Gear inches, gain ratio, etc - does it matter how we gear it?
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Gear inches, gain ratio, etc - does it matter how we gear it?
Something I had been wondering for a while about bike gearing - is there any functional difference in different combinations of front and rear rings and sprockets if they achieve the same number of inches (or gain ratio, or whichever metric you use)?
If I have two almost identical bikes that both are in, say, 54", with the only difference is one uses a smaller chain ring and a larger rear sprocket while the other uses a larger chain ring and a smaller rear sprocket. Both have the same number of inches, but achieve it differently.
I would suppose that the larger front chain ring would be more difficult to start pedaling from a start, but I'm not sure if that's actually a factor of the chain ring or the fact that usually if I'm in the larger ring I'm already geared up higher than an ordinary start.
Thoughts? Does it actually matter?
M.
If I have two almost identical bikes that both are in, say, 54", with the only difference is one uses a smaller chain ring and a larger rear sprocket while the other uses a larger chain ring and a smaller rear sprocket. Both have the same number of inches, but achieve it differently.
I would suppose that the larger front chain ring would be more difficult to start pedaling from a start, but I'm not sure if that's actually a factor of the chain ring or the fact that usually if I'm in the larger ring I'm already geared up higher than an ordinary start.
Thoughts? Does it actually matter?
M.
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,440
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 625 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 397 Times
in
275 Posts
If the wheel size is the same on both bicycles and the combination of big to small or small to big gives the same amount of gear inches then the effort will be the same.
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Posts: 40,865
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur
Mentioned: 68 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2952 Post(s)
Liked 3,106 Times
in
1,417 Posts
It doesn't matter.
#5
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
Only thing I can think of in terms of difficulty pedaling would be if the torque differed--if one of the combos involved cross-chaining, it would be harder to pedal than the other.
#6
Tortoise Wins by a Hare!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Looney Tunes, IL
Posts: 7,398
Bikes: Wabi Special FG, Raleigh Roper, Nashbar AL-1, Miyata One Hundred, '70 Schwinn Lemonator and More!!
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1549 Post(s)
Liked 941 Times
in
504 Posts
If I have two almost identical bikes that both are in, say, 54", with the only difference is one uses a smaller chain ring and a larger rear sprocket while the other uses a larger chain ring and a smaller rear sprocket. Both have the same number of inches, but achieve it differently.
Now, in a comparison between two differing systems where the final gear inch IS actually the same, the one with the larger rings/sprockets will be more efficient. Not by much, but it has been measured on test equipment.
#7
working on my sandal tan
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
Gear inches and gain ratios are just social constructs. Beyond very trivial differences in efficiency, there's no real need for most riders to concern themselves with it.
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Posts: 40,865
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur
Mentioned: 68 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2952 Post(s)
Liked 3,106 Times
in
1,417 Posts
Your example is incorrect. Your bike with a "smaller chain ring and a larger rear sprocket" could not possibly be the same gear inch as your other bike with a "larger chain ring and a smaller rear sprocket". The second bike would absolutely be a higher gear, and a higher gear inch.
Now, in a comparison between two differing systems where the final gear inch IS actually the same, the one with the larger rings/sprockets will be more efficient. Not by much, but it has been measured on test equipment.
Now, in a comparison between two differing systems where the final gear inch IS actually the same, the one with the larger rings/sprockets will be more efficient. Not by much, but it has been measured on test equipment.
#9
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
Your example is incorrect. Your bike with a "smaller chain ring and a larger rear sprocket" could not possibly be the same gear inch as your other bike with a "larger chain ring and a smaller rear sprocket". The second bike would absolutely be a higher gear, and a higher gear inch.
Now, in a comparison between two differing systems where the final gear inch IS actually the same, the one with the larger rings/sprockets will be more efficient. Not by much, but it has been measured on test equipment.
Now, in a comparison between two differing systems where the final gear inch IS actually the same, the one with the larger rings/sprockets will be more efficient. Not by much, but it has been measured on test equipment.
Stuff in the second paragraph--I didn't know that. Is there an explanation? Doesn't that make the most efficient combos cross-chained ones? That doesn't seem right.
