# Top-End Gearing: How Big Do You Need It?



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Yep, thread title is intentional double-entendre, since this sort of topic inevitably lends itself to such things, i.e. some guys seem to compare top gearing as if they were comparing male... err... bodyparts. :skep:

The poll'll be up in a minute. Yep, guess that's c0de too. Unavoidable.
.


----------



## 0.2HP (Jul 13, 2011)

Well, my old "touring" bike maxs out at 52x14 (assuming all 700c tires are 27" this is 100 gear inches.) My new "sport" bike came with 50x12 (113 gear inches.) But recently I've been running the rear wheel from the old bike on the new one (96 gear inches.) With a 28 mm tire I run out of gearing at around 33 mph, and that is plenty fast enough for me now-a-days.

So I voted 100.


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

130 here. 52x11 on the climbing bike for hilly racing and long rides. But I use a 53x11 on the other bike for flat races and shorter rides.


----------



## Guest (Jun 2, 2012)

Here's my gearing:

Gear Calculator - 50/36 w/ 12-28

50/12 is more than enough for me (I'm presently a non-racer ). That gets me up to 42mph @130rpm. (my preferred steady riding cadence range is 100-115rpm)

My commuter bike is only 64 gear-inches (singlespeed). Even on my geared bike the vast majority of my riding is near 70 gear-inches.


----------



## Guest (Jun 2, 2012)

pulser955 said:


> 130 here. 52x11 on the climbing bike for hilly racing and long rides. But I use a 53x11 on the other bike for flat races and shorter rides.


This is something I don't understand. I often see people talk about wanting a taller top gear for flat rides. The only time I ever use my top gear is going downhill. Wouldn't it make more sense to have wider range (say 11-27 for hills -- taller for going down, shorter gears for going up) in hills and narrower range on both ends on the flats (like 12-23 or 12-25)?


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

50x12 is more than enough for me. Most anything bigger than that is just for looking at.

It ain't the meat, it's the motion, or the cadence, or something like that.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*53/13*



SystemShock said:


> Yep, thread title is intentional double-entendre, since this sort of topic inevitably lends itself to such things, i.e. some guys seem to compare top gearing as if they were comparing male... err... bodyparts.


With a 53/13 it is very easy to get to a downhill speed where you will be faster in a tight tuck than when pedalling. You get a 13-19 straight block plus 21, 23, 26 cogs on the cassette so you are NEVER in a gear that's a little to high or a little too low for regular riding. I have coasted past guys who were grinding away in their 53/12 on the downhill. If you were a top level racer then smaller than 13 in the back might be appropriate. For the rest of us, not so much. Most bikes today are way over geared.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

While I occasionally use my 53x12 in downhill areas where tucking wouldn't be appropriate, but I don't miss that gear when I'm on my 7 speed bike with a 53x13 top gear. So I voted 110, but see the utility of one higher than that.

I also don't understand when it is possible to turn a 53x11 on flat ground for more than a few seconds. That seems like a waste, but I guess if you ride with no hills, what else are you going to do with all those gears?


----------



## CleavesF (Dec 31, 2007)

I used to a an 11 in the back, figured it was useless even on downhills since I seldom pedal if I'm already doing 50-60 MPH. 

Personally, I wish my cassette was 13-25 (eg: junior gearing) since I believe 11 and 12 in the back is basically too tall for most applications with a 52/53 in front. 

I used to have a compact 50/36 with 12/27 but the shifting gaps are far too big to be practical IMHO.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

CleavesF said:


> I used to a an 11 in the back, figured it was useless even on downhills since I seldom pedal if I'm already doing 50-60 MPH.
> 
> Personally, I wish my cassette was 13-25 (eg: junior gearing) since I believe 11 and 12 in the back is basically too tall for most applications with a 52/53 in front.
> 
> I used to have a compact 50/36 with 12/27 but the shifting gaps are far too big to be practical IMHO.


