Old 06-01-20, 10:04 AM
  #15  
ThermionicScott 
working on my sandal tan
 
ThermionicScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 22,629

Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers), All-City Space Horse (hers)

Mentioned: 98 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3871 Post(s)
Liked 2,568 Times in 1,579 Posts
Originally Posted by Sy Reene
How people use the range of their cassettes, IMO is personally-driven decisions -- based on fitness, cadence and what the current terrain looks like. There's no universal 'should be'.

The point is that whatever position cog in the cassette, where you personally feel you should be moving to the big ring, changes when you change the starting point of the cassette. If you think it should be the 4th cog (14-tooth with an 11-xx cassette), then with a 13-xx cassette, then it becomes the 16-tooth). A wider ranged cassette offers a wider range for EACH of the crankrings. Same goes on the low-end: eg. a XX-28 vs XX-34. You pick up some addt'l low gears available using the xx-34 while remaining in the large chainring, potentially avoiding more frequent need to downshift to the small chainring (depending on your terrain, etc)..
Let's say a person has a 50/34 crankset and an 11-28 cassette. Even though they *could* use the 34/13 combination, there is no advantage over the 50/19. The 50/19 runs smoother, wears the chain at a slower rate, and still has plenty of runway in both directions. So personal fitness and terrain don't enter into it.

It's not like I'm going to make "citizen's arrests" when I see people tooling around in their small-small, but there are no mechanical or physical reasons to do so, only personal quirks.
__________________
Originally Posted by chandltp
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
Originally Posted by noglider
People in this forum are not typical.
RUSA #7498
ThermionicScott is offline