Bike Forums

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   General Cycling Discussion (https://www.bikeforums.net/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   Road bike's chainring (https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=1209366)

alij2018 08-04-20 01:19 PM

Road bike's chainring
 
Hi, why road bikes have big chainring like 50T? Isn't ot more tough to climb?

Litespud 08-04-20 01:22 PM

Assuming that this is a serious question from someone who has posted 53 times: Generally you also have a small chainring for climbing. If you don't have that large chainring, you'll spin out at any decent road speed (and remember that road bikes are capable of higher speeds than MTBs because they're generally more efficient)

Reflector Guy 08-04-20 01:29 PM

I sometimes wish my big chainring was just a little bigger. Climbing hills isn't a priority where I live (and come to think of it, on my old 10-speed I used to have, the FD didn't even work and I went for years without even using the small gear).

fietsbob 08-04-20 01:32 PM

If you can climb a steep hill in a big chainring, higher gear, (Like Johan Museeuw ) you get to the top faster than your rivals , so you win.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/d3/31...e6e2f84719.jpg

genejockey 08-04-20 02:21 PM


Originally Posted by alij2018 (Post 21623693)
Hi, why road bikes have big chainring like 50T? Isn't ot more tough to climb?

That's what the other one is for. Little one going up, big one coming down.

shelbyfv 08-04-20 02:33 PM

53/11 FTW!! Doing things the easy way isn't for Real Men....

genejockey 08-04-20 02:52 PM


Originally Posted by shelbyfv (Post 21623838)
53/11 FTW!! Doing things the easy way isn't for Real Men....

Then you have to spin down the other side in 39x23.

BoraxKid 08-04-20 06:43 PM


Originally Posted by alij2018 (Post 21623693)
Hi, why road bikes have big chainring like 50T? Isn't ot more tough to climb?

50t is not a big chainring, it's actually a compact chainring. A full-size chainring is at least 53t. Whether or not it's hard to climb depends on the rider, not the gear. HTFU.

Drew Eckhardt 08-05-20 10:50 AM


Originally Posted by alij2018 (Post 21623693)
Isn't ot more tough to climb?

No. 50x34 yields a low gear like 42x29 which is sufficient for most mountains including those in the Colorado Rockies and European Alps.

Big cassettes let the pro peloton eschew small ring use, avoiding the potential for a stage losing chain drop as with Andy Schleck in the 2010 Tour de France 15th stage.


Cougrrcj 08-05-20 06:24 PM

BITD 40+years ago, most entry- to mid-level road bikes had a 52/42t crankset up front and a 14-28t five-speed freewheel out back. Generally a wide-enough gearing for most of the country.

'Race bikes' would drop the rear gears down to 14-21 or less.

Triple cranksets appeared with smaller inner tooth counts for hill-climbing ability.

Then along came six speed freewheels that allowed for more gears in a person's preferred range for varying conditions from 13t up to 35t..

Then seven, eight, nine, ten-speed rear clusters with small rings of down to 11t.

Along with that latest rear cluster 'advancement' came the 'compact crankset' where the big rings got smaller, so the overall gear ratio stayed the same...

The goal is to get gear ratios in the range you need. Use this tool https://www.gear-calculator.com to figure effective gear ratios... Use this app to change the front chainrings or rear sprockets and play around!

GlennR 08-05-20 06:29 PM

50... how about 104tooth?
https://road.cc/sites/default/files/...ycles%2052.JPG


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:56 AM.


Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.