Choosing gearing?

[AllanVarcoe]

Originally Posted by doomridesout

If you're in LA and you actually go into the mountains don't listen to guys from the Midwest. I used to live in Kansas, rode 53/39- 12-25, it was great. Then I moved to the West Coast and knew I had to go compact if I wanted to actually go anywhere. Mid compact is really good if you don't have too many steep ramps on your regular rides.

This! I just got into climbing here in LA and ride a cyclocross bike instead of a road bike because I constantly try to find new trails. Anyways, I just switched from a 42t and 11-36 to a 38t with the same cassette. I LOVE the new gearing! Moral of the story, gear to the type of riding you plan to do.

[Mzilliox]

Its not so complicated. what you have seems fine.

i really really like my 52-36 with 12-27 in back.
I can climb with it, hammer with it, and chill with it.

I run a 50-34 with 12-30 on my hills and gravel bike, because climbing gravel is different than climbing pavement

and my big boy bike has a 53-39 with 12-27. it doesn't climb as easily, but its a good way to see how strong im getting.

so yeah, play with it, its not hard to do.

[tctyres]

Originally Posted by .RJ

Agreed. I guess thats where I was going

Yes. The top gear always has 11t or 12t, so raising the lowest gear combination moves more to the middle (in terms of the cassette).

[bheight1]

Originally Posted by .RJ

Agreed. I guess thats where I was going

For recreational fast group/club riding, even racing, if using a standard crankset, 53-12 is probably more efficient than the 11. The efficiency of the pedaling movement has not been studied in depth and has been undervalued by most who think bigger, taller, longer is better and are more interested in the power of the “motor” rather than by the economy of exercise. The force to push an 11t at 120 rpms for extended period or short sprint is too great and in downhills you are more efficient in a tuck. The slightly higher cadence of a 12t avoids energy waste and helps protect muscle fiber, tendons and joints from problems due to overload. 11t is a spacer for most, 16t or 18t may be more useful.

[kingpin75s]

Originally Posted by tylercheung

Historically I had been using 170 mm compact crank w 11-32

Do I have to plug in numbers in the big scary Sheldon Brown calculator?
Before e

I would recommend you find the gear combination you ride most on your current setup and consider that your base gear. Wherever that is now, that same or similar gear inch combination should be the middle of the cassette on your next build.

The gear calculator is very easy to use especially if you have a reference point so plug in what you have now and look at the gear inch combinations you spend the most time in.

For reference I like 170mm cranks as well. I find that with 28mm tires for a fast city bike, I like 46/32 up front and 12/27 in the rear. I am a high cadence rider.

Another way to put this is if you spend most of your time cross chained in the big up front, your setup is not optimized.