Triple on a road bike - yay or nay

[GrasB]

I think he meant to say lazy AND weak, not or

Kinda immaterial, as the compact setup gives more gears across a marginally higher & wider ratio set.

 

[Fab Foodie]

Today, newbie buyers of bikes don't seem to have the time or willpower to become a 'half decent' cyclist by the 'ride up grades, don't ride upgrades' method, so we see Compacts and Triples on Roadrace bikes.

To old codgers like me, a Roadrace bike without a 53 ring or with a triple, is the sign of either a lazy or weak cyclist.

Load of old old-bollocks alert...

 

[Fab Foodie]

Great post. Don't the gears you need vary with the load you are carrying and to a lesser degree the strength of your legs?

Don't encourage him...B)

 

[Dave5N]

No

 

[Dave5N]

Sorry, that didn't answer the OP properly.

Nay.

 

[Bloke]

I personally couldn't give a fiddlers for what others think of my achievements or my gearing, I just want to enjoy my cycling on a bike that's ideally set up for me & the way I ride. I love spinning a constant hummingbird cadence and adjusting my pace incrementally and constantly with my gears. I live in the foothills of the Dublin and Wicklow "mountains" so I actually can't go for a spin without encountering hills, which suits me cos I like 'em and consider them great value-for-time-spent training. If I'm on a flat or rolling ride I'm on the gears all the time, spinning at my highest comfortable cadence, so I hate the fact that when I hit a steep hill my only option is to clunk into 1st and slog in the saddle or stand on the pedals. I'd dearly love to have lower ratios to play with, keep my cadence up and climb the hill faster and more efficiently as a result.

 

[Fab Foodie]

I personally couldn't give a fiddlers for what others think of my achievements or my gearing, I just want to enjoy my cycling on a bike that's ideally set up for me & the way I ride. I love spinning a constant hummingbird cadence and adjusting my pace incrementally and constantly with my gears. I live in the foothills of the Dublin and Wicklow "mountains" so I actually can't go for a spin without encountering hills, which suits me cos I like 'em and consider them great value-for-time-spent training. If I'm on a flat or rolling ride I'm on the gears all the time, spinning at my highest comfortable cadence, so I hate the fact that when I hit a steep hill my only option is to clunk into 1st and slog in the saddle or stand on the pedals. I'd dearly love to have lower ratios to play with, keep my cadence up and climb the hill faster and more efficiently as a result.

I like you bloke... you talk sense... you'll have to stop that on CC!

 

[zacklaws]

An excerpt from "Pro Secrets", part of an article by Greg Lemond:-

"Use Appropriate Gears. If your favourite pro climber uses a 39x21 tooth gear on a given climb, why are you tackling a similar gradient in the 23?

Example! Look at it this way: Pro riders can be competitive on any climb if they produce 6-7 watts of power per kilogram of body weight. If they weigh 70kg (154 pounds) they need to churn out 420 - 490 watts. The average pro can generate more than 400 watts on medium length climbs. Lance Armstrong generated in excess of 500 watts in a 35 to 40 minute climb. The average masters-age racer in contrast, manages 250 to 300 watts.

So the question becomes: If Lance put out almost twice as much power on a climb, why are you using a gear only 2 teeth easier?

Get a 27 tooth big cog, or swallow your false pride and invest in a triple crankset. Then you'll be able to keep your cadence above 80rpm, save your knees and climb faster than you would if you were slogging away in the 23"



I think that about sums it up, who can argue with someone who was better than all of us ever will be.

 

[Tim Bennet.]

Don't be swayed by real science, rational thought and experience!
Not when so much 'real' knowledge is available (whether you like it or not) from internet gurus and endless old gits in cycling clubs up and down the country.

 

[wafflycat]

To expand on this theme.

For choosing the low gears, there is an old bit of witchcraft which is so simple, it defies belief.

It is however, based around a 'half decent' cyclist.

In years gone by, the gears would be fitted, the rider told where the hills are and it wouldn't be long before he became a 'half decent' cyclist.

Today, newbie buyers of bikes don't seem to have the time or willpower to become a 'half decent' cyclist by the 'ride up grades, don't ride upgrades' method, so we see Compacts and Triples on Roadrace bikes.

To old codgers like me, a Roadrace bike without a 53 ring or with a triple, is the sign of either a lazy or weak cyclist.

You are Bobby Clamp and ICMFP!

