# What's the biggest ring on your rear cassette?



## links0311 (Aug 20, 2004)

I have a 25T big ring in the back. In Ohio it was fine, but now that I've moved to WV I am having some difficulties. I have a compact double (50X34) and am thinking about switching to a larger cassette in the back, maybe 28 or 30. What size cassette are you running in back?

-Links


----------



## cdhbrad (Feb 18, 2003)

I spent a week in CO riding this summer and I used a 12X27 10speed rear cassette with my compact on a Shimano drivetrain and did fine. We had climbs to 11,500 ft, so pretty sure that would handle most anything in WV, unless you are hitting some severe grades along the way. You don't mention what drivetrain you have, but if its Shimano and you have a standard cage rear der, you are going to be limited to a 27 unless you change to a mid or long cage derailleur. SRAM will go to a 28, don't know about Campy as I've never used it.


----------



## Hank Stamper (Sep 9, 2009)

You might want to give it some time if you just moved there and are semi new to biking. What would work well for you now might quickly become obsolete after your legs have adjusted to the hills.
I say this because I though seriously about doing the same early on with my bike but after a few more hills and miles I'm really glad I didn't because I'd be taking it off now.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Not to come off as snarky, but unless we're neighbors, generally have similar bike setups, ride the same terrain and are of the same general fitness level, it doesn't matter what gearing I (or anyone else uses). Based on the factors mentioned, you should decide what works best for you. 

If you can negotiate most climbs maintaining a reasonable (above 70) cadence in the 34/ 25T, then maybe going to a 27 or 28T cog would help some. But if you're walking some climbs or cranking at 50, you need more help. At that point, you'd have to go to a different rear derailleur/ add some links to your chain and (if going to a triple) change out the front derailleur and maybe shifter.

Another option would be to change out the 34 (inner) to a smaller ring. I believe most f/ der's have a max capacity of 20T difference, so you could go to a 30T, but they're not cheap. The link below is for Harris Cyclery special orders. The smallest they list for regular stock is a 33T.

http://harriscyclery.net/page.cfm?PageID=49&action=attributesearch&Category=203&type=T


----------



## links0311 (Aug 20, 2004)

I haven't had to walk up any climbs yet thankfully. I find myself wishing I had another shift on some climbs around my house. With the 34X25 setup I am probably doing 55-60 rpm for some stretches and thought a 28 would make me a little more comfortable and increase my rpm's to a more comfortable 65-70 rpms or so.


----------



## ericm979 (Jun 26, 2005)

Cassette sprockets are called "cogs". Chainring sprockets are "rings" for short.

Every time someone posts about gearing there's always a few replies of the form "I don't need lower than XX x YY, so you shouldn't either". Which is, of course, useless, but useful for bragging purposes.


PJ352's post is right on, except that you can't put a chainring smaller than 33t on a compact (110mm BCD) crankset, and it won't work on some of them (the crank arms hit the chain side plates).

You'll need a cassette with larger cogs. You can get an 11-30 or 12-30 made by IRD. You will need to go to a road triple rear derailleur to handle the chain wrap. A Shimano road triple RD is spec'd to go up to a 27t cog but they'll shift to a 30t with no problem.

Beyond that IRD also makes 10sp cassettes that go up to 34t. For those you can use a Shimano mountain bike rear derailleur. Find a gear calculator (there is one on Sheldon Browns web site) and look at some numbers.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

I'd go with a 12-27 cassette, maybe even 11-28, and see if that's enough. I agree that trying to grind up a long stretch in a low cadence (55-60 rpm) kinda sucks, and doesn't feel good. 

Many Shimano road rear derailleurs are spec'd for a max cog of only 27t, but in practice, that's a conservative spec and many ppl use 28t with no probem.

Ditto for the chain wrap specs... you can usually exceed them by a small amount without any major issues. That said, the 12-27 'sette is going to be 'safer', i.e. will exceed Shimano's stated specs by less than the 11-28 will, and is probably the way I'd go. Of course, talk to your LBS and see what they say too.
.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ericm979 said:


> PJ352's post is right on, except that *you can't put a chainring smaller than 33t on a compact (110mm BCD) crankset*, and it won't work on some of them (the crank arms hit the chain side plates).


You're right. Good catch! :thumbsup:


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

links0311 said:


> I haven't had to walk up any climbs yet thankfully. I find myself wishing I had another shift on some climbs around my house. With the 34X25 setup I am probably doing 55-60 rpm for some stretches and thought a 28 would make me a little more comfortable and increase my rpm's to a more comfortable 65-70 rpms or so.


