Best bike for uphill
#51
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,374
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4384 Post(s)
Liked 4,824 Times
in
2,981 Posts
You will climb faster than your current hybrid for sure. I'm not saying you should rule out road race climbing bikes either, but they can be quite uncompromising. If you go down that route at least make sure it has enough tyre clearance for your gravel rides. Ideally you would want clearance for at least 32c tyres and you will probably have to swap out the original narrower tyres for mixed road/gravel riding. A gravel bike would just work fine out of the box, as would some endurance road bikes. As I mentioned earlier a gravel bike would also have lower gearing to make climbing easier on your legs. That can actually make you faster in the real world. Remember pro racers put out 300+ W for hours at a time on these big climbs. Average people struggle to hold 200W.
Likes For PeteHski:
#52
climber has-been
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 7,080
Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3405 Post(s)
Liked 3,535 Times
in
1,778 Posts
Blah, blah, highest paved road in North America. Whatever.
__________________
Ride, Rest, Repeat. ROUVY: terrymorse
Ride, Rest, Repeat. ROUVY: terrymorse
Likes For terrymorse:
#53
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
Where did he state anything about "fast" climbing as a criterion? He also mentioned road and gravel on the same climbs. So maybe a road endurance bike or gravel bike would be "better"? Not faster, but more comfortable and easier to ride for extended periods. Listing a bunch of lightweight road race bikes is fine, but might not be the "best" option for everyone looking to climb. Actually I would suggest that most ordinary riders are better off with an endurance focused geometry, even if they don't admit it. Also note that the OP is coming from a hybrid here, so I'm guessing he's not a racer.
I own an excellent endurance bike suitable for gravel, an excellent tourer, a good MTB with a lockout fork, and several racers of various generations and technologies. They all climb fine with me as the engine. But at a consistent power output, my lightest bikes are the fastest climbers.
My '79 Peugeot has light wheels and excellent acceleration for what it is. It climbs very well (almost surprisingly well), but not like a carbon racer that's 4 1/4 pounds lighter.
Likes For Phil_gretz:
#54
Tractorlegs
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 3,185
Bikes: Schwinn Meridian Single-Speed Tricycle
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 119 Post(s)
Liked 60 Times
in
42 Posts
The answer may depend on your reason for climbing. Touring bikes are geared very low to make climbing easier, if you happen to be that type of cyclist. If you're working on gaining strength, it may be an idea to train using your current Scott before you make an investment in another machine. A lot of bike choice hangs on what your goals are.
__________________
********************************
Trikeman
Trikeman
Likes For Mark Stone:
#55
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,935
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3942 Post(s)
Liked 7,279 Times
in
2,940 Posts
Likes For tomato coupe:
#56
Tractorlegs
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 3,185
Bikes: Schwinn Meridian Single-Speed Tricycle
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 119 Post(s)
Liked 60 Times
in
42 Posts
Blah, blah, highest paved road in North America. Whatever.
__________________
********************************
Trikeman
Trikeman
#58
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,935
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3942 Post(s)
Liked 7,279 Times
in
2,940 Posts
Blah, blah, highest paved road in North America. Whatever.
Likes For spelger:
#60
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,935
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3942 Post(s)
Liked 7,279 Times
in
2,940 Posts
#61
Tractorlegs
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: El Paso, TX
Posts: 3,185
Bikes: Schwinn Meridian Single-Speed Tricycle
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 119 Post(s)
Liked 60 Times
in
42 Posts
Absolutely true. The road from Idaho Springs up to Echo Lake (up Chicago Creek) is always well maintained, but when you make the turn to go up Mt. Evans it gets iffy. I did the entire trip only once, because it's hard to breathe up there lol!
__________________
********************************
Trikeman
Trikeman
#62
Junior Member
Thread Starter
I know my question was kinda open, but thanks to you guys and the discussion I've narrowed it down a bit. It's a jungle out there, lol. Tyty 😁
#63
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Mission Viejo
Posts: 5,800
Bikes: 1986 Cannondale SR400 (Flat bar commuter), 1988 Cannondale Criterium XTR, 1992 Serotta T-Max, 1995 Trek 970
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1943 Post(s)
Liked 2,163 Times
in
1,322 Posts
You need to evaluate the gearing that you currently have on your bicycle.
If you do not fully understand the simple relationship that "GEARING" provides, you have little chance in getting it right on your "NEW" bike, and you'll just be pissing in the wind and throwing your money away.
Old timey, super-simple way to calculate "GEAR" number, that is entirely relevant and compareable among various bicycles:
Your numerator is the number of teeth on the front sprocket.
Your denominator is the number of teeth on the rear sprocket.
