Most common gearing on a road bike

[lostinthought]

I'm probably not typical and I'd say my gearing preferences are far from common, but nowadays I like a bottom gear of about 20" and a top one of about 100". My bikes are not what would spring to mind when talking "road bikes" but they're definitely for road use (even if one in particular is designed for off road use too) and they're designed for carrying weight (camping/touring/utility).

I find that in the hills of Warwickshire, I often use a very low gear whether I'm carrying weight or not. I can spin out downhill on my 2x, but this is at speeds in excess of 30mph and I'd rather tuck in and relax than pedal.

Here is the gearing of my 2x "adventure" bike and my 3x "road touring" bike (speed shown for cadence of 90rpm):
View attachment 761947

. . . and because people here are discussing such things, here's the gearing for the road bike I had in the early 80s (I had replaced the original freewheel for a 14-34T one)
View attachment 761948

For the uninitiated, the orange numbers are chainring tooth-count and the white-on black ones are rear sprocket tooth-count. Black numbers above the sprocket markers are gear-inches.

What website/app did you use to generate that visual? Or did you somehow make it yourself?! I like how it shows ratios proportionately

 

[ColinJ]

What website/app did you use to generate that visual? Or did you somehow make it yourself?! I like how it shows ratios proportionately

I liked it too so I did a search and found Gearcalculator.com.

PS It took me a while to work out how to do custom chainrings and cassettes... Drag a copy of the ring or sprocket icon from the left to where you want it. Repeat for more of them.

 

[wafter]

I'm probably not typical and I'd say my gearing preferences are far from common, but nowadays I like a bottom gear of about 20" and a top one of about 100". My bikes are not what would spring to mind when talking "road bikes" but they're definitely for road use (even if one in particular is designed for off road use too) and they're designed for carrying weight (camping/touring/utility).

I find that in the hills of Warwickshire, I often use a very low gear whether I'm carrying weight or not. I can spin out downhill on my 2x, but this is at speeds in excess of 30mph and I'd rather tuck in and relax than pedal.

Here is the gearing of my 2x "adventure" bike and my 3x "road touring" bike (speed shown for cadence of 90rpm):
View attachment 761947

. . . and because people here are discussing such things, here's the gearing for the road bike I had in the early 80s (I had replaced the original freewheel for a 14-34T one)
View attachment 761948

For the uninitiated, the orange numbers are chainring tooth-count and the white-on black ones are rear sprocket tooth-count. Black numbers above the sprocket markers are gear-inches.

Nice work - I assume the sub-compact double is an MTB crankset..? How do you find the top end on the road? I'm looking at a sub-compact double; typical "gravel" stuff at 46/30 still seems too high, but don't have the stone to go as low as MTB gear..

How do you find the double compared to the triple? I also have a 48/36/26 x 11-34 and love it - seems by far the most versatile, rounded and pleasant-to-use groupset I've ridden.

I liked it too so I did a search and found Gearcalculator.com.

PS It took me a while to work out how to do custom chainrings and cassettes... Drag a copy of the ring or sprocket icon from the left to where you want it. Repeat for more of them.

I've never paid too much attention to this site as I've always used spreadsheets to compare gearing, however having had a play recently I found it to be a really well-thought out and capable tool for visualising different setups

 

[freiston]

Yup, https://www.gear-calculator.com is the website I use for gear ratios. It's really useful for comparing bikes and "experimenting" with different set-ups.

Nice work - I assume the sub-compact double is an MTB crankset..? How do you find the top end on the road? I'm looking at a sub-compact double; typical "gravel" stuff at 46/30 still seems too high, but don't have the stone to go as low as MTB gear..

How do you find the double compared to the triple? I also have a 48/36/26 x 11-34 and love it - seems by far the most versatile, rounded and pleasant-to-use groupset I've ridden.

The sub-compact is the Spa Cycles TD-2 Super Compact - basically a touring triple with the outer ring replaced with a chainguard. I have it on a Spa Rove - but my spec differs quite a bit from the standard spec.
My triple is on a Jamis Aurora drop-bar touring bike (again, a bit different from the standard spec). I found that I almost never used the big ring and this is what made me think about a 2x for the Rove. On the road with the Rove, I don't miss the higher gear of the triple. I'm not sure how much this is to do with the Rove being a different beast, but probably not much cos I don't use the top gear on the Aurora much. The hills I typically ride tend to be short up and downs and on narrow windy roads, so I don't get the opportunity to make good use of a gear above 100". I'm not a fast rider.

With the extra sprocket on the 2x cassette, I get a good close ratio set-up and keep the overall gearing a wide ratio. Admittedly, I do lose my top gear, but I rarely used it anyway. I like the 2x so much that I was tempted to fit similar onto the Jamis - but I couldn't justify it on account of the "gain" being negligible and also that I tend to ride the Rove a lot more than the Aurora.

For reference, here are the two bikes (click for bigger image), both get used for four-pannier camping trips as well as pottering around country lanes; the plan is to use the Rove a lot more off-road and avoid the traffic.

