# 11-23 or 12-23 cassette



## Spicoli (Feb 18, 2004)

I'm looking to buy a Shimano 7800 group and don't know whether to use a 11-23 or 12-23 cassette. I am a racer and always used a 12-23. Are there any advantages or disadvantages in either cassette or has anyone prefered one over the other?


----------



## benInMA (Jan 22, 2004)

If you have 12-23 9-speed right now and you get a 11-23 10-speed it's exactly the same cassette with an 11 cog added to the small end. It will feel exactly the same except give you more range.

If you go 12-23 9-speed to 12-23 10-speed it will be the same gearing range but with one extra cog thrown in that makes the gear spacing tighter.

7800 is 10 speed right?

Ben


----------



## Spicoli (Feb 18, 2004)

Yes, 7800 is 10-speed. Is there an advantage in having the extra gear in the middle? I figure the 11 at the end will be slightly faster than a 12 right.


----------



## GeekRoadie (Dec 27, 2001)

*Do you spin @ 53 X 12?*

Gear calculator shows 100 rpm @ 53 X 12 - 55.6 KPH with standard road wheels.

It's actually a pretty big jump to the 11t. Do you routinely go over 60 kph? 

Getting a 12-23- gets you a 18t cog. Personally, I'd rather have a straight block from the 12t to the 19t cog. 

Mike


----------



## CycloPathic (Feb 3, 2004)

*how often you'd need 18t?*

maybe grinding some long 4.5% climb in big ring or 6.5% in small in headwind. BTW 7800 cranks come in 53/54/55/56-42t, you can get 12-25 or 12-27 cass and 42 small, consider.


----------



## benInMA (Jan 22, 2004)

My preference would be for the 12-23 on flat courses and the 11-23 on mountainous ones assuming I could climb the mountains in the 23.

My logic may be backwards. But I'm certainly not at a level where I would expect to be turning 53x11 on flat in a race, but could see down a mountain in a race. Realistically if I was at all worried I'd be grabbing the 12-25 for the mountainous race.

I find I appreciate tightly spaced gears when fighting a headwind. Having exactly the right gear seems to make it a little easier to bear.

Ben


----------



## Spoke Wrench (Aug 20, 2001)

The 11 will only be faster than the 12 if you are strong enough to turn the crank.


----------



## LC (Jan 28, 2004)

I would like a 12-25 or 12-27. Which on line store carries a full selection 10 speed Dura Ace cassettes? How much for one of those puppies anyway?


----------



## CycloPathic (Feb 3, 2004)

42 x 25 is the same ratio as 39 x 23 and 42 x 27 is like 39 x 25 very close.
Some pros choose to run 42 over 39 in spring classics it makes much smoother transition, and 48/42 was pretty much universal in 10sp era (that's when we had 5 cogs in the back .

Agree tighter gear cluster is better, however 53 x 18 very close to 39 x 13, and gap btw 39 x 17 and 39 x 19 will be a problem only under specific conditions: 6-6.5% constant grade with headwind, so I am not sure how useful it'll be for racing. On break if you reserve to 53 x 18 in headwind, you gave up and about to get caught. 53 x 11 could be very useful going downhill, out of corners and to keep legs warm. For 39 x 27, hey some of us are old, fat, gave up racing, have only one bike and lazy to swap cogs.


----------



## russw19 (Nov 27, 2002)

*Exactly! The 11t is an ego cog.*



Spoke Wrench said:


> The 11 will only be faster than the 12 if you are strong enough to turn the crank.


An 11 tooth cog is completely a waste of steel for most human riders. Even some of those in the pro ranks. It is purely an ego cog. It makes you feel good to have it in your cluster, and it allows for component manufacturers to use the small cog in the weights of their cassettes. But it is a complete waste of time. Most people can't turn it fast enough to make it worthwhile over a 12 tooth. I used to be a pretty fast Cat 2 sprinter and I couldn't turn it fast enough to choose it over a 12. I guess if you are using a compact drivetrain with a 48 or 50 tooth large chainring, it's fine, but if you are using a 52 or 53, skip it. You would be much better server by having an 18 tooth in the middle (or whatever cog they leave out to give you the 11.)

I know as soon as this post goes up, at least 4 people are going to say they can turn and actually need an 11. I say that's BS. If you can spin out a 53x12 at over 150 rpms, get off this damn board and start leading out Petacchi. 