I think 52x13 is big boy gearing, and what everyone used to race on until 7 speeds. Junior limits start at 52x14.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Kerry Irons said:


> With a 53/13 it is very easy to get to a downhill speed where you will be faster in a tight tuck than when pedalling. You get a 13-19 straight block plus 21, 23, 26 cogs on the cassette so you are NEVER in a gear that's a little to high or a little too low for regular riding.
> 
> I have coasted past guys who were grinding away in their 53/12 on the downhill.



Can't argue with that. Aero tuck FTW (62 mph! ).







.


----------



## Kuma601 (Jan 22, 2004)

I ride flats so getting the chain into the smaller cogs takes more than what these legs can put out and knees will be happy with. 52x15-14 are fine for me if I want to muscle a short distance. That's why old school 52 with the 6spd 13-19 is more than acceptable. 52x12-11 forget it. Only time my bikes see that gear is when it is on the rack having the chain cleaned-lubed. Hahaha...


----------



## ericm979 (Jun 26, 2005)

I've used 50x12 in nearly all of my races. It's enough to get me up to 40 mph (in a short burst) so I can get on someone's wheel on a descent. 

One race I've done a few times has a 8 mile section that's a slight downhill and usually has a stiff tailwind. The first time I did it with a 50x12 I made the selection on the climbs and then got dropped on that tailwind section. I just couldn't spin the pedals that fast for that long. I used a 50x11 last year and that was barely enough. There's a steep climb into the wind on the other side of the course where I need a 34x26.

Lately I have been riding a 11-26 in training. I'm not sure I like it. The 11t is useful for descents- I can close gaps without spinning so hard- but the missing 16t cog really bugs me. The gap between the 15t and 17t is just too big.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

SystemShock said:


> some guys seem to compare top gearing as if they were comparing male... err... bodyparts.


People should use the gearing that they NEED not what will get them coffee-shop bragging rights and ego trips. To do otherwise is just silly.

I used to be a 25mph time-trialist and decent cat 3 road and criterium racer and used nothing but 48/42 rings and 14-18t 5-speed freewheel (back in the mid '70s to mid '80s). My solo training rides were 21.5mph average.

Now I'm old and weak(er), don't race anymore and average 18mph (19 tops) and use 50/39 and 14-25. I can go 31.5mph in that 50/14. If I need to go faster I'll tuck. No wasted gears or cog-envy for me.

But there are no big, steep, long hills around here. 39mph is the fastest I reach freewheeling. YFMV.


----------



## Chainstay (Mar 13, 2004)

Downhill it's all tuck and the high end ratio doesn't matter. However, I was once in a pace line on a slight downhill with a tail wind and wished I had something higher than my 53 x 12


----------



## marathon marke (Nov 14, 2011)

My BMC came with a 11-26 Red cassette. I only used the 53x11 twice this year, and for very short runs on a long downhill. I finally switched over to a 12-25 Ultegra and I now have all practical high and low I need.


----------



## bigbill (Feb 15, 2005)

Ten speed, 53/39 with a 13-26.
Eleven Speed 53/39 with a 12-27.

Even in my hammerhead crit racing days, I never touched the 12 in a sprint. Even the 53-13 combo was only good for coming out a draft and driving for the line. IME, a faster cadence is better for accelerating instead of torqing over a bigger gear. The longer you spend accelerating up to speed, the more time you're allowing your competitors to jump on your wheel or you catching the wheel in front of you.


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

PhotonFreak said:


> This is something I don't understand. I often see people talk about wanting a taller top gear for flat rides. The only time I ever use my top gear is going downhill. Wouldn't it make more sense to have wider range (say 11-27 for hills -- taller for going down, shorter gears for going up) in hills and narrower range on both ends on the flats (like 12-23 or 12-25)?