 

[All uphill]

Yup, https://www.gear-calculator.com is the website I use for gear ratios. It's really useful for comparing bikes and "experimenting" with different set-ups.

The sub-compact is the Spa Cycles TD-2 Super Compact - basically a touring triple with the outer ring replaced with a chainguard. I have it on a Spa Rove - but my spec differs quite a bit from the standard spec.
My triple is on a Jamis Aurora drop-bar touring bike (again, a bit different from the standard spec). I found that I almost never used the big ring and this is what made me think about a 2x for the Rove. On the road with the Rove, I don't miss the higher gear of the triple. I'm not sure how much this is to do with the Rove being a different beast, but probably not much cos I don't use the top gear on the Aurora much. The hills I typically ride tend to be short up and downs and on narrow windy roads, so I don't get the opportunity to make good use of a gear above 100". I'm not a fast rider.

With the extra sprocket on the 2x cassette, I get a good close ratio set-up and keep the overall gearing a wide ratio. Admittedly, I do lose my top gear, but I rarely used it anyway. I like the 2x so much that I was tempted to fit similar onto the Jamis - but I couldn't justify it on account of the "gain" being negligible and also that I tend to ride the Rove a lot more than the Aurora.

For reference, here are the two bikes (click for bigger image), both get used for four-pannier camping trips as well as pottering around country lanes; the plan is to use the Rove a lot more off-road and avoid the traffic.

View attachment 762014

View attachment 762015

My 2x9 set up results in something similar.

21" to 106" and 90%+ of my cycling on the big ring, so I've optimised the chain line and chain length for that ring. The little ring is then only used for the bail-out gears.

 

[Ian H]

I run two triples and a double, but none of my cassettes go as far as 30T. I keep them close ratio. The club bike is 48/36, the other two 48/38 and either 26 or 24. Then of course there's this...

 

[wafter]

The sub-compact is the Spa Cycles TD-2 Super Compact - basically a touring triple with the outer ring replaced with a chainguard. I have it on a Spa Rove - but my spec differs quite a bit from the standard spec.
My triple is on a Jamis Aurora drop-bar touring bike (again, a bit different from the standard spec). I found that I almost never used the big ring and this is what made me think about a 2x for the Rove. On the road with the Rove, I don't miss the higher gear of the triple. I'm not sure how much this is to do with the Rove being a different beast, but probably not much cos I don't use the top gear on the Aurora much. The hills I typically ride tend to be short up and downs and on narrow windy roads, so I don't get the opportunity to make good use of a gear above 100". I'm not a fast rider.

With the extra sprocket on the 2x cassette, I get a good close ratio set-up and keep the overall gearing a wide ratio. Admittedly, I do lose my top gear, but I rarely used it anyway. I like the 2x so much that I was tempted to fit similar onto the Jamis - but I couldn't justify it on account of the "gain" being negligible and also that I tend to ride the Rove a lot more than the Aurora.

For reference, here are the two bikes (click for bigger image), both get used for four-pannier camping trips as well as pottering around country lanes; the plan is to use the Rove a lot more off-road and avoid the traffic.

View attachment 762014

View attachment 762015

Thanks - those look like a nice versatile pair

Ta for the link; seems that the off-the-shelf provision for dedicated sub-compacts is pretty pitiful and the "two-rings-on-a-triple" approach is a fairly common route to achieving this goal. Nice to see that achieved with a five-arm offering in your case - although unfortunately the square-taper axle rules it out for my application.

Of course rather than crippling a triple by effectively removing a ring I'd rather just have a triple.. but unfortunately modern component (in)compatability makes this impossible in my case too.

Your usage sounds similar to my own; truth be told I'm in the 36t middle ring for 95% of the time and on the rare occasions I shift it's usually down for a particularly arduous hill. The 48t ring rarely sees any use but I'm not sure I'd want to commit to being without it. Plus, as in your case the triple is on a tourer that's often ridden loaded and likely at a more leisurely pace than the gravel bike... so it's possible I'd find a max of 36/38t a bit restrictive.

What FD are you using on the Rove (I'm guessing something MTB-based..?) and how do you find the chainstay clearance? I notice you have a pretty large cutout where it joins the BB, so potentially less of an issue..

 

[Tail End Charlie]

My Sabbath September has an MTB triple (48,36,26) up front and 105 (11-27) at the rear. It is ten speed.
My Dawes Sardar tourer has a triple up front (I think it's one from Spa cycles XD something) and a MTB cassette at the rear which has a dinnerplate lowest (something like a 14-34). It is 9 speed.
On both bikes I can't push the highest gear on the flat, but regularly use the lowest gear (and often wish the September was lower still).

 

[T4tomo]

I'm slowly heading towards getting a road bike after years of using an MTB. What's the most common set up I should be looking for if riding in a hilly area. Lots of rolling countryside near me with the occasional flat bit, so likely need lower gearing than top speed.

Prefer disc brakes but is that a disadvantage with road bikes?

