# Gearing question . . . currently running 48/17



## inspectormorse (Nov 30, 2013)

Hi I currently run a 48/17 setup on my single speed.

Are there any advantages why I should keep the single speed at this gear ratio?

I live in a flat area with some hills. 

Thanks.


----------



## JCavilia (Sep 12, 2005)

inspectormorse said:


> Hi I currently run a 48/17 setup on my single speed.
> 
> Are there any advantages why I should keep the single speed at this gear ratio?
> 
> Thanks.


I don't understand the question. You're running it now, right? Does it work for you? Are you at a comfortable cadence at your typical cruising speeds? Can you make it up all the hills you need to, without hurting yourself? If both of those are "yes," sounds like you've got a good gear.

FWIW, that's a wee bit higher gear than a lot of people use for SS, if they ride some hills -- more like what people use for fixed gear. Unlike FG, where you maybe want a higher gear so you don't spin out so soon on the downhills, with SS you can get away with a lower gear to help you go up, because you can coast going down.

But if it works for you, it's good. Here's a little more math: with that gear, at 90 rpm you're going 20 mph. If that's your typical cruising speed, you're perfect (assuming that's your comfortable cadence, as it is for many riders).


----------



## inspectormorse (Nov 30, 2013)

It's doable on hills, but i have to put more effort enough to get a sweat going, but not enough to affect talking or breathing.

I usually run cadence on road bikes at 90-100 cruising speed. I don't know what it is on this bike, but I can tell it's probably below 90, perhaps 80 or so.



JCavilia said:


> I don't understand the question. You're running it now, right? Does it work for you? Are you at a comfortable cadence at your typical cruising speeds? Can you make it up all the hills you need to, without hurting yourself? If both of those are "yes," sounds like you've got a good gear.
> 
> FWIW, that's a wee bit higher gear than a lot of people use for SS, if they ride some hills -- more like what people use for fixed gear. Unlike FG, where you maybe want a higher gear so you don't spin out so soon on the downhills, with SS you can get away with a lower gear to help you go up, because you can coast going down.
> 
> But if it works for you, it's good. Here's a little more math: with that gear, at 90 rpm you're going 20 mph. If that's your typical cruising speed, you're perfect (assuming that's your comfortable cadence, as it is for many riders).


----------



## JCavilia (Sep 12, 2005)

inspectormorse said:


> It's doable on hills, but i have to put more effort enough to get a sweat going, but not enough to affect talking or breathing.
> 
> I usually run cadence on road bikes at 90-100 cruising speed. I don't know what it is on this bike, but I can tell it's probably below 90, perhaps 80 or so.


So it sounds maybe a little higher than ideal. If you're spinning 80, you're going a bit under 18 mph (sounds right). If you changed the cog to a 20, you'd be spinning 95 rpm at the same speed, which might work better. The 15% lower gear would make a noticeable difference on the climbs, too.


----------



## inspectormorse (Nov 30, 2013)

Thanks. Which combination will make me a better climber? I would like to use my commute runs as mini training sessions since I'm participating in granfondony 100 miler with one of my race bikes.



JCavilia said:


> So it sounds maybe a little higher than ideal. If you're spinning 80, you're going a bit under 18 mph (sounds right). If you changed the cog to a 20, you'd be spinning 95 rpm at the same speed, which might work better. The 15% lower gear would make a noticeable difference on the climbs, too.


----------



## 2:01 (May 10, 2010)

I guess I'm confused as to what you're trying to achieve. Riding a SS is always going to be a compromise. If you run it fixed, it's even a further compromise. Faster flat ground speed will result in harder climbs. Easier climbs means you'll be spinning like a spaz on the flats. It's really different for everyone, so really, it's up to you to decide what your balance point is. My rides are fairly hilly, and used to be at 48x18, but now running 47x17. I keep a stack of chainrings and cogs on hand to change out if needed.

So if 48x17 is a little too hard, switch the cog out to a 18. Make 1-2 tooth changes until you dial in what you need. Also, keep a bail out cog on the "flop" side of the wheel, just in case. I've got a 19T myself.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

Your hills will still be tougher than the flats when you fit a lower gear. And you can always go look for hills if you want a harder workout on a particular day.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

inspectormorse said:


> Hi I currently run a 48/17 setup on my single speed. Are there any advantages why I should keep the single speed at this gear ratio?


Yeah, it's cheaper than changing to another ratio.


----------



## UrbanPrimitive (Jun 14, 2009)

inspectormorse said:


> Thanks. Which combination will make me a better climber? I would like to use my commute runs as mini training sessions since I'm participating in granfondony 100 miler with one of my race bikes.


Honestly I can't think of anyway to answer this that doesn't sound insulting. That isn't my intent and I mean this with the most respect I can, but here goes:

Which gear ratio will make you a better climber? The one you use on hills.