#10
Zip tie Karen
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Fair Oaks Ranch, TX
Posts: 7,004
Bikes: '13 Motobecane Fantom29 HT, '16 Motobecane Turino Pro Disc, '18 Velobuild VB-R-022, '21 Tsunami SNM-100
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1465 Post(s)
Liked 1,542 Times
in
806 Posts
In practice, it may matter if you select large/large versus small/small combinations to get the same gear ratio. More teeth in contact with the chain means that the loading is spread across more surface area, so wear (on the teeth) could be slower. I would venture to guess that heavy torque riders might wear in components faster, so this effect might be more pronounced than with, say, light spinners.
When possible, it's good to select gear ranges that complement each other with the minimum of overlap.
When possible, it's good to select gear ranges that complement each other with the minimum of overlap.
#11
Tortoise Wins by a Hare!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Looney Tunes, IL
Posts: 7,398
Bikes: Wabi Special FG, Raleigh Roper, Nashbar AL-1, Miyata One Hundred, '70 Schwinn Lemonator and More!!
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1549 Post(s)
Liked 941 Times
in
504 Posts
Studies I've read showed chain line increases friction less than small sprockets do. (modern chains are pretty "flexible") I will post link(s) if I have a chance, or maybe others will.
#12
Generally bewildered
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Eastern PA, USA
Posts: 3,037
Bikes: 2014 Trek Domane 6.9, 1999 LeMond Zurich, 1978 Schwinn Superior
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1152 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
251 Posts
The mechanical advantage for identical tooth ratios of front chainring/rear cog is identical. You'll go exactly the same distance per rotation of the crank. Your cadence at the same speed will be identical.
But, if you find two front/rear combinations that are nearly identical, there appears to be a slight advantage in using the larger sizes( this would be on both front and back), for frictional purposes. The dominant frictional factor appears to be the small cog, so the degree of chain bend and wrap seems to be the driving frictional issue.
That works for, say, 52/17 vs 43/14. But at some point, the chainline being more twisted matters. For me (Dura Ace and Ultegra 11 speed) I only use the smallest 8 or so rear cogs with my big (53) front ring. I also feel (pure conjecture here) that the smaller front chainring is more tolerant of cross-chaining, and I can do my two smallest cogs no problem.
The frictional differences are at most a few percent, though, and cadence has a pretty big impact on your physiological efficiency, so probably just adjust the gears to get the cadence you want/are comfortable with, without hearing any complaining noises from your driveline (that is, avoid big/big). If it matters (e.g if you are a TdF racer) then I suppose that they'd put you on a dynamometer and use calimetry to see which gear is best.
https://www.bikeradar.com/features/f...oper-shifting/
But, if you find two front/rear combinations that are nearly identical, there appears to be a slight advantage in using the larger sizes( this would be on both front and back), for frictional purposes. The dominant frictional factor appears to be the small cog, so the degree of chain bend and wrap seems to be the driving frictional issue.
That works for, say, 52/17 vs 43/14. But at some point, the chainline being more twisted matters. For me (Dura Ace and Ultegra 11 speed) I only use the smallest 8 or so rear cogs with my big (53) front ring. I also feel (pure conjecture here) that the smaller front chainring is more tolerant of cross-chaining, and I can do my two smallest cogs no problem.
The frictional differences are at most a few percent, though, and cadence has a pretty big impact on your physiological efficiency, so probably just adjust the gears to get the cadence you want/are comfortable with, without hearing any complaining noises from your driveline (that is, avoid big/big). If it matters (e.g if you are a TdF racer) then I suppose that they'd put you on a dynamometer and use calimetry to see which gear is best.
https://www.bikeradar.com/features/f...oper-shifting/
Last edited by WizardOfBoz; 05-06-19 at 12:39 PM.
#13
Senior Member
I think this probably applies to most, but I have one very, Very, VERY steep hill that I can't get up with one of my bikes, but I can with the other one. If I was going to buy a bike with the understanding that I MUST be able to ride the steep hill then I had better consider the gear inches of what works and the gear inches of what doesn't!
#14
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
I pretty much live in the high gears where there isn't overlap, so it's all pretty academic to me.
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Brighton, Michigan
Posts: 662
Bikes: Optima Baron LR, '14 Nishiki Maricopa,'87 Trek 330 Elance, '89 Miyata 1400, '85 Peugeot PGN10, '04 Fuji Ace, '06 Giant Rincon, '95 Giant Allegre, '83 Trek 620, '86 Schwinn High Sierra
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 225 Post(s)
Liked 163 Times
in
107 Posts
Chain efficiency comes into play here. Larger sprockets means less friction with the chain links rotating less as they run through the system. And supposedly, more chain tension, meaning more torque applies to the rear wheel.