Because I have 2 bikes I can gear them for more specific uses. Both run campy 10sp on wheels I can't convert to campy. So I am limited by conversion cassettes. I also cant run any thing bigger then a 26 with the rear derailleur's. So I would have to ether change wheels or put a medium cage on them to run 27s. So I run the semi compact on the climbing bike and a regular on the other. It works the 36-25 is about as low as I need for the nasty stuff here. If I want to do the bigger mountain passes I might have to change over to a 27 or a standard compact. I actually use the 11 quite a bit. we have a fast downhill sprint in one of the weekly group rides. and allot of short hills when the groups go east. So it works for closing the brakes that happen on the downhills.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

pulser955 said:


> Because I have 2 bikes I can gear them for more specific uses. Both run campy 10sp on wheels I can't convert to campy. So I am limited by conversion cassettes. I also cant run any thing bigger then a 26 with the rear derailleur's. So I would have to ether change wheels or put a medium cage on them to run 27s. So I run the semi compact on the climbing bike and a regular on the other. It works the 36-25 is about as low as I need for the nasty stuff here. If I want to do the bigger mountain passes I might have to change over to a 27 or a standard compact. I actually use the 11 quite a bit. we have a fast downhill sprint in one of the weekly group rides. and allot of short hills when the groups go east. So it works for closing the brakes that happen on the downhills.


Which Campy derailleur can't work with a 27?


----------



## bigbill (Feb 15, 2005)

Kontact said:


> Which Campy derailleur can't work with a 27?


Ten speed short cage, 26T max. Might be able to run something bigger, just not recommended.


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

Kontact said:


> Which Campy derailleur can't work with a 27?


Short cadge chorus and veloce. I use to run sram 11-26s with the jtek shiftmate. the top jockey wheel would touch the 26 cog.


----------



## erik1245 (Jan 6, 2012)

I run compact cranks (50/34) with an 8-speed 13-23 (13-14-15-16-17-19-21-23) cassette. It works great for me -- my biggest gear is 50/13, and I can spin up to ~35 MPH on downhills with that. Any faster, and I may as well tuck anyways. That cassette was the best $7 I ever spent. 

Only time I've used the 50/13 while not descending was during a flat, gnarly-fast crit. We were doing 30-35 on the straightaways, and my teammate recorded about a 28-MPH average for the entire race. That one hurt before I got dropped.


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

SystemShock said:


> Can't argue with that. Aero tuck FTW (62 mph! ).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not bad but this one is more my style


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

pulser955 said:


> Not bad but this one is more my style


Nice, but it didn't look anywhere near 62mph in most parts.

Music's very good though.
.


----------



## boneman (Nov 26, 2001)

*"I'm running an eleven...."*

I hear this in Singapore and laugh....even for the tri-TT crowd...

When I raced in the NE, I was good at climbing and not much else. Ran a 52-13 and rarely used it except downhill.

Fast forward 40 years and with the last 14 years in flat locations, London, Shanghai and Singapore, I run a 50/39 non-compact front and 13-26 Campag 10 in the rear. From 13-19 it's one tooth between cogs and perfect for all conditions. I don't race anymore but even following wheels of those that do, 50-13 is okay albeit completely spun out. The good news is I can still go uphill and 39-26 will take me over anything I encounter.

The older I get, the more I spin on the flat. Never had big output and nowadays, it's all down to technique to keep up with the younger riders.


----------



## MShaw (Jun 7, 2003)

Buncha years ago when I wasn't quite the trackie I am now, I useta run 53x11 and want more gear. Now that I've learned to spin faster instead of push harder, I'm happier with smaller gears and winding em up higher.

M


----------



## RussellS (Feb 1, 2010)

pulser955 said:


> Short cadge chorus and veloce. I use to run sram 11-26s with the jtek shiftmate. the top jockey wheel would touch the 26 cog.


No, No, No, No. Utter nonsense. Short cage Campagnolo rear derailleurs easily work with 27, 28, and 29 cogs. My 1998 Chorus nine speed rear derailleur shifts a 28 cog. There is another thread on roadbikereview talking about Campagnolo short cage derailleurs working with 29 cogs. Lots of people run this setup.


----------



## RussellS (Feb 1, 2010)

Back to the poll question. A 4:1 ratio of chainring to cassette is plenty for a high gear. 53x13, 52x13, 50x12, 48x12. Roughly 4:1. With a 700C wheel spinning 90rpm you are going 28-29 mph. Unless you are lucky to have a very strong tailwind or steep descent you will never get above those speeds. Or spin it up to 100rpm and you are at 32 mph.