EXAMPLE: 45 front , 15 rear
45 divided by 15 = 3
3 x INCH diameter of wheel = "GEAR"
(For 27" 630mm, and 622mm 700C tires, USE (27) as INCH diameter of the wheel)
For 26" 597mm, 590mm, 650, 650a, 650b, 650c, 584mm, 571mm, and 559mm cruiser/mountain bike tire , USE (26) as INCH diameter of the wheel)
******* Yes, this does make certain assumptions and isn't precise as to such various differences as well as then the differences among the various production tires bearing the same sizing, BUT THIS Super-Simple method IS COMPAREABLE and HIGHLY ACCURATE when the bicycles being compared are not too disparate.**********
Remember that this simple calculation is:
FRONT divided by REAR = "result"
TAKE THAT "result" AND MULTIPLY IT BY THE DIAMETER IN INCHES OF THE WHEEL = "GEAR" number
Example: 45 front, 15 rear
45 divided by 15 = 3
3 X 27" = 81 GEAR
You can further do a very simple calculation that will tell you the DISTANCE IN INCHES TRAVELLED WITH EACH REVOLUTION OF THE PEDALS.
To do this, you simply take that GEAR number and MULTIPLY IT TIMES Pi and that gives you distance in INCHES Travelled.
*****You do recall from 4th grade math that Pi is equal to 3.14******************
Recall that Pi = 3.14
So taking the 81 GEAR x Pi
81 GEAR X 3.14 = 254 inches
converting to feet, for something a bit more meaningful and useful..........Simply divide the inches by 12 to get distance Travelled in feet with each Pedal Revolution.
Well that 254 inches comes close to something like 20 ft.
THE COMPUTATION FOR DISTANCE TRAVELLED WITH EACH PEDAL REVOLUTION MAY NOT BE AS MEANINGFUL AS THE SIMPLE GEAR number CALCULATION FOR COMPARING BIKES, BUT IT GIVES YOU ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT IS RELEVANT AS TO HOW slow THAT YOU MAY BE STEADILY MOVING WHILE CLIMBING SAID HILL(S). Obviously your pedal spinning rate factors in, but the DISTANCE TRAVELLED PER PEDAL REVOLUTION IS A FIXED NUMBER, so assuming that your cadence (pedal spin rate) wouldn't vary significantly among the various bikes that you are comparing, then those DISTANCE numbers are totally relevant and compareable in figuring just how slow you'd be going in any significant low gear for hill climbing. Obviously comparing widely different bicycles for example, say a 40 pound Schwinn with an Ashtabula one piece crank and factory steel wheels, with something 27 pounds or less with lightweight alloy wheels, --and unless you're almost super-human, you will not be able to SPIN the old Schwinn's crank at the same cadence as you can SPIN the lightweight bike's crank. For similar bicycle comparisons, you should have relatively comparative numbers that will help you decide what is and what is not.
I suggest that you do take stock of what your current gearing is.
Make a gear chart table that tells you the "GEAR" number for each of your bicycle's gears.
SINCE YOU ARE PRIMARILY CONCERNED WITH GETTING THE BEST HILL CLIMBING FOR YOUR NEEDS, BUT KEEPING THE OVERALL PLEASANT RIDING, YOU HAVE TO REALIZE THAT YOU GENERALLY DON'T WANT TO GIVE UP MUCH OR ANY OF YOUR TOP-END CRUISING RANGE! This is seldom ever a problem as long as you have enough gears, but you obviously can see that it would become an issue with a single speed cruiser bike... I simply want you to understand and consider the ramifications of just doing something cave-man ultra simple as some folks do with old mountain bikes or ancient ten speeds where they simply place the chain on the smallest front sprocket and forget about the other front sprokets and front derailleur.....this limits the GEAR range significantly where one might miss the cruising top end ability. YOU CAN CERTAINLY GO TO A 1 x in the front versus a double or tripple BUT DO KEEP IN MIND THAT YOUR CHOICE OF THE front's TEETH number must PROVIDE REASONABLE ENOUGH GEARING WITH WHATEVER THE CASSETTE-or-FREEWHEEL THAT YOU DO CHOOSE TO EMPLOY ON THE REAR WHEEL. You have to calculate that GEARING to see if it ultimately is both LOW geared enough and WIDE RANGING ENOUGH to Suit Your Needs!!!
That is where that your focus needs to be.
Everybody in the world can tell you that you should go this way, or look at this bike or that bike model, and perhaps some might have really useful advice in that the bike(s) that they suggest might be geared most closely to what you might need. THE PROBLEM IS YOU NEED TO KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT GEARING AND ABOUT THE DIFFERENCES OUT THERE AMONG VARIOUS MODEL BIKES, AS WELL AS THE POTENTIAL CHOICES IN CASSETTES WITH LOW GEAR AND STILL A WIDE ENOUGH RANGE. You're getting well meaning responses from smart experienced cyclists that have probably significant riding differences from your type of riding and geographic-elevation range. What you're getting is essentially the same as their opinions on favorite color, or favorite music artist/group. They aren't necessarily wrong or anything like that, but you gotta look at it as it has to be applicable to what you need and want. Shaq wears something like size 18 shoes and Tiger plays with blade irons with old school Dynamic steel shafts that are extra-stiff, those are are going to be next to impossible for someone that isn't pro caliber with the swing speed to match, or unless you've got the massive foot to wear the same size shoe as Shaq.
