50/34 or 52/36 Crankset for racing (mostly flat)
#51
Newbie
Thread Starter
#52
Senior Member
you dont need a 52-36 to race with your power. my ftp is 305 and I ride a compact and rarely am ever at the highest gear, and even when I am I'm not spinning out. and this applies to both racing and non-racing riding I do
Likes For hubcyclist:
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,491
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7652 Post(s)
Liked 3,478 Times
in
1,836 Posts
This could be the most favorable information in the thread---essentially, OP, just buy your bike and ride it a lot and everything will be fine.
#54
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,814
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 501 Post(s)
Liked 631 Times
in
373 Posts
We are missing the point somewhat. It's not all about having bigger gears, it's where the gears lie in your power band. In a straight block, or single tooth changes as found near the chain stay. As you move to smaller cogs, the difference between each shift will be greater. so if you are in a 53/15 (my al time favorite gear) a shift to the left or right will give you a smaller change than if you were on a similar gear with a 50 ring and the corresponding adjacent cogs. This negates or reduces that too big/too small feel when you shift, specially if you are at or near upper effort limit...
#55
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,950
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3952 Post(s)
Liked 7,299 Times
in
2,947 Posts
We are missing the point somewhat. It's not all about having bigger gears, it's where the gears lie in your power band. In a straight block, or single tooth changes as found near the chain stay. As you move to smaller cogs, the difference between each shift will be greater. so if you are in a 53/15 (my al time favorite gear) a shift to the left or right will give you a smaller change than if you were on a similar gear with a 50 ring and the corresponding adjacent cogs. This negates or reduces that too big/too small feel when you shift, specially if you are at or near upper effort limit...
Likes For tomato coupe:
#56
Thread Killer
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 12,448
Bikes: 15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, 76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, 17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, 12 Breezer Venturi, 09 Dahon Mariner, 12 Mercier Nano, 95 DeKerf Team SL, 19 Tern Rally, 21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, 19 T-Lab X3, 91 Serotta CII, 23 3T Strada
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3147 Post(s)
Liked 1,712 Times
in
1,034 Posts
As for gear charts, they are nice to look at, however they do not tell the entire story. On the bike "feel" (quote marks as I don't know how else to explain "feel") plays a role, and an individuals legs have a roll in it. The human body is not a machine, no two are alike, and I believe that makes a difference.
Torque is the force we apply at the pedals, and is the best measure of what we feel, our perceived pedaling effort. Assuming the same rear cog and same crank arm length, a drivetrain with a lower tooth count (i.e. smaller) front chainring will require less torque to pedal through a rotation. Depending on the particular make-up of any given rider— like ratio of fast twitch muscle fibers to slow twitch, their body mass, pain tolerance, aerobic and anaerobic capacities, etc.— the range and amount of torque they like to work with will be variable.
We can move around the gear range in the cassette to get equivalent or similar ratios with different chainring sizes, but how they feel at the pedal is largely a function of the leverage created by the crankarm length acting on the diameter of the chainring. It’s calculable, measurable, and tangible.
As somewhat of an aside, I used to be more familar with torque values because the old Powertap analysis software, PowerAgent, used to display torque, but since that went away— well, it’s no longer supported/updated— I haven’t looked at it at all, but I know Golden Cheetah will display it, so that’s a good resource for cyclists who are interested in understanding that aspect of their performance and gaining insight into optimal gearing choices.
Last edited by chaadster; 08-04-23 at 09:56 AM. Reason: Sp
#57
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 3,691
Bikes: Too many bikes, too little time to ride
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 431 Post(s)
Liked 460 Times
in
318 Posts
I ride 50/34 and don't ride fast anymore but if I were racing or interested in speed I'd definitely go with 52/36 or the 53/39. The differences may be small but they're there. The 52 or 53 just feel better if wanting to go fast on the flats or the descents. It could be due to the slightly smaller jumps when shifting up and down the cassette, or it could be that marginal drivetrain efficiency improvement when pushing 53/12 vs 50/11, or which cog positions the chain spends the most time in while in the pack. Incidentally, I also feel I was able to pedal smoother on a 53t vs. a 50t. On paper I wouldn't have thought there would be such an appreciable difference but the legs and the Strava do not lie.