#16
Senior Member
In the end, the torque on the rear wheel is the same, disregarding the losses. These losses are also fairly small compared to your power output though. They are measurable but definitely marginal gains.
#17
Senior Member
I have wondered this for years and played with different ring size combos front and rear giving the same gear inch and swear the smaller ring up front climbs easier than having a larger ring up front. It should not make a difference, however it seems that it does for me.
#19
Cycleway town
There's a limit. If you're running 10/30 then the gearing is identical to running 30/90. However, throwing a chain three times the weight around a 90t chainring at the same speed will be causing increased rolling resistance due to the increased centrifugal forces whilst doing so.
#20
Passista
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,599
Bikes: 1998 Pinarello Asolo, 1992 KHS Montaņa pro, 1980 Raleigh DL-1, IGH Hybrid, IGH Utility
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 867 Post(s)
Liked 721 Times
in
396 Posts
Some old racers I knew used to say that for a given gear ratio, small/small is better for fast pace changes and large/large is better for steady efforts. Is that true? Who knows...
#21
Senior Member
I am more likely to ride in my 52/20 than 42/16 even though they are basically the same gear. Bigger chainring and sprocket have more chain wrap and just feels better.
#22
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ffld Cnty Connecticut
Posts: 21,843
Bikes: Old Steelies I made, Old Cannondales
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1173 Post(s)
Liked 927 Times
in
612 Posts
However, here, there are lots of short hills, so I spend a lot of time on the larger cogs. I try to use the small-small when I can so the larger cogs don't wear out too quickly. Otherwise, my 12, 13 & 14 would almost never get used.
__________________
Bikes: Old steel race bikes, old Cannondale race bikes, less old Cannondale race bike, crappy old mtn bike.
FYI: https://www.bikeforums.net/forum-sugg...ad-please.html
Bikes: Old steel race bikes, old Cannondale race bikes, less old Cannondale race bike, crappy old mtn bike.
FYI: https://www.bikeforums.net/forum-sugg...ad-please.html
#23
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Providence
Posts: 732
Bikes: Specialized tarmac sl2 giant tcx zero
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 319 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
it matter because ....... the straighter the chain line the more efficient the drive train will be , even if its the same ratio or size , you want your chain line strain as can be in the most used gear and or 1 or two cogs next to it . id live to see a drive train use one chain ring that moves over with a simple hydrolic action so you can run 1x without loosing power
#24
Palmer
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 8,627
Bikes: Mike Melton custom, Alex Moulton AM, Dahon Curl
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1669 Post(s)
Liked 1,825 Times
in
1,062 Posts
Fun fact: early derailleur gearing systems (in the 1890s) moved the (2!) cogs side to side under the straight chain line.
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Rural Missouri - mostly central and southeastern
Posts: 3,013
Bikes: 2003 LeMond -various other junk bikes
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 44 Times
in
35 Posts
Something I had been wondering for a while about bike gearing - is there any functional difference in different combinations of front and rear rings and sprockets if they achieve the same number of inches (or gain ratio, or whichever metric you use)?
Let's start by examining what happens to gear ratio results when using a 48 tooth sprocket. If this sprocket is used with a wide range 10-spd cassette - perhaps a 12-36 teeth range the resulting gear ratios would span a 4-to-1 ratio for high gear - all the way down to 1.333-to-1 ratio for low gear. If the front sprocket choice is 52 teeth - then the same cog selections result in 4.333 and 1.444-to-1.
If you can imagine that there are eight other gear ratio variations between these two extremes - AND - you review the ratio-variation between each individual cog's ratio - you will realize that ALL the gear ratios on the smaller sprocket are closer together than the big sprocket. (often called gear "steps")
And the point I am trying to make about the selection of sprocket size and the resulting ratios is that depending on each rider's personal power-to-weight ratio - there IS an optimal gear ratio "step" range for each rider.
However, in modern times - with everyone choosing multi-sprocket chain sets - there are so many gear possibilities few riders notice or care. In practice - one of the few times I would expect this gear "theory" to be important would be a big guy riding a loaded touring bike in mountainous territory. (never needing double shifts under load)
Typically other aspects of bicycling power trains are more often noted - such as making sure that adequate gear ratio ranges keep a rider in the saddle no matter the load or grade. And just as importantly the optimal crank arm length and seat position for cycling terrain at hand.
Harrumph.
Last edited by Richard Cranium; 05-10-19 at 02:34 PM.