You can't simply just say, oh well, this is the most popular, most expensive bike, so it must be the most desireable for me. IT MIGHT BE, BUT IT JUST THE SAME, MIGHT NOT BE.........YOU MUST KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT THE DETAILS OF SAID BIKE(S) BEFORE YOU CAN MAKE AN GOOD INFORMED DECISION. Many bike shops don't give a damn, as if you want it, they will sell it to ya. In fairness to the LBS community, they cannot read minds and unless you plainly explain to them in terms that they can understand, they have no way of knowing exactly what might be best for you. You, as the consumer, are responsible for knowing how to compare bicycle gearing and what might meet your needs. You cannot fault the LBS community so much because their proprietors and employees typically are usually predominantly road-bike oriented, and are typically on average, high-ability road bike riders, and may not need the LOW gearing that normal folks might need.
You certainly have a few LBS that are more mountain bike oriented, etc....................but this goes to show that there are indeed differences in both bicycle preference and styles of riding............one matters just as much as the others, so you do need to focus on what is RIGHT for you. You cannot blindly go on just what the 23 year old spandex boy that is the $15 hour LBS technician that still dreams of doing the tour de france but because he has no education beyond HS and makes so little in annual wages that he still lives at home in his parents' basement, and has no plan in place to further his education or immediately significantly improve this situation.
You simply need to know enough about GEARING and how it relates to your bicycling needs. Once you know enough, you can easily determine what NEW or USED models have what might suit you the best. DON'T GUESS, or LET THE LOCAL BIKE SHOP FLUNKIE TELL YOU THAT, Oh Yeah Dude, You'll Love This, I Guarantee You Man....... in a nutshell, they simply want to ring-up a sale.
Generally, a ball-park WIDE RANGE for "GEAR" number is from about maybe (28) to about maybe (104). YOU DON'T NEED ANYTHING THAT REALLY APPROACHES (100) AS MUCH AS YOU NEED SOMETHING THAT CAN GIVE YOU DECENT ABILITY TO GET UP THE HILLS NEAR YOU.
You can certainly go a little LOWER or a little HIGHER in the "GEAR" number than those numbers.
Obviously the lower number indicates BETTER HILL CLIMBING (low gear) CAPABILITY and generally the higher the number close to ~100+ indicates typically the GREATER POTENTIAL FOR TOP-SPEED assuming that one can turn the crank at a cadence that allows for this.
Just knowing how various gearing combinations give the "GEAR" numbers that you can calculate, will allow you or anyone to instantly compare among very similar bicycles. It isn't super-scientific or perfect without flaws because there are other minor variables that could and do sometimes come into play, but if the bikes have the same size wheels and are similar enough, then those other variables will be immaterial.
If you do not fully understand the simple relationship that "GEARING" provides, you have little chance in getting it right on your "NEW" bike, and you'll just be pissing in the wind and throwing your money away.
Old timey, super-simple way to calculate "GEAR" number, that is entirely relevant and compareable among various bicycles:
Your numerator is the number of teeth on the front sprocket.
Your denominator is the number of teeth on the rear sprocket.
EXAMPLE: 45 front , 15 rear
45 divided by 15 = 3
3 x INCH diameter of wheel = "GEAR"
(For 27" 630mm, and 622mm 700C tires, USE (27) as INCH diameter of the wheel)
For 26" 597mm, 590mm, 650, 650a, 650b, 650c, 584mm, 571mm, and 559mm cruiser/mountain bike tire , USE (26) as INCH diameter of the wheel)
******* Yes, this does make certain assumptions and isn't precise as to such various differences as well as then the differences among the various production tires bearing the same sizing, BUT THIS Super-Simple method IS COMPAREABLE and HIGHLY ACCURATE when the bicycles being compared are not too disparate.**********
Remember that this simple calculation is:
FRONT divided by REAR = "result"
TAKE THAT "result" AND MULTIPLY IT BY THE DIAMETER IN INCHES OF THE WHEEL = "GEAR" number
Example: 45 front, 15 rear
45 divided by 15 = 3
3 X 27" = 81 GEAR
You can further do a very simple calculation that will tell you the DISTANCE IN INCHES TRAVELLED WITH EACH REVOLUTION OF THE PEDALS.
To do this, you simply take that GEAR number and MULTIPLY IT TIMES Pi and that gives you distance in INCHES Travelled.
*****You do recall from 4th grade math that Pi is equal to 3.14******************
Recall that Pi = 3.14
So taking the 81 GEAR x Pi
81 GEAR X 3.14 = 254 inches
converting to feet, for something a bit more meaningful and useful..........Simply divide the inches by 12 to get distance Travelled in feet with each Pedal Revolution.
Well that 254 inches comes close to something like 20 ft.