If that's a photo of you in your avatar I'd go as low as you possibly can

 

[freiston]

Thanks - those look like a nice versatile pair

Ta for the link; seems that the off-the-shelf provision for dedicated sub-compacts is pretty pitiful and the "two-rings-on-a-triple" approach is a fairly common route to achieving this goal. Nice to see that achieved with a five-arm offering in your case - although unfortunately the square-taper axle rules it out for my application.

Of course rather than crippling a triple by effectively removing a ring I'd rather just have a triple.. but unfortunately modern component (in)compatability makes this impossible in my case too.

Your usage sounds similar to my own; truth be told I'm in the 36t middle ring for 95% of the time and on the rare occasions I shift it's usually down for a particularly arduous hill. The 48t ring rarely sees any use but I'm not sure I'd want to commit to being without it. Plus, as in your case the triple is on a tourer that's often ridden loaded and likely at a more leisurely pace than the gravel bike... so it's possible I'd find a max of 36/38t a bit restrictive.

What FD are you using on the Rove (I'm guessing something MTB-based..?) and how do you find the chainstay clearance? I notice you have a pretty large cutout where it joins the BB, so potentially less of an issue..

Yeah, I agree about crippling the triple - my cheapest option to "convert" the Aurora from 3x to 2x would be to get rid of the big ring - but all loss and no gain. If I changed the little and middle rings, I wouldn't be changing the overall range much either. Our usage sound very similar.

The FD is a Shimano Deore FD-M6025. The chainstay clearance is good even though the frame can take wide tyres (not sure how wide but the standard spec comes with 29" 2.25" tyres). As you say, there is like a "cutout" for the chainset which can be clearly seen in the photos on Spa's Rove frame page.

 

[wafter]

Yeah, I agree about crippling the triple - my cheapest option to "convert" the Aurora from 3x to 2x would be to get rid of the big ring - but all loss and no gain. If I changed the little and middle rings, I wouldn't be changing the overall range much either. Our usage sound very similar.

The FD is a Shimano Deore FD-M6025. The chainstay clearance is good even though the frame can take wide tyres (not sure how wide but the standard spec comes with 29" 2.25" tyres). As you say, there is like a "cutout" for the chainset which can be clearly seen in the photos on Spa's Rove frame page.

That all makes sense - personally I'd hang onto the triple like grim death since they're now almost extinct.

Thanks for the info on the frame and FD; I notice it has a particularly short and stubby cage; which I assume is a result of the small rings it's intended to shift. Unfortuantely I need to use mine with drop bar shifters so I suspect this model is out on account of the cable pull.. I have a GRX FD lined up but am becoming increasingly concerned about chainstay clearance. I suppose I can only suck it and see once I have all of the bits..

 

[Chislenko]

That all makes sense - personally I'd hang onto the triple like grim death since they're now almost extinct.

Thanks for the info on the frame and FD; I notice it has a particularly short and stubby cage; which I assume is a result of the small rings it's intended to shift. Unfortuantely I need to use mine with drop bar shifters so I suspect this model is out on account of the cable pull.. I have a GRX FD lined up but am becoming increasingly concerned about chainstay clearance. I suppose I can only suck it and see once I have all of the bits..

I converted a drop bar (Sora 3 x 8) to a flat bar. Obviously had to change the shifters (they are Shimano something or other) but it can take a bit of effort to get it into the big outer front ring.

 

[Dogtrousers]

I've just been poring over photos of my bike from my younger years. As far as I can tell it was 52/42 or maybe 40. With a biggest sprocket of I think 28. So a bottom gear of about 40" if I've got that right. No wonder I had a tough time touring.

I only have myself to blame as I built the bike myself in circa 1978 but I had no source of advice or info other than Richard's Bicycle Book. I knew nothing about gear ratios.

 

[lostinthought]

I've just been poring over photos of my bike from my younger years. As far as I can tell it was 52/42 or maybe 40. With a biggest sprocket of I think 28. So a bottom gear of about 40" if I've got that right. No wonder I had a tough time touring.

I only have myself to blame as I built the bike myself in circa 1978 but I had no source of advice or info other than Richard's Bicycle Book. I knew nothing about gear ratios.

When I started cycling "properly", as a teenager in the late 80's, my bike had 52/42 chainrings and a 13-23 freewheel. I later swapped to a 13-21 because it looked cooler and I thought made me better...

Those are basically 50 inch lowest gears! I rode the same hills then that I do now, struggling with a 36/32 30 inch low gear. I honestly don't know how I did it. Fitter, sure, and a bit lighter, but I guess you just manage with what you've got!

I might try limiting myself to the 19 sprocket next time I go out (51 inches), and see how far I get 😂🫠

 

[wafter]

I converted a drop bar (Sora 3 x 8) to a flat bar. Obviously had to change the shifters (they are Shimano something or other) but it can take a bit of effort to get it into the big outer front ring.

Thanks - although IIRC pull ratios were consistant across the whole Shimano range up until 10sp when they changed; the setup I'm looking at is 11sp so no mixy-matchy for me, unfortunately