Touring gears dilemma

[Danny]

I am having a bit of a dilemma about what gears I should have on my new touring bike

My current “old style” Orbit has a 7 speed 13-28 cassette and 28-38-48 chain rings. This gives me a high gear of 98.8” and a low of 26.8”. I rarely use the highest gear and mostly ride on the middle chain ring, but definitely use my lowest gears when there are hills.

The new bike will have a Deore chainset which has two standard options: 26-36-48 or 22-32-44, and I am planning to use an 9 speed 11-34 cassette.

My dilemma is over which chainset option I should go for. The 26-36-48 would give me a maximum gear of 116.8” which is probably way higher than I would normally use for touring. The 22-32-44 chainset gives me a more usable high gear of 107”. However the lowest gear would be 17.3” which seems incredibly low.

Would I be better of going for the smaller chainset on the grounds that at some point I will welcome the really low gears?

Or should I think about other options? The obvious ones being to go for a cassette with a narrower range of gears, or possibly fit a Stronglight Impact chainset which seems to have more intermediate options (e.g. 24-34-46).

 

[Amanda P]

I think if you have the choice, you should re-think the cassette. Do you need that 34 tooth sprocket? Not if you're going for an inner chain ring as small as 22 or 26.

If your largest sprocket is 34, there'll be some big (and potentially annoying) gaps between gears.

If you went for the 22 - 32 - 44 chainset, you could use a biggest sprocket of only 22 teeth and still have the same bottom gear you have now. Or you could go to a 24, 26 or 28 tooth biggest sprocket, and have a real wall-climbing gear, while still having a top gear of 107ish inches.

And, the gaps between gears will be smaller and more regular. And you'll be carrying the minimum amount of ironmongery around.

 

[peanut]

have you considered using a compact double ?
If you have a 9 speed cassette I should have thought that a double chainset should give you any spread you'd need.
heres an example


12 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27
104.6 96.5 83.6 73.8 66 59.7 54.6 50.2 46.5 48t
74.1 68.4 59.3 52.3 46.8 42.3 38.6 35.6 32.9 34t

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

 

[Danny]

I think if you have the choice, you should re-think the cassette.

One of the options I have would be to go for a 12-27 cassette which would give me the a high gear of 98.1" and a low gear of 21.8".

However I worry that I might occasionally want gears that were higher or lower than this. Or will I get more benefit from having gears that don't have such big gaps between them?

 

[Amanda P]

My tourer has gears from around 22 to 100".

When touring fully loaded with camping gear, I occasionally use the 22", but not often. The 100" is rarely used.

I have an 8-speed cassette, which was originally an 11-34 "megarange". I think there was a jump from a 26 tooth sprocket to a 34 tooth: too big a gap - I always seemed to want an intermediate gear. I split up the cassette and put in a 30-tooth sprocket to bridge the gap, and swapped some of the smaller ones too, to give me a better group of cruising gears.

I'm not suggesting you need to do this - you're starting from scratch; I wasn't. But it's my opinion that you'll benefit more from well-spaced gears than from absurdly high or low ones that are rarely used.

You can always freewheel if you spin out (this is a tourer, right? Not a track sprint bike?), and it won't actually kill you if you have to push your bike up a hill now and again. (But with 22", that won't be often). It's much more annoying to constantly want a "halfth" gear that isn't there.

 

[Danny]

I believe the 9 speed cassette goes 26-30-34 so I would still get an intermediate gear. Presumably the thinking is that when you are going up a hill you don't need such small gaps as when you are cruising on the flat.

Pushing my bike up a hill might not kill me but I could still die of emarassment.

PS Like your pink saddle - what is it?

 

[Amanda P]

Actually, I think that you need smaller gaps when crawling up a hill. Too high a gear and you stall, too low and you're spinning against too small a load to maintain balance. So even among the very low gears, gaps need to be reasonably small: hence me deciding to bridge the gap.

Looks like a 9 speed 11-34 is a bit more sensibly specified than my 8-speed was.

The saddle is a common Brooks B17 - but with a rubber cover on it to keep it dry! 50p from a Cycle Promotions sale, that was. Cheap because no-one else wanted it, obviously!

 

[byegad]

For me, on a touring bike, I'd rather carry an extra low gear I rarely use than an extra high gear I rarely use. You can always free wheel if you run out of high gears, on the other hand the only option at the other end is walking!
Also FWIW I find the the 11-34 is a very usable cassette much more evenly spaced than the 11-32.

 

[Danny]

For me, on a touring bike, I'd rather carry an extra low gear I rarely use than an extra high gear I rarely use. You can always free wheel if you run out of high gears, on the other hand the only option at the other end is walking!
Also FWIW I find the the 11-34 is a very usable cassette much more evenly spaced than the 11-32.

What size chainset are you using?

I still worry that if I had a 22-32-44 chainset I would end up with a absurdly low gear.

Having said that my legs aren't getting any younger and I am sure I would make use of lower gears - though 17" does seem very low.

 

[Steve Austin]

I don't tour, but i MTB. I never used the 34 or the 32 so i run a 11-28 which gives a much better spread of usable gears with a 22/32/44 crankset.

I really don't think a 32 or 34 on the rear is worthwhile for touring on the road

 

[col]

For what its worth,my mountain bikes gears are the ones it came with and has a gap on the top gear,like a slight overdive if you like,and the difference gives me plenty for the road,very rarely used unless im on a flat or long clear section or downhill,but i find the standard set up suits me fine,i dont know the tooth count but if there is a standard that thay fit then its ok for me.I think it may be well suited to touring with weight too,as on hills gear changes are not far apart and keep my cadence going nicely.

 

[TheDoctor]

My gut reaction would be to go with the 26-36-48 chainset, but with a tighter cassette. I'm using a 24-38-48 chainset with an 8 speed 13-26, and I can vouch that this will get a lardy fatboy up Ventoux without totally losing the will to live. A 12-27 cassette will give you gears from 108 top to 26 bottom. On the other chainset, the same cassette gives you 99" to 22 ", which sounds plenty low enough, but you may find that neither of the top two rings is quite right. On my MTB, I find I'm constantly changing between them...

 

[RedBike]

Go for the smaller chainset. The gears are there is you need them; but you don't have to!

I failed to get up hardknott pass in the lakes even with 22/32.
I know, I know but in my defense I was pulling a VERY heavy trailer.

 

[peanut]

Go for the smaller chainset. The gears are there is you need them; but you don't have to!

I failed to get up hardknott pass in the lakes even with 22/32.
I know, I know but in my defense I was pulling a VERY heavy trailer.

how many tourist's were in the trailer ?

 

[byegad]

On diferent bikes I ran 22, 32, 44 and 24, 36, 48. If I had to chose one it would be the former.