THE COMPUTATION FOR DISTANCE TRAVELLED WITH EACH PEDAL REVOLUTION MAY NOT BE AS MEANINGFUL AS THE SIMPLE GEAR number CALCULATION FOR COMPARING BIKES, BUT IT GIVES YOU ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT IS RELEVANT AS TO HOW slow THAT YOU MAY BE STEADILY MOVING WHILE CLIMBING SAID HILL(S). Obviously your pedal spinning rate factors in, but the DISTANCE TRAVELLED PER PEDAL REVOLUTION IS A FIXED NUMBER, so assuming that your cadence (pedal spin rate) wouldn't vary significantly among the various bikes that you are comparing, then those DISTANCE numbers are totally relevant and compareable in figuring just how slow you'd be going in any significant low gear for hill climbing. Obviously comparing widely different bicycles for example, say a 40 pound Schwinn with an Ashtabula one piece crank and factory steel wheels, with something 27 pounds or less with lightweight alloy wheels, --and unless you're almost super-human, you will not be able to SPIN the old Schwinn's crank at the same cadence as you can SPIN the lightweight bike's crank. For similar bicycle comparisons, you should have relatively comparative numbers that will help you decide what is and what is not.
I suggest that you do take stock of what your current gearing is.
Make a gear chart table that tells you the "GEAR" number for each of your bicycle's gears.
SINCE YOU ARE PRIMARILY CONCERNED WITH GETTING THE BEST HILL CLIMBING FOR YOUR NEEDS, BUT KEEPING THE OVERALL PLEASANT RIDING, YOU HAVE TO REALIZE THAT YOU GENERALLY DON'T WANT TO GIVE UP MUCH OR ANY OF YOUR TOP-END CRUISING RANGE! This is seldom ever a problem as long as you have enough gears, but you obviously can see that it would become an issue with a single speed cruiser bike... I simply want you to understand and consider the ramifications of just doing something cave-man ultra simple as some folks do with old mountain bikes or ancient ten speeds where they simply place the chain on the smallest front sprocket and forget about the other front sprokets and front derailleur.....this limits the GEAR range significantly where one might miss the cruising top end ability. YOU CAN CERTAINLY GO TO A 1 x in the front versus a double or tripple BUT DO KEEP IN MIND THAT YOUR CHOICE OF THE front's TEETH number must PROVIDE REASONABLE ENOUGH GEARING WITH WHATEVER THE CASSETTE-or-FREEWHEEL THAT YOU DO CHOOSE TO EMPLOY ON THE REAR WHEEL. You have to calculate that GEARING to see if it ultimately is both LOW geared enough and WIDE RANGING ENOUGH to Suit Your Needs!!!
That is where that your focus needs to be.
Everybody in the world can tell you that you should go this way, or look at this bike or that bike model, and perhaps some might have really useful advice in that the bike(s) that they suggest might be geared most closely to what you might need. THE PROBLEM IS YOU NEED TO KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT GEARING AND ABOUT THE DIFFERENCES OUT THERE AMONG VARIOUS MODEL BIKES, AS WELL AS THE POTENTIAL CHOICES IN CASSETTES WITH LOW GEAR AND STILL A WIDE ENOUGH RANGE. You're getting well meaning responses from smart experienced cyclists that have probably significant riding differences from your type of riding and geographic-elevation range. What you're getting is essentially the same as their opinions on favorite color, or favorite music artist/group. They aren't necessarily wrong or anything like that, but you gotta look at it as it has to be applicable to what you need and want. Shaq wears something like size 18 shoes and Tiger plays with blade irons with old school Dynamic steel shafts that are extra-stiff, those are are going to be next to impossible for someone that isn't pro caliber with the swing speed to match, or unless you've got the massive foot to wear the same size shoe as Shaq.
You can't simply just say, oh well, this is the most popular, most expensive bike, so it must be the most desireable for me. IT MIGHT BE, BUT IT JUST THE SAME, MIGHT NOT BE.........YOU MUST KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT THE DETAILS OF SAID BIKE(S) BEFORE YOU CAN MAKE AN GOOD INFORMED DECISION. Many bike shops don't give a damn, as if you want it, they will sell it to ya. In fairness to the LBS community, they cannot read minds and unless you plainly explain to them in terms that they can understand, they have no way of knowing exactly what might be best for you. You, as the consumer, are responsible for knowing how to compare bicycle gearing and what might meet your needs. You cannot fault the LBS community so much because their proprietors and employees typically are usually predominantly road-bike oriented, and are typically on average, high-ability road bike riders, and may not need the LOW gearing that normal folks might need.
You certainly have a few LBS that are more mountain bike oriented, etc....................but this goes to show that there are indeed differences in both bicycle preference and styles of riding............one matters just as much as the others, so you do need to focus on what is RIGHT for you. You cannot blindly go on just what the 23 year old spandex boy that is the $15 hour LBS technician that still dreams of doing the tour de france but because he has no education beyond HS and makes so little in annual wages that he still lives at home in his parents' basement, and has no plan in place to further his education or immediately significantly improve this situation.
You simply need to know enough about GEARING and how it relates to your bicycling needs. Once you know enough, you can easily determine what NEW or USED models have what might suit you the best. DON'T GUESS, or LET THE LOCAL BIKE SHOP FLUNKIE TELL YOU THAT, Oh Yeah Dude, You'll Love This, I Guarantee You Man....... in a nutshell, they simply want to ring-up a sale.
