11 speed gears

On 2/24/2016 5:27 PM, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 21:34:23 -0500, "(PeteCresswell)"
wrote:

Per John B.:
Has anyone ridden a bike with the Shimano 11 speed cassette and single
chain ring? I saw one at my local bike shop that had a 11 - 40 tooth
cassette and a single (looked like) 30 something tooth chain ring. It
looked like the difference in gear ratio between the gears would be
pretty big jumps.

Has anyone actually ridden one of these?

No, but I ride a Rohloff with 14 speeds (13.6% between gears) and I
would say that 14 is plenty for a rider like me (doesn't have to keep up
with a pack....).

Rohloff's total span is 526%.

Depending on the cogs put on the Shimano 11-speed, I could see it
working OK for certain riders - me included.

You can quantify this stuff: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gear-calc.html

I wasn't thinking so much of the overall gear limits as the difference
between gears as I find that more bothersome than whether I've got a
500% difference between high gear and low. After all, one can always
get off and push :-)

What I find bothersome is pedaling along in a gear that seems to be a
bit less then optimum and shifting up or down a gear and finding that
it is a little more, or less, then one wants.

As for Sheldon's gear calculation I've always used "Gear Inches"
which, to me, gives a better feeling for gearing.

--
cheers,

John B.


Only due to familiarity. Those who grew up with development
are equally conversant with those numbers to express the
same ratios.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 2/24/2016 6:47 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 24 Feb 2016 07:20:33 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 2/23/2016 6:51 PM, John B. wrote:
Has anyone ridden a bike with the Shimano 11 speed cassette and single
chain ring? I saw one at my local bike shop that had a 11 - 40 tooth
cassette and a single (looked like) 30 something tooth chain ring. It
looked like the difference in gear ratio between the gears would be
pretty big jumps.

Has anyone actually ridden one of these?
--
cheers,

John B.


Yes.
The jumps are of course bigger than a 2x11 or a 3x11 but in
practice eleven is more than the 2x5 bicycles of my (very
high mileage) youth (8 useful) and wider gear range to boot.

Must have been one of those "10 speed English racers" I remember :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


[ahem] French.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 1:55:28 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/24/2016 3:17 PM, jbeattie wrote:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/img.ultrasi...cc29262c5b.jpg One of my all-time favorite climbs except for the slippery crack seal **** they use in California.

They use that in lots of states. It's particularly bad when very hot.
On our coast to coast trip, my daughter took to calling it "road snakes."

AFAIK, they started using it after I left California in 1984. I came back for a visit and climbed up Mt. Hamilton -- only to find that the descent (on a hot day) was treacherous because of that crack seal -- which is everywhere. in the 70s and early 80s, I could rip down the mountain without losing traction on the crack seal. BTW, it's a great 20+ mile descent -- except for the two short-ish climb-outs. No mountain lions -- but I did see a fox, cow (in the road), dogs -- and lots of tarantulas and tarantula hawks, which give me the creeps. https://sp.yimg.com/xj/th?id=OIP.Mc9...=0&w=189&h=169

-- Jay Beattie.

On 2/25/2016 10:05 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 1:55:28 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/24/2016 3:17 PM, jbeattie wrote:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/img.ultrasi...cc29262c5b.jpg One of my all-time favorite climbs except for the slippery crack seal **** they use in California.

They use that in lots of states. It's particularly bad when very hot.
On our coast to coast trip, my daughter took to calling it "road snakes."

AFAIK, they started using it after I left California in 1984. I came back for a visit and climbed up Mt. Hamilton -- only to find that the descent (on a hot day) was treacherous because of that crack seal -- which is everywhere. in the 70s and early 80s, I could rip down the mountain without losing traction on the crack seal. BTW, it's a great 20+ mile descent -- except for the two short-ish climb-outs. No mountain lions -- but I did see a fox, cow (in the road), dogs -- and lots of tarantulas and tarantula hawks, which give me the creeps. https://sp.yimg.com/xj/th?id=OIP.Mc9...=0&w=189&h=169

Impressive that you can climb Mount Hamilton at your age.

On 2016-02-25 10:06, sms wrote:
On 2/25/2016 10:05 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 1:55:28 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
On 2/24/2016 3:17 PM, jbeattie wrote:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/img.ultrasi...cc29262c5b.jpg
One of my all-time favorite climbs except for the slippery crack
seal **** they use in California.

They use that in lots of states. It's particularly bad when very hot.
On our coast to coast trip, my daughter took to calling it "road
snakes."

AFAIK, they started using it after I left California in 1984. I came
back for a visit and climbed up Mt. Hamilton -- only to find that the
descent (on a hot day) was treacherous because of that crack seal --
which is everywhere. in the 70s and early 80s, I could rip down the
mountain without losing traction on the crack seal. BTW, it's a great
20+ mile descent -- except for the two short-ish climb-outs. No
mountain lions -- but I did see a fox, cow (in the road), dogs -- and
lots of tarantulas and tarantula hawks, which give me the creeps.
https://sp.yimg.com/xj/th?id=OIP.Mc9...=0&w=189&h=169


Impressive that you can climb Mount Hamilton at your age.


