Standard gear ratios

[Lozz360]

Having lurked on this forum for a long while, I thought I would join and ask a question that has been bugging me.

I got back into cycling last year with my first road bike (B'Twin 500se). Gearing as standard on this triple is 50/39/30 at the front with 8-speed 12-25t at the back. All sensible gear ratios for a mature rider who is not overly fit. I can get up any hills that I normally encounter but wanted something easier for the 10%+ gradients. I changed the rear cassette for a 11-28t knowing that the trade off would be bigger gaps between the gears. However, while the new arrangement is much improved as I have noticeable lower 1st gear and very slightly higher top gear, the ratios are still very close together it seems (not that I'm complaining). So my question is, why are gear ratios on bikes so close together? Road bikes are often sold with 11-speed cassettes with 11-25t which makes the ratios even closer. Is it that experienced cyclists have finely tuned cadence range that is best for them and they need close ratios instead of a decent range? Or is there some other reason I can't think of.

 

[MichaelW2]

Elite racing cyclists like to optimise their pedalling to a far greater degree than regular everyday riders, so have traditionally selected close-ratio rear cassettes. Everyday riders gain more from a wider range to tackle hills and are not so concerned with being in precisely the right gear for their power output and cadence.

 

[Lozz360]

Sounds like a well informed answer. Thank you Michael.

It then makes me wonder; why, on entry level bikes are they still supplied with close ratio cassettes. I suppose one could say that, in the case of the B'Twin, it has a triple chain wheel which wouldn't be on the elite cyclist's bike. But these affordable bikes still have very close ratio cassettes.

 

[ColinJ]

I like to have a really wide range of gears. I am more tolerant of bigger gaps at the low gear end of the cassette than at the high end. If I am going to use a low gear it is because I am going up one of our tough local hills and I am more interested in going low enough rather than having a particular gear ratio.

When I am spinning along on a fast stretch of road, I do like smaller steps between sprockets.

I used to use a 10 speed 13-29 cassette but have recently started using a 12-30. I get tight 1-tooth changes where I want them (12-13-14-15), bigger 2-tooth steps in the middle of the range (15-17-19-21) and bigger still 3-tooth steps where I want them (21-24-27-30).

Many people like to have a 16 tooth sprocket because that gives them a nice gear for spinning along in but my big ring is only a 48 so I often end up in 48/15 instead and don't miss the 16.

Oh, and I use a triple chainset as well!

My top gear is 48/12 which gets me up to well over 30 mph. The only time I go faster than that is on downhills when I can freewheel anyway. My bottom gear is 28/30 which is lovely to have on those '25% climbs into a headwind when knackered' moments ... (I don't have many of them, but when I do, having a grovelling gear saves me from walking!)

Which is my way of saying that I agree with you - that many cyclists would benefit from wide-range cassettes.

 

[Fab Foodie]

Considering it's not that long ago a standard road-bile woul;d have a lowest gear of 39/23, modern road triples of 30/25 are luxury!
To be fair, they have to pitch the gear-range somewhere and the original gearing is pretty reasonable, there are limitations to derailleur capacity. However, there is a trend towards more spinney lower gears in general.

 

[raleighnut]

Considering it's not that long ago a standard road-bile woul;d have a lowest gear of 39/23, modern road triples of 30/25 are luxury!
To be fair, they have to pitch the gear-range somewhere and the original gearing is pretty reasonable, there are limitations to derailleur capacity. However, there is a trend towards more spinney lower gears in general.

And before that 42-26 was the norm.

 

[Dogtrousers]

I sometimes wonder if the limited range of a lot of bikes in the market is down to cost. A short cage mech + narrower cassette may be a smidge cheaper than a long cage. Multiply that smidge by units sold, with tight margins, and it may be significant.

 

[SpokeyDokey]

Sounds like a well informed answer. Thank you Michael.

It then makes me wonder; why, on entry level bikes are they still supplied with close ratio cassettes. I suppose one could say that, in the case of the B'Twin, it has a triple chain wheel which wouldn't be on the elite cyclist's bike. But these affordable bikes still have very close ratio cassettes.

Along with a few other items it depends on whether you are talking about a genuine entry level racing bike or a bike for someone just starting out on the road who wants a drop-barred 'racing' bike.

I think the manufacturers and purchasers get a bit confused about what they really need at times.

At a guess I imagine that a good many people punting around on skinny tyred, short wheelbase and close ratio cassette first purchase bike would find something along the lines of a chubbier tyred adventure bike, with a longer wheelbase and wider range of gears, a far more pleasurable option.

 

[Ihatehills]

I always read these threads with a bit of a shudder, my hybrid has a triple 48, 38, 26 with an 11-32 cassette, whilst I hardly ever go 26, 32, I quite often use maybe three sprockets up and sometimes two ( 1 on the front 3 on the back) and this seems considerably lower than most roadies seem to go, I don't think I'll be switching to a road bike any time soon

 

[swansonj]

The fact that some of the keenest cyclists around choose to cycle fixed (ie single speed) surely gives the lie to any argument that close ratio gears are physiologically necessary?

 

[Dogtrousers]

The fact that some of the keenest cyclists around choose to cycle fixed (ie single speed) surely gives the lie to any argument that close ratio gears are physiologically necessary?

I dunno, you don't get much closer than gaps of zero.

 

[Lozz360]

I always read these threads with a bit of a shudder, my hybrid has a triple 48, 38, 26 with an 11-32 cassette, whilst I hardly ever go 26, 32, I quite often use maybe three sprockets up and sometimes two ( 1 on the front 3 on the back) and this seems considerably lower than most roadies seem to go, I don't think I'll be switching to a road bike any time soon

How about a road bike with a decent range of gears on the cassette?

This is my point. Do every day cyclists need or even want the close ratios that come as standard?

With a decent range of gears as standard on road bikes, Ihatehills could well be tempted and even have to change his username!

 

[Fab Foodie]

The fact that some of the keenest cyclists around choose to cycle fixed (ie single speed) surely gives the lie to any argument that close ratio gears are physiologically necessary?

Or more than 1 very good gear.

 

[si_c]

How about a road bike with a decent range of gears on the cassette?

This is my point. Do every day cyclists need or even want the close ratios that come as standard?

With a decent range of gears as standard on road bikes, Ihatehills could well be tempted and even have to change his username!

I ride a road bike, lowest is 34/32, so low, but not as low as some, still find myself wishing for lower on occasion.

 

[Ian H]

Personally, for comfort over distances, I want close ratios. Currently on the old Omega I have a 13-26 with a triple.

I'll admit there might appear to be a contradiction in that I also ride fixed. But, for me, fixed is a different animal, and I adopt a different riding strategy for it.