Generally, a ball-park WIDE RANGE for "GEAR" number is from about maybe (28) to about maybe (104). YOU DON'T NEED ANYTHING THAT REALLY APPROACHES (100) AS MUCH AS YOU NEED SOMETHING THAT CAN GIVE YOU DECENT ABILITY TO GET UP THE HILLS NEAR YOU.
You can certainly go a little LOWER or a little HIGHER in the "GEAR" number than those numbers.
Obviously the lower number indicates BETTER HILL CLIMBING (low gear) CAPABILITY and generally the higher the number close to ~100+ indicates typically the GREATER POTENTIAL FOR TOP-SPEED assuming that one can turn the crank at a cadence that allows for this.
Just knowing how various gearing combinations give the "GEAR" numbers that you can calculate, will allow you or anyone to instantly compare among very similar bicycles. It isn't super-scientific or perfect without flaws because there are other minor variables that could and do sometimes come into play, but if the bikes have the same size wheels and are similar enough, then those other variables will be immaterial.
Half way through I was thinking, “Okay, okay. Here’s my bank account, social security number, and Mother’s maiden name. And if you need any PIN numbers you can have those too.”
John
Likes For 70sSanO:
#64
Klaatu..Verata..Necktie?
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 17,907
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: 10397 Post(s)
Liked 11,849 Times
in
6,066 Posts
Best climbing bike, coming from a hybrid? There are a lot of 'Endurance' bikes out there, which will be an easier transition from your hybrid because the saddle-to-bar drop and reach won't be so much as it would be with a 'Climbing' bike. The bike I prefer for climbing is my Canyon Endurace, which has 52/36 chainrings and 11-34 cassette for going up, and disk brakes for coming back down. It gives up maybe a pound to a similarly equipped Ultimate.
__________________
"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
Likes For genejockey:
#66
Klaatu..Verata..Necktie?
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 17,907
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: 10397 Post(s)
Liked 11,849 Times
in
6,066 Posts
Lorem ipsum....
__________________
"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
Likes For genejockey:
#67
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 9,095 Times
in
5,053 Posts
Likes For livedarklions:
#68
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 9,095 Times
in
5,053 Posts
I don't doubt that for a second but, as you pointed out, the op was harder to answer when we had no idea what kind of riding they were doing.
A lot easier to say what the best of a type of bike is for climbing than list one for each type.
Likes For prj71:
#70
Junior Member
Thread Starter
You need to evaluate the gearing that you currently have on your bicycle.
If you do not fully understand the simple relationship that "GEARING" provides, you have little chance in getting it right on your "NEW" bike, and you'll just be pissing in the wind and throwing your money away.
Old timey, super-simple way to calculate "GEAR" number, that is entirely relevant and compareable among various bicycles:
Your numerator is the number of teeth on the front sprocket.
Your denominator is the number of teeth on the rear sprocket.
EXAMPLE: 45 front , 15 rear
45 divided by 15 = 3
3 x INCH diameter of wheel = "GEAR"
(For 27" 630mm, and 622mm 700C tires, USE (27) as INCH diameter of the wheel)
For 26" 597mm, 590mm, 650, 650a, 650b, 650c, 584mm, 571mm, and 559mm cruiser/mountain bike tire , USE (26) as INCH diameter of the wheel)
******* Yes, this does make certain assumptions and isn't precise as to such various differences as well as then the differences among the various production tires bearing the same sizing, BUT THIS Super-Simple method IS COMPAREABLE and HIGHLY ACCURATE when the bicycles being compared are not too disparate.**********
Remember that this simple calculation is:
FRONT divided by REAR = "result"
TAKE THAT "result" AND MULTIPLY IT BY THE DIAMETER IN INCHES OF THE WHEEL = "GEAR" number
Example: 45 front, 15 rear
45 divided by 15 = 3
3 X 27" = 81 GEAR
You can further do a very simple calculation that will tell you the DISTANCE IN INCHES TRAVELLED WITH EACH REVOLUTION OF THE PEDALS.
To do this, you simply take that GEAR number and MULTIPLY IT TIMES Pi and that gives you distance in INCHES Travelled.
*****You do recall from 4th grade math that Pi is equal to 3.14******************
Recall that Pi = 3.14
So taking the 81 GEAR x Pi
81 GEAR X 3.14 = 254 inches
converting to feet, for something a bit more meaningful and useful..........Simply divide the inches by 12 to get distance Travelled in feet with each Pedal Revolution.
Well that 254 inches comes close to something like 20 ft.
