A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

are 12-21 clusters are stupid?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 16th 05, 07:09 PM
Donald Gillies
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default are 12-21 clusters are stupid?

I was reading (I think) Frank Berto's "The Dancing Chain" book last
weekend, and it mentioned some efficiency research that Berto did with
3-speed hubs, 7-speed hubs, and regular derailleur bikes. If I
remember correctly, drivetrain energy loss was about 3-5% for
derailleurs, and 5-7% for internally geared hubs.

More interesting than this was a statement that the highest losses on
derailleur bikes came from 13-tooth cogs. The results implied that
using a 13-tooth cog was tanamount to using a Sturmey Archer 3-speed
hub. And Berto asserted that this is why 14-28 rear clusters are so
popular on road bikes of the 1970's and 1980's.

Has anything changed ?

Are 13-tooth (and 12-tooth (and 11-tooth)) cogs only 90-92% efficient?

- Don Gillies
San Diego, CA


Ads
  #2  
Old September 16th 05, 07:17 PM
Dave
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default are 12-21 clusters are stupid?


Donald Gillies wrote:
I was reading (I think) Frank Berto's "The Dancing Chain" book last
weekend, and it mentioned some efficiency research that Berto did with
3-speed hubs, 7-speed hubs, and regular derailleur bikes. If I
remember correctly, drivetrain energy loss was about 3-5% for
derailleurs, and 5-7% for internally geared hubs.

More interesting than this was a statement that the highest losses on
derailleur bikes came from 13-tooth cogs. The results implied that
using a 13-tooth cog was tanamount to using a Sturmey Archer 3-speed
hub. And Berto asserted that this is why 14-28 rear clusters are so
popular on road bikes of the 1970's and 1980's.

Has anything changed ?

Are 13-tooth (and 12-tooth (and 11-tooth)) cogs only 90-92% efficient?

- Don Gillies
San Diego, CA


There's an inherent relationship between cog size and mechanical drag,
since the chain links have to rotate further on their pins the smaller
the cog gets.

In actual usage, however, if you are in the 53-11 and pedaling at a
decent cadence, the speed would be high enough so that the mechanical
drag would be trivial compared to aerodynamic drag.

  #3  
Old September 16th 05, 08:40 PM
noname
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default are 12-21 clusters are stupid?

Good answer... but as i said before... if are not strong enough doesnt
matter it will be less eficient hehehe... common sense right? :P

cya



There's an inherent relationship between cog size and mechanical drag,
since the chain links have to rotate further on their pins the smaller
the cog gets.

In actual usage, however, if you are in the 53-11 and pedaling at a
decent cadence, the speed would be high enough so that the mechanical
drag would be trivial compared to aerodynamic drag.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Leave Ed Alone, It's Not Him,he's not Johnny NoCom Not Johnny NoCom Recumbent Biking 133 January 5th 05 04:44 AM
Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! ___________ ylojceq Tom Kunich Rides 672 December 3rd 04 06:49 AM
Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! TBGibb Rides 0 November 28th 04 07:57 PM
Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! TBGibb Rides 0 November 28th 04 07:57 PM
Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! ___________ylojceq Paul Cassel Rides 0 November 7th 04 11:16 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.