If crit racing is the game then I would go with a 1x setup.
And nowadays with 11 or 12 speed and 32t+ cassettes, you can still maintain those close gaps in the taller gears. I'm still riding 10 speed and hate having to choose between keeping my 16t or having a lower climbing gear.
If crit racing is the game then I would go with a 1x setup.
And nowadays with 11 or 12 speed and 32t+ cassettes, you can still maintain those close gaps in the taller gears. I'm still riding 10 speed and hate having to choose between keeping my 16t or having a lower climbing gear.
Likes For tFUnK:
#58
Klaatu..Verata..Necktie?
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 17,980
Bikes: Litespeed Ultimate, Ultegra; Canyon Endurace, 105; Battaglin MAX, Chorus; Bianchi 928 Veloce; Ritchey Road Logic, Dura Ace; Cannondale R500 RX100; Schwinn Circuit, Sante; Lotus Supreme, Dura Ace
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10435 Post(s)
Liked 11,912 Times
in
6,100 Posts
One thing I keep reading on threads about gearing is that you won't spin out a 50x11, or you'll never use a 52 or 53 x 11, because nobody who doesn't race professionally could push that gear on the flat, etc. But, you know, sometimes you want to go fast without your legs whirling like an eggbeater. I'm not really a huge fan of spinning at 120 rpm, though I can do it if I need to.
For example, there's a half-mile, straight, 3.5% descent on my Sunday ride, where I can generally get up to about 35-38 mph with a little effort. (Then the momentum carries me part way up the next rise, which is more like 6%). I end up in my highest gear at a low cadence, gently adding force to the acceleration of gravity, precisely because I can turn the pedals over slowly. It's after an almost mirror image climb, which I tend to push hard on because of the descent waiting at the top.
Anyway, "spinout" speed is only one factor.
For example, there's a half-mile, straight, 3.5% descent on my Sunday ride, where I can generally get up to about 35-38 mph with a little effort. (Then the momentum carries me part way up the next rise, which is more like 6%). I end up in my highest gear at a low cadence, gently adding force to the acceleration of gravity, precisely because I can turn the pedals over slowly. It's after an almost mirror image climb, which I tend to push hard on because of the descent waiting at the top.
Anyway, "spinout" speed is only one factor.
__________________
"Don't take life so serious-it ain't nohow permanent."
"Everybody's gotta be somewhere." - Eccles
"Don't take life so serious-it ain't nohow permanent."
"Everybody's gotta be somewhere." - Eccles
#59
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 919
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 446 Post(s)
Liked 1,045 Times
in
442 Posts
If crit racing is the game then I would go with a 1x setup.
And nowadays with 11 or 12 speed and 32t+ cassettes, you can still maintain those close gaps in the taller gears. I'm still riding 10 speed and hate having to choose between keeping my 16t or having a lower climbing gear.
And nowadays with 11 or 12 speed and 32t+ cassettes, you can still maintain those close gaps in the taller gears. I'm still riding 10 speed and hate having to choose between keeping my 16t or having a lower climbing gear.
#60
Super-duper Genius
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Muskrat Springs, Utah
Posts: 1,713
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 768 Post(s)
Liked 984 Times
in
508 Posts
Yes, you are right, and part of the explanation is to do with torque at the pedals.
Torque is the force we apply at the pedals, and is the best measure of what we feel, our perceived pedaling effort. Assuming the same rear cog and same crank arm length, a drivetrain with a lower tooth count (i.e. smaller) front chainring will require less torque to pedal through a rotation. Depending on the particular make-up of any given rider— like ratio of fast twitch muscle fibers to slow twitch, their body mass, pain tolerance, aerobic and anaerobic capacities, etc.— the range and amount of torque they like to work with will be variable.
We can move around the gear range in the cassette to get equivalent or similar ratios with different chainring sizes, but how they feel at the pedal is largely a function of the leverage created by the crankarm length acting on the diameter of the chainring. It’s calculable, measurable, and tangible.
Torque is the force we apply at the pedals, and is the best measure of what we feel, our perceived pedaling effort. Assuming the same rear cog and same crank arm length, a drivetrain with a lower tooth count (i.e. smaller) front chainring will require less torque to pedal through a rotation. Depending on the particular make-up of any given rider— like ratio of fast twitch muscle fibers to slow twitch, their body mass, pain tolerance, aerobic and anaerobic capacities, etc.— the range and amount of torque they like to work with will be variable.
