]

I once did 83 kph (52 mph) down this descent on my singlespeed bike... (not the bike in the photo)

View attachment 524237

... which corresponds to a cadence of about 240 rpm.

Yes, I WAS freewheeling at the time!

I hit 56 mph on my mtn bike in 2005 on a descent to Kirkby Stephen. I was in my most aero position 🤔

 

[Landsurfer]

I'm a great fan of LSD training ........ Freewheeling is an essential aspect of my pursuit of excellence ..........

 

[roley poley]

I'm a great fan of LSD training ........ Freewheeling is an essential aspect of my pursuit of excellence ..........

you go steady on that rubber bike Mr.Hoffman

 

[Blue Hills]

IMO the crucial difference is that between those who've done their homework and buy what best suits their needs (or wants) versus those who casually and unquestioningly buy whatever the marketing men happen to be pushing this week.

Usually whatever random, simplistic metric the marketeers seize upon to push as the measure by which their products should be judged (be this number of gears or mass of a bike, pixel count in cameras etc) holds little real world benefit and is often detrimental to the performance of the item in other, potentially more important areas.

Agree totally - a two or three years ago I went looking for a new expedition tourer.
Of course I checked out the Surly Long Haul Trucker as it is very well regarded as a tough beast and Surly seem to promote it as a non nonsense workhorse for serious use.
So I was shocked to see that it had gone to ten speed on the standard build available from shops.
I could see no reason at all for this.
A very friendly shop did look into building one up for me as a nine speed but in the end I went for the Ridgeback Expedition 2016 model.
Ridgeback know a thing or two about bikes.
This is it, though that spec does list the brakes incorrectly (actually they are Vs).
https://www.evanscycles.com/ridgeback-expedition-2016-touring-bike-EV258092

Key info on gears:
Front: 48/38/28
Rear 9 speed 12-36

The gearing is a joy. Fully loaded I have whizzed along a (fortunately flat) Norfolk road to get to a campsite before dark and have also been up the steepest hills with no need to walk.

If Surly, screenman or anyone else can tell me what on earth I would gain by going above 9 speed on that bike I'd love to know.

By the by, PlanetX sent me info this the other day - latest incarnation of the Cinelli steel tourer the other day.

https://www.planetx.co.uk/i/q/FBCINHBL/cinelli-hobootleg-easy-travel-sora-bike

Saw an earlier model at a show a few years ago and was very impressed by the sensible spec, though I personally don't go for drops.

Also 9 speed.

In 2020 - well fancy that

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

In MY style of cycling I have worked hard uphill and invested that potential energy to enjoy later in a downhill,this for me is a joy when I sit up, freewheel, air the arm-pits and admire the view

That's exactly my approach. If I've had to slog my way to the top of a gradient I'm buggered if I'm going to put any more effort whatsoever into going back down the other side!. I just amble over the peak of any climb at barely more than walking pace then relax and the ride down comes for free. Normally there's more than enough potential energy stored up at the summit to go plenty fast enough down, often way too much. Pedalling down sounds like an act of lunacy.

 

[DCBassman]

Thread re-rail: we all need the number of gears we've got/are happy with.
Sorted.

 

[Sharky]

Key info on gears:
Front: 48/38/28
Rear 9 speed 12-36

I'm mostly a 2x10 or a 1x10 or just a 1x1 rider, but I did have a spell riding a triple and found it really good to ride, but it had a relatively close ratio cassette. Probably a 13-25 9 speed. What puzzles me is that using a triple gives you a very wide gear range choice, but using a wide cassette as well, this introduces a huge over lap. Apart from any chain alignment issues, you could remove the middle chain ring completely and have a double and still enjoy the same wide range.
On the 28 - range is 20" - 61"
On the 38 - range is 27" - 83"
On the 48 - range is 34" - 105"

So what is the benefit of having a wide range at the front and at the rear?

 

[screenman]

Agree totally - a two or three years ago I went looking for a new expedition tourer.
Of course I checked out the Surly Long Haul Trucker as it is very well regarded as a tough beast and Surly seem to promote it as a non nonsense workhorse for serious use.
So I was shocked to see that it had gone to ten speed on the standard build available from shops.
I could see no reason at all for this.
A very friendly shop did look into building one up for me as a nine speed but in the end I went for the Ridgeback Expedition 2016 model.
Ridgeback know a thing or two about bikes.
This is it, though that spec does list the brakes incorrectly (actually they are Vs).
https://www.evanscycles.com/ridgeback-expedition-2016-touring-bike-EV258092

Key info on gears:
Front: 48/38/28
Rear 9 speed 12-36

The gearing is a joy. Fully loaded I have whizzed along a (fortunately flat) Norfolk road to get to a campsite before dark and have also been up the steepest hills with no need to walk.

