Thread: 48/16 sucks
View Single Post
Old 01-19-20, 03:45 PM
  #15  
joesch
Senior Member
 
joesch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Hotel CA / DFW
Posts: 1,733

Bikes: 83 Colnago Super, 87 50th Daccordi, 79 & 87 Guerciotti's, 90s DB/GT Mtn Bikes, 90s Colnago Master and Titanio, 96 Serotta Colorado TG, 95/05 Colnago C40/C50, 06 DbyLS TI, 08 Lemond Filmore FG SS, 12 Cervelo R3, 20/15 Surly Stragler & Steamroller

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 601 Post(s)
Liked 781 Times in 498 Posts
Originally Posted by 79pmooney
The ancient rule was that you never used a gear that was an integer ratio for a fix gear. 48/16 = 3; an integer. This means that the relationship between your chainring and cog comes up exactly the same every pedal stroke. 48:15, o issues. 49:16 is OK. 52:17 is virtually exactly the same gear as 48:16; just far enough off to be not exact.

I haven't ridden a gear that high since I was a first year racer 40 years ago. Listened to the club vets and moved it down the next year and got serious. So I have very l;imited experience on intrger ratios. A little on a 42:21 but that was virtually all on major climbs. Harmonic issues at those RPMs wasn't happening!

Ben
I like to mash a 52:16 but mostly stay on flat sections around DFW.
For sure need some other gears if Im doing any hills.
The SS forces me to get off the saddle often which my @@$ really enjoys.
joesch is offline