Any hybrids with 20 inch low gear?

Are there any hybrid bikes currently being made with a 19 or 20 inch low
gear? I'm over the 50 year old hill, but find it tough getting over
some of the local hills with my 24 inch low gear. Replacing my cassette
is apparently not an option, and replacing the chainwheel, bottom
bracket, etc. seemed like too much non-manufacturer approved major surgery.

Don Swaner wrote in :
Are there any hybrid bikes currently being made with a 19 or 20 inch low
gear? I'm over the 50 year old hill, but find it tough getting over
some of the local hills with my 24 inch low gear. Replacing my cassette
is apparently not an option, and replacing the chainwheel, bottom
bracket, etc. seemed like too much non-manufacturer approved major surgery.

Why is replacing your cassette not an option? What gearing do you currently
have? Can you just put in a smaller granny chainring?

"Don Swaner" wrote in message
...
Are there any hybrid bikes currently being made with a 19 or 20 inch low
gear? I'm over the 50 year old hill, but find it tough getting over
some of the local hills with my 24 inch low gear. Replacing my cassette
is apparently not an option, and replacing the chainwheel, bottom
bracket, etc. seemed like too much non-manufacturer approved major
surgery.

What type of cassette do you have; i.e range of sprockets? It should be a
relatively simple matter to replace it with a unit having 30+ teeth at the
bottom end.
However, you may find that at 19-20" low gear, balance could become a
problem.
Have you tried improving your climbing technique? For what it's worth, I
may be old enough to be your father and find that 24" is quite low enough
for non-loaded touring. My regular 18 speed Bianchi that I use for group
outings has a 44" low ratio. For leg strength I have taken to using a
single-speed fixed gear bike with a 67" gear which is just great for
flattish terrain but not recommended for the mountains

Good luck anyway,

"Three score years and ten in two weeks."

Don Swaner wrote in message ...
Are there any hybrid bikes currently being made with a 19 or 20 inch low
gear? I'm over the 50 year old hill, but find it tough getting over
some of the local hills with my 24 inch low gear. Replacing my cassette
is apparently not an option, and replacing the chainwheel, bottom
bracket, etc. seemed like too much non-manufacturer approved major surgery.

Well, there's this. http://dahon.com/speedtr.htm

The specs give the low gear, as 21 inches, but that seems to be based
on the tire being a nominal 20 inches. When you consider that the
real tire size is probably closer to 19, that would bring it down to
20.

But my experience with super-low gears like that is that I reach a
point of diminishing returns. I may not have to exert as much muscle
power, but it takes forever to get up the hill, and I'm not sure that
I've used much less energy by the time I reach the top. Another
factor is how much you carry on your bike, of course.

Anyway, good luck with your search.

Kaputnik wrote:
But my experience with super-low gears like that is that I reach a
point of diminishing returns. I may not have to exert as much muscle
power, but it takes forever to get up the hill, and I'm not sure that
I've used much less energy by the time I reach the top. Another
factor is how much you carry on your bike, of course.

To be clear, you'll use the same amount of energy climbing a hill
no matter what speed you climb at as the energy you expend (to a
first order approximation) depends solely on the elevation gain.
The speed you climb the hill at depends on the power you exert, but
you can produce the same amount of power and hence maintain the same
speed by pushing hard on the pedals at a low cadence in a higher
gear, or pushing not-so-hard on the pedals at a higher cadence in
a lower gear. The optimal, individual choice of gearing for hills
hence relates to the cadence at which the person on the bike is
best able to produce power, which is also the cadence which allows
the person to climb at the highest speed.

When I first moved to California, from a much flatter place, I was
in the habit of climbing at a cadence of about 80 RPM. If I dropped
much below this cadence I would have difficulty maintaining my speed.
At 80 RPM the minimum speed you can travel in the 40" or so low gear
typical of a dual chain ring road bike is (if I computed this
correctly) over 9 mph, and with the 30" low gear on my triple chain
ring bike is still over 7 mph. I was not a strong climber (I'm
still not), and there are extended segments of hills here where
maintaining even 7 mph takes a fair bit more effort than I could
expend. At the time a 20" low gear, which gets you about 4.5 mph
at 80 RPM, wouldn't have been excessively low.

Since then, however, I've not only gotten a bit stronger but have
also spent some effort getting comfortable climbing at lower
cadences (in part by learning to climb out of the saddle for
extended periods, something I didn't do before). My goal is to
be able to get rid of the third chain ring on my racing-geometry
bicycle since I've found triple chain rings to be relatively
fussy and unreliable on bikes with short chainstays, so I'd
really like to be able to handle the steep bits in higher gears.
This isn't a goal I'd expect everyone to share, however, and for
someone who does their best climbing at higher cadences I can
sympathize with wanting really low gears on the bike.

