# Shifting - Big Ring vs Little Ring



## Mufasa (Dec 12, 2011)

So on my training rides, I've been playing with my gears a lot trying to figure out what the pros and cons of certain gears are at certain times.

I'm trying to determine if it's best to spend most of my time on the small ring or the big ring? It seems that I can dial in the same amount of resistance on either ring. The only major difference that I've noticed is that shifting the rear cassette is much more gradual (in terms of resistance) when I'm on the small front ring. If I'm on the big ring, I shift directly from a pretty easy gear straight into a mashing gear. On the small ring, the resistance builds much more smoothly from gear to gear. Make sense?

Can anyone point out the ups and downs of riding on a specific (front) ring other than what I've pointed out above?

Thanks in advance! :thumbsup:

PS I've used the search engine, but I got nuttin'. Maybe I didn't use the right terms but it returned nothing related to my question.


----------



## Mr. Versatile (Nov 24, 2005)

Using the big chain ring reduces both friction & wear. I don't know what cogs you have on the cassette, but if you can't find a comfortable gear when on the big ring then by all means use the small one.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

if you're going slowly or climbing medium to steep hills, small ring. if you're going fast, you guessed it...


----------



## 4Crawler (Jul 13, 2011)

I always print out a gearing chart:
- http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/
and tape it to the stem on my bikes to refer to on the road. Handy to find out what overall gear ratio you are in if you need to find something a bit harder or easier in a given situation. 

With the chart, you can see that the percentage jumps from cog to cog in back don't depend on what ring you are in up front. But the size of the jump, say in terms of gear-inches, is smaller in the small ring than in the big ring for a given set of cogs. For example on my CX bike, if I shift from cog 9 to cog 10 (a 18.2% jump from 13 to 11 teeth), I see a gearing change of 42.0 up to 49.7 gear-inches (+7.7 gear-inches) in the small ring, but in the big ring the jump is from 92.5 up to 109.3 gear-inches which is an increase of almost 17 gear-inches. Percentage-wise, it is the same increase, but the jump in "wheel size" is bigger in the big ring.

I'll pick which ring to use up front based upon which one gives me easy access to a selection of rear cogs for the given terrain I am riding. So like on today's ride (on a 3x10 geared bike), I was in the big ring on the paved bike trail then when it turned to dirt/gravel, I dropped into the middle ring because the speeds dropped a bit. Then when I got to a hilly section, I dropped into the small ring. The return trip was then middle ring and ended in the large ring when I got back to pavement. I'll ride like this on my road bike as well, it has 3x7 gearing, fairly close ratio. But on my touring bike, with 3x6 wide ratio gearing, I find I shift between front rings a lot more since I have the gear ratios setup up to be split between the different front rings. Since that bike has bigger jumps between the rear cogs, I often need to split those big jumps by shifting the front rings and changing rear cogs to shift to a different gear. 

But you can learn all that by studying the gearing chart and find what works for you and your bike.


----------



## brucew (Jun 3, 2006)

Mufasa said:


> The only major difference that I've noticed is that shifting the rear cassette is much more gradual (in terms of resistance) when I'm on the small front ring. If I'm on the big ring, I shift directly from a pretty easy gear straight into a mashing gear. On the small ring, the resistance builds much more smoothly from gear to gear. Make sense?


What I'm seeing you say is that you prefer a close-ratio cassette. So do I. 

Unfortunately, most bikes come with wide-ratio cassettes (12-28, 11-28) and drivetrain manufacturers keep expanding that width (11-30, 11-32).

Depending on your terrain and front gearing, a 12-23 or 11-21 would give you those small steps between gears on both rings. Of course, you need legs to start from a stop in the big ring and 23 or 21 in back.

Anyway, there are only two "shoulds" in cycling drivetrains. 

1) The drivetrain should provide you with adequate gearing for your typical terrain and fitness level. 

2) You should avoid cross-chaining (big/big and small/small). Those positions wear things out faster. Occasional use is okay, just don't make it a habit.

Other than that, who cares which ring you prefer?


----------



## Mufasa (Dec 12, 2011)

Thanks for all of the advice so far. I'm checking out the chart now.

BruceW - You are correct, I like the close ratio of the smaller ring. If I'm cranking down the road and catch a head wind, I may want to lower the resistance SLIGHTLY. When I'm on the big ring, if I shift down, the reduction in resistance is way too much.