Russ


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

I wish Campy made a Record 12-23 as well. All they have is 11-23 or 12-25.....I don't need the bigger gear and I sure don't need the 11....was riding with a group of Hells Angels at 30mph just a few days ago through a little village in 17T....I was spinning pretty well and drew slightly surprised looks.....then again it might have been cause my bike was so different from theirs.


----------



## BugMan (Feb 16, 2004)

Spicoli,

I always used a 12-23 on my 9-speed also (w/ 53/39 front), and I'm going with 12-25 on my new 10-speed. The steep hills will be a little more bearable as a result, and I still get to have that all important 16t that caused me to choose the 12-23 in the first place. I considered adding the 18t instead of the 25t, but as others have pointed out it doesn't add much that's not already there and is a low frequency need. I did not ever consider the 11t - but then I'm not Petachi's lead-out man, maybe you are.


----------



## AJS (Aug 7, 2003)

I'd MUCH rather have the 18T cog in there - it's a great "cruising" gear for me, and often the jump from 17T to 19T is too big. I've NEVER needed an 11T cog, as someone above has said.

The only reason I can see to get an 11-23 or 11-21 cogset is if you're trying to cut weight in every possible way, or if you can't get the 18T gear in other cogsets, (like with Campy 10s you have to buy the 11T cogsets or the 13-26 to get the 18T; the 12-25 and 13-29 don't have it).


----------



## bill (Feb 5, 2004)

I have too used my 11.
On my rollers. I hit 50. 
So there.
But not since.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

*1 of 4*



russw19 said:


> An 11 tooth cog is completely a waste of steel for most human riders.
> 
> I know as soon as this post goes up, at least 4 people are going to say they can turn and actually need an 11. I say that's BS. If you can spin out a 53x12 at over 150 rpms, get off this damn board and start leading out Petacchi.
> 
> Russ


Though it may never have occured to you, there are times in a race where you have to go very fast downhill to catch back on to the pack. In another thread, I referred to chasing back onto the pack down the Sapillo or the back side of Gates Pass. In both cases, I was pedaling at speeds over 40 mph. A 53x12 gives a speed of 42 mph at 120 rpm so it is not out of line to say one needs an 11 for these cases. The fact that you're point of comparison is leading out Petacchi shows me you haven't thought this through very well.


----------



## Mariowannabe (Oct 21, 2002)

*Campy 12-23*

Campy just introduced a 12-23 this year. I just got one. Love the 18T.


----------



## bill (Feb 5, 2004)

I don't know, man. I don't know from gear inches and resulting speeds and stuff, but I've never spun out my 12. I suppose I was surprised now and then how close I came (not very, but closer than I thought I'd come, anyway), but I never have spun it out, and I don't know anyone who has. I also suppose it may depend on the nature of the descent and exactly how fast this race is, but that's a pretty narrow "need." Most racers, and certainly most recreational riders, will never have any need for an 11. My guess is, if you don't know by now that you need an 11 and exactly why you need it, you don't need it.


----------



## 853 (Feb 4, 2002)

*Just get a 12-25!*

It's the same as your 12-23 w/ the 25 stuck on the end.

It has saved me more and been used more to stay w/ the group, than having to try and catch back on to the group on the descent!


----------



## russw19 (Nov 27, 2002)

asgelle said:


> Though it may never have occured to you, there are times in a race where you have to go very fast downhill to catch back on to the pack. In another thread, I referred to chasing back onto the pack down the Sapillo or the back side of Gates Pass. In both cases, I was pedaling at speeds over 40 mph. A 53x12 gives a speed of 42 mph at 120 rpm so it is not out of line to say one needs an 11 for these cases. The fact that you're point of comparison is leading out Petacchi shows me you haven't thought this through very well.



Actually, I have thought this thru very well. You don't really need an 11. When you were chasing that pack downhill, how was your tuck? Did you do what most of us do and spin the 53x12 for about 5 seconds as fast as you could, then coast for a second, then spin, then coast? I have drafted a truck on flat land at 60 mph and have hit 52 in a downhill sprint in a Pro/1/2 race. Both of which I did on a 53x12. If you could have spun that 53x12 at 120 rpm's on that downhill and that was it, you weren't even close to spinning out that gear. After you spin out that gear at say 180 rpm's or higher where you would really NEED that 11, come back and talk to me about thinking things thru. The part about leading out Patacchi was a joke that was lost on you. But that doesn't surprise me. You may not be a sprinter big enough to turn the gears those guys turn. I want you to know right now, I DO NOT mean that as an insult, but it is my speculation. Do you know why top sprinters sprint in the saddle? It is so that they can turn over a gear as large as a 53x12 with the speed they need to be not only fast, but efficient. That is also why top sprinters often come from track backgrounds. It is because you need to turn that gear at 150 or so rpm's to be good. If you are sprinting out of the saddle, you are turning a gear at most likely 100 or so rpm's and that is way to slow to do anything. You can't accelerate properly with that low of a cadence and you won't top out very fast either. If you can turn over a 53x12 at 150 rpm's, you may be one of about 200 riders worldwide who needs that 11 tooth (the exception of compact chainrings being the only other reason to use an 11)