Dennis Ferguson

On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 18:23:57 -0500, Don Swaner
wrote:
Are there any hybrid bikes currently being made with a 19 or 20 inch low
gear? I'm over the 50 year old hill, but find it tough getting over
some of the local hills with my 24 inch low gear. Replacing my cassette
is apparently not an option, and replacing the chainwheel, bottom
bracket, etc. seemed like too much non-manufacturer approved major surgery.

Why is replacing the cassette not an option? The usual reason is
that the rear derailer can't handle it; but most rear derailers can
be used far beyond the manufacturer's specifications.

"Non-manufacturer approved" means nothing. What difference does it
make to you if the manufacturer gives it's blessing? This is bike
configuration, not personal injury law or rocket science.

My mountain bike has a 22 tooth granny and a 34 tooth large rear
cog. With 26x2.1" tires, that's approximately 17 inches. It would
approach 18 inches for a hybrid running 700x38 tires.

The bike did need upgraded rear and front derailers to handle the
new gears. The front won't be necessary if you reduce the size of
the largest chainring as well as the smallest. The rear probably
won't be necessary either, if you already have a long-cage derailer.

I can't imagine why you'll need a new bottom bracket, unless the old
one is worn, incompatible with your new crank, or if your old crank
is a double and the new a triple (not likely with a 24 inch low).
--
Rick Onanian

Thanks for the feedback. For the time being, I'll keep trying to make
the 24 inch gear work for me. My dealer's catalog showed a
(manufacturer approved) replacement cassette with 34T max - it would
take 39T to get to 20 inches with the current 28T chainwheel. In order
to replace the chainwheel (with a non-approved trail bike chainwheel),
their bike mechanic said he'd have to replace the bottom bracket to get
a 22T to shift properly - I assume he's correct, but I'm pretty clueless.

(Dennis Ferguson) wrote:

To be clear, you'll use the same amount of energy climbing a hill
no matter what speed you climb at as the energy you expend (to a
first order approximation) depends solely on the elevation gain.

Not true, even a little bit. There's elevation gain, and then there
are losses. Aerodynamic losses add up if you climb quickly,
mechanical losses increase as you gear down, and physiological losses
increase if you pedal quickly or very slowly. Losses will vary
according to speed, gear ratio, cadence, and riding technique, even if
the elevation gain remains the same.

Chalo Colina

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article ,
Don Swaner wrote:
Thanks for the feedback. For the time being, I'll keep trying to make
the 24 inch gear work for me. My dealer's catalog showed a
(manufacturer approved) replacement cassette with 34T max - it would
take 39T to get to 20 inches with the current 28T chainwheel. In order
to replace the chainwheel (with a non-approved trail bike chainwheel),
their bike mechanic said he'd have to replace the bottom bracket to get
a 22T to shift properly - I assume he's correct, but I'm pretty clueless.

_ Huh? I'm not following exactly what's going on, but if you've
got a triple front chainring, then there is no need to replace
the bottom bracket when you swap out the inner ring for a smaller
one. The only reason to replace the bottom bracket would be if
you need to install a whole new crank[1]. I could maybe see
getting a new front derailler, but if it shifts to a 28 it should
shift to a 24. You might want to try a different bike mechanic...

_ Why don't you tell us what chainrings are on the front ( crank
end), what brand of crank you have and exactly what's on the back
end. If the front crank is a triple with a 28T small chainwheel,
then it should be relatively straightforward to get a 24t
chainwheel to replace the 28t. A 24t front 34t rear is 19 inches
more or less. You can learn everything you need to know about
chainwheels and gearing here

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/articles.html

_ Approved, smoomved.. It's a bike, if it works use it.

_ Booker C. Bense

[1]- Even then it isn't always needed, mostly you need
a new bottom bracket when going from a double to triple.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQFo/SWTWTAjn5N/lAQFj6AP/d7CKl0Tp8SfF6gpyLGe5CENN0OGtTBuf
xAwh+mTwlQ4i7T43iat2QthGH3ej2MxN65Y91y973gBPxbVzdE nwmcW1lou7RQcz
zI6nzSPj1rUuS5BD3w4Up+26cTpTwaYtll9L18FI/zYqEaKLPa2r82/ArF+GPa1q
EfxSPxIZ7O8=
=yNtX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----