This is kind of like asking a weight lifter if you should curl 30 pounds for twelve reps kind of quickly or 35 pounds for twelve reps kind of slowly. We don't have enough information about your current performance and your performance goals to know how to answer.

If you're looking for a gear ratio that will let you keep your cadence up all the way up a hill you will want a larger cog. If you want a gear ratio that encourages you to slow way, way down and slowly mash your way up the hill you'll want a smaller cog. Both techniques have training benefits. But they are very different tactics and achieve different ends.

Unfortunately asking what gearing will make you better at hills is sort of like asking what brakes will make you a better driver; the ones you use.


----------



## JCavilia (Sep 12, 2005)

inspectormorse said:


> Thanks. Which combination will make me a better climber? I would like to use my commute runs as mini training sessions since I'm participating in granfondony 100 miler with one of my race bikes.


The answer is probably, "none of them." If you want to train to do a long hilly ride on a multi-geared bike, you should be climbing hills on the geared bike. A SS is by nature a compromise. If you have a good cruising gear on it, you have the "wrong" gear for climbing (i.e., a gear you wouldn't choose on the shifty bike). Commuting on a SS bike is good fitness training, and can make you stronger generally, but you're simply not going to be riding the same way you need to on a long hilly ride.


----------



## inspectormorse (Nov 30, 2013)

good point, it's acutally a 48/16. so you recommend just keeping this?



UrbanPrimitive said:


> Honestly I can't think of anyway to answer this that doesn't sound insulting. That isn't my intent and I mean this with the most respect I can, but here goes:
> 
> Which gear ratio will make you a better climber? The one you use on hills.
> 
> ...


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

Change to fixed to get any kind of benefit from a single speed. Freewheels allow you to rest when you should be working. A gear that is better for climbing will force you to spin on the flat, so when you get back on gears you'll naturally pedal all the time.


----------



## inspectormorse (Nov 30, 2013)

I cannot do fixie in my city . . . too many hills and too many car drivers that cannot drive .... seriously.



ultimobici said:


> Change to fixed to get any kind of benefit from a single speed. Freewheels allow you to rest when you should be working. A gear that is better for climbing will force you to spin on the flat, so when you get back on gears you'll naturally pedal all the time.


----------



## JCavilia (Sep 12, 2005)

inspectormorse said:


> I cannot do fixie in my city . . . too many hills and too many car drivers that cannot drive .... seriously.


I thought you lived in a "flat area with some hills" (what is that, anyway?). In any event, there's nothing inherent in FG, as distinguished from SS, that makes it more hazardous in bad traffic, or in hilly areas. You can drag the brakes on the downhills to keep the spin under control. And stopping with brakes is the same either way.

That said, I think the training benefits ultimobi cites are overblown. I ride FG on my commutes and some other rides, and I like it a lot, but I don't think it's made that big a difference in my conditioning. I naturally pedaled (nearly) all the time on the geared bikes anyway, long before I started riding fixed.

But it's perfectly okay to prefer SS. They're just two different styles. But again, it's not going to be especially good training for a hilly century on a multi-speed bike. Low-cadence climbing, grinding a too-tall gear, can make your legs stronger, but it's not training the movements and techniques you'll use for the other kind of riding.

And where exactly is this flat-but-hilly city with the terrible drivers?


----------



## inspectormorse (Nov 30, 2013)

Hi JCavilia, 

So, there is no direct fitness/training benefit from riding SS/Fixed.

Oh well. Well at least I have piece of mind that I can ride this bike without hassle as my alloy and carbon race bikes.



JCavilia said:


> I thought you lived in a "flat area with some hills" (what is that, anyway?). In any event, there's nothing inherent in FG, as distinguished from SS, that makes it more hazardous in bad traffic, or in hilly areas. You can drag the brakes on the downhills to keep the spin under control. And stopping with brakes is the same either way.
> 
> That said, I think the training benefits ultimobi cites are overblown. I ride FG on my commutes and some other rides, and I like it a lot, but I don't think it's made that big a difference in my conditioning. I naturally pedaled (nearly) all the time on the geared bikes anyway, long before I started riding fixed.
> 
> ...


----------



## JCavilia (Sep 12, 2005)

inspectormorse said:


> So, there is no direct fitness/training benefit from riding SS/Fixed.


I wouldn't (didn't) say "no" benefit. Grinding the hills can add some strength if you're careful, and if you're in the habit of coasting a lot, and don't spin fast, a FG can help change the habits. 

No comment on the peace of mind issue, except to say that riding any bike improves my peace of mind.


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

inspectormorse said:


> Hi JCavilia,
> 
> So, there is no direct fitness/training benefit from riding SS/Fixed.
> 
> Oh well. Well at least I have piece of mind that I can ride this bike without hassle as my alloy and carbon race bikes.


From your username am I right in thinking you are in Oxford?


----------