We can move around the gear range in the cassette to get equivalent or similar ratios with different chainring sizes, but how they feel at the pedal is largely a function of the leverage created by the crankarm length acting on the diameter of the chainring. It’s calculable, measurable, and tangible.
#61
Super-duper Genius
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Muskrat Springs, Utah
Posts: 1,713
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 768 Post(s)
Liked 984 Times
in
508 Posts
I am not very strong. And yes, I go up some fairly steep climbs sometimes. I mostly ride just for fun and fitness, but I enter the occasional race, various formats. You really can't go wrong with that cassette range and either a road standard or mid-compact crank.
#62
Thread Killer
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 12,448
Bikes: 15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, 76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, 17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, 12 Breezer Venturi, 09 Dahon Mariner, 12 Mercier Nano, 95 DeKerf Team SL, 19 Tern Rally, 21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, 19 T-Lab X3, 91 Serotta CII, 23 3T Strada
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3147 Post(s)
Liked 1,712 Times
in
1,034 Posts
I don't know about torque at the crank and how hard a rider has to push on the pedals as a function of chainring size alone. To me, a given gear ratio (in gear inches or whatever units you prefer) is the important thing. I think you're trying to say that some riders can better achieve a given level of power at higher cadence and low torque, vs. other riders who produce the same power at low cadence and high torque. This is true. Claiming there's a difference between two sets of gears, different sizes but with the same overall ratio? I'm not buying it. Some components of the bike might notice a difference. The drivetrain's efficiency will be a little less or little more--hardly enough for any rider to notice. To the legs, 75 gear inches is 75 gear inches (with a given wheel size and crank arm length).
#63
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,442
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4414 Post(s)
Liked 4,867 Times
in
3,012 Posts
#64
Thread Killer
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 12,448
Bikes: 15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, 76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, 17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, 12 Breezer Venturi, 09 Dahon Mariner, 12 Mercier Nano, 95 DeKerf Team SL, 19 Tern Rally, 21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, 19 T-Lab X3, 91 Serotta CII, 23 3T Strada
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3147 Post(s)
Liked 1,712 Times
in
1,034 Posts
Like @Broctoon said, it doesn't matter how you achieve an overall gear ratio. Obviously a larger chainring makes all the gears on the cassette taller. In this case there is so much overlap between a 52/36 and 50/34 that it only makes a difference for the lowest and highest gears. If there are steep climbs involved I would prefer the 50/34, otherwise I wouldn't care either way.
#65
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,997
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4955 Post(s)
Liked 8,097 Times
in
3,832 Posts
Of course it requires less torque to pedal through the rotation. It's a smaller gear.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
#66
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 5,374
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2483 Post(s)
Liked 2,955 Times
in
1,678 Posts
A highly successful track and road sprinter I knew decades ago once told me that he was delighted when the other guys started switching to 53-tooth big rings for road and crit races. "I've used a 50-tooth ring for years," he said. "This'll just make it that much easier for me to get the jump on them at the end of the race."
#67
Thread Killer
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 12,448
Bikes: 15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, 76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, 17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, 12 Breezer Venturi, 09 Dahon Mariner, 12 Mercier Nano, 95 DeKerf Team SL, 19 Tern Rally, 21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, 19 T-Lab X3, 91 Serotta CII, 23 3T Strada
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3147 Post(s)
Liked 1,712 Times
in
1,034 Posts
Anyway, to restate the context again, I was addressing the comment about being aware, but unable to explain fully, why rings feel differently to the legs.
#68
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,997
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4955 Post(s)
Liked 8,097 Times
in
3,832 Posts
A highly successful track and road sprinter I knew decades ago once told me that he was delighted when the other guys started switching to 53-tooth big rings for road and crit races. "I've used a 50-tooth ring for years," he said. "This'll just make it that much easier for me to get the jump on them at the end of the race."
