What is your lowest gear and how low is too low. Are new bikes geared too high?

[Sharky]

It's an enigma, I have geared bikes and when. I hit a hill, end up searching for my lowest gear.

But I also have a 68" SS and cope with most hills around here and coasting descents, no problem. On one of my 1 hour training loops, often quicker on the SS!

Can usually manage up to 1:10's hills. Steeper than that, depends on the approach.

 

[the_mikey]

My Marin Hybrid that I bought last year has a 38T front chainring, and 51T rear at the lowest, I never use it as I'd be more inclined to dismount and push instead of pointlessly flailing my legs around for the sake of staying on the bike.

 

[ColinJ]

My Marin Hybrid that I bought last year has a 38T front chainring, and 51T rear at the lowest, I never use it as I'd be more inclined to dismount and push instead of pointlessly flailing my legs around for the sake of staying on the bike.

(Using a low enough gear ratio) I find it easier to ride my bike up a very steep hill than to push it!

 

[VinSumRox]

Current road bike has 50/34 and 11/34 at the back - on hills over 12-14% I could really do with a slightly lower gear. New gravel bike has 48/32 and 11-36 so it'll be interesting to see what that is like on the really steep ones round here.
OH's new road bike has 50/34 and 11/36 which seems a quite good range.

 

[freiston]

That is probably the most extreme example! I think that the organiser was trying to see if he could plot a metric century route without any flat roads on it. He almost succeeded... Something like 2,200 m of ascent in 100 km (7,200 ft in 62 miles). (That profile was plotted when the event started a bit further along the valley from where the climbing starts and finishes.)

That works out as 116 feet/mile (but in long slogs) - my local rides usually work out at about 60-70 feet/mile, but in short up and downs. I'm a slow cyclist (I average 10-12 mph overall speed) and I like to spin at about 90, but I sometimes wonder how much of a ride I am actually pedalling. I'm also the sort of rider who is constantly changing gears to make my cadence comfortable

Now I have no experience of Penny Farthings but they look to me like an excellent device for propelling a person forcefully head first into the ground. Especially so on a downhill gradient.

I expect the downhills in the Alps would also be challenging!

I understand that the experienced Ordinary rider would sit facing the other way and go farthing-first - at least, I think they approached steps that way when showing off.

 

[freiston]

Reading this thread would be so much easier if posters gave their gears in gear-inches - and I'm sure that those that don't, if they converted their expressions thus, would soon begin to appreciate the benefits - especially when comparing their single-speed/derailleur-geared bike with a hub-geared bike, a small-wheeled bike or a fat bike.

 

[freiston]

I understand that the experienced Ordinary rider would sit facing the other way and go farthing-first - at least, I think they approached steps that way when showing off.

I looked it up - steering seems to be modified though:

 

[Shut Up Legs]

Reading this thread would be so much easier if posters gave their gears in gear-inches - and I'm sure that those that don't, if they converted their expressions thus, would soon begin to appreciate the benefits - especially when comparing their single-speed/derailleur-geared bike with a hub-geared bike, a small-wheeled bike or a fat bike.

What's an "inch"?

Sorry, just kidding: I'm at the wrong end of my 50s, and grew up knowing my height was just under 6'3" and also 190cm (Australia switched from imperial to metric when I was very young). I must admit I've never become familiar with gear-inches, though.

 

[Alex321]

What's an "inch"?

Sorry, just kidding: I'm at the wrong end of my 50s, and grew up knowing my height was just under 6'3" and also 190cm (Australia switched from imperial to metric when I was very young). I must admit I've never become familiar with gear-inches, though.

I suspect quite a few of us haven't.

It isn't a term I've ever come across outside these fora.

 

[Sharky]

I'm sure most on here know where "inches" originate from. But for the minority ....

In the early days, a Penny farthing's gear ratio was the size of the front wheel, measured in inches. To get a bigger gear, it was limited to the size of your leg.

I'm old, but not quite old enough to have been around in those days, but when I started, wheels were usually either 26" or 27". Even when I started using "sprints", I used to take wheel size as 27" for the calculation.

Hence my bottom gear on my TT bike was
27x54/18 = equivalent to a penny farthing, with an 81" front wheel.