If Surly, screenman or anyone else can tell me what on earth I would gain by going above 9 speed on that bike I'd love to know.

By the by, PlanetX sent me info this the other day - latest incarnation of the Cinelli steel tourer the other day.

https://www.planetx.co.uk/i/q/FBCINHBL/cinelli-hobootleg-easy-travel-sora-bike

Saw an earlier model at a show a few years ago and was very impressed by the sensible spec, though I personally don't go for drops.

Also 9 speed.

In 2020 - well fancy that

Well obviously you have nothing to gain in your opinion which is great, however the whole population does not live and cycle in Norfolk, nor are they you.

 

[Shearwater Missile]

I have never spun out on a ride. I have occasionally gotten into the 12 tooth gear going down hill and that is not for long and not putting effort in. 30mph is about max around these parts (for me) and besides I am too cautious, never knowing what wild animal or bird is going to commit suicide at my expense. However the lower gears I use all of them, not always for hills though. I have used lower gears plenty of times this year with the winds we have had. That sudden gust, just when you think you are going along quite nicely and then, whoosh, a gust and speed drops and then a lower gear to keep the cadence going. Whether it is my 9 speed or 11 speed it does not matter as I will find the gear that suits the job, saving ones knees. I will just add that if there comes a point in my life when I struggle to cycle because of fitness or health then yes I would opt for an ebike, not for speed but to get me out and enjoying the countryside.

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

On the 28 - range is 20" - 61"
On the 38 - range is 27" - 83"
On the 48 - range is 34" - 105"

So what is the benefit of having a wide range at the front and at the rear?

Not quite the true picture though, is it? If you avoid only the most extreme small/small and large/large combos, your highest small ring gear will likely be in the mid 50's and your lowest big ring gear will be in the low 40's. If you are really kind to your transmission and avoid the TWO most misaligned combos in both large and small rings, the situation is worse still. That means more double-changes are needed, which costs you momentum, and on a gradient momentum really matters. When I go up a gradient on a 2x or 3x transmission bike, I decide which ring I'm going to do the climb in at the bottom, and I stay in it until I mount the summit, only changing rear gears if absolutely necessary. Changing rings mid-climb, to me, means I made a bad choice of gearing at the start.
The middle ring of a triple is a good general purpose range, that will get you up must climbs and is fast enough on the flat for leisure cycling at an easy pace. Plenty of London riders only ever use their middle ring from my own observations!

however the whole population does not live and cycle in Norfolk, nor are they you.

I've got news for you @screenman; Norfolk isn't dead flat. Granted, it's not the hilliest of counties, and Cornishmen will be saying "call them hills? " - but it does have a few steep bits nonetheless, both rural and urban. Go into the centre of Norwich and check for yourself!

 

[Blue Hills]

I'm mostly a 2x10 or a 1x10 or just a 1x1 rider, but I did have a spell riding a triple and found it really good to ride, but it had a relatively close ratio cassette. Probably a 13-25 9 speed. What puzzles me is that using a triple gives you a very wide gear range choice, but using a wide cassette as well, this introduces a huge over lap. Apart from any chain alignment issues, you could remove the middle chain ring completely and have a double and still enjoy the same wide range.
On the 28 - range is 20" - 61"
On the 38 - range is 27" - 83"
On the 48 - range is 34" - 105"

So what is the benefit of having a wide range at the front and at the rear?

Partly because it allows you to stay in the same front ring longer and partly because i like a certain overlap/repetition. I do have a single chainring bike (21 gears in all, sram dualdrive, but when that chainring gets worn/starts to slip, there's not much you can do)

 

[Blue Hills]

Well obviously you have nothing to gain in your opinion which is great, however the whole population does not live and cycle in Norfolk, nor are they you.

Suggest you reread my post. I referred to big hills. And heavy loading. I don't live in norfolk, didn't say i did. I live in london as my avatar says. Up a dirty big hill in london. A dead end. Every time i come home on any bike i have no choice but to go up it. I do all my shopping by bike so very often go heavily loaded up it. And more loaded with camping gear. I also regularly cycle in the decidedly non flat lancs and yorks.
Have also ridden that bike fully loaded across the fens - flat as hell but with fearsome headwinds at times - lower gears kinda handy there.