Low Gears and Internet Shaming

[deluz]

I have a triple on our tandem 50/39/28 with 12/36 on the back.
The FD is Campy Centaur and has worked great for years without need for adjustment. The rear is SRAM RED 10 speed and it also works great. So I have non matching shifters which is fine with me. I just ordered a 12/30 cassette for flatter rides as I find the jumps on the 12/36 a bit too much.

[Baron Blubba]

I was thinking about this thread during my 50 mile/7000 feet of climbing ride today, on a single speed 58 x 13.
"Gear shaming." Can someone please provide an example? I don't think I've ever seen real shaming in real life.
Is gear shaming like when you tell someone "You know, that slice of Costco pizza has over 700 calories," and are accused of 'fat shaming.'
The gear shaming equivalent of the above might be, 'Hey, I see you went with your 36 tooth low gear today, I think you'd probably be fine with a 30.'
Or, 'An 11-34? I usually don't use anything higher than an 11-28 on this route!'

That's not exactly 'shaming' and if the person on the receiving end of those quips feels ashamed, that's not the quipper's fault.

Oh, the closest I've seen to gear shaming is one of my favorite 'your shoelace is untied' practical jokes. Going up long steep grindy hills, I like to ride behind my riding partners and ask 'Hey, why don't you shift to your little ring?'
There's a brief glimmer of hope that they have actually been grinding in the big ring all this time and have several gear inches of salvation available, then look down and see, nope, the little ring is already being put to good use.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by Baron Blubba

I was thinking about this thread during my 50 mile/7000 feet of climbing ride today, on a single speed 58 x 13.
"Gear shaming." Can someone please provide an example? I don't think I've ever seen real shaming in real life.
Is gear shaming like when you tell someone "You know, that slice of Costco pizza has over 700 calories," and are accused of 'fat shaming.'
The gear shaming equivalent of the above might be, 'Hey, I see you went with your 36 tooth low gear today, I think you'd probably be fine with a 30.'
Or, 'An 11-34? I usually don't use anything higher than an 11-28 on this route!'

That's not exactly 'shaming' and if the person on the receiving end of those quips feels ashamed, that's not the quipper's fault.

Oh, the closest I've seen to gear shaming is one of my favorite 'your shoelace is untied' practical jokes. Going up long steep grindy hills, I like to ride behind my riding partners and ask 'Hey, why don't you shift to your little ring?'
There's a brief glimmer of hope that they have actually been grinding in the big ring all this time and have several gear inches of salvation available, then look down and see, nope, the little ring is already being put to good use.

That’s because it doesn’t exist. And, on the off chance that someone says something snide about your gearing, go home, look in the mirror, and do some self-affirmations.

[fourflys]

did you watch the video posted in the first post? Russ sums up his experience pretty well..

for me, while it wasn't gears in particular, it was the pseudo father-in-law that I wasn't a real cyclist because I hadn't been riding for xx years and I didn't prescribe to the same riding ethos that he does (every ride all out, all the time, etc).. among other things..

Originally Posted by Baron Blubba

I was thinking about this thread during my 50 mile/7000 feet of climbing ride today, on a single speed 58 x 13.
"Gear shaming." Can someone please provide an example? I don't think I've ever seen real shaming in real life.
Is gear shaming like when you tell someone "You know, that slice of Costco pizza has over 700 calories," and are accused of 'fat shaming.'
The gear shaming equivalent of the above might be, 'Hey, I see you went with your 36 tooth low gear today, I think you'd probably be fine with a 30.'
Or, 'An 11-34? I usually don't use anything higher than an 11-28 on this route!'

That's not exactly 'shaming' and if the person on the receiving end of those quips feels ashamed, that's not the quipper's fault.

Oh, the closest I've seen to gear shaming is one of my favorite 'your shoelace is untied' practical jokes. Going up long steep grindy hills, I like to ride behind my riding partners and ask 'Hey, why don't you shift to your little ring?'
There's a brief glimmer of hope that they have actually been grinding in the big ring all this time and have several gear inches of salvation available, then look down and see, nope, the little ring is already being put to good use.

[tommyrod74]

Originally Posted by benb

I think it's funny that we think the triples dropped chains that much when it was only in the era of the compact 50/34 that dropped chains became so common that a cottage industry of chain drop protectors was created and then manufacturers started including them stock with frames.

The last bike I built as a frameset the choice was partially made to do a frameset because I didn't want at 50/34 and all complete models of the bike came with a 50/34. When I got the frameset it came with a pre-installed chain drop protector that was sized for the 50/34 and I had to order the one for larger chainrings... That's my Domane, and I'm really curious if the "Race Shop" version that was ridden by the Trek Pro teams came pre-installed with a 50/34 protector installed too, because it would have been especially ridiculous for them, and the Domane was never intended as a high mountains race bike.

50/34 dropped more chains because the chain has to drop further to go to the small chainring. It was so bad all the front derailleurs had to get redesigned and then SRAM struggled with it so much that they never got it right till they had electronic front derailleurs, and then they made the AXS chainring sizes which are a much better solution.

From a certain perspective it seems like the dog chasing it's own tail making tons of engineering changes to deal with problems caused because of gear shaming of triples.

I think far and away the problems come when the gaps between the rings get too large... MTB triples never had 16-20 tooth differences that I ever saw, IIRC the last MTB triple I had (XT) had smaller gaps between the rings than any road setup I've ever had, I want to say only a 8-10 tooth gaps.

I worked at a shop; it's what we saw. Don't know what else to tell you. Compacts did have the same issue.

[fourflys]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

That’s because it doesn’t exist. And, on the off chance that someone says something snide about your gearing, go home, look in the mirror, and do some self-affirmations.

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..

[EB]

A very long discussion without anyone mentioning the development of full suspension mountain bikes, which was a huge driver of the push to 1x drivetrains. This article from a few years ago covers most of the bases and the history:

https://www.singletracks.com/mtb-gea...sts-and-tires/

It's hard to understate how important 1x drivetrains have been for mountain bike performance, due to their impact on all kinds of other design parameters like anti-squat, suspension design, tire clearance, frame design, and so on.

[XXtwindad]

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..

Well, hey, here we are talking about it, so Russ has struck marketing gold. For me, the meta issue is that too many people are running around in a constant state of offense and than posting about the egregious slights on social media. It’s nauseating.

[jamesdak]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

That’s because it doesn’t exist. And, on the off chance that someone says something snide about your gearing, go home, look in the mirror, and do some self-affirmations.

Amen! It only exists if YOU allow it to.