 

[jimboalee]

I personally couldn't give a fiddlers for what others think of my achievements or my gearing, I just want to enjoy my cycling on a bike that's ideally set up for me & the way I ride. I love spinning a constant hummingbird cadence and adjusting my pace incrementally and constantly with my gears. I live in the foothills of the Dublin and Wicklow "mountains" so I actually can't go for a spin without encountering hills, which suits me cos I like 'em and consider them great value-for-time-spent training. If I'm on a flat or rolling ride I'm on the gears all the time, spinning at my highest comfortable cadence, so I hate the fact that when I hit a steep hill my only option is to clunk into 1st and slog in the saddle or stand on the pedals. I'd dearly love to have lower ratios to play with, keep my cadence up and climb the hill faster and more efficiently as a result.

Here's the route I rode the day before the TdF in '98.

I was on my old 22.5lb Pug with a 38 x 23 lowest. I had to use it 'cus a group of lads from Essex who I rode with were totally shagged and I wasn't going to leave them.

So you've go plenty of hills.

Wish I could get to some hills like that in half an hour. Birmingham and the West Midlands are as flat as a pancake.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

If I did a big long sportive on a triple and got round faster than some person with a double and they sneered at the triple that is their problem not mine. They lost. I don't expect them to congratulate me for having smarter tactics and better technology than them.

I've had similar on shorter rides....
He's got mudguards.
Yeah and a rack.
Bloody Tourist what was his time?
Faster than yours so shut up.

 

[jimboalee]

Serious now.

Let’s take the favourite 10% gradient.

For example, a cyclist rides along at 18.5 mph and is putting 200 Watts into it.

Climbing up the 10%, his speed will reduce to one third ( 6.2 mph ) and the power required will approximately increase by 50% to 300 Watts.

What gear is required to ride at 6.2 mph at 80 cadence? It happens to be 27” or a 28 chainring to 28 sprocket 1:1 ratio.

How many ROAD bikes have this gear? Only very recent ones where the manufacturers have identified their customers haven’t much cycling experience.

The normal situation is that a 10% hill will be climbed in something like a 40” gear, 30 ring to 20 sprocket, or 39 ring to 27 sprocket, or other combinations with 34, 36 and 38 tooth chainrings.

So does it matter what size chainring the bike has?

Let’s go mental and try a 20 % hill.

Speed will be something like 3 mph at 300 Watts into the cranks. The bike will need a gear down at 21”, or 28 ring and 36 sprocket for the rider to turn the cranks at 50 rpm.

Only Touring and MTBs have these kind of gears.
Roadies are seen struggling at 35 rpm on a 30 ring and 27 sprocket.


Climbing up hills steeper that 8% at 80 cadence is really ‘out of the question’ on a road bike, even one with a 30 ring and 27 sprocket.

And the way to have a 30 tooth chainring, is to fit a triple.

 

[MrRidley]

Serious now.

Let’s take the favourite 10% gradient.

For example, a cyclist rides along at 18.5 mph and is putting 200 Watts into it.

Climbing up the 10%, his speed will reduce to one third ( 6.2 mph ) and the power required will approximately increase by 50% to 300 Watts.

What gear is required to ride at 6.2 mph at 80 cadence? It happens to be 27” or a 28 chainring to 28 sprocket 1:1 ratio.

How many ROAD bikes have this gear? Only very recent ones where the manufacturers have identified their customers haven’t much cycling experience.

The normal situation is that a 10% hill will be climbed in something like a 40” gear, 30 ring to 20 sprocket, or 39 ring to 27 sprocket, or other combinations with 34, 36 and 38 tooth chainrings.

So does it matter what size chainring the bike has?

Let’s go mental and try a 20 % hill.

Speed will be something like 3 mph at 300 Watts into the cranks. The bike will need a gear down at 21”, or 28 ring and 36 sprocket for the rider to turn the cranks at 50 rpm.

Only Touring and MTBs have these kind of gears.
Roadies are seen struggling at 35 rpm on a 30 ring and 27 sprocket.


Climbing up hills steeper that 8% at 80 cadence is really ‘out of the question’ on a road bike, even one with a 30 ring and 27 sprocket.

And the way to have a 30 tooth chainring, is to fit a triple.

That must be where i'm going wrong Jimbo, i have none of the above combo's on my road bike (30,42,52) (12-25) so that explains why i'm crap going up hills.

 

[Fab Foodie]

That must be where i'm going wrong Jimbo, i have none of the above combo's on my road bike (30,42,52) (12-25) so that explains why i'm crap going up hills.

Me too