# 56t chainring



## nat_ct1 (Dec 15, 2001)

does anyone know who carries a 56t chainring?


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*Avatar???*



nat_ct1 said:


> does anyone know who carries a 56t chainring?


I recall a company product named Avatar being made woth a 56T ring. Who can ride a 56?


----------



## imetis (Jul 5, 2005)

ttug said:


> Who can ride a 56?


That was my thought. Unless you are hammering down hills or trying to set a speed record, there is no reason for a ring that big.


----------



## nat_ct1 (Dec 15, 2001)

*sicily*

i was in sicily for 3yrs..now im in virginia. its pretty much flat here, in 9mo i plan to move to texas. i for the most part am a masher so it fits my riding style better.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*uh huh*



nat_ct1 said:


> i was in sicily for 3yrs..now im in virginia. its pretty much flat here, in 9mo i plan to move to texas. i for the most part am a masher so it fits my riding style better.


Try Performance and then Colorado Cyclist. At one time, I believe both carried this part.

Otherwise, some of the best TT guys out there (elite) do a 54 or maybe a 55. Depending on where in Texas you are going, a 56 may not be a great idea BUT, its your ride and your bike. Go nuts.

You da man and have a future in the Olympics if you push a 56 because you live in flat land......


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Wrong style*



nat_ct1 said:


> i was in sicily for 3yrs..now im in virginia. its pretty much flat here, in 9mo i plan to move to texas. i for the most part am a masher so it fits my riding style better.


Rather than looking for gearing that suits an inefficient riding style, it might make more sense to work on riding skills, such as developing the spin that any reputable coach will tell you is a fundamental.


----------



## nat_ct1 (Dec 15, 2001)

*coach*

i dont need a coach if im only riding for me. now i spin a 53t at a cadence of 75. if i can do that comfortably then i guess i will experiment. i am also a guy that is only 5'6" and 220lbs. im built more for sprinting, I could hang in a pack and draft then...but then again im not racing its just for me.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*cadence cadence cadence*



nat_ct1 said:
 

> i dont need a coach if im only riding for me. now i spin a 53t at a cadence of 75. if i can do that comfortably then i guess i will experiment. i am also a guy that is only 5'6" and 220lbs. im built more for sprinting, I could hang in a pack and draft then...but then again im not racing its just for me.



A 75 cadence is not a useful reference point because you also need to know how many teeth are you pushing in the back as well. If as Kerry has rightly pointed out, you are using say a 53x12 or x14, get a coach or training program and then hit a trainer and develop an interval program with a specificity towards a more efficient use gears, your knees and the cool combination of an aerobic and strength base which will really show you what is better for you.

Otherwise, a cadence of 75 does not at all bode well for a 56 as some local sprinters are hitting well over 100 rpm is some freakish ratios.


----------



## hrv (Dec 9, 2001)

Haven't checked on a 56, but I got a 55/44 from Chucksbikes.com, for $18.00 total. 130mm bolt pattern. I use the 55 for training on my fixed for overgeared sprinting stuff. Will eventually use it for TT'ing with the fixed, like 55-15,16.

Can be found in the Online Store under Cranks. Have fun!


----------



## Dave_Stohler (Jan 22, 2004)

TA makes rings in any size, any amount of teeth up to 73 (but only in 144 BCD on that size, I believe).

Seriously, though-why do you want a 56 tooth?


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

nat_ct1 said:


> does anyone know who carries a 56t chainring?


delusional cat 4 riders


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

nat_ct1 said:


> does anyone know who carries a 56t chainring?


Have you looked at the numbers? 53X11 @80 rpm: 30.1 mph, [email protected] rpm: 31.8 mph. Do you really find cruising along at 30 mph too slow for you, and will increasing it to 32 mph make that much difference? Also going to a 56 rules out running a 39 inner ring.


----------



## RocketDog (Apr 9, 2005)

ttug said:


> NOBODY CRUISES AT 30 MPH. Not so, wrong sorry. If sanybody says that. They are a liar.


My jetpack makes it quite easy. I use it on the same bike that I've got the frickin' laser beams on.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*Ok*



asgelle said:


> Have you looked at the numbers? 53X11 @80 rpm: 30.1 mph, [email protected] rpm: 31.8 mph. Do you really find cruising along at 30 mph too slow for you, and will increasing it to 32 mph make that much difference? Also going to a 56 rules out running a 39 inner ring.


NOBODY CRUISES AT 30 MPH. Not so, wrong sorry. If sanybody says that. They are a liar.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*Lmfao*



RocketDog said:


> My jetpack makes it quite easy. I use it on the same bike that I've got the frickin' laser beams on.


LMFAO "frickin Laser beams". I can just see Dr Evil now.......Throw me a frickin bone people...I need the INFO.......