----------



## draganM (Nov 27, 2001)

This thread makes little sense since everyone is talking about different terrain, different types of riding, different types of riders, etc.
If you ride the front range of the Rocky's and do Time trials, a 53-12 is handi-cap. There are plenty of down-hill sections here in the foothills, considered only rollers by the locals, where you want to keep accelerating but your spun out at 100+ cadence.
Your in the high 40 mph range by this point and sure you can tuck in and coast to over 50mph but wouldn't it be better to accelerate up to 50 and then coast up from there? I hit 54 mph in the last TT I did coasting, but wanted to pedal beyond what the the 53-12 allowed.
A typical TT gearing here for a higher placing rider averaging 27/28mph is 53-11 or even 56/11 with a 42 tooth small ring. This is not rumor, just observation. Note, not talking about the official hill climbs like Mt. Evans but the TT's out in the plains and foothills.


----------



## wtfbbq (Apr 5, 2012)

draganM said:


> A typical TT gearing here for a higher placing rider averaging 27/28mph is 53-11 or even 56/11 with a 42 tooth small ring. This is not rumor, just observation. Note, not talking about the official hill climbs like Mt. Evans but the TT's out in the plains and foothills.


TT gearing is very specialized. While race gearing can be specialized too, it's less so that TT.

And I think the OP was more interested in what people were running outside of racing. It seems that the responses have two general criteria:

1) How do like to approach downhills (tuck and/or spin) and

2) How steep are your local hills.

Personally, I don't work too hard on descents other than a tuck so I don't care what gear I'm in. I like saving my work for the flats and hills. To that end, a long hill around here is two miles with perhaps 600-800 feet elevation gain (sure there are some longer ones but they are not as easily accessed from rides starting at my front door). Anyway, I use a 39x25 for those.

Thus the 53/39 and 12-25 is my preferred combination. I've even been happy racing that the few times I have done so.


----------



## Guest (Jun 4, 2012)

draganM said:


> This thread makes little sense since everyone is talking about different terrain, different types of riding, different types of riders, etc.
> If you ride the front range of the Rocky's and do Time trials, a 53-12 is handi-cap. There are plenty of down-hill sections here in the foothills, considered only rollers by the locals, where you want to keep accelerating but your spun out at 100+ cadence.
> Your in the high 40 mph range by this point and sure you can tuck in and coast to over 50mph but wouldn't it be better to accelerate up to 50 and then coast up from there? I hit 54 mph in the last TT I did coasting, but wanted to pedal beyond what the the 53-12 allowed.
> A typical TT gearing here for a higher placing rider averaging 27/28mph is 53-11 or even 56/11 with a 42 tooth small ring. This is not rumor, just observation. Note, not talking about the official hill climbs like Mt. Evans but the TT's out in the plains and foothills.


The choice of what top gears for bursts of acceleraton on downhills will be determined by a couple things: 

1) what is the maximum RPM the rider can spin before power output begins to drop significanty

2) what is the "terminal" speed at which the extra air drag of pedaling outweighs the power produced by pedaling. Note this is actually air-speed that matters, so in a tailwind there's more to be gained by pedaling vs coasting. 


Both of these will be highly dependent on the individual rider. Some riders (like the folks at this site) may be more efficient at pedaling from a highly aerodynamic pose compared to others. For them a higher top gear for going downhilll will make sense. 

Some riders (like myself) prefer or are more efficient at higher cadences. A few people on this thread who voted for taller top gears have described >100rpm as being "spun out". For me, <100 rpm is when I shift to an easier gear. 

For spinning downhill, my sweet spot is around 130rpm or about 43mph in a 50/12 gear. A good time-trialer in a montain descent might benefit from being able to pedal up to 52mph in a 56/11 gear @ 130rpm, as opposed to having to spin up to 150rpm in a 53/12 

As a rider who rides solo most of the time, occasionally does groups an organized rides, but doesn't seriously race, there's absolutely no reason for me to want to pedal faster than 43mph -- I'd rather have more gears in a range I'll actually use often.


