Small to small big to big

[slowmotion]

As @Ajax Bay has already said, why not cycle with good technique?

As usual, a depressing proportion of men seem to think good technique doesn't matter (whereas, as a majority of women know, it can actually be crucial ).

Very good!

 

[ufkacbln]

Rohloff with Schlumpf HSD

34 /85 front ring, and a standard Rohloff on the back.

Massive gear range, and no chain movement involved at all when changing gear

 

[ufkacbln]

4 pages and no mention of tension?

 

[DaveReading]

Yes but you're saying that in the big ring not to use the biggest two cogs at the back? I think that's taking the "safe" option a little too far, and when not under load all will be fine and you can "use" those gears. My mistake was to push hard up hill, change into the biggest on the rear still in the big ring on the front, all under load! Beginner error. BANG!

Worth pointing out that if your chain is too short and/or your RD range isn't big enough, you will probably get away with it until one day you try to use big-big.

 

[cosmicbike]

4 pages and no mention of tension?

Sorry.

Chains slack

 

[ufkacbln]

Sorry.

Chains slack

That is better!

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Worth pointing out that if your chain is too short and/or your RD range isn't big enough, you will probably get away with it until one day you try to use big-big.

Worth pointing out that if you chain is the correct length, the right type, your RD, and other transmission components are setup properly and matched correctly not least to your gear range, you will probably get away with big-big.... forever.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Sorry.

Chains slack

Normal for Copenhagen

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I have seen two cyclists walking home this week with broken chains. I suspect the sun has brought out the less experienced and that a bit of cross-chaining has caused the problem. Surely the right approach is to keep the chainline as straight as possible and only go to the extremes when necessary.

Really? Do you also know what this week's lottery numbers are?

 

[GrumpyGregry]

And folk wonder why they break chains.

One, since 1979, and I was in mid-cassette and botched a front shift on a badly set up front mech.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Two things:
1. Fixed wheel. You know it makes sense.
2. @User13710 's answer 26 caused me to need a new keyboard.

I tried it here, in cph, for a day, a week-or-so ago, but my over-taxed brain could not cope with it.

Bizarre, as I like riding fixed in Blighty.

 

[Dogtrousers]

The main reason for the reason of the cross chaining meme is nothing to do with component wear. It's to enable self appointed experts to look down on others. As in "I saw a newbie MAMIL cross chaining. All the gear and no idea". Probably followed by a made up story about overtaking them on a hill while riding a butcher's bike.

 

[Ajax Bay]

I'll offer another reason for avoiding cross chaining.

If you are large-large and you need a lower gear then, probably on lower than normal cadence and higher than normal force straining up a hill, you're faced with a sudden 'dump' of 32% using the FD (going from 50 > 34). Sure you can double shift (eg 27 > 21) on the RH STI simultaneously, but if you're that capable, look ahead and be skillful: drop on to the smaller chainwheel ahead of need and give yourself the option of several sprocket shifts up or down from mid-cassette.

If you are small-small and you need a higher gear then, you're faced with a sudden 'rise' of 47% using the FD (going from 34 > 50). Sure you can treble shift (eg 12 > 15) on the RH STI simultaneously, but if you're that capable, look ahead and be skillful: step up to the larger chainwheel ahead of need and give yourself the option of several sprocket shifts up or down from mid-cassette.

Maybe there's a 'real men don't use the small chainring' syndrome coming into play here. I suggest the only rationale for not changing from one chainring to the other in good time is the laziness/ cba factor (underpinned by denial of the physics and/or the effect on chain durability and efficiency). And that's not a rationale; it's irrational.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

The main reason for the reason of the cross chaining meme is nothing to do with component wear. It's to enable self appointed experts to look down on others. As in "I saw a newbie MAMIL cross chaining. All the gear and no idea". Probably followed by a made up story about overtaking them on a hill while riding a butcher's bike.

and it probably dates from the age of the first multi-speed freewheels and double chain rings, and was uttered by the same sort of UK Cyclists who, a few years ago, reacted with Bateman-esque horror to the very idea of disc brakes on road bikes...

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I saw it the other way round actually. Some people in this thread seem to be suggesting, no, scornfully asserting, that those of us who think cross-chaining is a bad thing are the ignoramuses. As it happens, I often see people who don't appear to know that pumping their tyres up once in a while would make their journey a lot easier but I don't look down on them, I just wonder if no one has explained that idea to them. Does that make me a 'self-appointed expert' in your eyes?

Does cross chaining have a moral dimension?

Once upon a time, in the early days of multispeed freewheels there may have been good technical reasons to avoid it. But things have since moved on.

Flat tyres, cross chained, bso, slack chain, poor technique, etc, dont care so long as they are riding bikes.