# 53/39 w 11-32 vs Compact 11-28



## dieselcruiserhead (Aug 30, 2008)

Subject says it all.  Building a new bike and upgrading to 11 speed. 

I currently run a compact with 11-28 but I'm sick of the difference of the wide gearing up front, and that the 50 is too slow. I live in the mountains so deep gearing is important as well.

At first the new 52/36 peaked my interest but the difference between 6 teeth up front versus 4 teeth up front with a 39-53 is the same as my current 34/50 and this makes a big difference with shifting and keeping up in the rear. I'm feeling fit enough to drop from 34 to 36 on the low.

With a 39-53 / 11-32 I'm aware of the weight gain with the larger gears and also that there will be wider gaps in the gearing. Here is a screenshot of what http://www.gear-calculator.com/ is saying. 

Not sure what else might be of concern? Thoughts?


----------



## RJP Diver (Jul 2, 2010)

dieselcruiserhead said:


> I currently run a compact with 11-28 but I'm sick of the difference of the wide gearing up front, and that the 50 is too slow. I live in the mountains so deep gearing is important as well.
> 
> At first the new 52/36 peaked my interest but the difference between 6 teeth up front versus 4 teeth up front with a 39-53 is the same as my current 54/50 and this makes a big difference with shifting and keeping up in the rear. I'm feeling fit enough to drop from 34 to 36 on the low.
> 
> ...


What cadence are you riding at in general? Downhill in "the mountains" currently?

50x11 @ 110 = 39.1mph
52x11 @ 110 = 40.7mph
53x11 @ 110 = 41.5mph

It's fairly hilly here where I am in NJ and with a compact up front and 11-28 in back I can bomb down many of my favorite hills at ~45-50mph if I'm really spinning. Not sure what I'd do with the extra 2.5mph that three more teeth would give me... other than pray I don't hit an acorn.

50x11 @90 in the flats is 32mph, and over 35mph @100. 

Are you a spinner or a masher? Personally, I'd rather have narrower gaps than an extra MPH or two.


----------



## spdntrxi (Jul 25, 2013)

^^^^^ that is what I am thinking too.. I used to ride 53/42 way back but recently got back into cycling and went with compact & 11/27. I don't think I am missing anything.


----------



## crossracer (Jun 21, 2004)

I'm riding this right now, actually a 53/39 x12-36 nine speed setup. 
I have set so many more pr on this set up then before. It allows me to stay in the big ring longer. That works fine for me, but my biggest hills are only 300 feet high. 

Personally I love it. 

Bill


----------



## Guod (Jun 9, 2011)

I'm not exactly in a hilly area, but if you're creative you can have a crapload of elevation in a relatively short distance (I've done a ride that was 86mi with 11k ft...). That being said, I recently got 11s and decided to go with a mid compact (52/36) with an 11-25 cassette. It's been really nice for me because cruising on flat ground, the small jumps are a benefit. The 36-25 ratio isn't too far off of a 39-28. The jump up front is not huge, but it's not as good as a standard crank. I think all in all, it's a good compromise.

If you're thinking you might need an 11-32 with a standard crank though, I think that says it all. Stick with the compact or go mid compact. You shouldn't have to have crazy gearing just to run any particular crank. Tailor it to fit your strength and fitness level.


----------



## DrSmile (Jul 22, 2006)

Modern cassettes are designed for the big compact ring on flats. If you're concerned about front shifting Campy and FSA make a 48/34. IF you live in flat country non-compact makes sense, but around here you're going to suffer!

I personally use 50/34 and a 12-25 11 speed cassette. It allows for a lot of cadence fine tuning because of the 16 and 18 cogs. When I travel to Colorado or Hawaii I use a 48/34 and a 12-28.


----------



## tom_h (May 6, 2008)

At speeds above about 40 mph, most people are faster on downhills of 5% or steeper by getting into a low position, aerodynamic tuck -- and not pedaling.


----------



## Duane Behrens (Nov 8, 2013)

My tarmac has the standard 53/39 in front and 12/25 cassette. My wife has the compact crank (50/34 I think), and an 11/28 cassette. 

Because of the closer gear ratio in the back, MY shifting is a bit smoother and easier than hers. (We both run Ultegra derailleurs and similar carbon frames.) That seems to be the primary advantage of the standard setup, plus a bit taller gearing for top end speed.

But our regular ride includes at least one 1400 foot climb in a horizontal span of about 3 miles. And on the steeper hills . . . I'm jealous of her setup. 

So when it's time to change the chain next, I'll probably switch to the compact 50/34 and 11/28 cassette, and just live with the wider gaps between the gears. 

Hope this was helpful. Thanks.


