Climbing Groupset for new bike

[Patdys]

My marriage has one new bike left in it.

I currently ride an old azzuri primo with ultegra 53/39 and 23/11. Last year I rode 6000 km with 60 km of climb.
I can climb the Adelaide nasty hills with this- Checkers, Corkscrew, Sheoak, Woodlands etc- but it hurts. A lot.

My bike will be used for the Alpine Classic and Taupo enduro, I hope. (next long term goals). I am better at distance and hills than speed.

I thought I would keep the gearing the same on the new beast, which will be lighter, more comfortable and have a Sram red groupset. I like the smoothness of the change with the 'tighter' cluster. My question is, should I consider a 12/27 cluster or compact crank? I currently have the power to cope with steep hills, although it really hurts. Would a lower granny gear help?
My gut feeling is that if it aint broke, don't fix it. What do ya reckon?

[hartleymartin]

An extra bottom gear may not always be used, but will be appreciated when you come to a hill steeper than expected.

[bongo]

I have gone the compact and cant rate it enough.A lot of climbs on the old bike with the same 11/23 cassette you have, were out of the saddle stomping on the pedals,now I can sit and spin for longer and faster.I believe it is a lot more efficient and less stress on knees.I cant spin up corkscrew as my strength and fitness is not to that level,but most other climbs are fine.You do change from the big to small chainring more often,is just something to get used to,no real problem.

[biker jk]

I know you mentioned you have a Sram groupset but I have a compact Ultegra 6700 with 11-28 cassette so you get a very low gear and keep the high one at the cost of bigger jumps across the cluster. if you do a lot of longer hills/mountains then the compact is great. since you will be shifting frm the big to small chainring more often you really want great front shifting (it is with Ultegra 6700).

[Patdys]

We have votes for both a compact crank and a wider spread across the cluster.
I could perceive the compact crank will give me a lower range generally, whilst maintaining 'smoothness in changing' within the cluster. I guess that would lean me towards a compact crank. The downside being you lose power through the entire cluster I guess.

[drubie]

We have votes for both a compact crank and a wider spread across the cluster.
I could perceive the compact crank will give me a lower range generally, whilst maintaining 'smoothness in changing' within the cluster. I guess that would lean me towards a compact crank. The downside being you lose power through the entire cluster I guess.

You don't necessarily "lose power" but if you're a chugger rather than a spinner, you might lose some speed on the flats with a compact.

Compromise might be a compact crank with slightly larger chain rings - say a 52 instead of the 50 and a 38 instead of the 34. FSA do some sets like that.
I think the 28 rears are more designed for touring/tandems than for a road bike.

[PHL]

You don't necessarily "lose power" but if you're a chugger rather than a spinner, you might lose some speed on the flats with a compact.

Easy enough to calculate; you lose 8%. Actually a bigger issue for spinners, as it's something like .8m development per rev, so at 100 rpm, it would be 80m, whereas at say 50rpm, it would be 40m.

[ausrandoman]

My bike will be used for the Alpine Classic and Taupo enduro, I hope. (next long term goals). I am better at distance and hills than speed.

I did the last Taupo Enduro and the ACE 250 (finished mid-field). Like you, I'm better at endurance than speed. I used a 24/38/48 triple chainwheel. No strain, no pain, no stress. You're obviously stronger than me, so a bog-standard 30 tooth inner ring would probably be low enough and you can keep the nice close ratios of the 11-23.

If smoothness changing across the cassette is a concern, a triple is the winner: you'd mostly be on the middle ring. I found that a compact double involved too much double shifting.

[ausrandoman]

The downside being you lose power through the entire cluster I guess.

What does that mean? Why would you "lose power"? Where would it go? Please do not interpret this as an argument: I am genuinely mystified.

[Patdys]

The downside being you lose power through the entire cluster I guess.

What does that mean? Why would you "lose power"? Where would it go? Please do not interpret this as an argument: I am genuinely mystified.

The confusion is probably due to me still learning the jargon. And besides this is only a five minute argument and you have paid for the full half hour.