THE COMPUTATION FOR DISTANCE TRAVELLED WITH EACH PEDAL REVOLUTION MAY NOT BE AS MEANINGFUL AS THE SIMPLE GEAR number CALCULATION FOR COMPARING BIKES, BUT IT GIVES YOU ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT IS RELEVANT AS TO HOW slow THAT YOU MAY BE STEADILY MOVING WHILE CLIMBING SAID HILL(S). Obviously your pedal spinning rate factors in, but the DISTANCE TRAVELLED PER PEDAL REVOLUTION IS A FIXED NUMBER, so assuming that your cadence (pedal spin rate) wouldn't vary significantly among the various bikes that you are comparing, then those DISTANCE numbers are totally relevant and compareable in figuring just how slow you'd be going in any significant low gear for hill climbing. Obviously comparing widely different bicycles for example, say a 40 pound Schwinn with an Ashtabula one piece crank and factory steel wheels, with something 27 pounds or less with lightweight alloy wheels, --and unless you're almost super-human, you will not be able to SPIN the old Schwinn's crank at the same cadence as you can SPIN the lightweight bike's crank. For similar bicycle comparisons, you should have relatively comparative numbers that will help you decide what is and what is not.
I suggest that you do take stock of what your current gearing is.
Make a gear chart table that tells you the "GEAR" number for each of your bicycle's gears.
SINCE YOU ARE PRIMARILY CONCERNED WITH GETTING THE BEST HILL CLIMBING FOR YOUR NEEDS, BUT KEEPING THE OVERALL PLEASANT RIDING, YOU HAVE TO REALIZE THAT YOU GENERALLY DON'T WANT TO GIVE UP MUCH OR ANY OF YOUR TOP-END CRUISING RANGE! This is seldom ever a problem as long as you have enough gears, but you obviously can see that it would become an issue with a single speed cruiser bike... I simply want you to understand and consider the ramifications of just doing something cave-man ultra simple as some folks do with old mountain bikes or ancient ten speeds where they simply place the chain on the smallest front sprocket and forget about the other front sprokets and front derailleur.....this limits the GEAR range significantly where one might miss the cruising top end ability. YOU CAN CERTAINLY GO TO A 1 x in the front versus a double or tripple BUT DO KEEP IN MIND THAT YOUR CHOICE OF THE front's TEETH number must PROVIDE REASONABLE ENOUGH GEARING WITH WHATEVER THE CASSETTE-or-FREEWHEEL THAT YOU DO CHOOSE TO EMPLOY ON THE REAR WHEEL. You have to calculate that GEARING to see if it ultimately is both LOW geared enough and WIDE RANGING ENOUGH to Suit Your Needs!!!
That is where that your focus needs to be.
Everybody in the world can tell you that you should go this way, or look at this bike or that bike model, and perhaps some might have really useful advice in that the bike(s) that they suggest might be geared most closely to what you might need. THE PROBLEM IS YOU NEED TO KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT GEARING AND ABOUT THE DIFFERENCES OUT THERE AMONG VARIOUS MODEL BIKES, AS WELL AS THE POTENTIAL CHOICES IN CASSETTES WITH LOW GEAR AND STILL A WIDE ENOUGH RANGE. You're getting well meaning responses from smart experienced cyclists that have probably significant riding differences from your type of riding and geographic-elevation range. What you're getting is essentially the same as their opinions on favorite color, or favorite music artist/group. They aren't necessarily wrong or anything like that, but you gotta look at it as it has to be applicable to what you need and want. Shaq wears something like size 18 shoes and Tiger plays with blade irons with old school Dynamic steel shafts that are extra-stiff, those are are going to be next to impossible for someone that isn't pro caliber with the swing speed to match, or unless you've got the massive foot to wear the same size shoe as Shaq.
You can't simply just say, oh well, this is the most popular, most expensive bike, so it must be the most desireable for me. IT MIGHT BE, BUT IT JUST THE SAME, MIGHT NOT BE.........YOU MUST KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT THE DETAILS OF SAID BIKE(S) BEFORE YOU CAN MAKE AN GOOD INFORMED DECISION. Many bike shops don't give a damn, as if you want it, they will sell it to ya. In fairness to the LBS community, they cannot read minds and unless you plainly explain to them in terms that they can understand, they have no way of knowing exactly what might be best for you. You, as the consumer, are responsible for knowing how to compare bicycle gearing and what might meet your needs. You cannot fault the LBS community so much because their proprietors and employees typically are usually predominantly road-bike oriented, and are typically on average, high-ability road bike riders, and may not need the LOW gearing that normal folks might need.
You certainly have a few LBS that are more mountain bike oriented, etc....................but this goes to show that there are indeed differences in both bicycle preference and styles of riding............one matters just as much as the others, so you do need to focus on what is RIGHT for you. You cannot blindly go on just what the 23 year old spandex boy that is the $15 hour LBS technician that still dreams of doing the tour de france but because he has no education beyond HS and makes so little in annual wages that he still lives at home in his parents' basement, and has no plan in place to further his education or immediately significantly improve this situation.
You simply need to know enough about GEARING and how it relates to your bicycling needs. Once you know enough, you can easily determine what NEW or USED models have what might suit you the best. DON'T GUESS, or LET THE LOCAL BIKE SHOP FLUNKIE TELL YOU THAT, Oh Yeah Dude, You'll Love This, I Guarantee You Man....... in a nutshell, they simply want to ring-up a sale.
