dumb chainring questions

OK, please humor a dumb question... I've been pretty much out of cycling
for a good decade or more, because I've lives in pretty bike-unfriendly
areas. I do have a hand me down MTB and SWMBO has a decent-ish Trek she
bought herself a while back, when she expressed and interest in starting
riding semi-seriously, I figured I'd jump on that because I wouldn't
mind riding myself, I just hate doing it all by myself. So I stopped at
my LBS today and picked up some lights (my main excuse for not riding is
it's always dark when I *can* ride...) and of course while I was there
started looking at new bikes, it'd be nice to ride something that I
actually picked out myself and liked.

Anyway, question is this. Back when I was actually paying attention,
the newest and greatest thing was chainrings that weren't perfectly
round, e.g. "biopace" and similar setups. I hated them and far
preferred the old school round rings, my legs could tell the difference.
My question is this, which ended up taking over the market? I see no
mention in any specs anywhere of round or non-round; I'd like to think
that the traditional round rings became the norm and Biopace died a
natural death, is this so? If not, what component sets still use round
chainrings?

Also, the salesman at the LBS recommended a cyclocross bike for my
intended use (mostly road riding, some (mostly paved) trail, general
commuting type use if not actual commuting) as they are a little heavier
but stronger than standard road bikes, which makes sense. However it
seems that they all have rather small chainrings, are they all pretty
much interchangeable if I decide I need a bigger ring? I always was
more about torque than horsepower, to use an automotive analogy... my
legs are big ol' V-8s and don't like to spin. Or should I disregard his
advice and simply look for a steel framed road bike that I like and put
some slightly fatter tires on it?

I apologize for being under a cycling rock for the last decade or so...
be nice

thanks

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 19:47:18 -0400, Nate Nagel
wrote:

My question is this, which ended up taking over the market?

R-o-u-n-d...

All the best,
--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

snip, of a good humored introduction

round, e.g. "biopace" and similar setups. snip which ended up taking over the market?

As you see, FBOW, round.
For a good article on biospace, see: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/
biopace.html


Also, the salesman at the LBS recommended a cyclocross bike for my
intended use (mostly road riding, some (mostly paved) trail, general
commuting type use if not actual commuting) as they are a little heavier
but stronger than standard road bikes, which makes sense.

It's stronger wheels that might make a difference. For example, 36
spoke wheels tend to hold up better than 14 spokers.

However it
seems that they all have rather small chainrings, are they all pretty
much interchangeable

You can probably swap it out for a bigger one. Many LBSs would
accommodate you for that on a new bike.

snip

Or should I snip simply look for a steel framed road bike that I
like and put
some slightly fatter tires on it?

Nate,
Great! I really like that idea, a lot. Panaracer Pasela tires are nice, easy to find, and come in wide sizes. Craigslist, if available in your area, has just what you need. Have a glass of plonk on me.

Best,
Larry

On Apr 6, 6:47*pm, Nate Nagel wrote:
snip

round.

Also, the salesman at the LBS recommended a cyclocross bike for my
intended use (mostly road riding, some (mostly paved) trail, general
commuting type use if not actual commuting) as they are a little heavier
but stronger than standard road bikes, which makes sense. *However it
seems that they all have rather small chainrings, are they all pretty
much interchangeable if I decide I need a bigger ring? *I always was
more about torque than horsepower, to use an automotive analogy... *my
legs are big ol' V-8s and don't like to spin. *Or should I disregard his
advice and simply look for a steel framed road bike that I like and put
some slightly fatter tires on it?

Which cross bike did he recommend? A good number of them are indeed
rather practical with braze-ons allowing mounting of fenders and racks
to domesticate the beasts. My LBS pushes Kona Jakes very heavily. The
drawback with cross bikes are the short chainstays that become an
issue when mounting fenders and if you decide to use a rack with
panniers, as you'll often suffer heel strike. If you have big dogs, a
proper touring bike would probably be a better choice for an all
rounder.

The gearing on most cross or touring bikes will probably be just fine--
though you might eventually swap out the rear cogset for something
closer ratio if the low gears remain unused.

On Apr 7, 12:05*am, landotter wrote:
On Apr 6, 6:47*pm, Nate Nagel wrote:
snip

round.

sweet. I *thought* so, but didn't 100% trust visual inspection.


Also, the salesman at the LBS recommended a cyclocross bike for my
intended use (mostly road riding, some (mostly paved) trail, general
commuting type use if not actual commuting) as they are a little heavier
but stronger than standard road bikes, which makes sense. *However it
seems that they all have rather small chainrings, are they all pretty
much interchangeable if I decide I need a bigger ring? *I always was
more about torque than horsepower, to use an automotive analogy... *my
legs are big ol' V-8s and don't like to spin. *Or should I disregard his
advice and simply look for a steel framed road bike that I like and put
some slightly fatter tires on it?