----------



## Argentius (Aug 26, 2004)

<cue the Chicken as Dr Evil pic>


----------



## MB1 (Jan 27, 2004)

*Guys, guys, guys come on.*



nat_ct1 said:


> does anyone know who carries a 56t chainring?


This is the beginners forum-set up to gently help folks with specific questions and to avoid the thread hijacking so often found elsewhere. 

Man asks a simple sourcing question.

He didn't ask about how to pedal a bike. 

He didn't ask about possible shifting problems.

He didn't ask if he was doing anything wrong.

He didn't ask for anything more than where to find a bicycle part.

He asked about a 56 tooth chainring.

Peter White Cycles seems to have them in stock.

http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/chainrings.asp

Let us know how it works out.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*what happened?*

I agree as well. My reply was not to cause insult. It is highly unusual to ask for a 56t large ring. Since this was a public forum, some folks offered what they from personal experience. It was public. 

As I stated and will again, its their ride, go nuts.


----------



## MB1 (Jan 27, 2004)

ttug said:


> I agree as well. My reply was not to cause insult. It is highly unusual to ask for a 56t large ring. Since this was a public forum, some folks offered what they from personal experience. It was public.
> 
> As I stated and will again, its their ride, go nuts.


Well I gotta admit that I did like the "Jet Pack" business.

Still, the point of this forum is to help new riders while getting beginner posts off other forums where they were annoying regular posters who saw the same questions over and over again. Another problem was that beginner threads like this one were getting hijacked mostly for the amusement value of some of the more experienced/jaded regular posters. 

We can avoid most of those problems on this forum by just simply answering beginner questions and perhaps gently sharing our experiences with similar issues.

Although I nearly spewed on my laptop when I saw "I use it on the same bike that I've got the frickin' laser beams on."

Alas this is not the place.


----------



## RocketDog (Apr 9, 2005)

MB1 said:


> Well I gotta admit that I did like the "Jet Pack" business.
> 
> Still, the point of this forum is to help new riders while getting beginner posts off other forums where they were annoying regular posters who saw the same questions over and over again. Another problem was that beginner threads like this one were getting hijacked mostly for the amusement value of some of the more experienced/jaded regular posters.
> 
> ...


Sorry Nat, MB1, All. It's difficult to provide useful answers to folks that are uniformed or misinformed, sometimes. Rather than offering unsolicited advice, I resorted to sarcasm. I didn't mean to discourage posting in begginers for fear of being blasted.  I'll cool my jets in the future.


----------



## MB1 (Jan 27, 2004)

*No worries, mate.*



RocketDog said:


> Sorry Nat, MB1, All. It's difficult to provide useful answers to folks that are uniformed or misinformed, sometimes. Rather than offering unsolicited advice, I resorted to sarcasm. I didn't mean to discourage posting in begginers for fear of being blasted.  I'll cool my jets in the future.


I am still laughing from your Jet Pack post.


----------



## RodeRash (May 18, 2005)

It would seem to make more sense to go with a smaller cog on the casette. That avoids the inevitable chain tension issues of a large ring in the front. Your drive train should be set up to accommodate running the largest cog on the casette and the large ring in the front--even though that's "cross chaining" and not a practical way to go. Still, the chain and derailleur should be able to run that combination.

56 tooth is going to limit what can be run as a small chainring up front and what you can run on the casette in the rear. The whole idea of a derailleur system is to provide some range in gears. Running the limit on the chainring cuts down on your gear range. 

As for "spinning" . . . 75 RPM is a "proficient tourist" cadence. The casual bike rider -- as in "I don't get on a bike very often." -- runs in the range of 50 - 60 RPM. 

The other day I checked my cadence on the beach cruiser. Flat asphalt, 46 in. coaster brake gear, balloon tires. Cadence was running 80 - 85 RPM, and I was just cruising around, not riding hard or fast. "Sidewalk speed" . . . 

Racers run in the realm of 90 - 110 RPM, more or less depending on terrain and riding style. A faster cadence is much more efficient and easier on the knees. Cadence is probably easier to cultivate than searching for a 56T ring and running through the wrenching to make it work. 

But it's your bike, your knees . . .


----------



## sivart (Apr 26, 2005)

*All hail 56t.*



asgelle said:


> Have you looked at the numbers? 53X11 @80 rpm: 30.1 mph, [email protected] rpm: 31.8 mph. Do you really find cruising along at 30 mph too slow for you, and will increasing it to 32 mph make that much difference? Also going to a 56 rules out running a 39 inner ring.


Have you really looked at the numbers? The mph listed below are on a 700c bike at a cadence of 80 rpm. Going to a 53t over a 56t doesn't improve your efficiency, it lowers your max and min speeds at a given cadence. Efficiency is neither lost nor gained on a chainring as you can see by the percentages listed on the left of the table. The percentage of change between gears in your cassette are the same whether you are running a 56t or a 39t.