----------



## looigi (Nov 24, 2010)

tom_h said:


> At speeds above about 40 mph, most people are faster on downhills of 5% or steeper by getting into a low position, aerodynamic tuck -- and not pedaling.


Yes. And since you're going so fast, the fast part is over with quickly so there's little to be gained. Going up hill takes a lot longer, so gearing can be more critical, IMO.

Another thing to consider: When going fast, aerodynamic drag is the limiting factor and speed is proportional to the cube of the power. It takes way more power to only go a teeny bit faster. Climbing, virtually all the work is being done against gravity, so speed is proportional to power.


----------



## dieselcruiserhead (Aug 30, 2008)

Thanks for everyone's comments...

To answer questions: 

RE top speed and its relevancy: some of the areas where I'm riding 40+ mph are descents but not steep enough to not pedal, or I do it as I run out of top end with the 50/11 I have now. 

I know the difference between 2.5 mph doesn't seem like much but I think it will help as I reach about maximum wind resistance / pedaling power on some of these stretches. I pretty much hit right around 40-43mph max with about every ride I do, so I could see having some pedaling resistance at 42 mph actually helping a little.


RE Masher or spinner depends on my shape. If I don't ride that week I'll feel it and will drop back to where I feel like I need the 34/28 or similar, but when I'm in shape I can ride the equivalent of 34/25 at worse case scenario even on steep hills. So I guess when I'm in shape I'm a masher (by my standards), when I'm not or I feeling whooped I'm a spinner, if that helps... 


---

Pretty sure I am still leaning towards the 53/39 and the Force 22 with the 11-32 using their WiFli deraileur. Yes the gaps will be big. Also I don't have a lot of choices is I want to move from the 32 low, because a 28 will be a big drop and I'd have to be super fit to pull that off. But I think it will be a good all round setup perhaps.

I do wish I could have some tighter spacing for the right cadence. I don't have any cadence or wattage computers unfortunately so I'm playing it by ear.


----------



## biggunnz (May 27, 2013)

I recently went to a similar set up. 53/39 with a 11-32 using the WiFli rear, force 20. The gaps are wide, but for me I like the 53 and I live in Colorado and I'm not a good climber. So having the 32 in addition to the 28 is a huge difference. It makes me want to do the climbing knowing I got the 32 there. The trade between the big gaps or the 53 in front and the 32 in the rear is so much worth it. Plus I can always tighten things up with a different cassette.


----------



## wabasso (May 18, 2012)

Stephen Roche won the Tour de France and the Giro with a 14 tooth cog as his biggest gear .

Recreational cyclists are funny.


----------



## martino (May 11, 2009)

wabasso said:


> Stephen Roche won the Tour de France and the Giro with a 14 tooth cog as his biggest gear .
> 
> Recreational cyclists are funny.


This will probably shock a huge intellect like you but that's what this forum is full of RECREATIONAL CYCLISTS. Perhaps you should try a baseball forum, I hear they don't have to think that much!
48-34 up front, 11-32 at the back and I love it. But then I'm a recreational cyclist so what do I know.


----------



## wabasso (May 18, 2012)

martino said:


> This will probably shock a huge intellect like you but that's what this forum is full of RECREATIONAL CYCLISTS. Perhaps you should try a baseball forum, I hear they don't have to think that much!
> 48-34 up front, 11-32 at the back and I love it. But then I'm a recreational cyclist so what do I know.


What we have here is a reading comprehension failure.


----------



## DrSmile (Jul 22, 2006)

wabasso said:


> What we have here is a reading comprehension failure.


He's a recreational reader!


----------



## wabasso (May 18, 2012)

DrSmile said:


> He's a recreational reader!


That is funny. Well done.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

wabasso said:


> Stephen Roche won the Tour de France and the Giro with a 14 tooth cog as his biggest gear .
> 
> Recreational cyclists are funny.


What chainrings?


----------



## sandiegosteve (Mar 29, 2004)

I've thought about this a lot as I've had 2 knee surgeries and now a back surgery. Too much down time to kill.

Bottom line, I love riding in my 53/21 and 53/19. Uphill, I'm in a 39/something and downhill I'm in a 53/something. I spend most of my time in those two favorite gears, so I realized that the compact option didn't have what I liked.

I've now evolved up to a 10-speed going back to 7, 8, and 9 speeds before. I love the 53/39 and an 11-28. I shift fairly frequently, but I can't say that shifting is bad with the jumps. Yes, I had manual index shifting long ago, but I assume I'll get crisp shifting from STI now and I do. Bad shifting means something else is wrong.

So, you should look at what gear sizes you like (I like to compare in inches) and choose something that works for you.


----------