Which cross bike did he recommend? A good number of them are indeed
rather practical with braze-ons allowing mounting of fenders and racks
to domesticate the beasts. My LBS pushes Kona Jakes very heavily. The
drawback with cross bikes are the short chainstays that become an
issue when mounting fenders and if you decide to use a rack with
panniers, as you'll often suffer heel strike. If you have big dogs, a
proper touring bike would probably be a better choice for an all
rounder.

The guy at the LBS was pushing the Fuji Cross Comp, which actually
seemed like a nice bike, although I declined his offer to take it for
a spin (the only one he had in stock was about 2cm too big for me, so
I wasn't going to like it anyway, and I'm not seriously looking to buy
*right now.*) Certainly a lot lighter than the hand me down MTB that
I currently have! Felt like a dream hefting it. Their price was
pretty good too compared to "recommended list."

I am tempted to trust his judgement, as this was at Performance Bike
and when I look on their web site they don't even list Fuji bikes so I
suspect that this is something that the local store has picked up.


The gearing on most cross or touring bikes will probably be just fine--
though you might eventually swap out the rear cogset for something
closer ratio if the low gears remain unused.

I was actually thinking more of swapping the large chanring from a 46
(or was it a 48?) to a 50 or 52...

He also showed me a Fuji Roubaix as another option, thoughts?

Like I said, I'm not really seriously shopping now, just trying to get
up to speed so that if/when I can convince SWMBO that regular riding
is something that we want to do and therefore I have a reason to buy a
good bike, when that window opens I'll have an idea of what to buy

nate

On Apr 7, 11:37*am, N8N wrote:

I was actually thinking more of swapping the large chanring from a 46
(or was it a 48?) to a 50 or 52...


It's a 48. And I wouldn't bother...it has a 12-25 cassette, so your
high gear is 108 inches with 700x32 tires. You're only going to spin
that out on a big downhill, when you're already doing 35mph. It comes
with a FD customized for a 48T big ring, so going bigger will require
a new FD and a new, longer chain as well. If you need a taller gear,
get a cassette with an 11T cog instead. It will be much cheaper than
replacing a big ring/FD/chain combo. An 11/48 is a 117" gear, enough
to get you up to 40mph on a downhill. About $55, vs well over $100 for
making the change up front.

On Apr 7, 1:37*pm, N8N wrote:
On Apr 7, 12:05*am, landotter wrote:

On Apr 6, 6:47*pm, Nate Nagel wrote:
snip

round.

sweet. *I *thought* so, but didn't 100% trust visual inspection.





Also, the salesman at the LBS recommended a cyclocross bike for my
intended use (mostly road riding, some (mostly paved) trail, general
commuting type use if not actual commuting) as they are a little heavier
but stronger than standard road bikes, which makes sense. *However it
seems that they all have rather small chainrings, are they all pretty
much interchangeable if I decide I need a bigger ring? *I always was
more about torque than horsepower, to use an automotive analogy... *my
legs are big ol' V-8s and don't like to spin. *Or should I disregard his
advice and simply look for a steel framed road bike that I like and put
some slightly fatter tires on it?

Which cross bike did he recommend? A good number of them are indeed
rather practical with braze-ons allowing mounting of fenders and racks
to domesticate the beasts. My LBS pushes Kona Jakes very heavily. The
drawback with cross bikes are the short chainstays that become an
issue when mounting fenders and if you decide to use a rack with
panniers, as you'll often suffer heel strike. If you have big dogs, a
proper touring bike would probably be a better choice for an all
rounder.

The guy at the LBS was pushing the Fuji Cross Comp, which actually
seemed like a nice bike, although I declined his offer to take it for
a spin (the only one he had in stock was about 2cm too big for me, so
I wasn't going to like it anyway, and I'm not seriously looking to buy
*right now.*) *Certainly a lot lighter than the hand me down MTB that
I currently have! *Felt like a dream hefting it. *Their price was
pretty good too compared to "recommended list."


You'll be enjoying the bike by riding, not hefting--keep that in mind.
A pound or two here or there matters little if you don't feel right in
the cockpit.

Fuji could be a nice all rounder, but it does bug me to see Formula
hubs instead of proper Shimano hubs on a $1K bike. It looks to have
most of the money in the frame and fork for folks that most likely
will purchase an upgraded wheelset at some point. I mean, you look at
a Kona entry level Jake for $200 less list, and you get LX hubs--but a
less fancy plain steel fork. Just a little perspective.