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Likes For Eric F:
#69
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,950
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3952 Post(s)
Liked 7,299 Times
in
2,947 Posts
#70
Thread Killer
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 12,448
Bikes: 15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, 76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, 17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, 12 Breezer Venturi, 09 Dahon Mariner, 12 Mercier Nano, 95 DeKerf Team SL, 19 Tern Rally, 21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, 19 T-Lab X3, 91 Serotta CII, 23 3T Strada
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3147 Post(s)
Liked 1,712 Times
in
1,034 Posts
#71
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,491
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7652 Post(s)
Liked 3,478 Times
in
1,836 Posts
Of course, the same was in Post #3 and mentioned elsewhere in the thread .... but we aren't here to spread knowledge or share wisdom ... it's the internet, dang it, and if it ain't porn it's an argument!
Of course this might all be some sort of abstruse porn and I am simply not refined enough to be excited by it ....
#72
Super-duper Genius
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Muskrat Springs, Utah
Posts: 1,713
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 768 Post(s)
Liked 984 Times
in
508 Posts
This is the part that made me scratch my head:
”We can move around the gear range in the cassette to get equivalent or similar ratios with different chainring sizes, but how they feel at the pedal is largely a function of the leverage created by the crankarm length acting on the diameter of the chainring. It’s calculable, measurable, and tangible.”
Um, no. It’s not a function of the chainring diameter. It’s a function of the ratio of chainring teeth to cog teeth. Any explanation more complicated than that is a waste of words.
Likes For Broctoon:
#73
Thread Killer
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 12,448
Bikes: 15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, 76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, 17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, 12 Breezer Venturi, 09 Dahon Mariner, 12 Mercier Nano, 95 DeKerf Team SL, 19 Tern Rally, 21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, 19 T-Lab X3, 91 Serotta CII, 23 3T Strada
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3147 Post(s)
Liked 1,712 Times
in
1,034 Posts
This is the part that made me scratch my head:
”We can move around the gear range in the cassette to get equivalent or similar ratios with different chainring sizes, but how they feel at the pedal is largely a function of the leverage created by the crankarm length acting on the diameter of the chainring. It’s calculable, measurable, and tangible.”
Um, no. It’s not a function of the chainring diameter. It’s a function of the ratio of chainring teeth to cog teeth. Any explanation more complicated than that is a waste of words.
”We can move around the gear range in the cassette to get equivalent or similar ratios with different chainring sizes, but how they feel at the pedal is largely a function of the leverage created by the crankarm length acting on the diameter of the chainring. It’s calculable, measurable, and tangible.”
Um, no. It’s not a function of the chainring diameter. It’s a function of the ratio of chainring teeth to cog teeth. Any explanation more complicated than that is a waste of words.
The ratio of chainring teet to cog teeth does not at all describe the amount of force required to turn the geartrain.
#74
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,950
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3952 Post(s)
Liked 7,299 Times
in
2,947 Posts
Sorry. I missed that part. And yeah, obviously there’s a different feel when your gear ratio changes because of a change in chain ring size.
This is the part that made me scratch my head:
”We can move around the gear range in the cassette to get equivalent or similar ratios with different chainring sizes, but how they feel at the pedal is largely a function of the leverage created by the crankarm length acting on the diameter of the chainring. It’s calculable, measurable, and tangible.”
Um, no. It’s not a function of the chainring diameter. It’s a function of the ratio of chainring teeth to cog teeth. Any explanation more complicated than that is a waste of words.
This is the part that made me scratch my head:
”We can move around the gear range in the cassette to get equivalent or similar ratios with different chainring sizes, but how they feel at the pedal is largely a function of the leverage created by the crankarm length acting on the diameter of the chainring. It’s calculable, measurable, and tangible.”
Um, no. It’s not a function of the chainring diameter. It’s a function of the ratio of chainring teeth to cog teeth. Any explanation more complicated than that is a waste of words.
Likes For tomato coupe:
#75
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Redmond, WA & Bangkok, Thailand
Posts: 566
Bikes: 1999 Giant ATX MTB, 2002 Lemond Zurich, 2018 Fuji Transonic 2.3, 2019 Specialized Tarmac Disc Expert
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 171 Post(s)
Liked 395 Times
in
227 Posts
52/34 would be a very wide range of gearing. Would a 11-34 cassette work with this kind of set up?
As to the OP's original question, I think 52/36 would be better for racing.
As to the OP's original question, I think 52/36 would be better for racing.