<table border="1" cellpadding="2"><tbody><tr><td><center><table border="1" cellpadding="2"><tbody><tr align="center"><td></td> <th bgcolor="yellow"><font color="red">56</font></th><td align="center" width="12%"><font size="-1">5.7 %</font></td><th bgcolor="yellow"><font color="red">53</font></th><td align="center" width="12%"><font size="-1">35.9 %</font></td><th bgcolor="yellow"><font color="red">39</font></th></tr><tr><th bgcolor="yellow"><font color="RED">11</font></th><th bgcolor="white">31.8</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">30.1</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">22.2</th></tr><tr><td align="center"><font size="-1">9.1 %</font></td></tr><tr><th bgcolor="yellow"><font color="RED">12</font></th><th bgcolor="white">29.2</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">27.6</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">20.3</th></tr><tr><td align="center"><font size="-1">8.3 %</font></td></tr><tr><th bgcolor="yellow"><font color="RED">13</font></th><th bgcolor="white">26.9</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">25.5</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">18.8</th></tr><tr><td align="center"><font size="-1">7.7 %</font></td></tr><tr><th bgcolor="yellow"><font color="RED">14</font></th><th bgcolor="white">25.0</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">23.7</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">17.4</th></tr><tr><td align="center"><font size="-1">7.1 %</font></td></tr><tr><th bgcolor="yellow"><font color="RED">15</font></th><th bgcolor="white">23.4</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">22.1</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">16.3</th></tr><tr><td align="center"><font size="-1">6.7 %</font></td></tr><tr><th bgcolor="yellow"><font color="RED">16</font></th><th bgcolor="white">21.9</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">20.7</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">15.2</th></tr><tr><td align="center"><font size="-1">6.3 %</font></td></tr><tr><th bgcolor="yellow"><font color="RED">17</font></th><th bgcolor="white">20.6</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">19.5</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">14.3</th></tr><tr><td align="center"><font size="-1">11.8 %</font></td></tr><tr><th bgcolor="yellow"><font color="RED">19</font></th><th bgcolor="white">18.4</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">17.4</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">12.8</th></tr><tr><td align="center"><font size="-1">10.5 %</font></td></tr><tr><th bgcolor="yellow"><font color="RED">21</font></th><th bgcolor="white">16.7</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">15.8</th><td></td><th bgcolor="white">11.6</th></tr></tbody></table></center></td></tr></tbody></table>
*Courtesy of Sheldon Brown.

I know everybody hates 56t's on this site, but when you look at the numbers, I would argue that they make more sense. You have less overlapping gear speeds with a 56x39 combination, and a wider range of possible speeds. To me, that is more efficient than having a handful of gears I can be using in either my big or small chainring.

Still think the 53 is more efficient? Think about it, if a 53 is more efficient than a 56, then a 39 is ginormously more efficient than a 53. So we should be in our 39 until we reach 22.3 mph and are forced to shift up to the big ring. Or think of it like this, if you want to go 20mph, you have three choices at 80rpm, 53x16, 39x12, or 56x17. All go the same mph at the same cadence, is one magically easier to push?

Can it be done, yes. I have a 56x39 on my bike right now, as does my roomate. But be prepared to fine tune your front derailleur to perfection. STI shifters are the trickiest, but downtube and bar end shifters work pretty good.

Is it worth it, debateable, but the numbers do not lie. There is a 5.7% increase in max and min speed between a 56t and a 53t at the same cadence. But if you are a fine tuned machine and can hold 56x14 at 25mph, but can't hold 53x13 at 25.5mph, you gain a rather large advantage with the 56 because the next drop down on a 53 is 23.7mph and that can add up quick on a long flat course.

I have a 56t because that is what my bike had on it when I bought it. I got accustomed to the gearing range and when I tried a 53t, it just didn't feel right. If the course is flat, and you don't worry about the wind much, give the 56t a shot. Whatever gets you out on the bike with a smile on your face.

Salsa makes a 56t that you can order through most any LBS. They might even have one in stock. Hope I was able to help.


----------



## RocketDog (Apr 9, 2005)

The 53 is preferable to the 56 for the same reasons that 10 speed replaced 9 speed, and 9 preplaced 8, 8-7,7-6,6-5... Adding more speeds was not intended to extend the range of available gearing, but to provide the rider with more usable ratios at normal cruising speed and cadence. In addition to this a 56-39 combo would force the rider to be more severly cross-chained for normal cruising speeds. 20mph equals 39-12 (not a good idea) or 56-17. 56-17 ain's so bad except that you don't have an 18 tooth cog on many cassettes when you need a lower gearing. So you either drop 2 teeth, or have to shift into the small ring and then all the way over to the 13. This could be corrected by going 56-42, but none of us are strong enough to require those gears.


----------

