Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Compact Chainset or not ?

Options
  • 06-08-2008 11:26pm
    #1
    Murph100
    Registered Users Posts: 1,088 ✭✭✭


    Just been offered a regular or compact chainset on me new bike, whats the general sus on the compacts ? HELP !!!!


    Cheers,

    Murph


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    barrabus
    Registered Users Posts: 562 ✭✭✭barrabus


    If you plan on doing hills and aren't super fit go compact.
    Standard is usually 52(3) /39 .
    Compact is 50 /34.
    If the standard cassette offered is 25 / 12 ask about changing it to a 25 / 11, as the 50:11 ratio gets more rotations of the wheel per pedal revolution than a 52:12.


  • Options
    #3
    blorg
    Registered Users Posts: 15,989 ✭✭✭✭blorg


    Compact gives you easier gears- 34 smallest front chainring rather than 39. As barrabus says, if you want to do hills and are not super fit (and frankly even if you are) I would go for compact. Easier to do high cadence hill climbing with one, irrespective of your fitness level. I have a triple which is even easier again :D


  • Options
    #4
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    blorg wrote: »
    Compact gives you easier gears- 34 smallest front chainring rather than 39. As barrabus says, if you want to do hills and are not super fit (and frankly even if you are) I would go for compact. Easier to do high cadence hill climbing with one, irrespective of your fitness level. I have a triple which is even easier again :D

    LOL this again.

    If you are planning to be a competitive, or even close to, cyclist riding on Irish hills get the standard.

    If you're a recreational cyclist, get whatever you want :)


  • Options
    #5
    cantalach
    Registered Users Posts: 1,937 ✭✭✭cantalach


    The following thread from a couple of months back started as a double vs triple question, but expanded to become a traditional vs compact debate too. You should find lots of useful stuff in there (plenty of "real cyclists ride traditional cranksets" from tunney countered by me and others :)).

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055316895


  • Options
    #6
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    its not a case of real versus freds....

    its more a case of what you want to do.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    cantalach
    Registered Users Posts: 1,937 ✭✭✭cantalach


    tunney wrote: »
    its not a case of real versus freds....

    its more a case of what you want to do.

    I'm only pulling your leg - hence the smiley.


  • Options
    #8
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,269 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    If you're going to be riding on flat to moderate terrain, a standard double is fine for everyone.

    If you're going to be riding in the hills, such as the Wicklow mountains, it depends on your level of fitness. There are plenty of guys out there who swear by their compacts and if you go by events such as the Wicklow 200 where you see people walking their bikes up the hills, there are people out there who need the lower gearing.

    Having said all that, I think a lot of people underestimate the difference your cassette can make. For example, a lot of new bikes at entry to mid range are now sold with a 50/34 compact crankset and a 12-25 cassette. That will give you a lowest gear of 36.7 inches, which is more than enough for even beginners. However, a standard 53/39 double with a 12-27 cassette will give you a lowest gear of 39 inches, which isn't that far off.

    At €30 or so, a cassette is way cheaper than a crankset and is also far easier to swap out.

    Downsides of a compact crankset include the fact that it has a 16 tooth difference between rings, which makes the shift less crisp than with a double. It also means more shifting at the back when you switch rings, given the greater difference beetween the two.


  • Options
    #9
    ROK ON
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,831 ✭✭✭ROK ON


    I am new to all this, but here's my tuppence worth. I have a triple set, and for the serious hills I find I need all of it. But then again have been commuting for years and only road cycling for four months. The gears that I have used on the hills (Wicklow, Kerry) I would never have used/use in commuting.
    Also, I have seen fit experienced cyclists coast past me on the hills like I wasnt even there. But that has less to do with gearing IMO and more to do with fitness/lung capacity and milage in the legs.

    When I get beaten by the hills it is usually down to my lung capacity, not gears. Again, only a newbie, but thats what I find.


  • Options
    #10
    Hermy
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 11,375 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hermy


    ROK ON wrote: »
    When I get beaten by the hills it is usually down to my lung capacity, not gears. Again, only a newbie, but thats what I find.

    Couldn't agree more. I'm just getting back into cycling having done very little the past four years and the lowest gears in world wouldn't help me. I tried climbing Slieve Mann at the weekend and failed miserably using a 28-23.:o

    Genealogy Forum Mod



  • Options
    #11
    DirkVoodoo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,504 ✭✭✭✭DirkVoodoo


    Compact is fine. I have only been caught out once on a descent needing a bit more, but I've been more than happy to have the 34 ring.

    (Climbing up that 20%-er a few weeks back when Peadar kicked our collective butts springs to mind).

    El tonto makes a good point about the cassette too, if you have a compact and need more in the climbs, a 11/12-27 tooth rear cassette will make a big difference!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Murph100
    Registered Users Posts: 1,088 ✭✭✭Murph100


    Cheers guys for all the advice, much appreciated, what a can of worms ... I'm not even gonna think about crank length !!!

    Just spent the last hour on Compag's Gear-Inch calculator, me head is totally fecking fried now !!!! And whaddya know .... Campy dont do a 12/27 ... grrrr !!! BUT they do a 36/50 chainset which when coupled with an 11/25 sprocket might give me the best of both worlds and possibly a smoother gear change at the front ?? ... or have I completely lost it ?

    I think I need a drink .......


    Murph

    living on a mountain is all about pain at the end of a cycle


  • Options
    #13
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,269 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    Murph100 wrote: »
    And whaddya know .... Campy dont do a 12/27 ... grrrr !!!

    You can get a Campag compatible BBB cassette though. Parkers sell them.
    Murph100 wrote: »
    BUT they do a 36/50 chainset which when coupled with an 11/25 sprocket might give me the best of both worlds and possibly a smoother gear change at the front ??

    If you're going for compact, 50/36 is probably the best of both worlds alright.


  • Options
    #14
    cantalach
    Registered Users Posts: 1,937 ✭✭✭cantalach


    Murph100 wrote: »
    Campy dont do a 12/27 ... grrrr !!! BUT they do a 36/50 chainset which when coupled with an 11/25 sprocket might give me the best of both worlds and possibly a smoother gear change at the front ??

    Although I'm an avowed compact fan, I must admit that with Shimano at any rate you do lose a bit of smoothness in the front shifting. That said, the front mech on my bike is pretty much the only component that is still 105 and it has seen a lot of action. So upgrading to Ultegra or DA might improve matters.


Advertisement