Generally, a ball-park WIDE RANGE for "GEAR" number is from about maybe (28) to about maybe (104). YOU DON'T NEED ANYTHING THAT REALLY APPROACHES (100) AS MUCH AS YOU NEED SOMETHING THAT CAN GIVE YOU DECENT ABILITY TO GET UP THE HILLS NEAR YOU.
You can certainly go a little LOWER or a little HIGHER in the "GEAR" number than those numbers.
Obviously the lower number indicates BETTER HILL CLIMBING (low gear) CAPABILITY and generally the higher the number close to ~100+ indicates typically the GREATER POTENTIAL FOR TOP-SPEED assuming that one can turn the crank at a cadence that allows for this.
Just knowing how various gearing combinations give the "GEAR" numbers that you can calculate, will allow you or anyone to instantly compare among very similar bicycles. It isn't super-scientific or perfect without flaws because there are other minor variables that could and do sometimes come into play, but if the bikes have the same size wheels and are similar enough, then those other variables will be immaterial.
If you do not fully understand the simple relationship that "GEARING" provides, you have little chance in getting it right on your "NEW" bike, and you'll just be pissing in the wind and throwing your money away.
Old timey, super-simple way to calculate "GEAR" number, that is entirely relevant and compareable among various bicycles:
Your numerator is the number of teeth on the front sprocket.
Your denominator is the number of teeth on the rear sprocket.
EXAMPLE: 45 front , 15 rear
45 divided by 15 = 3
3 x INCH diameter of wheel = "GEAR"
(For 27" 630mm, and 622mm 700C tires, USE (27) as INCH diameter of the wheel)
For 26" 597mm, 590mm, 650, 650a, 650b, 650c, 584mm, 571mm, and 559mm cruiser/mountain bike tire , USE (26) as INCH diameter of the wheel)
******* Yes, this does make certain assumptions and isn't precise as to such various differences as well as then the differences among the various production tires bearing the same sizing, BUT THIS Super-Simple method IS COMPAREABLE and HIGHLY ACCURATE when the bicycles being compared are not too disparate.**********
Remember that this simple calculation is:
FRONT divided by REAR = "result"
TAKE THAT "result" AND MULTIPLY IT BY THE DIAMETER IN INCHES OF THE WHEEL = "GEAR" number
Example: 45 front, 15 rear
45 divided by 15 = 3
3 X 27" = 81 GEAR
You can further do a very simple calculation that will tell you the DISTANCE IN INCHES TRAVELLED WITH EACH REVOLUTION OF THE PEDALS.
To do this, you simply take that GEAR number and MULTIPLY IT TIMES Pi and that gives you distance in INCHES Travelled.
*****You do recall from 4th grade math that Pi is equal to 3.14******************
Recall that Pi = 3.14
So taking the 81 GEAR x Pi
81 GEAR X 3.14 = 254 inches
converting to feet, for something a bit more meaningful and useful..........Simply divide the inches by 12 to get distance Travelled in feet with each Pedal Revolution.
Well that 254 inches comes close to something like 20 ft.
THE COMPUTATION FOR DISTANCE TRAVELLED WITH EACH PEDAL REVOLUTION MAY NOT BE AS MEANINGFUL AS THE SIMPLE GEAR number CALCULATION FOR COMPARING BIKES, BUT IT GIVES YOU ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT IS RELEVANT AS TO HOW slow THAT YOU MAY BE STEADILY MOVING WHILE CLIMBING SAID HILL(S). Obviously your pedal spinning rate factors in, but the DISTANCE TRAVELLED PER PEDAL REVOLUTION IS A FIXED NUMBER, so assuming that your cadence (pedal spin rate) wouldn't vary significantly among the various bikes that you are comparing, then those DISTANCE numbers are totally relevant and compareable in figuring just how slow you'd be going in any significant low gear for hill climbing. Obviously comparing widely different bicycles for example, say a 40 pound Schwinn with an Ashtabula one piece crank and factory steel wheels, with something 27 pounds or less with lightweight alloy wheels, --and unless you're almost super-human, you will not be able to SPIN the old Schwinn's crank at the same cadence as you can SPIN the lightweight bike's crank. For similar bicycle comparisons, you should have relatively comparative numbers that will help you decide what is and what is not.
I suggest that you do take stock of what your current gearing is.
Make a gear chart table that tells you the "GEAR" number for each of your bicycle's gears.
SINCE YOU ARE PRIMARILY CONCERNED WITH GETTING THE BEST HILL CLIMBING FOR YOUR NEEDS, BUT KEEPING THE OVERALL PLEASANT RIDING, YOU HAVE TO REALIZE THAT YOU GENERALLY DON'T WANT TO GIVE UP MUCH OR ANY OF YOUR TOP-END CRUISING RANGE! This is seldom ever a problem as long as you have enough gears, but you obviously can see that it would become an issue with a single speed cruiser bike... I simply want you to understand and consider the ramifications of just doing something cave-man ultra simple as some folks do with old mountain bikes or ancient ten speeds where they simply place the chain on the smallest front sprocket and forget about the other front sprokets and front derailleur.....this limits the GEAR range significantly where one might miss the cruising top end ability. YOU CAN CERTAINLY GO TO A 1 x in the front versus a double or tripple BUT DO KEEP IN MIND THAT YOUR CHOICE OF THE front's TEETH number must PROVIDE REASONABLE ENOUGH GEARING WITH WHATEVER THE CASSETTE-or-FREEWHEEL THAT YOU DO CHOOSE TO EMPLOY ON THE REAR WHEEL. You have to calculate that GEARING to see if it ultimately is both LOW geared enough and WIDE RANGING ENOUGH to Suit Your Needs!!!