If it fits and the price is right...go for it, just make sure that the
bearings in the Forumula hubs are properly greased and adjusted so
they don't self-destruct in a thousand miles.

I am tempted to trust his judgement, as this was at Performance Bike
and when I look on their web site they don't even list Fuji bikes so I
suspect that this is something that the local store has picked up.



The gearing on most cross or touring bikes will probably be just fine--
though you might eventually swap out the rear cogset for something
closer ratio if the low gears remain unused.

I was actually thinking more of swapping the large chanring from a 46
(or was it a 48?) to a 50 or 52...

He also showed me a Fuji Roubaix as another option, thoughts?

At $1200 list with funny wheels, no provisions for even 28mm rubber,
and not even a 10 speed cluster--it looks to me to be an overpriced
toy good for sunny days and 160 pound riders with a sag wagon.

On Apr 7, 3:16*pm, Hank wrote:
On Apr 7, 11:37*am, N8N wrote:

I was actually thinking more of swapping the large chanring from a 46
(or was it a 48?) to a 50 or 52...

It's a 48. And I wouldn't bother...it has a 12-25 cassette, so your
high gear is 108 inches with 700x32 tires. You're only going to spin
that out on a big downhill, when you're already doing 35mph.

Heh. *you* may be doing 35 MPH but my legs may hit redline before
yours

It comes
with a FD customized for a 48T big ring, so going bigger will require
a new FD and a new, longer chain as well. If you need a taller gear,
get a cassette with an 11T cog instead. It will be much cheaper than
replacing a big ring/FD/chain combo. An 11/48 is a 117" gear, enough
to get you up to 40mph on a downhill. About $55, vs well over $100 for
making the change up front.

ISTR back in the day I was running a 50/11 or 52/11, I forget which,
on my frankenbike (Schwinn road frame with hand-me-downs from when my
friend upgraded his Cannondale - hey, it kinda looked like a Bianchi
from a distance G) and actually was able to effectively use the
highest gear on downhills.

Of course, I was in much better shape and about 20 lbs. lighter
then...

nate

On Apr 7, 3:31*pm, landotter wrote:
On Apr 7, 1:37*pm, N8N wrote:





On Apr 7, 12:05*am, landotter wrote:

On Apr 6, 6:47*pm, Nate Nagel wrote:
snip

round.

sweet. *I *thought* so, but didn't 100% trust visual inspection.

Also, the salesman at the LBS recommended a cyclocross bike for my
intended use (mostly road riding, some (mostly paved) trail, general
commuting type use if not actual commuting) as they are a little heavier
but stronger than standard road bikes, which makes sense. *However it
seems that they all have rather small chainrings, are they all pretty
much interchangeable if I decide I need a bigger ring? *I always was
more about torque than horsepower, to use an automotive analogy... *my
legs are big ol' V-8s and don't like to spin. *Or should I disregard his
advice and simply look for a steel framed road bike that I like and put
some slightly fatter tires on it?

Which cross bike did he recommend? A good number of them are indeed
rather practical with braze-ons allowing mounting of fenders and racks
to domesticate the beasts. My LBS pushes Kona Jakes very heavily. The
drawback with cross bikes are the short chainstays that become an
issue when mounting fenders and if you decide to use a rack with
panniers, as you'll often suffer heel strike. If you have big dogs, a
proper touring bike would probably be a better choice for an all
rounder.

The guy at the LBS was pushing the Fuji Cross Comp, which actually
seemed like a nice bike, although I declined his offer to take it for
a spin (the only one he had in stock was about 2cm too big for me, so
I wasn't going to like it anyway, and I'm not seriously looking to buy
*right now.*) *Certainly a lot lighter than the hand me down MTB that
I currently have! *Felt like a dream hefting it. *Their price was
pretty good too compared to "recommended list."

You'll be enjoying the bike by riding, not hefting--keep that in mind.
A pound or two here or there matters little if you don't feel right in
the cockpit.

Fuji could be a nice all rounder, but it does bug me to see Formula
hubs instead of proper Shimano hubs on a $1K bike. It looks to have
most of the money in the frame and fork for folks that most likely
will purchase an upgraded wheelset at some point. I mean, you look at
a Kona entry level Jake for $200 less list, and you get LX hubs--but a
less fancy plain steel fork. Just a little perspective.

Hmm, that is an appealing looking option. Three rings instead of two
would be nice for road riding as well, although what are your thoughts
on Tiagra vs. 105? The sales rep kind of ran down Tiagra as if I
wouldn't be happy with a bike so equipped. The list price for the
Jake is about what the LBS was offering the Fuji for, FWIW, although
the Jake the Snake is about comparable list for list. All of this
advice is greatly appreciated as I probably haven't a clue as to what
brands are "good" and which are not anymore.