For hills, I can see the use of the more dramatic change of the big ring. For mostly flat terrain, my needs for resistance changes are much more slight. 

Again, thanks for the input so far! Anymore insight on big/little ring or other shifting techniques would be great!


----------



## dgeesaman (Jun 9, 2010)

Yeah, where I live and with my strength I need 27 or 28 teeth in back and a 34t double to climb the steep hills.

My basic thought is this: use the big ring wherever practical. That means for me I'm in the small ring when I'm going up a grade or 3-4% or more. Of course if my legs are anaerobic and I can't sustain at least 75rpm cadence, it's time to slow down and change to the small ring.

The one combination of gearing I try to avoid is small/small. This crosses the chain severely and if it doesn't sound rough it's probably wearing quickly. I also avoid big/big because the rear derailleur runs tight to the rear sprocket. That's plenty of overlap.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Assuming your bikes gearing is a good match for your fitness/ terrain, _along with_ learning the importance of reading the road and conditions, then choosing the appropriate gear combo, if you're not already doing, start focusing on smoothing the pedal stroke and keeping your cadence up. 

I say _along with_, because knowing (and anticipating) upcoming conditions and planning with appropriate gear changes is important, but it does go hand in hand with maintaining adequate cadence. You recognized this by mentioning resistance, and smoothing the pedal stroke and developing/ maintaining good cadence (varying with terrain/ conditions) will keep resistance low, build your endurance and save your knees from undue stress.

I don't think you should pigeonhole yourself by thinking big ring in X conditions, little ring in Y conditions, because (as one example) I can think of situations along my routes where I can sprint up a couple of hills in the big ring/ large cog, cresting them at a high enough cadence that shifting to the inner ring isn't necessary. And yes, I cross chain - just keep it brief. 

Other times, facing a stiff headwind, even though I'm traversing a flat section of road, I stay in the inner ring. So, my best answer for using inner/ outer rings is (similar to Bruce's #1) it depends on the riders fitness, terrain and current conditions.

On the topic of cadence, if you don/t already own one, I suggest investing in a computer with cadence, and reading up on the topic. It's an important part of cycling and (as mentioned) will yield benefits in both building endurance and saving your knees. A win-win.


----------



## NJBiker72 (Jul 9, 2011)

I second PJ's comment on cadence. 

I tend to run the big ring unless going up a hill. Winds rarely bother me. But I will use the full 34t x 28 on a few of the hills. Then stay in the small to recover for a couple of minutes.

The other time I use the small ring is when riding with slower riders or in heavy traffic. I find I can still pedal at a relaxed pace without dropping them so easily.


----------



## Camilo (Jun 23, 2007)

I run the small ring when it gives me the gears I need, and the big ring when it gives me the gears I need. That of course depends on strength, speed, cadence preferences, terrain, My rule of thumb (with exceptions abounding) is to use the small ring with the inner 2/3 - 3/4 of the cassette and the large ring with the outer 2/3 - 3/4 of the cassette. With a triple I further modify that rule of thumb and use the middle ring with the entire cassette.

I know that the OP probably wants more detailed rules, but that's what it boils down to. Ride the bike, use the gears you need and use whichever chain wheel gives you what you need thinking of minimizing cross chaining if possible.

I personally don't believe there is any meaningful efficiency difference between a gear with a large chainwheel+ sprocket combo compared to the the same general gear with a small chainwheel+ sprocket combo. That's an excercise for the theoretical and hyper analytical, I think.


----------



## vladvm (May 4, 2010)

to simplify, if knees hurt, use small ring. if it doesn't use big ring. that's it.


----------



## dnmoss (Jun 27, 2008)

Run whatever ring gives you the most comfortable ride and cadence. Most people tend to run the big ring on flats and downhill, the small ring for inclines and climbs...there is no penalty for shifting often -- to make a mass generalization, as the terrain changes, so should your gearing...

I try to keep my cadence above 90 even on climbs and usually it's closer to 95-105. That's where I feel most comfortable...others might ride closer to a cadence of 80 -- we can both be on the same rode going the same speed and generating the same power -- but with different gears and cadence. 

No right answer here (although most people would suggest using a smaller gear and a higher cadence to tax the aerobic system and not fatigue your muscles as much).


----------