That being the case, I agree with the other posters that going to a 27 or 28 cassette should get you the 'breathing room' (so to speak) that you're looking for.

Speaking from experience, keep the cadence up and save your knees!


----------



## Loraura (Jun 30, 2008)

I can't tell the difference, physically, between a 27 and a 28 on the rear cassette. I had a 27 previously, and now have the SRAM 12-28 because that is what came stock on my Cannondale Carbon Synapse (Feminine). I guess it's a tad easier up steep climbs, but I think I actually prefer the 27 because it's a big jump between the 25 and 28 gear hops, which seems less smooth.

I kinda miss the 24/27 gear.


----------



## cyclust (Sep 8, 2004)

Try a 12-27 for a while, and then if you still need something lower, consider going to a triple. A triple will allow you to keep a tighter cassette like the 12-25 but still have the granny ring as a bail out on the steep stuff. Compacts are a good compromise for those who don't quite need [or want to be seen with] a triple, but lack the ability to spin a 39 up their terrain. However, the triple gives you the better ring combination of the 39/53 plus the granny [which you probably won't need much, but will treasure when you do]. The compact has a less desireable 34-50 jump, which causes more double or triple shifting on the rear when you shift the front. As I said before, it is a compromise.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

PJ352 said:


> You're right. Good catch! :thumbsup:


For some reason, I just want a 33t chainring now. 

It seems so unusual, and I bet almost no one else has one. :yesnod:
.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

SystemShock said:


> For some reason, I just want a 33t chainring now.
> 
> It seems so unusual, and I bet almost no one else has one. :yesnod:
> .


And your point is... what?

The 33T is listed on Harris' website, so you can have what you want!


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

PJ352 said:


> And your point is... what?


I think I stated it quite clearly... no one else has one. :yesnod:



> _The 33T is listed on Harris' website, so you can have what you want! _


Yup.

Oh, wait. Ah crap... might have to swap out the 50t too. The 17t chainring difference might be a bit much... or do I give a crap?
.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

SystemShock said:


> I think I stated it quite clearly... no one else has one. :yesnod:
> 
> 
> Yup.
> ...


AFAIK you can go to 20T max difference, so where's the problem??


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

PJ352 said:


> AFAIK you can go to 20T max difference, so where's the problem??


20t? First I've heard of that. And of course you have to consider chain wrap as well. But 50/33 is sounding increasingly appealing.
.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

SystemShock said:


> 20t? First I've heard of that. And of course you have to consider chain wrap as well. But 50/33 is sounding increasingly appealing.
> .


Actually, it's neither 17 nor 20. It's 16T according to Shimano's specs. I was thinking triple and we're talking compact doubles. Still, if you're seriously considering the 33T, IMO it's worth a try.

EX:
http://bike.shimano.com/publish/con...l/product.-code-FD-6600-GB.-type-fd_road.html


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

PJ352 said:


> Actually, it's neither 17 nor 20. It's 16T according to Shimano's specs. I was thinking triple and we're talking compact doubles. Still, if you're seriously considering the 33T, IMO it's worth a try.
> 
> EX:
> http://bike.shimano.com/publish/con...l/product.-code-FD-6600-GB.-type-fd_road.html


Yeah, I knew what the typical Shimano FD's spec'd capacity was already. I was just hoping that, like with their RDs, you could exceed their specs slightly, 'cuz Shimano is known to be conservative with their specs.

So I'm hoping 17t is possible without any significant issues... though I get the feeling FDs are a bit more 'finicky' about such things. 20t to me sounded like you were _really_ pushing it, so thanks for clarifying that you were thinking 'bout something else.

For Shimano road triple FDs, btw, it's 22t sometimes, depending on the line.
.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*The difference*



Loraura said:


> I can't tell the difference, physically, between a 27 and a 28 on the rear cassette.