I once had a wrinkle-faced guy high in his 70's pull away from me on a
long uphill stretch. Despite being at least two decades younger and
having lots of leg muscles I could not keep up with him.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 2/25/2016 12:19 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-02-25 10:06, sms wrote:
On 2/25/2016 10:05 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 1:55:28 PM UTC-8,
Frank Krygowski
wrote:
On 2/24/2016 3:17 PM, jbeattie wrote:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/img.ultrasi...cc29262c5b.jpg

One of my all-time favorite climbs except for the
slippery crack
seal **** they use in California.

They use that in lots of states. It's particularly bad
when very hot.
On our coast to coast trip, my daughter took to calling
it "road
snakes."

AFAIK, they started using it after I left California in
1984. I came
back for a visit and climbed up Mt. Hamilton -- only to
find that the
descent (on a hot day) was treacherous because of that
crack seal --
which is everywhere. in the 70s and early 80s, I could
rip down the
mountain without losing traction on the crack seal. BTW,
it's a great
20+ mile descent -- except for the two short-ish
climb-outs. No
mountain lions -- but I did see a fox, cow (in the road),
dogs -- and
lots of tarantulas and tarantula hawks, which give me the
creeps.
https://sp.yimg.com/xj/th?id=OIP.Mc9...=0&w=189&h=169



Impressive that you can climb Mount Hamilton at your age.


I once had a wrinkle-faced guy high in his 70's pull away
from me on a long uphill stretch. Despite being at least two
decades younger and having lots of leg muscles I could not
keep up with him.



this guy?

http://cx.cxmagazine.com/wp-content/...5_o-edit_1.jpg

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 2016-02-25 11:17, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/25/2016 12:19 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-02-25 10:06, sms wrote:
On 2/25/2016 10:05 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 1:55:28 PM UTC-8,
Frank Krygowski
wrote:
On 2/24/2016 3:17 PM, jbeattie wrote:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/img.ultrasi...cc29262c5b.jpg


One of my all-time favorite climbs except for the
slippery crack
seal **** they use in California.

They use that in lots of states. It's particularly bad
when very hot.
On our coast to coast trip, my daughter took to calling
it "road
snakes."

AFAIK, they started using it after I left California in
1984. I came
back for a visit and climbed up Mt. Hamilton -- only to
find that the
descent (on a hot day) was treacherous because of that
crack seal --
which is everywhere. in the 70s and early 80s, I could
rip down the
mountain without losing traction on the crack seal. BTW,
it's a great
20+ mile descent -- except for the two short-ish
climb-outs. No
mountain lions -- but I did see a fox, cow (in the road),
dogs -- and
lots of tarantulas and tarantula hawks, which give me the
creeps.
https://sp.yimg.com/xj/th?id=OIP.Mc9...=0&w=189&h=169




Impressive that you can climb Mount Hamilton at your age.


I once had a wrinkle-faced guy high in his 70's pull away
from me on a long uphill stretch. Despite being at least two
decades younger and having lots of leg muscles I could not
keep up with him.



this guy?

http://cx.cxmagazine.com/wp-content/...5_o-edit_1.jpg


No, he looked way older than Jobst :-)

My problem is that I am heavier than most and bicycling does not shed
much in terms of pounds, despite 4-5k miles/year in hilly terrain. I
guess the fault is with my bikes. They have panniers and the growler
fits in there.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 03:42:16 +0000, Phil W Lee
wrote:

John B. considered Thu, 25 Feb 2016 06:27:47
+0700 the perfect time to write:

On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 21:34:23 -0500, "(PeteCresswell)"
wrote:

Per John B.:
Has anyone ridden a bike with the Shimano 11 speed cassette and single
chain ring? I saw one at my local bike shop that had a 11 - 40 tooth
cassette and a single (looked like) 30 something tooth chain ring. It
looked like the difference in gear ratio between the gears would be
pretty big jumps.

Has anyone actually ridden one of these?

No, but I ride a Rohloff with 14 speeds (13.6% between gears) and I
would say that 14 is plenty for a rider like me (doesn't have to keep up
with a pack....).

Rohloff's total span is 526%.

Depending on the cogs put on the Shimano 11-speed, I could see it
working OK for certain riders - me included.

You can quantify this stuff: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gear-calc.html

I wasn't thinking so much of the overall gear limits as the difference
between gears as I find that more bothersome than whether I've got a
500% difference between high gear and low. After all, one can always
get off and push :-)

What I find bothersome is pedaling along in a gear that seems to be a
bit less then optimum and shifting up or down a gear and finding that
it is a little more, or less, then one wants.

