Gearing snobbery?

[Accy cyclist]

Wouldn't dream of it mate her bikes are a complete mess to be truthful I believe her favorite one got nicked

Yes she left it on the front of the house overnight...unlocked!!
Anyway, i'm off to do a few hours ladder climbing..in the sunshine!
Speak to you soon!

 

[Nibor]

Enjoy Craig will have to go out for a ride some time mate.

 

[iggibizzle]

Nothing wrong with a 32. I have one. Rarely use it but it's good to know it's there incase of emergency. Especially toward the tail end of 100+ mile rides when you get to 20% ers.

 

[Accy cyclist]

Enjoy Craig will have to go out for a ride some time mate.

Yes ok.

 

[dellzeqq]

True gear snobbery would involve pointing out that Campagnolo cassettes only go up to 29...

true gear snobbery is not being seen within ten feet of a Campagnolo cassette

 

[adamangler]

It is not the wattage but the pedalling force that is reduced by low gears. As "grandad" a few posts back noted, he kept climbing whilst all those younger, fitter, higher wattage riders ran out of low gear and could not generate the turning force so they stalled. It is like starting your car on a hill in 3rd gear.

isnt wattage the same as turning force or torque?

for example a guy putting out 400watts on a flat time trial is going to be pushing a significantly bigger gear than a 200w rider

surely up a hill a guy holding 400w would turn a bigger gear than the 200w rider, the 200w rider could get bogged down and run out of gears, wheras if he could hold 400w he would not get bogged down and run out as he is putting out more power required to turn the pedals

i would have though the guy putting out 400w on a climb would spin out a 34-28 and wouldnt be able to put 400w out in this gear unless the gradient was ridiculously steep.

 

[ColinJ]

isnt wattage the same as turning force or torque?

for example a guy putting out 400watts on a flat time trial is going to be pushing a significantly bigger gear than a 200w rider

surely up a hill a guy holding 400w would turn a bigger gear than the 200w rider, the 200w rider could get bogged down and run out of gears, wheras if he could hold 400w he would not get bogged down and run out as he is putting out more power required to turn the pedals

No - 200 W guy might be using exactly the same gear as 400 W guy, but with a much lower cadence and therefore speed. Power and force are not the same thing.

i would have though the guy putting out 400w on a climb would spin out a 34-28 and wouldnt be able to put 400w out in this gear unless the gradient was ridiculously steep.

I used an online calculator to try out some numbers ...

On a 10% climb, (a particular rider on a particular bike who was generating) 400 W on a 34/28 gear with a cadence of 100 rpm might climb at a speed of about 16 km/hr or 10 miles/hr. So if the rider wanted to use a cadence of 100 rpm on the climb, they would need a gear of 34/28 or lower for gradients of 10+%. For less steep climbs and/or lower cadences they'd need to use higher gears.

 

[Ajax Bay]

please compare this picture with my avater (sic)

'Nibor' - your avatar image is a much 'harder' 'I mean business' look than the happy chappy in the photo @Accy cyclist posted.

 

[Ajax Bay]

isnt wattage the same as turning force or torque?

Dimensions are different. Torque is Nm and power (as you have called it 'wattage') is Nm/s.
I think, moderating my earlier argument and having had a long relatively hilly ride today to, inter alia, think about it, the reason why the young lads 'stalled' may have been because they couldn't generate their 'powerrr' at very low revs. Just as cars have different torque curves: typically diesels can still pull (eg up hill) at revs which a petrol-fuelled car can't manage. The power @ColinJ was generating at his (much) higher cadence, was less than the young lads' but he could deliver it: they couldn't.

Just before my turn, I was overtaken by a fast-moving group of younger male riders. One of them spotted the gearing on my bike and started laughing. He called out "Ha ha - got yer triple ready have yer, granddad!"
They climbed away from me up round a RH bend where the road really starts to kick up. I engaged my 28/28 bottom gear and was twiddling my way up at a comfortable pace when I turned the bend and saw a slow-moving group of younger male WALKERS ahead of me, dripping sweat, and pushing their bikes.

Or perhaps more likely, in a young testosterone-filled group, they competitively hammered the first bit of the climb, went way over threshold, and found there was no way but 'off'.

 

[ColinJ]

Dimensions are different. Torque is Nm and power (as you have called it 'wattage') is Nm/s.
I think, moderating my earlier argument and having had a long relatively hilly ride today to, inter alia, think about it, the reason why the young lads 'stalled' may have been because they couldn't generate their 'powerrr' at very low revs. Just as cars have different torque curves: typically diesels can still pull (eg up hill), whereas @ at revs which a petrol-fuelled car can't manage. The power @ColinJ was generating at his (much) higher cadence, was less than the young lads' but he could deliver it: they couldn't.

Or perhaps more likely, in a young testosterone-filled group, they competitively hammered the first bit of the climb, went way over threshold, and found there was no way but 'off'.

Yes!

I am sure that they were fitter than me. I was overweight and suffering from a sore back that day, but I knew what I had to do to get up the climb at a reasonable pace. They completely misjudged it.

They were only having fun teasing me, and I thought it was funny giving it back to them a few minutes later.

 

[Mikesshed]

Very new starter, I have a triple, 50/39/30 and 12 - 25 at rear, only just made myself use the inner ring, too old to kill myself, would certainly consider bigger cogs on rear if needed, not explored enough yet

 

[Apollonius]

Don't rush to change anything until you have built up your fitness a bit. You will be amazed how quickly hills shrink once you have a few hundred miles of fitness in your legs.

 

[fatjel]

So .. my jamis has , as it's lowest gear , 26 on the front and 34 on the back...

 

[GuyBoden]

Very new starter, I have a triple, 50/39/30 and 12 - 25 at rear, only just made myself use the inner ring, too old to kill myself, would certainly consider bigger cogs on rear if needed, not explored enough yet

Don't rush to change anything until you have built up your fitness a bit. You will be amazed how quickly hills shrink once you have a few hundred miles of fitness in your legs.

Excellent advice, you'll get up most hills with a 30T front chainring when you're fitter.....