# 50/36 vs standard vs other compact/mid compact re: chainring jump



## texass4 (Oct 13, 2005)

I've searched, but can't find much directly on point. 

Briefly: I'm about to finally upgrade from the DA 7800 drivetrain i've been using for the last decade. Time I let go of my grouchy old man ways and get hip to the new stuff. That said, as I'm looking at 11 speed options these days and compact gearing, I hear about large chainring jumps being less than seamless to those of us who are so used to ratios that we've been on for the longest time...

I'm looking at the Shimano 11 speed road offerings and seeing several options for standard, compact and mid compact with options for 14 tooth jumps (39/53 and 38/52) and larger jumps of (50/34 and 52/36) teeth. 

I've historically been mostly a flatlander, so 53/39 has been great, though I've been riding more hilly terrain in the last several years AND i'm older and riding less than I used to. Enter the compact thoughts. 

Gear calculations and front shifting performance (debateably) aside, why is 50/36 not a popular "stock" option for gearing to preserve the 14 tooth jump between chainrings? When i take a look at other popular compact ratios that have 16 tooth jumps, it seems like there is an inevitable gap-gear range that would require crosschaining or lots of front and rear shifts to keep momentum as terrain changes. 

So basically, for someone who is getting older but wants to keep the same basic front gearing spread, but just lower overall, why wouldn't 50/36 be ideal with maybe a spare "rainy day" cassette with a larger 28t cog in back for climbs etc when needed? Seems like this would effectively be a downsized version of 53/39 and 12-23 or 12-25 that I've known forever, only slightly lower across the board overall. 

Is my thinking off on compact gearing? I'd be fine just getting an 11 spd shimano crank and swapping a chainring to make this combo, but just wondered why I haven't seen more about this through my research. Thanks for reading.


----------



## steelbikerider (Feb 7, 2005)

It's the missing 18t cog that screws up the gearing spacing and the 50something/18 is right in the sweet spot for older former fast guys on the flats. At least with 11 speed cassettes you can keep the 18 on a 12-25 and not have any gaps on a 52/36


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

I went from a 50/36 where I would run an 11/23 10 speed (in flatter areas) to 52/36 with 12/25, 11 speed and like the slightly closer gear spacing. I am running DA9000 and find no issues shifting from chainring to chainring.


----------



## JCavilia (Sep 12, 2005)

> wants to keep the same basic front gearing spread, but just lower overall, why wouldn't 50/36 be ideal with maybe a spare "rainy day" cassette with a larger 28t cog in back for climbs etc when needed? Seems like this would effectively be a downsized version of 53/39


I think your thinking is right, but just be more precise about it, you should pay attention to the ratios, not the absolute tooth differences. 14 teeth is not the same if the ring sizes are different. To duplicate 53/39, 50/37 is closer. 49/36 is also closer than 50/36. The old "standard" was 52/39, and 36/48 is exactly the same ratio.

The chainsets sold as compact or mid-compact don't make a lot of sense to me in terms of shift patterns. Those large jumps are awkward.


----------



## ericm979 (Jun 26, 2005)

The compact or mid-compact makes sense if you need the low gearing. The larger spread between the chainrings is no problem. You just shift one more cog when changing chainrings. It's not difficult.

But if you don't find yourself wanting lower gears than 39x28 (or have epic mountains in your future) there's not much point in going compact. I find that on flat land the smaller 50t big ring is more useful and it's extremely rare that I want a higher gear than 50x11.

I suggest finding your favorite gearing calculator, looking at gearing charts and comparing to your current setup.


----------



## tvad (Aug 31, 2003)

It's easy to overthink this.

I believe you just have to commit to a gearing scheme and give it a try. You can always change it. It's easy and relatively inexpensive to swap chainrings on the current Shimano drive trains.


----------



## jtompilot (Mar 31, 2002)

50/36 is just a stupid compact ratio. I've been using 50/34 on most of my bikes and 53/39 on one. The 50/34 is a little pain if constantly transitioning above and below 20mph. I just ordered a new frame and I'm going with Ultegra Di2 with 52/36 up front and 11-28 in back. I'm hoping it will work out well


----------



## TmB123 (Feb 8, 2013)

Shimano design the shift ramps/ pins as a matched set for 50/34, 52/36, 52/38, 53/39 etc to optimise shift performance. I dont know if there is any noticeable difference when using combinations outside of these matched pairs though, I'm sure it will shift. I have 52/36 & 11-28, 11 speed, ride hills, love it.

Shimano's FD is designed to take a max of 16t chain ring difference.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

jtompilot said:


> 50/36 is just a stupid compact ratio...


