# Gear ratios for touring



## roundisland (18 Jul 2010)

Hi I'm looking at a bike at the moment with a chaingring set up of 30-42-52 and a rear cassette of 12-26 is this setup going to be any good for climbing hills with the bike loaded up.

Any advice on what i find a complicated subject much appreciated.


----------



## Muddyfox (18 Jul 2010)

roundisland said:


> Hi I'm looking at a bike at the moment with a chaingring set up of 30-42-52 and a rear cassette of 12-26 is this setup going to be any good for climbing hills with the bike loaded up.
> 
> Any advice on what i find a complicated subject much appreciated.



My Ridgeback Panorama uses a 48-36-26 up front with an 11-32 cassette at the back 

So the gear ratios your looking at might be a bit high for loaded touring ?


----------



## andym (18 Jul 2010)

Muddyfox said:


> My Ridgeback Panorama uses a 48-36-26 up front with an 11-32 cassette at the back
> 
> So the gear ratios your looking at might be a bit high for loaded touring ?



48-36-26 and 11-32 (or even 11-34) seems to be the most popular spec for purpose-built touring bikes. But the choice of ratios depends a lot on how fit you are, your riding style, and where you are riding.

If you are fit/riding in a flat area/prefer riding with a slower cadence (or all three) then you might want to tend towards bigger chainrings. And of course the converse applies.

My advice would be to err on the side of lower gears.


----------



## roundisland (18 Jul 2010)

Thanks for the replies. the ratios i have mentioned are currently on a Claud Butler Regent touring bike. If the setup of 30-42-52 rear cassette 12-26 wont be practical for fully loaded touring what would there reason be for setting the bike up like that. cost? The regent being a budget level touring bike.


----------



## willem (18 Jul 2010)

The reason is simple: cost and convenience for the manufacturer. This is a drop bar tourer (I love those) with sti shifters, so it is easiest to use road bike components. Road bike sti works best out of the box with 130 mm bcd road cranksets such as this one (minimum ring size 48-38-26, but those smaller rings would be special order because not standard on a road bike). The alternative would be a 110 mm bcd diameter triple crankset (allowing something like 46-36-24) but for these the manufacturer has to shop elsewhere.such as with Sugino.
Even for a road bike for a mere mortal the gearing is actually on the high side, but all those wannabees who think they are racing the Tour de France don't want sensible gearing. It looks like the bike comes with a long arm rear derailleur, so a larger cassette with 34t should be fine, and may be perhaps be exchanged on purchase of the bike. By the time you change the front chainwheels, you could replace them by more sensible rings such as 48-38-26, provided you can lower the front derailleur sufficiently. For now, you could also try to use a 28t ring instead of the 30t. That should probably work ok, and will not cost much. In general, for loaded touring my preference is for the lowest gearing you can get with mtb parts, such as 22 or 24 front and 32 or 34 rear, and work upwards from there to see what the highest gear is that the derailleurs will take. You will need those low gears, and it is far more important to get up that hill/mountain than to be able to pedal on a fast descent.
This changes a bit of course if you travel really ultralight with only something like 10 kg, but even then you would like at least 1:1 gearing which this bike does not have.
Willem


----------



## Banjo (18 Jul 2010)

roundisland said:


> Hi I'm looking at a bike at the moment with a chaingring set up of 30-42-52 and a rear cassette of 12-26 is this setup going to be any good for climbing hills with the bike loaded up.
> 
> Any advice on what i find a complicated subject much appreciated.



My 9kg Scott Speedster triple roadbike has a 30 tooth small chainring and 25 tooth largest cog. Gets me up steep long hills carrying two gels and a marsbar but I couldnt see it being any use on a laden touring bike.


----------



## mcshroom (18 Jul 2010)

Looking up the rear mech (Shimano 2300) it appears to only be rated up to 26t. (Confusingly Tredz state their Regent's have an 11-30




)

I don't know why they've gone with a road mech on a tourer. I've just got a Dawes Vantage (same sort of price) and that has an altus mtb rear mech. Gearing is 48-38-28 front and 11-32 rear .To buy replacements the altus and the 2300 are almost identical in price. (about £15-£20) so I can't see where the saving is.

It may be that the gearing is suitable for the sort of riding you intend to do, although I'd prefer lower myself.


----------



## HJ (18 Jul 2010)

roundisland said:


> Thanks for the replies. the ratios i have mentioned are currently on a Claud Butler Regent touring bike. If the setup of 30-42-52 rear cassette 12-26 wont be practical for fully loaded touring what would there reason be for setting the bike up like that. cost? The regent being a budget level touring bike.



The cheapest thing to do would be to swop to an 11-28 cassette, which should give you low enough gearing.


----------



## snorri (18 Jul 2010)

roundisland said:


> Any advice on what i find a complicated subject much appreciated.


Perhaps it just complicates the issue for you, but as you have not yet purchased a bike, have you considered buying a Rohloff compatible model? Their hubs seem to be the answer for trouble free touring.


----------



## willem (18 Jul 2010)

They are, but not at this kind of price bracket.
Willem


----------



## vernon (18 Jul 2010)

I had a Raleigh road bike and I successfull lowered the gearing by changing the 30 tooth granny ring to a 26 tooth and substituting an 11- 28 tooth cassette. No mech changes or adjustments were needed.

For touring though, I'd look at getting a cassette with a largest sprocket of 32 teeth which will mean you having to buy a mountain bike mech for the rear.


----------



## byegad (18 Jul 2010)

Imagine it's blowing a gale into your face, you're tired and the hill you are climbing seems never ending. 

26 at the front and 34 at the back, will give you a gear you can keep turning until you get to the top. 30 front 26 back is a lot higher so much harder to keep turning over. 

I'd be looking for a 22 at the front to 34 at the back, but I'm 59 and travel with the kitchen sink!


----------



## MacB (18 Jul 2010)

30/42/52 is the sort of gearing I'd expect to see on a bike for general use that could be toured on in a pinch. It doesn't fit in with a full on touring setup and definitely seems like a cost thing rather than a fit for purpose thing.


----------



## Ben M (19 Jul 2010)

I toured on a 50/34T and 12-25T cassette and it was fine.


----------



## roundisland (21 Jul 2010)

thanks for all the reples really useful info and feel I have learnt more about gearing, decided not to buy , but the bike though it reached a good price on ebay £360 for a bike that you can get new for £399


----------



## Danny (21 Jul 2010)

For a long time I had a set up similar to your's, but when I got a new touring bike two years ago I changed it following advice given here, and went for a 44, 32, 22 crankset, and a 12-27 nine speed rear cassette. 

This was definitely a big improvement for touring and I wouldn't go back to my old setup. Having spent years riding on bikes with wide ratio rear cassettes I would definitely recommend trying to fit one with closer ratios.


----------



## Ergle (22 Jul 2010)

I would go for the lowest gears you can get for loaded touring.
I had a 28 tooth inner chainring and thought it was fine until I had to push the bike, loaded for camping, up hills. in cycling shoes it was not fun at all. 

My Thorn Sherpa has an MTB chainset, and I have fitted a 22 ring inner on it. That, with a 34 tooth on the cassette will climb a house.


----------



## Dave Davenport (26 Jul 2010)

Ben M said:


> I toured on a 50/34T and 12-25T cassette and it was fine.



I've used the same set up when staying at B&B's but wouldn't fancy it fully loaded with camping gear (use a 26-36-46 x 12-27 for that).


----------

