Old 09-07-21, 08:49 AM
  #12  
79pmooney
Senior Member
 
79pmooney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,909

Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder

Mentioned: 129 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4806 Post(s)
Liked 3,932 Times in 2,557 Posts
I share your dislike for 50 -34. I started my (derailleur bike) life on a 52-35 X 14-28, Way, wa better than enything I ever knew before but when I bought a triple with 52-42-30 (which I quicly changed to a 28), it was "Wow! This is it. I raced that bike, simply not using hte inner ring. Bought a real race bike. 1977. It was geared the usual 42-53 and I acquired 43,44,53 and 54, stitching them depending on the race. I was in my mid-20s, racing strong and loved to climb out of the saddle in big gears. I also loved the 52-42 shift with close ratios in back.

In the 40 years since, I've aged. The triple is a given on all my bikes. All my gearing has come down. But the concept I love hasn't. My best bike is set up 50-38-24; very close to a simply scaled down 53-42-28.

Years ago I had a race bike (but decades after my last race), I geared it 53-39, the gearing that existed but was not at all common when I was racing. Hated it. The 39 was too low to be a good flat ground gear and the shift up and down too big. Went back to the 52-42-28 and all was right again.
79pmooney is offline  
Likes For 79pmooney: