Low Gears and Internet Shaming

[Baron Blubba]

Perhaps the definition of 'gear shaming' is either relative to each individual, or needs to be more defined.

My sisters went to a very orthodox religious highschool where some of their teachers, including the male principal, would call them sluts for wearing something like an Abercrombie hoodie or Converses.
Similarly, the cool girls would berate the more religious ones for *not* wearing Abercrombie and Converses (or whatever the shoe of the week was).
To me, that's shaming.

My experience with 'gear shaming' has never gone beyond poking fun. I'm aware that one person's definition of poking fun might translate into shame for another person. But I grew up in a very toxically sarcastic environment and think I am sensitive to the difference between hurtful pokes and fun pokes. I've only ever seen or been subjected to the fun variety of poking, insert saucy joke here.

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by fourflys

glad it doesn't in your world, but it clearly does.. there have a been a few examples buried in this thread.. I would admit its probably much, much less face to face these days and more accepted in the circles most of us run as we typically run "accepted" drivetrains.. Russ obviously runs "Alt" gearing as well as other "Alt" bike configurations that seem to bug folks, including some on here.. many on here see him as whining, but I see him as just wanting something the industry doesn't currently provide in any meaningful way.. a good example is the video he posted right before one in the original post.. he was showing some samples of some, hopefully, future products he is working on with Soma Fab that will address some areas he would like to see addressed..

to say something categorically doesn't exist is like sticking your head in the sand.. especially when someone has given examples of it happening..

Bringing it back to the video, he says something at the beginning which I think is absolutely ridiculous. He says "the bike industry--at least in my opinion the major component manufacturers--don't really appear to be interested in expanding range but want to just redo the same roadie gear range that they've been serving up for the past 20 years."

This strikes me as somewhat ridiculous. Going back 20-ish years, 53/39 cranksets and and 11-25 cassettes were pretty standard. 50/34 "compact" cassettes were about as small a chainring option as was available, and 11-28 was about the largest cassette any standard road derailleur could handle (yes, I know some people mixed and matched mountain bike parts with some success, but trying to limit to stuff specifically marketed for drop bars since that's what he called out).

Today, Sram can run 2x with a 10-36 cassette, and ranging from 50/37 chainrings to 43/30. With 1x, Sram offers 10-52 cassettes compatibility. Shimano offers cranks ranging from 54-40 to 46-30, 2x cassettes ranging up to 11-36 (officially) and 1x cassetts ranging up to 10-51.

The industry is absolutely catering to folks who want wider gear ranges. Maybe it's not perfect, and not every rider's desire is being catered to exactly, but it's not nothing either. This is what's frustrating to me about trying to watch his videos. He's out there taking shots left and right, then acting all surprised when he gets some pushback.

It's fine if that helps him get clicks and make a living, but we don't have to take his complaints seriously.

[NHAero]

In defense of triples (which I have on my Big Dummy because not gonna change it on a bike with infrequent usage)...

I have a triple on my Bob Jackson, it's vestigial, 48-36-24, and it's gone over the past 30+ years from a 7 speed freewheel to a 10 speed cassette in the rear. In a place like Martha's Vineyard, with the 12-30 cassette, it's kinda like a 1X using the middle ring. I wouldn't set the bike up that way today, but it's fine for the several hundred miles/year I ride it. It shifts peachy with Dura Ace bar end shifters.

I rebuilt one of my sister's bikes last year, an almost 25 year old Spesh Sequoia. She rides on Cape Cod, the Rail Trail, the Canal Path, and the Shining Sea Bikeway. Pretty darn flat. Her drivetrain was pretty shot. I changed the rings to 48-38-26 from 53-42-30, and put a 105 11 speed shifter on with an 11-34 cassette. She can stay in the 38T ring and it's perfect for her riding. I could have dispensed with the other two chainrings, but why? With the triple, the 38T lines up with the centerline of the cassette.

I would only build up a bike from scratch with a triple if I was adventure bikepacking and knew I'd have a bunch of weight and mountainous terrain. But if so, a triple is what I'd use.

[benb]

Originally Posted by prototoast

Today, Sram can run 2x with a 10-36 cassette, and ranging from 50/37 chainrings to 43/30. With 1x, Sram offers 10-52 cassettes compatibility. Shimano offers cranks ranging from 54-40 to 46-30, 2x cassettes ranging up to 11-36 (officially) and 1x cassetts ranging up to 10-51.

The industry is absolutely catering to folks who want wider gear ranges. Maybe it's not perfect, and not every rider's desire is being catered to exactly, but it's not nothing either. This is what's frustrating to me about trying to watch his videos. He's out there taking shots left and right, then acting all surprised when he gets some pushback.

As I mentioned he wants 42/26 + 11-42. I guess you are confirming you can't run a double with Eagle in the back on SRAM? AFAICT that is the closest thing to what he wants and is about to start selling.

I think his other gripe is that people who want low gears are being pushed to 1X.

But he clearly describes his products he's launching as basically not shifting well and you need to think of it like having 2 different 1x systems on your bike and you should use the big ring 90% of the time and then just shift to the 26 when you hit a massive mountain and you've got 100+ lbs of bike + luggage. It's not intended for someone to shift back and forth frequently.

The disconnect for me is why he needs gearing to pedal out to 28-30mph @ 90rpm as if he is in a fast group ride or race. The only reason 1X doesn't work is you can't get the lows he wants and still cruise at 28-30mph, which is really fast for what he does. It's somewhere between how fast you can go on a 50/34 and a 53/39.

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by benb

As I mentioned he wants 42/26 + 11-42. I guess you are confirming you can't run a double with Eagle in the back on SRAM? AFAICT that is the closest thing to what he wants and is about to start selling.

I think his other gripe is that people who want low gears are being pushed to 1X.

But he clearly describes his products he's launching as basically not shifting well and you need to think of it like having 2 different 1x systems on your bike and you should use the big ring 90% of the time and then just shift to the 26 when you hit a massive mountain and you've got 100+ lbs of bike + luggage. It's not intended for someone to shift back and forth frequently.

The disconnect for me is why he needs gearing to pedal out to 28-30mph @ 90rpm as if he is in a fast group ride or race. The only reason 1X doesn't work is you can't get the lows he wants and still cruise at 28-30mph.

I just listed the officially supported ranges. Unofficially, I've heard folks have had success running 2x with an Xplr rear derailleur (10-44 cassette), or with Shiman GRX using 2x with a 10-45 cassette.

[marciero]

Gearing is like reading glasses for me. So far I'm holding firm at 2.0 - 2.25 and 40/44 low gear.