In your opinion. With my old ride I wanted a compact 50/34 for trips to hilly areas like California, but the 34 was pretty useless in SE Wisconsin. The 36 was much better suited. With gearing there are too many variables to make blanket statements. I have two sets of chainrings (52/36 & 50/34) and 4 cassettes so that I can tailor to wherever I will be riding.


----------



## riccardo123 (May 29, 2014)

I'm also an older guy (I'm 50) in a hilly area, and I find 52/36 works just fine. I should add that I am less fussed than most about small gaps on the cassette, so I'm happy to leave a wide range cassette on the back. The best way must be to borrow or rent a bike with the ratios you think you want, and go for a spin on your usual routes.


----------



## gab1707 (Dec 15, 2014)

Is it possible to run a 52/36 with an 11-32 in the back?


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

why not wait a few months. Shimano is set to come out with their new gear set and one of the rumors is that it will be 12 speed, which if true will cut down on the jumps in the rear cassette. You could do semi-compact with a 32 cog and get the best of both worlds, not common but it would give you the escape gear when tired and climbing.


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

Yes, but you need a long cage rear derailleur, which rules out Dura Ace for that part.



gab1707 said:


> Is it possible to run a 52/36 with an 11-32 in the back?


----------



## DaveG (Feb 4, 2004)

Trek_5200 said:


> why not wait a few months. Shimano is set to come out with their new gear set and one of the rumors is that it will be 12 speed, which if true will cut down on the jumps in the rear cassette. You could do semi-compact with a 32 cog and get the best of both worlds, not common but it would give you the escape gear when tired and climbing.


12 speed? Seriously? I thought we were done with this


----------



## FeltF75rider (Feb 10, 2012)

I have found a 52/36 up front with an 11-25 in back is perfect for my riding. I deal with l lots of hills and it meets my needs. I had an 11-28 on my Tarmac but found I just did not need the 28 so I matched up both bikes. I did ride a 10 speed with 50/34 and 11-25 and it was ok but seemed like the 34 ring did not get much use. I would guess I am probably conditioned to what I have for he most part. I can say I prefer the mid compact over a triple for sure.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

gab1707 said:


> Is it possible to run a 52/36 with an 11-32 in the back?


Yes it is.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

Trek_5200 said:


> Yes, but you need a long cage rear derailleur, which rules out Dura Ace for that part.


That is not necessarily correct for 11 speed. I can run a 32 on my Domane with DA9000 (standard cage) with no issues. If need be, one could always could swap the cage on their DA9000 to the longer GS cage from an Ultegra derailleur.


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

not recommended by Shimano



Blue CheeseHead said:


> That is not necessarily correct for 11 speed. I can run a 32 on my Domane with DA9000 (standard cage) with no issues. If need be, one could always could swap the cage on their DA9000 to the longer GS cage from an Ultegra derailleur.


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

It's a serious rumor floating out there. Heard both from very knowlegable local bike shop and seen some chatter on forums. Not official and it may not happen, but if it does probably won't require new wheels and it may be available for only electronic shifting(something about the ability to accurately shift in smaller increments).



DaveG said:


> 12 speed? Seriously? I thought we were done with this


----------



## traverpen (Feb 4, 2013)

My goal was to keep my RPM above 85 on a 7mi 6% climb. Since I am a weekend warrior and not increasing my pwr/weight ratio fast enough I lowered my gearing. I have a 50/34 with a 12/28 (usual) or a 12/32 for long days of climbing. Why not, the worlds best climbers use similar gearing?

Since I don't do a lot of group rides or any racing I don't need to push 50x11 or 53x12 in a sprint. The 16t is way more useful than the 11t and the 50/34 crank is more suited to my riding. I put a triple (used as a double (39/28) with a 12-36 cassette on my cross bike for long and steep dirt back roads carrying camping and/or fishing gear....


----------



## Keoki (Feb 13, 2012)

For flat and very hilly areas, all you need is only the greatest gear ratio that is the 50/36 w/ 11-*23T* (10 speed) combo.

1) It's lighter than then 53/39 wtih 12/25T 
2) It's faster than 53/12T
3) It climbs equal to 39/25T


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

It's really very simple. What I use is the best and everyone should use that.


----------



## ericm979 (Jun 26, 2005)

Jay Strongbow said:


> It's really very simple. What I use is the best and everyone should use that.


yea, I have to laugh at posts that say "no one needs" gears lower than the poster needs. I should just stop reading and replying to gearing threads. Posting essentially "figure it out for yourself, everyone is different" gets no replies. I guess people really do want to engage in the usual bragging contest that ensues. All we need is that guy who did one climb once 20 years ago and tells everyone to use super tall gears.

All you guys who think "no one needs" low gears are welcome to race against me in the Everest Challenge or Death Valley stage race, or compare Death Ride etc. riding times, you using your he-man gearing and me on my wimpy low gearing.