----------



## PSC (Mar 10, 2004)

I don't race, so I don't see the need to go super fast downhill. I still ride 9 spd stuff and would love to have a 14-27(14,15,16,17,18,19,21,24,27). Mid range gearing to me is much more important than being able to go fast downhill. The vast majority of my riding is rolling terrain, where I rarely find myself going over 40mph, and if I do I just tuck.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

PSC said:


> I don't race, so I don't see the need to go super fast downhill. I still ride 9 spd stuff and would love to have a 14-27(14,15,16,17,18,19,21,24,27). Mid range gearing to me is much more important than being able to go fast downhill. The vast majority of my riding is rolling terrain, where I rarely find myself going over 40mph, and if I do I just tuck.


Me too and my 14-25 has got the 20t cog too which I use many times every ride, not an 11, 12 or 13 which I might never use as tucking will be just as fast.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Interesting poll results thus far... about evenly split between 'club gearing' (53x12 etc) and a step shorter than that (50x12, 53x13 etc), with 53x11 coming in a distant 3rd, and rarer than expected.

There's also a bit more 'old-school' 52x14 than I thought there'd be. Had that top gear for a number of years, could probably be fine with it again.
.


----------



## sandiegosteve (Mar 29, 2004)

I just got a new ride with 10spd and went with the 11-28 in the back. I used to run a 12-25 9spd. Most of the hills here are short, so to get going fast down it is quick. I really like the 11 for that. And the ups are making me equally like the 28.

Do I need the 11? No. Do I like it when I want it? Yes.
Do I need the 28? Probably not. Do I use it more than expected? Yes.

I am really glad I stayed with the 53/39 and didn't go compact. I really like being in my 53/21 and 53/19. I may like what compact gives me, but happy now and riding which is nice.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Kerry Irons said:


> With a 53/13 it is very easy to get to a downhill speed where you will be faster in a tight tuck than when pedalling. You get a 13-19 straight block plus 21, 23, 26 cogs on the cassette so you are NEVER in a gear that's a little to high or a little too low for regular riding.
> 
> I have coasted past guys who were grinding away in their 53/12 on the downhill.
> 
> *If you were a top level racer then smaller than 13 in the back might be appropriate. For the rest of us, not so much. Most bikes today are way over-geared.*



Well said. Additionally on that...

It's interesting (and a bit strange) that almost no one makes cassettes starting with a 13 anymore. Not that big-gear lovers have to somehow knuckle under and get them (if you need an 11 or 12, great, 99% chance your bike comes with it), but rather that _everyone_ should have a choice. 

Campy still has a couple of 13-X cassettes (though not in 11-spd), and IRD has one, but the majority of the market is Shimano and SRAM. SRAM makes NO road cassettes that start with other than an 11 or 12, and Shimano makes *one* cassette that starts with a 13 (a 'junior' cassette).

It's kinda silly. Everyone thinks they're a racer. 

Or at least the bike industry thinks everyone thinks that. But they also very much push that in their marketing, so... self-fulfilling in a (major) way.

Perhaps even some recreational riders wouldn't want a 13-X cassette with a compact (50t big ring), but plenty of non-racers still ride standard doubles (53/39), and mid-compact (52/36) seems to be gaining traction. 

With a 53t or 52t big ring, a 13 is 'big enough' for a lot of ppl in a lot of conditions. I remember back in Davis, with some of the strong summer tailwinds that blow through there, I'd be riding solo @34mph and not be spun out (or even uncomfortable) in the 52x13. Heck, even the 52x14.

Plus, and more importantly, if you get rid of the 12, you then have another cog to play with... either to give yourself an 18t that many rec riders will use a *lot* more than a 12t, or to develop a lower climbing gear (as in Campy's 13-29 cassette).

So 13-X cassettes would definitely be very nice for some. But almost no one wants to make 'em.