If it fits and the price is right...go for it, just make sure that the
bearings in the Forumula hubs are properly greased and adjusted so
they don't self-destruct in a thousand miles.

I am tempted to trust his judgement, as this was at Performance Bike
and when I look on their web site they don't even list Fuji bikes so I
suspect that this is something that the local store has picked up.

The gearing on most cross or touring bikes will probably be just fine--
though you might eventually swap out the rear cogset for something
closer ratio if the low gears remain unused.

I was actually thinking more of swapping the large chanring from a 46
(or was it a 48?) to a 50 or 52...

He also showed me a Fuji Roubaix as another option, thoughts?

At $1200 list with funny wheels, no provisions for even 28mm rubber,
and not even a 10 speed cluster--it looks to me to be an overpriced
toy good for sunny days and 160 pound riders with a sag wagon.

duly noted I have to say I wasn't seriously considering it, but
figured I'd ask for opinions.

nate

On Apr 7, 3:07*pm, N8N wrote:
On Apr 7, 3:31*pm, landotter wrote:



On Apr 7, 1:37*pm, N8N wrote:

On Apr 7, 12:05*am, landotter wrote:

On Apr 6, 6:47*pm, Nate Nagel wrote:
snip

round.

sweet. *I *thought* so, but didn't 100% trust visual inspection.

Also, the salesman at the LBS recommended a cyclocross bike for my
intended use (mostly road riding, some (mostly paved) trail, general
commuting type use if not actual commuting) as they are a little heavier
but stronger than standard road bikes, which makes sense. *However it
seems that they all have rather small chainrings, are they all pretty
much interchangeable if I decide I need a bigger ring? *I always was
more about torque than horsepower, to use an automotive analogy... *my
legs are big ol' V-8s and don't like to spin. *Or should I disregard his
advice and simply look for a steel framed road bike that I like and put
some slightly fatter tires on it?

Which cross bike did he recommend? A good number of them are indeed
rather practical with braze-ons allowing mounting of fenders and racks
to domesticate the beasts. My LBS pushes Kona Jakes very heavily. The
drawback with cross bikes are the short chainstays that become an
issue when mounting fenders and if you decide to use a rack with
panniers, as you'll often suffer heel strike. If you have big dogs, a
proper touring bike would probably be a better choice for an all
rounder.

The guy at the LBS was pushing the Fuji Cross Comp, which actually
seemed like a nice bike, although I declined his offer to take it for
a spin (the only one he had in stock was about 2cm too big for me, so
I wasn't going to like it anyway, and I'm not seriously looking to buy
*right now.*) *Certainly a lot lighter than the hand me down MTB that
I currently have! *Felt like a dream hefting it. *Their price was
pretty good too compared to "recommended list."

You'll be enjoying the bike by riding, not hefting--keep that in mind.
A pound or two here or there matters little if you don't feel right in
the cockpit.

Fuji could be a nice all rounder, but it does bug me to see Formula
hubs instead of proper Shimano hubs on a $1K bike. It looks to have
most of the money in the frame and fork for folks that most likely
will purchase an upgraded wheelset at some point. I mean, you look at
a Kona entry level Jake for $200 less list, and you get LX hubs--but a
less fancy plain steel fork. Just a little perspective.

Hmm, that is an appealing looking option. *Three rings instead of two
would be nice for road riding as well, although what are your thoughts
on Tiagra vs. 105? *The sales rep kind of ran down Tiagra as if I
wouldn't be happy with a bike so equipped. *The list price for the
Jake is about what the LBS was offering the Fuji for, FWIW, although
the Jake the Snake is about comparable list for list. *All of this
advice is greatly appreciated as I probably haven't a clue as to what
brands are "good" and which are not anymore.


I'm not necessarily a Kona-head by any means--but I do think that the
entry level Jake is really smartly specced all-rounder. Tiagra is more
than fine for a recreational rider. Drawbacks to the Jake are the same
as the Fuji when it comes to geometry: yes, you can mount fenders and
a rack for some light utility use, but with big feet there will be a
chance of heel strike and toe overlap on the front end. That's
something you don't think about till you ride the thing. If you wear
size 12s on a 58cm bike--I can pretty much guarantee it being an
issue.

Keep in mind that the same chunk of change buys a good basic touring
bike like a Surly LHT that's a stupendous all-rounder, with plenty of
heel clearance and toe clearance. Drawback compared to a Jake or the
Fuji are going to be a less sporty geometry and about five pounds of
various extra-strength bits.