 

[Mike Ayling]

What's an "inch"?

Sorry, just kidding: I'm at the wrong end of my 50s, and grew up knowing my height was just under 6'3" and also 190cm (Australia switched from imperial to metric when I was very young). I must admit I've never become familiar with gear-inches, though.

An archaic measuring system based on the drive wheel diameter of an old time penny farthing bike. So chain ring teeth times rear cog teeth times diameter of the rear wheel gives gear inch equivalent.

 

[Alex321]

I'm sure most on here know where "inches" originate from. But for the minority ....

In the early days, a Penny farthing's gear ratio was the size of the front wheel, measured in inches. To get a bigger gear, it was limited to the size of your leg.

I'm old, but not quite old enough to have been around in those days, but when I started, wheels were usually either 26" or 27". Even when I started using "sprints", I used to take wheel size as 27" for the calculation.

Hence my bottom gear on my TT bike was
27x54/18 = equivalent to a penny farthing, with an 81" front wheel.

An archaic measuring system based on the drive wheel diameter of an old time penny farthing bike. So chain ring teeth times rear cog teeth times diameter of the rear wheel gives gear inch equivalent.

I never knew that.

I had assumed it was simply the distance that you would travel with one revolution of the pedals for a given gear ratio and wheel size.

 

[Dogtrousers]

I never knew that.

I had assumed it was simply the distance that you would travel with one revolution of the pedals for a given gear ratio and wheel size.

No, that's développement, typically given in metres. I'm told that it's used in Continental Europe. I've never seen it used except in my own gear calculation spreadsheet where I calculate it because I can.

I do use gear inches if I'm doing comparisons or planning a new gearing setup. But I need a spreadsheet or calculator to hand and the figures evaporate from my head once I've finished. I couldn't post gear inches on a thread like this without doing a load of sums first.

For reference, mid-upper 20s is a 1:1 low gear on a road bike in gear inches (Think 27" wheel) 110 ish is a high gear like 50/11 or thereabouts. Roughly-ish. All done without recourse to a spreadsheet so probably wrong.

Another attempt at a unified gearing figure is Sheldon Brown's Gain Ratio mentioned by @Sharky above, which also takes crank length into account.

 

[C R]

No, that's développement, typically given in metres. I'm told that it's used in Continental Europe. I've never seen it used except in my own gear calculation spreadsheet where I calculate it because I can.

I do use gear inches if I'm doing comparisons or planning a new gearing setup. But I need a spreadsheet or calculator to hand and the figures evaporate from my head once I've finished. I couldn't post gear inches on a thread like this without doing a load of sums first.

For reference, mid 20s is a 1:1 low gear in gear inches (Think 27" wheel) 110 ish is a high gear like 50/11 or thereabouts. Roughly-ish. All done without recourse to a spreadsheet so probably wrong.

Another attempt at a unified gearing figure is Sheldon Brown's Gain Ratio mentioned by @Sharky above, which also takes crank length into account.

Development is definitely used in continental Europe, as you would expect, inches don't mean much outside of the UK and US. However the most common use is to say how many "developments" you have, ie, how many distinct gear combinations.

 

[freiston]

Despite its archaic and non-metric origin, it is widely used in the cycling industry/community around the world - even in mainland Europe.

And once you're used to it (it doesn't take long if you know the range of your own bikes), it's so much easier to discuss and compare gears. Remember that, even when comparing your derailleur-geared bikes, like-for-like tooth counts might not give the same gear due to wheel and tyre sizes.

For example, the bottom gear on my 12 speed Brompton (40T chainwheel, 18T rear + 1st gear on the Sturmey Archer hub, all with 37-349 tyres) is 23.6".

The bottom gear on my utility bike (28T chainwheel, 28T rear with 37-622 tyres) is slightly higher at 27.6" (as the utility bike is 28T/28T, so a 1:1 gear, then the gear inches is the diameter of the tyred wheel).

My Rohloff geared bike's bottom gear (46T chainwheel, 20T rear, 50-622 tyres) is 18.3" - quite a bit lower than the Brompton but only just lower than my Rove (24T chainwheel, 36T on the rear, 50-622 tyres) at 19.1"