It's like Poseur-ville™ has won. rrr:











.


----------



## Cat 3 boy (Aug 20, 2002)

SystemShock said:


> Well said. Additionally on that...
> 
> It's interesting (and a bit strange) that almost no one makes cassettes starting with a 13 anymore. Not that big-gear lovers have to somehow knuckle under and get them (if you need an 11 or 12, great, 99% chance your bike comes with it), but rather that _everyone_ should have a choice.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

You're so correct. They spec pro gearing and pro tires (23mm) on all factory bikes. That's like the Average Joe buying a 500lb barbel for his basement gym - lots of bragging rights but he can't use it.

That's why I scoured the world's mailorder sites for 14-25 10-speed cassettes and I bought a bunch of them. I can count on half the fingers of one hand the number of times I could have *used* a smaller cog than my 14 (that would be +33mph)

But I have the scarce 18 & 20t cogs that I use every day.

I see silly people riding the slight grade past my house in gears that I don't even own and they're doing 9mph in a 52 something or other (12? 13?). I'd blow by 'em at 20mph in my 50/19.


----------



## mmoose (Apr 2, 2004)

New bike has an 11 on it. Will I use it? rarely. But it moves the 12 over so I can spin 39x12. This is why I got the 11.


----------



## pulser955 (Apr 18, 2009)

RussellS said:


> No, No, No, No. Utter nonsense. Short cage Campagnolo rear derailleurs easily work with 27, 28, and 29 cogs. My 1998 Chorus nine speed rear derailleur shifts a 28 cog. There is another thread on roadbikereview talking about Campagnolo short cage derailleurs working with 29 cogs. Lots of people run this setup.


If you say so. But I know for a fact that the RD would touch the 26 cog. There is no way my RD would work any thing bigger then a 26.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Doing math*



mmoose said:


> But it moves the 12 over so I can spin 39x12.


Or you could use the 53/16, which is essentially the same gear, and then you would experience longer cassette life, longer chain life, and longer chainring life. Unless of course by choosing a cassette with an 11t cog you lost the 16. Wouldn't that be ironic?


----------



## Pieter (Oct 17, 2005)

I was used to and happy with a 9 speed 12-23 cassette, then the new bike came with a 10-speed 11-23. (53 tooth chainrings, both).

I had it changed to a 12-23, figuring the 18 tooth cog is way more useful than the 11.

Plus, I loathe the tiny 11 toother from a purely mechanical point of view. 

I think I could live with a 13 anyway.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Closing in on 100 votes. Don't think the results are gonna shift much going forward, though.
.


----------



## redlude97 (Jun 29, 2010)

Cat 3 boy said:


> SystemShock said:
> 
> 
> > Well said. Additionally on that...
> ...


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

redlude97 said:


> Are you using that with a 53/39?


You kinda scrambled Cat 3 Boy's post and mine together (as did he), but I think you're talking to him, not me.
.


----------



## Cat 3 boy (Aug 20, 2002)

Sorry 'bout the scrambling!

I'm using a 13-26 10sp cassette, the example I posted is what would persuade me to go 11speed - if only it existed.


----------



## Fixed (May 12, 2005)

SystemShock said:


> Yep, thread title is intentional double-entendre, since this sort of topic inevitably lends itself to such things, i.e. some guys seem to compare top gearing as if they were comparing male... err... bodyparts. :skep:
> 
> The poll'll be up in a minute. Yep, guess that's c0de too. Unavoidable.
> .


Depends entirely on the route and strategery. I do some racing in the mountains and deserts, where you can have very long descents and strong tail winds. For my FC 508 racing, I'll run a 56x11 top end.

I also have a 67 tooth that I throw on my TT bike just for fun so I can go really fast down hill. It helped me to average over 50 mph for 8.5 miles and topped out at 57 mph on a -6% slope. 

For most riding, though, a 53x11 is fine.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Fixed said:


> I also have a 67 tooth that I throw on my TT bike just for fun so I can go really fast down hill. It helped me to average over 50 mph for 8.5 miles and topped out at 57 mph on a -6% slope.