That is where that your focus needs to be.
Everybody in the world can tell you that you should go this way, or look at this bike or that bike model, and perhaps some might have really useful advice in that the bike(s) that they suggest might be geared most closely to what you might need. THE PROBLEM IS YOU NEED TO KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT GEARING AND ABOUT THE DIFFERENCES OUT THERE AMONG VARIOUS MODEL BIKES, AS WELL AS THE POTENTIAL CHOICES IN CASSETTES WITH LOW GEAR AND STILL A WIDE ENOUGH RANGE. You're getting well meaning responses from smart experienced cyclists that have probably significant riding differences from your type of riding and geographic-elevation range. What you're getting is essentially the same as their opinions on favorite color, or favorite music artist/group. They aren't necessarily wrong or anything like that, but you gotta look at it as it has to be applicable to what you need and want. Shaq wears something like size 18 shoes and Tiger plays with blade irons with old school Dynamic steel shafts that are extra-stiff, those are are going to be next to impossible for someone that isn't pro caliber with the swing speed to match, or unless you've got the massive foot to wear the same size shoe as Shaq.
You can't simply just say, oh well, this is the most popular, most expensive bike, so it must be the most desireable for me. IT MIGHT BE, BUT IT JUST THE SAME, MIGHT NOT BE.........YOU MUST KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT THE DETAILS OF SAID BIKE(S) BEFORE YOU CAN MAKE AN GOOD INFORMED DECISION. Many bike shops don't give a damn, as if you want it, they will sell it to ya. In fairness to the LBS community, they cannot read minds and unless you plainly explain to them in terms that they can understand, they have no way of knowing exactly what might be best for you. You, as the consumer, are responsible for knowing how to compare bicycle gearing and what might meet your needs. You cannot fault the LBS community so much because their proprietors and employees typically are usually predominantly road-bike oriented, and are typically on average, high-ability road bike riders, and may not need the LOW gearing that normal folks might need.
You certainly have a few LBS that are more mountain bike oriented, etc....................but this goes to show that there are indeed differences in both bicycle preference and styles of riding............one matters just as much as the others, so you do need to focus on what is RIGHT for you. You cannot blindly go on just what the 23 year old spandex boy that is the $15 hour LBS technician that still dreams of doing the tour de france but because he has no education beyond HS and makes so little in annual wages that he still lives at home in his parents' basement, and has no plan in place to further his education or immediately significantly improve this situation.
You simply need to know enough about GEARING and how it relates to your bicycling needs. Once you know enough, you can easily determine what NEW or USED models have what might suit you the best. DON'T GUESS, or LET THE LOCAL BIKE SHOP FLUNKIE TELL YOU THAT, Oh Yeah Dude, You'll Love This, I Guarantee You Man....... in a nutshell, they simply want to ring-up a sale.
Generally, a ball-park WIDE RANGE for "GEAR" number is from about maybe (28) to about maybe (104). YOU DON'T NEED ANYTHING THAT REALLY APPROACHES (100) AS MUCH AS YOU NEED SOMETHING THAT CAN GIVE YOU DECENT ABILITY TO GET UP THE HILLS NEAR YOU.
You can certainly go a little LOWER or a little HIGHER in the "GEAR" number than those numbers.
Obviously the lower number indicates BETTER HILL CLIMBING (low gear) CAPABILITY and generally the higher the number close to ~100+ indicates typically the GREATER POTENTIAL FOR TOP-SPEED assuming that one can turn the crank at a cadence that allows for this.
Just knowing how various gearing combinations give the "GEAR" numbers that you can calculate, will allow you or anyone to instantly compare among very similar bicycles. It isn't super-scientific or perfect without flaws because there are other minor variables that could and do sometimes come into play, but if the bikes have the same size wheels and are similar enough, then those other variables will be immaterial.
#71
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
...You cannot blindly go on just what the 23 year old spandex boy that is the $15 hour LBS technician that still dreams of doing the tour de france but because he has no education beyond HS and makes so little in annual wages that he still lives at home in his parents' basement, and has no plan in place to further his education or immediately significantly improve this situation...
#72
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: North Central Wisconsin
Posts: 4,618
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2973 Post(s)
Liked 1,178 Times
in
769 Posts
Vintage Schwinn's post is the type that would make we quit biking if I had to think about it that way. Seriously....Who does that?
#73
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,212
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18397 Post(s)
Liked 15,485 Times
in
7,316 Posts