If you're climbing at 60 rpm in a 27 cog, switching to a 28 cog would increase your cadence to 62 rpm. If that makes a big difference, then make the switch


----------



## Zachariah (Jan 29, 2009)

-I have a Dura Ace 11/21 cassette and 34/50 Ultegra compact on road bike

-Mountain bike has Dura Ace 12/27 cassette and XTR 44/32/22 rings


----------



## newmexrb1 (Aug 16, 2009)

Mine is about to get bigger. Right now i'm riding 39-23 and for an old out of shape geezer in hill country, not slack enough. At 35 it seemed fine--at 53 not so kind. But as many have posted, there is no single answer. But there is one rule of thumb worth observing--knee replacement is expensive. Be kind to the pair you have, even if others sneer.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

newmexrb1 said:


> Mine is about to get bigger. Right now i'm riding 39-23 and for an old out of shape geezer in hill country, not slack enough. At 35 it seemed fine--at 53 not so kind. But as many have posted, there is no single answer.
> 
> But there is one rule of thumb worth observing--knee replacement is expensive. Be kind to the pair you have, even if others sneer.


Very true. And there's nuthin' wrong with a compact crank or wide-range cassette... no matter what anyone says.

Heck, even Andy Hampsten uses both these days:

*http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/article/pro-bike-andy-hampstens-cycles-strada-bianca-ti-16577*
.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

SystemShock said:


> Very true. And there's nuthin' wrong with a compact crank or wide-range cassette... no matter what anyone says.
> 
> Heck, even Andy Hampsten uses both these days:
> 
> ...


Sorry, but that Chuck Norris avatar just doesn't go with your enlightened 'tude.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

PJ352 said:


> Sorry, but that Chuck Norris avatar just doesn't go with your enlightened 'tude.


Actually, Chuck Norris knows lots.

Chuck Norris doesn't read books. He stares them down until he gets the information he wants.
.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

SystemShock said:


> Actually, Chuck Norris knows lots.
> 
> Chuck Norris doesn't read books. He stares them down until he gets the information he wants.
> .


Wow. Kinda like... thru osmosis?  

Wish I could do that.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

PJ352 said:


> Wow. Kinda like... thru osmosis?


Yes. Chuck Norris is an amoeba.

Don't tell anyone.
.


----------



## hyperfocal (Oct 22, 2009)

I'm currently running 50/34 with a 11-32 cassette. I had to go with a mountain bike rear derailleur (LX) cause my original Sora derailleur wouldn't shift very well although it was a long cage (my bike came with triples). 

Current setup works very well for me as I'm a heavy guy who usually carries heavy camera equipment with me and I like a high cadence. 

Someone mentioned a 30t on a compact crank. With a 110mm bolt circle that all compacts that I'm aware come in, the smallest chainring that is physically possible is the 33T. 

my ride ... 










I'm new here so please forgive any protocol violations (& please correct me if I've made any)


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Welcome! No 'protocol violations' and you're correct re: the 33T minimum. That was sorted out as the thread progressed, but was easy to miss. 

I'm surprised that you had problems w/ the Sora RD and the (Deore?) LX works ok for you, but I don't know all the particulars of your set up.


----------



## Camp Connell Steve (Aug 23, 2009)

*Help with mtn bike gearing on a Roubaix...*



ericm979 said:


> Cassette sprockets are called "cogs". Chainring sprockets are "rings" for short.
> 
> Every time someone posts about gearing there's always a few replies of the form "I don't need lower than XX x YY, so you shouldn't either". Which is, of course, useless, but useful for bragging purposes.
> 
> ...



Thanks to Ericm979 for his sensitive understanding of gearing. I used to ride up Mtn Tam in Marin and Hamilton in the East Bay in a 42/26 gearing combo on a Raleigh Competition and loved it. That was in my 20s. Now at 61 with a arthritis in my right knee from an old skiing injury, I am riding a Bruce Gordon, a road touring frame that comes stock with mountain bike gearing. I have retired to the Sierra, and I ride daily on hills that include sustained climbs at 10-12%. I spin happily along in my 22 front inner chain ring/32 rear cluster cog up these hills with a cadence of 80-85, and my right knee sings my praises. If I start mashing AT ALL, my right knee punishes me that night with deep aching.
The reason for this posting is that I wish to move from the Bruce Gordon to a Specialized Roubaix Expert Triple. Why? Because I prefer the handling and ride. But the problem is that current 10 speed road triples are limited to a 29 or 30 as the smallest inner chain ring possible. I want my Roubaix to sport a mountain bike gearing ratio like I enjoy on my Bruce Gordon. Has anyone had experience with this kind of set-up? The current Roubaixs have the BB30 bottom brackets. Can anyone suggest a way I can set up a Roubaix so that is has a 24 chain ring/34 cluster cog, or 22 chain ring/32 cluster cog lowest gear? Thanks for the help. 
Camp Connell Steve


----------



## nor_cal_rider (Dec 18, 2006)

I live/ride in the foothills/mountains of northern California. I have a compact front and a 12-27 rear. Seems to get me anywhere I want to ride. YMMV.