Very nice, but still a bit slow compared to how fast some riders descend without pedaling at all.
.


----------



## JCavilia (Sep 12, 2005)

*Sheeeeeeee-it!*



Fixed said:


> I also have a 67 tooth that I throw on my TT bike just for fun so I can go really fast down hill. It helped me to average over 50 mph for 8.5 miles and topped out at 57 mph on a -6% slope.


67x11 gives you a 160-inch gear. You only needed 120 rpm at 57 mph. On only a 6% descent, that took some serious power, as well as staying seriously aero while pedaling hard.

I say again, sheeeeeee-it! That must have been a wild 10 minutes.


----------



## Fixed (May 12, 2005)

SystemShock said:


> Very nice, but still a bit slow compared to how fast some riders descend without pedaling at all.
> .


Of course. I've gone much faster, too, but not on a 6% slope.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Fixed said:


> Of course. I've gone much faster, too, but not on a 6% slope.


"Much" faster? YouTube it, bro.
.


----------



## Mr. Versatile (Nov 24, 2005)

I just returned from a trip across the U.S. I used a compact crank & the small cog on the cassette was an 11. I didn't think I'd ever need or use it, but I used it in the mountains quite often.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

JCavilia said:


> 67x11 gives you a 160-inch gear. You only needed 120 rpm at 57 mph. On only a 6% descent, that took some serious power, as well as staying seriously aero while pedaling hard.
> 
> I say again, sheeeeeee-it! That must have been a wild 10 minutes.


I don't type well enough to use a 160 inch gear.


----------



## Fixed (May 12, 2005)

velodog said:


> I don't type well enough to use a 160 inch gear.


Here's the bike. I posted an SRM file at the time, but can't find it now.


----------



## Fixed (May 12, 2005)

JCavilia said:


> 67x11 gives you a 160-inch gear. You only needed 120 rpm at 57 mph. On only a 6% descent, that took some serious power, as well as staying seriously aero while pedaling hard.
> 
> I say again, sheeeeeee-it! That must have been a wild 10 minutes.


The only wild part, really, was passing a Jeep. When I pulled around him, it started buffeting the heck out of me. This was on a wide 4 lane road, too.


----------



## Fixed (May 12, 2005)

*youtube*

This isn't really a top speed thing, but downhill antics. Start at about 13:00 for fun.

Climb to Kaiser 2011 - YouTube


----------



## MR_GRUMPY (Aug 21, 2002)

Back in my 7 speed days, I'd use a 13-21 for just about everything except hilly road races. Then I'd use a 13-24. With 8 speed, I'd use a 13-23 for everything. With 9 speed, it was 13-23 for crits, & 12-23 for road races. 10 speed sees me in a 12-23 for crits, and a 12-25 for road races.
53X39.
I've only been in one race where a 13 prevented my from placing better. I spin out at 38 mph, in a flat sprint, with a tail wind.


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

SystemShock said:


> Can't argue with that. Aero tuck FTW (62 mph! ).
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Love that vid!


I also like the descent vid of Rasmussen.


----------



## Dozer (Mar 25, 2012)

So, where can one find a 13-25 cassette for Dura Ace 7900? I've searched with no luck finding a source.


----------



## sanrensho (Jan 2, 2003)

I do a lot of long mountain descents and 50x12 is ample to go fast enough to scare myself silly. It's just not worth it to push too hard on descents.


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

Dozer said:


> So, where can one find a 13-25 cassette for Dura Ace 7900? I've searched with no luck finding a source.


They're not DA but:

Shimano CS-6600 Wide 10 Speed Cassette - Road Bike Cassettes


----------



## Dozer (Mar 25, 2012)

cda 455 said:


> They're not DA but:
> 
> Shimano CS-6600 Wide 10 Speed Cassette - Road Bike Cassettes


Thanks! :thumbsup:


----------



## David Loving (Jun 13, 2008)

I don't go fast - a 13-29/53-39 works down here


----------