What I meant was that with a smaller chain ring, every gear on the cluster, would have the net cost/benefit of that smaller chain ring. Whereas widening the ratios of the cluster itself would only affect the gears at the top and bottom of the cluster that are actually outside the current utilised range.

[rkelsen]

How about going for a triple crankset?

This will give you a much lower gear set for climbing, while enabling you to maintain you higher gears too.

I recently went from a double (52/42) to 52/42/28, keeping the same cassette. I had to swap the derailleurs too, but now I have a 28/26 low gear which is brilliant for climbing steeper hills. Top gear for me is 52/13, which is kinda low by modern standards but still too hard for me to push on the flat. At 120 rpm, this gear is enough to get to 60km/h which is more than fast enough for me. Upgrading the "top end" would be as easy as swapping the large chainring or buying a cassette which has an 11 or 12 tooth top gear.

[cooperplace]

My bike will be used for the Alpine Classic and Taupo enduro, I hope. (next long term goals). I am better at distance and hills than speed.

I did the last Taupo Enduro and the ACE 250 (finished mid-field). Like you, I'm better at endurance than speed. I used a 24/38/48 triple chainwheel. No strain, no pain, no stress. You're obviously stronger than me, so a bog-standard 30 tooth inner ring would probably be low enough and you can keep the nice close ratios of the 11-23.

If smoothness changing across the cassette is a concern, a triple is the winner: you'd mostly be on the middle ring. I found that a compact double involved too much double shifting.

well that's interesting. I ride exactly the same roads in the Adelaide Hills. I like climbing. I had a 34/50 and 12 to 30 on my old bike, and thought I wanted lower when I got a new bike, so I got a triple campag 30/39/53 and 12 to 28 on the rear. It was a royal pain in the neck because the small on the front was too low and I always found myself changing front & rear. So I threw away the expensive campag and put the cheap 9 speed Sora 34/50 on, from my old bike, and I love it. Turns out I didn't need to go lower. And I'm much happier with a compact than a triple. I usually use small chainring for ascents, big for descents.

SO it depends on personal preference and perhaps on the derailleurs too.

Hope this helps.

Peter.

[brockie2]

Check this out.
http://www.sram.com/news/sram-apex-wher ... -takes-you

[Mulger bill]

Check this out.
http://www.sram.com/news/sram-apex-wher ... -takes-you

Thanks for that, investigating...

Shaun

[sblack]

My bike will be used for the Alpine Classic and Taupo enduro, I hope. (next long term goals). I am better at distance and hills than speed.

I did the last Taupo Enduro and the ACE 250 (finished mid-field). Like you, I'm better at endurance than speed. I used a 24/38/48 triple chainwheel. No strain, no pain, no stress. You're obviously stronger than me, so a bog-standard 30 tooth inner ring would probably be low enough and you can keep the nice close ratios of the 11-23.

If smoothness changing across the cassette is a concern, a triple is the winner: you'd mostly be on the middle ring. I found that a compact double involved too much double shifting.

well that's interesting. I ride exactly the same roads in the Adelaide Hills. I like climbing. I had a 34/50 and 12 to 30 on my old bike, and thought I wanted lower when I got a new bike, so I got a triple campag 30/39/53 and 12 to 28 on the rear. It was a royal pain in the neck because the small on the front was too low and I always found myself changing front & rear. So I threw away the expensive campag and put the cheap 9 speed Sora 34/50 on, from my old bike, and I love it. Turns out I didn't need to go lower. And I'm much happier with a compact than a triple. I usually use small chainring for ascents, big for descents.

SO it depends on personal preference and perhaps on the derailleurs too.

Hope this helps.

Peter.

I'm another triple user here. Mine is a 52/42/30 and 12-26 (9 speed). Personally I find the 12-26 a little more spaced out than I'd like and if I wasn't towing my son in a trailer up hills I'd be thinking of getting a smaller range on the back but at times when towing my son up the hill to home I start thinking something bigger on the back would be nicer so for now it's a reasonable compromise.

So to the OP, if you're already happy most of the time with 53/39 and 11-23 then maybe the option of 53/39/30 with 11-23 would be worth considering. It'll give you the gearing you're familiar and happy with now with the added option of the 30 for the tougher climbs and/or longer rides.