----------



## duriel (Oct 10, 2013)

Real men don't need gears, they flintstone it up the hill passing me all the time.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

Trek_5200 said:


> not recommended by Shimano


It works for me...and Lennard Zinn. Technical FAQ: Cassette options, crank sizes, and more - VeloNews.com 

BTW, mine works without even messing with the B screw.

Men don't read no stinking directions.


----------



## Drew Eckhardt (Nov 11, 2009)

Keoki said:


> For flat and very hilly areas, all you need is only the greatest gear ratio that is the 50/36 w/ 11-*23T* (10 speed) combo.
> 
> 1) It's lighter than then 53/39 wtih 12/25T
> 2) It's faster than 53/12T
> 3) It climbs equal to 39/25T


11-23 10 cogs has an annoying gap between the 17 and 19. 12-23 works better.

I think cassettes lacking one-tooth jumps through the 19 are inappropriate for riding a road bike on flat terrain.

With changing cogs a hassle (especially on group rides where the decision isn't made until you ride to the meeting point) compromises should be made in crank selection (36 small ring, road triple, mountain triple...) and/or top gear (pedal faster or tuck) to combine that with an appropriate climbing gear.


----------



## bleckb (Jun 13, 2005)

I moved from a 50/34 to a 52/36 (Ultegra Sport Compact is how they describe it I think) on a Felt F2 and I'm glad for it. I can still get up the climbs I do (and I'll be 58 in April and still in the 200# range) but with 52 I don't spin out the way I did in the 50, and also the 34. That means I can hang a little better with those damn kids. Spokane isn't flat by any reasonable standards, but I do have some say in how long and steep and while I occasionally wish I had the 34, I never miss not having the 50.


----------



## FeltF75rider (Feb 10, 2012)

F2 is a great bike what year is it? I missed the TeXtrem by a year.


----------



## duriel (Oct 10, 2013)

bleckb said:


> but with 52 I don't spin out the way I did in the 50


You can spin out a 50/11, you da man. Or you don't pedal very fast.


----------



## bleckb (Jun 13, 2005)

2014. They swapped the Di2 for mechanical to make it affordable for me. Love it.


----------



## TmB123 (Feb 8, 2013)

duriel said:


> You can spin out a 50/11, you da man. Or you don't pedal very fast.


Can't speak for others, but I often hit 130 - 150rpm on descents looking for more speed in my 52 x 11.


----------



## JCavilia (Sep 12, 2005)

TmB123 said:


> Can't speak for others, but I often hit 130 - 150rpm on descents looking for more speed in my 52 x 11.


That's 50-55 mph. If I were to get going that fast, I probably wouldn't be looking for more speed, and if I were, I'd do it by improving my tuck, not by pedaling. Different styles, I guess.


----------



## TmB123 (Feb 8, 2013)

JCavilia said:


> That's 50-55 mph. If I were to get going that fast, I probably wouldn't be looking for more speed, and if I were, I'd do it by improving my tuck, not by pedaling. Different styles, I guess.


Yup - ultimate top speed is in a tuck, and I already have my chin on the bars (or out on my Garmin actually) but there are lumps and bumps where you try an accelerate or maintain some speed in between the steeper parts. This is one example...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goN8D5m2Ges (I've done well over 100kph down there with a tail wind, this was a slight cross wind)


----------



## duriel (Oct 10, 2013)

TmB123 said:


> I've done well over 100kph down there with a tail wind, this was a slight cross wind


And you climb that in a 36/28?


----------



## TmB123 (Feb 8, 2013)

duriel said:


> And you climb that in a 36/28?


i have, but it's not at all pleasant, even a struggle with a 34/28 for me, multiple ramps of 15% and then finishes with around 25%. Fortunately there are plenty of other climbs around that are much easier (average 5-6%) so I usually only descend it.

edit: and for those wondering what it's like to climb it, this guy has done a series of videos of all the climbs around here.
http://youtu.be/LgvAaTCGQNw


----------



## duriel (Oct 10, 2013)

TmB123 said:


> but it's not at all pleasant


So you "love" your 52/36, but have to take another route if you come up to a hill you regularly go down. I believe that one should have gears for the area he rides, including up in addition to down. 

If your just riding down, why not put a 55/44 on it?


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

jtompilot said:


> 50/36 is just a stupid compact ratio.


Too bad your wrong.

I think what you meant to say is 50/36 is a ratio that dosen't work for you.


----------



## bleckb (Jun 13, 2005)

duriel said:


> And you climb that in a 36/28?


While not the climb under discussion, at 57 years of youth, these are two climbs I do at least once a year using a 36/27 or 28 (never bother to check that closely).