----------



## Camp Connell Steve (Aug 23, 2009)

*61 year old with knee injury weighs in on gearing...*

"Hi, my name is Steve and I'm a gear weenie."

Don't mind admitting it here. Thought I'd post up my experience to provide a "bookend" at the other end of the spectrum. When I was in my twenties I used to ride up Mt Hamilton and Tamalpias in the Bay Area in my lowest gear a 42/26 on my old Raleigh Competitioin. Loved riding miles out of the saddle crunching up the mountains.

Then tore up my knee in a skiing accident. Now I'm 62 years young, and still love road cycling. Live in the Sierra where there is no flat road to be found. Have a Garmin so I know the grades, and frequently have to ride sustained 15% and higher grades.

My solution? I ride a Bruce Gordon touring bike. Bike is heavier than I need since it is built for loaded touring, and I am just doing day rides. So I don't need the extra beef in the frame (with its weight). But what this bike does come stock with is mountain bike gearing. I am running a 22 front chain ring/32 rear cog as my lowest gear. As a result I can spin, yes literally spin, up 15% grades at an RPM of around 85 to 90. And the benefit? My knee thanks me every singe day. If I try to upshift into any higher gear, the knee hurts and swells that evening. If I spin in my 22/32 combo, my knee feels *better* after the ride.

I ride with lots of folks in their sixties and mid seventies. They have all switched to triples on their road bikes, generally going with a 24 front inner chain ring and a 32 rear cluster cog. And they aren't looking back. Our LBS mechanic, who is a sweetheart, resisted making this change for folks for a while. Why? Because he's still in his early forties and he "just doesn't get it." He said, "Oh, you don't need that low gearing..." Easy for him to say.

So the message is this, take your mountain bike and put skinny slick tires on it. Take it out to the hilly roads you wish to ride and spend some time figuring out what lowest gear makes sense to you for your road bike. Don't get caught up in the "macho thing" about what someone else will think. Who gives a rat's "a....s" what they think anyway. Then make the conversion on your road bike. Plan to get a gearing that has one *lower* gear than you think you'll need. Remember, you're getting this bike for the next 15 years, not the last...

You'll have trouble making this low gearing work in some cases because the new doubles and triples make life tough for these kinds of conversions. The old nine cogged triples worked fine, but the new ten cog triples don't, for the reasons mentioned in this string. You'll have trouble with many of the road derailleurs too in making this switch. In all likelihood you'll have to switch out much of your drive train. You might get lucky by calling these folks. They know a ton about gearing and may be able to set you up: http://www.actiontec.us/

Or you can go ahead and buy a Bruce Gordon off the shelf. Mine weighs 26 pounds and is 15 years old, and I just love it. I don't know what they weigh now, but this is a fine reliable bike. Doesn't have the upper end gearing, but I don't have any flat areas here, so I'm either spinning up hill in low gears, or coasting downhill. I spin out in my highest gear at about 30 mph at about 110 rpm or something like that. It works for me. Bruce sells two different price categories with the same gearing, basically the same frame geometry, but frame and parts are upgraded on the more expensive. http://www.bgcycles.com/faq.html

Good luck.


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

50/36 front 12-34 rear


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

Camp Connell Steve said:


> I want my Roubaix to sport a mountain bike gearing ratio like I enjoy on my Bruce Gordon. Has anyone had experience with this kind of set-up? The current Roubaixs have the BB30 bottom brackets. Can anyone suggest a way I can set up a Roubaix so that is has a 24 chain ring/34 cluster cog, or 22 chain ring/32 cluster cog lowest gear? Thanks for the help.
> Camp Connell Steve


I'm not sure if there is a 10-speed solution for this. One alternative is to buy a Roubaix Pro frameset. It will have a standard BB, not BB30, and you can then move your existing 9-speed MTB drive-train over to it (or new components if you prefer). You would then pair the drive-train with 9-speed STI road shifters.

Another option might be to use SRAM's 10 speed mountain bike drive-train, though I have no idea on its compatibility with 10-speed road shifters.

By the way, Highway 4 from Arnold past Camp Connell to Markleeville and back is one of my favourite rides of all time!


----------



## terbennett (Apr 1, 2006)

Depends on which wheels I'm in the mood to ride on. My Neuvations are running a 12-25; My Mavics are running a 12-27; And my Velocitys are running an 11-23.


----------