As for Sheldon's gear calculation I've always used "Gear Inches"
which, to me, gives a better feeling for gearing.

It has an option for that, as well as speed at various cadences in
each gear.

I found his preferred "gain ratio" system very useful when re-gearing
for shorter cranks than are typical (152mm). Gear inches make no
allowance for that.

It is similar to metres and yard. Whatever one is used to, I'd think.

While it may be possible for the elite to tell the difference between
a millimeter, or two, in crank length I suspect that the "average
bloke" can't, although many claim to do so.

Some years ago Bicycle Quarterly published an article about a double
blind test to differentiate between stiff and flexible frames and
discovered that for all the talk about which is better hardly anyone
could actually tell the difference. I suspect that this is true of
most things.
--
cheers,

John B.

On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 07:12:49 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 2/24/2016 5:27 PM, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 21:34:23 -0500, "(PeteCresswell)"
wrote:

Per John B.:
Has anyone ridden a bike with the Shimano 11 speed cassette and single
chain ring? I saw one at my local bike shop that had a 11 - 40 tooth
cassette and a single (looked like) 30 something tooth chain ring. It
looked like the difference in gear ratio between the gears would be
pretty big jumps.

Has anyone actually ridden one of these?

No, but I ride a Rohloff with 14 speeds (13.6% between gears) and I
would say that 14 is plenty for a rider like me (doesn't have to keep up
with a pack....).

Rohloff's total span is 526%.

Depending on the cogs put on the Shimano 11-speed, I could see it
working OK for certain riders - me included.

You can quantify this stuff: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gear-calc.html

I wasn't thinking so much of the overall gear limits as the difference
between gears as I find that more bothersome than whether I've got a
500% difference between high gear and low. After all, one can always
get off and push :-)

What I find bothersome is pedaling along in a gear that seems to be a
bit less then optimum and shifting up or down a gear and finding that
it is a little more, or less, then one wants.

As for Sheldon's gear calculation I've always used "Gear Inches"
which, to me, gives a better feeling for gearing.

--
cheers,

John B.


Only due to familiarity. Those who grew up with development
are equally conversant with those numbers to express the
same ratios.

A point I made in another post. I now live in a "metric country" and
if you ask someone how far it its from hither to yon they tell you in
metres or kilos. Back in "America" they tells you in feet and miles
and in both places the residents understand how far it is.
--
cheers,

John B.

On 2016-02-25 16:06, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 03:42:16 +0000, Phil W Lee
wrote:

John B. considered Thu, 25 Feb 2016 06:27:47
+0700 the perfect time to write:

On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 21:34:23 -0500, "(PeteCresswell)"
wrote:

Per John B.:
Has anyone ridden a bike with the Shimano 11 speed cassette and single
chain ring? I saw one at my local bike shop that had a 11 - 40 tooth
cassette and a single (looked like) 30 something tooth chain ring. It
looked like the difference in gear ratio between the gears would be
pretty big jumps.

Has anyone actually ridden one of these?

No, but I ride a Rohloff with 14 speeds (13.6% between gears) and I
would say that 14 is plenty for a rider like me (doesn't have to keep up
with a pack....).

Rohloff's total span is 526%.

Depending on the cogs put on the Shimano 11-speed, I could see it
working OK for certain riders - me included.

You can quantify this stuff: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gear-calc.html

I wasn't thinking so much of the overall gear limits as the difference
between gears as I find that more bothersome than whether I've got a
500% difference between high gear and low. After all, one can always
get off and push :-)

What I find bothersome is pedaling along in a gear that seems to be a
bit less then optimum and shifting up or down a gear and finding that
it is a little more, or less, then one wants.

As for Sheldon's gear calculation I've always used "Gear Inches"
which, to me, gives a better feeling for gearing.

It has an option for that, as well as speed at various cadences in
each gear.

I found his preferred "gain ratio" system very useful when re-gearing
for shorter cranks than are typical (152mm). Gear inches make no
allowance for that.

It is similar to metres and yard. Whatever one is used to, I'd think.

While it may be possible for the elite to tell the difference between
a millimeter, or two, in crank length I suspect that the "average
bloke" can't, although many claim to do so.

Some years ago Bicycle Quarterly published an article about a double
blind test to differentiate between stiff and flexible frames and
discovered that for all the talk about which is better hardly anyone
could actually tell the difference. I suspect that this is true of
most things.


I sure can, esspecially when on the large chain ring. When putting on
the coals" its sideways motion over a pedal stroke is so large that I
have to trim my front derailleur when shifting in the back, to avoid the
nasty krrrrrk .. krrrrrk sound and cage wear. Which you can't replace on
most "modern" derailleurs.

With a carbon frame that chain ring wobble is much less. But I know that
a carbon bike is not for me because I take it offroad too much and might
bust an expensive frame. So I just put up with the chain ring wobble.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/