Mt. Spokane, WA -Top 100 U.S. Bike Climb – one of toughest, hardest and most difficult climbs by bike in U.S.

Schweitzer Hill Climb in Sandpoint, ID, United States | MapMyRide

They're too curvy to hit very high speeds on the descent, but we have some grades where it can be done, just not by me, who gets a bit antsy when I get much over 40 mph.


----------



## TmB123 (Feb 8, 2013)

duriel said:


> So you "love" your 52/36, but have to take another route if you come up to a hill you regularly go down. I believe that one should have gears for the area he rides, including up in addition to down.
> 
> If your just riding down, why not put a 55/44 on it?


Because I'm spoilt for choice riding here in the Adelaide hills. There are 4 climbs within 5 minutes of the bottom of that hill that are in the 5% range that I can happily ride in the 36/23,21 and probably another 4 within 15 minutes or so. The road in the video is basically straight down the front of the hillside, all the other roads wind around. Turning right at the bottom of the hill (where the red van was) is Norton Summit road where the Tour Down Under went up recently. It's kinda hard to explain without knowing the geography of the area. There are that many climbs around here that I don't "need" to go up the real steep ones for 95% of my riding (actually, I dont need to go up any of them) and still do around 1000m+ vertical gain on a relatively easy 40-50km ride. So for me, and the riding I do, I "love" my 52/36.

The descent was mentioned with respect to spinning out a gear, rather than struggling to climb it. My bike is set up for the majority of the riding i do, not for something i might do twice a year. Even if i had a 34-32 on the bike, I still wouldn't ride up that hill by choice.


----------



## jtompilot (Mar 31, 2002)

32and3cross said:


> Too bad your wrong.
> 
> I think what you meant to say is 50/36 is a ratio that dosen't work for you.


Ok, I'll say we are both right.

To me the advantage a compact has is the 16 tooth jump. It allows a good top end and a good bottom end without a triple crank. With a 14 tooth gap might as well stick to a 53/39.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

jtompilot said:


> Ok, I'll say we are both right.
> 
> To me the advantage a compact has is the 16 tooth jump. It allows a good top end and a good bottom end without a triple crank. With a 14 tooth gap might as well stick to a 53/39.


For you that may be appropriate, but not for everyone. I prefer a 36t small chainring as it allows me to run a cassette that has closer spacing. Some like the closer spacing between a 50 and 36 vs 50 and 34. This is totally a personal preference thing. One is not universally smarter or dumber than the other.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

jtompilot said:


> Ok, I'll say we are both right.
> 
> To me the advantage a compact has is the 16 tooth jump. It allows a good top end and a good bottom end without a triple crank. With a 14 tooth gap might as well stick to a 53/39.


Not really. My wife found a 50-36 perfect for her. The 34 was too small and a 53 is way to big for her. So the 50-36 fit her riding style and leg strength perfectly. It also meant that what ever neutral service handed her in race cassette wise she would not be stuck with a 39-23 as her low gear on a mountain stage (that happen once).


----------



## TiCoyote (Jun 28, 2005)

I agonized over this too, but it really doesn't make much difference. I went from a 39/53 in the front and a 12-25 10-spd in the front to a 36/50, 12-25 11-spd in the back. I'm probably going to switch to a 11-25 in the back. I just like being able to spin at a higher cadence on a steeper hill. My cadence is around 94 RPM.


----------



## DrSmile (Jul 22, 2006)

The idea behind compact with a 16 tooth front gap is that the increased rear cassette range allows the rider to stay in the big ring in all but significant climbing situations. Theoretically it would require less front shifting, not more. Once you get used to that idea it actually works very well. If you're down on power, eg getting old like me, going to a 48/34 makes more sense than 50/36.


----------



## jtompilot (Mar 31, 2002)

32and3cross said:


> Not really. My wife found a 50-36 perfect for her. The 34 was too small and a 53 is way to big for her. So the 50-36 fit her riding style and leg strength perfectly. It also meant that what ever neutral service handed her in race cassette wise she would not be stuck with a 39-23 as her low gear on a mountain stage (that happen once).


Of course you and Blue are right about the 50/36. It's just that I've done so many rides that have grades up to 14% and then need to hammer a little flatter stuff the 16 tooth jump is great to have. The 34 helps me spin and let my legs chill out a bit. I can definitely see that if you rarely get more than 6 or 7% grades the 50/36 would also work for me.


----------



## echo7 (Sep 7, 2010)

is someone running ultegra 6800 50/36 combination? hows the shifting?


----------



## spdntrxi (Jul 25, 2013)

echo7 said:


> is someone running ultegra 6800 50/36 combination? hows the shifting?


its gonna be fine..the question is if the gearing makes sense for you.


----------

