Miele Man

Depending on the bolt circle diameter of your present crank, you might NOT need a new crankset. You might be able to put new chainrings on your existing crank. I had an MTB that I used for dirt road touring in Northern Ontario Canada. I needed a lower gear for the hills I encountered there. I ended up just putting a 24 teeth ring where the 28 teeth ring was. Later I put a freewheel with a low cog of 34 teeth on instead of the one with the 32 teeth that came with the bike. That worked for me.

If there is a bicycle co-op near you they will have both the tools needed and the expertise to show you how to do it.

Good luck and cheers

csport

The chain will be the same 7/8s chain. It may be a good practice to put a new chain when installing a new cassette or a new crank, but in terms of compatibility the chain you have is fine. It depends on how worn the chain is.

You may need to shorten the chain if you go from 48 to 44 or 42, search for the "big-big +1 chain sizing method"; otherwise it may be slack in some gears. Make sure to not make it too short, otherwise shifting to the big-big will destroy at least the rear derailleur + hanger.

You front derailleur may be not ideal, they are optimised for some different between the big and the middle, in your case it is 48-38=10. If you go to 42/34/24, it is 42-34=8. It may work. You can also go to 42/32/22.

Most likely your crank uses square taper bottom bracket, they can have different spindle length. Square tapered cranks for 8 speed do not cost a fortune; e.g., https://www.jensonusa.com/Shimano-Al...Square-Crankst

Assuming it is square taper and both cranksets need more or less the same spindle length, you will need a crank bolt wrench and a crank puller to do the swap:
https://www.parktool.com/product/cra...-cranks-ccp-22
https://www.parktool.com/product/crank-wrench-ccw-5

Some 9 speed cranksets (44/32/22) may also work. Higher end ones will use a different bottom bracket system (Hollowtech II).

TinyBear

Wow there’s a lot of dick waving and bee itching here. Grow up people.

As to the original question. There’s two trains of thought as you have seen. Try and ride it out and build muscle to negate the need for any modifications. This is more cost effective and cheaper. But if not done right can be frustrating and even can cause some injuries.

The second is what your were asking is to change gearing on your bike to make things a bit easier at the cost of speed. This options may negate the frustrations and chance of any injury. But it’s an expense and could end up being unneeded in the future.

The correct option is what you feel is going to get you out riding more. No one on the internet can tell you what’s best. Only you can tell what will get you out riding more. And riding is the only thing that matters. Your not out there to prove anything to anyone. Just get out ride and have fun if that means training or modifications then that’s the right option for you.

Enjoy the journey.

Miele Man

Ah, I forgot about front derailleur cage shape being different for a crank designed for a 24-28-48 set up and one designed for a 22-42 setup. I'd try a 24 chainring in place of the 28 one first. Then if you still need lower gearing I'd get a rear cluster with a larger cog. If your rear derailleur doesn't work with it you can a rear derailleur hanger extender that's inexpensive and will allow you to use your existing rear derailleur.

Cheers

TheDudeIsHere

Where do you get your information proving that lower gears negate the chance of "any" injury?

TinyBear

Simply put, low gears can lessen the chance of injury as your giving yourself more mechanical advantage And thus lowering the stress to your body and joints.

Something I did myself. I kept pushing to hard too soon. I was young NEW and didn’t know any better. Torn meniscus in my knee. Not a bad injury and healed fairly quickly. But it was an annoyance and I learned from it. Now that bike had lower gears I just was trying to push too hard a gear for the trail conditions. This was rider error. Something else more prevalent in newer riders.

cyccommute 

CoffeeDrinkerNC can't change rings. The crank on the Verve has riveted rings.

The shape of the front derailer isn't as much of an issue as people make it out to be. The chainring size range that a front derailer will handle is rather broad with the cheaper Shimano units being far more forgiving than the more expensive ones. The derailer will have to be lowered to accommodate a 44 or 42 (I'd suggest the 44 to maintain a little higher high range) but that's trivial. The rear derailer will handle any kind of change easily. The chain might need to be shortened by a couple of links, however.

TheDudeIsHere

I see, "lessen" the chance of injury.

cyclist2000

Im not familiar with the crankset on the OP's bike but isn't a simple solution to replace the 28T chainring with a 24T chainring?

starkmojo

I think swapping the chain ring is a great idea. I mean you can ride it with a 28, but you are more likely to enjoy it with a 24, so ride the 24 and if it gets to easy switch back. The more you enjoy it the more you ride the faster you get in shape.

I mean I CAN do roofing with a jewelry hammer, but its a lot faster and more enjoyable with a roofing hammer.

Miele Man

I've seen bikes that had old school triples with a 28 inner ring that were switched out to a newer crankset with a 22 inner ring and the tail of the derailleur cage snagged and jammed on the chain when trying to shift up from the 22 ring.

Cheers

cyccommute 

Old school triples that came with 28 tooth inner rings are too large for a 64mm BCD inner ring that is used for the 22 tooth ring. 130mm BCD cranks...and 110mm BCD, for that matter...use 74mm BCD inner ring. The smallest one ring that can be used on a 74mm BCD is a 24 tooth ring.

However, the problem you are describing can’t really happen. If all someone has done is to change the inner ring, the position of the derailer is exactly the same. The height of the derailer is set to clear the largest ring but has little to do with the inner chainring. If the radius of the derailer is meant for a 52 tooth gear and a 48 (46 or 44) tooth ring is used, the tail of the derailer would set further back from the crank than it would for a larger chainring. There’s no way it could snag on the crank. It might hit the frame but it won’t interfere with the crankset.

Miele Man

Gee, I guess I was imagining things then. LOL VBEG

What I SAW, was this. The shape of the front derailleur cage on the derailleur designed to be used with a 28 ring had a far more gradual curve to it and a longer curve than did a derailleur designed for a 22 ring. Thus when the crank with the 22 ring was installed the rear of the derailleur cage would catch the on top of the chain and jam when trying to shift up from that 22 ring. That's precisely why derailleurs designed for use with a 22 rung have a different cage shape than one designed for use with a 28 ring.

Cheers

cyccommute 

As for “imagining” things, you must think I’m imagining things as well (or instead). I have a 46/34/20 with an 11-36 cassette that I shift with a front derailer designed for a road 50/39/30 crankset. It’s capacity is supposed to be 20 teeth and I’m pushing it to 26 teeth. It has never jammed or even had problems making a shift in roughly 10,000 miles of use on a loaded touring bike.

The Verve that CoffeeDrinkerNC has is equipped with a Shimano Tourney TY710 front derailer. It’s a mountain bike front derailer and Shimano mountain shifters. Shimano doesn't make derailers for 48/38/28 and another for 44/34/22 cranksets. They make derailers for mountain cranksets, period.

Miele Man

Last post on this. I know what I saw and what I experienced. I have a least one-half dozen Shimano cranksets with 28-38-48 chainrings. I've seen people change a crankset form on with those 28-38-48 chainrings to a crankset * with 22-32-42 or 44 teeth. I also saw that when they did not change the front derailleur that was designed for the original 28-38-48 crankset, that the cage of the derailleur would snag and jam on a chainring. YMMV and seems like it did.

CHeers

Wilfred Laurier

How can we be sure the OP needs lower gears? The OP said they need lower gears, that's how. Suggesting that they just HTFU and learn to mash away in too high of a gear is insulting and ignorant.

CoffeedrinkerNC

You are right, after a month of riding I find myself mostly using the 38 and 48 crank gears.

tallbikeman

I'm really not at liberty to admit how low or high my bicycles are geared.