You should really take a look at some sites like analytic cycling's website about going downhill fast. Once the road points downward with enough slope that you would spin out a 53x12, you don't need to pedal anyways. You won't go any faster. Pedal out of the apex of corners, but if the pack is in front of you and you are off the back, don't waste your energy spinning the pedals to catch them. You will be much better served to tuck your body out of the wind and out brake them in and out of corners if you want to catch back up. I don't want to turn this into a flame war, but you really don't need an 11 tooth cog anymore than you need a set of ksyrium wheels. Cyclists have been riding faster than 40 mph on downhills for a much longer period of time than Campy and Shimano have been trying to sell you an 11 tooth. It's for weight weenie wars over cassette weights. I don't see that as being a hard thing to figure out, unless you like buying into hype.

BTW, according to the model on analyticcycling, spinning a 53x12 downhill at 150 rpms gives a speed of 52.30 mph and the 53x11 gives a speed of 57.05. Spin the 12 at 164 rpms and you go faster than the 11 at 150. The amount you have to increase your cadence to match the speed of the smaller cog gets smaller as the cadence lowers. Your speed of 42 mph at 120 rpms with the 12 is accurate, but in order to go the same speed as you would hit at that cadence with the 11, you only need to spin the 12 at 130rpms. If you are going downhill and the hill is that steep, you should have ZERO problems spinning that 12 just that much faster. The whole thing about you using a downhill example where the resistance of the wind is less than the downward pull of gravity to show your point in your comparision also shows that you didn't think this thru very well. The point of leading out Petacchi, or anyone for that matter, is just to show that you have to be strong enough to turn the gear, which is what Kerry Irons said and I agreed with. Analytic Cycling even says on their website that you should learn to spin at 125 rpms before you buy an 11 tooth cog. 

Russ


*edit... I just wanted to point out that I am not trying to pick a fight, so please don't read into this post that way, and don't respond that way either or the whole point of the discussion will quickly be lost.


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

Mariowannabe said:


> Campy just introduced a 12-23 this year. I just got one. Love the 18T.


I see they snuck that one in without telling me


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

russw19 said:


> Actually, I have thought this thru very well. You don't really need an 11.


The long and short of it is you can't tell what I need.


russw19 said:


> When you were chasing that pack downhill, how was your tuck? Did you do what most of us do and spin the 53x12 for about 5 seconds as fast as you could, then coast for a second, then spin, then coast?


No.


russw19 said:


> I have drafted a truck on flat land at 60 mph and have hit 52 in a downhill sprint in a Pro/1/2 race. Both of which I did on a 53x12. If you could have spun that 53x12 at 120 rpm's on that downhill and that was it, you weren't even close to spinning out that gear.


No, If my fastest cadence was 120, that was spinning out the gear for me. You can only do what you can do. Going into a race I know what my fastest sustained cadence is and what the top speed I think I'll need during the race. Given those 2 facts, I know what my top gearing needs to be. Just like knowing the steepest slope of the climbs and my maximum vertical climbing rate tells me my lowest required gear. 


russw19 said:


> After you spin out that gear at say 180 rpm's or higher where you would really NEED that 11, come back and talk to me about thinking things thru.


That may be fine in the long run, but the race is tomorrow and I need to be able to close gaps at 40+ mph. So for right now, I need a big gear.


russw19 said:


> The part about leading out Patacchi was a joke that was lost on you. But that doesn't surprise me. You may not be a sprinter big enough to turn the gears those guys turn. I want you to know right now, I DO NOT mean that as an insult, but it is my speculation. Do you know why top sprinters sprint in the saddle? It is so that they can turn over a gear as large as a 53x12 with the speed they need to be not only fast, but efficient. That is also why top sprinters often come from track backgrounds. It is because you need to turn that gear at 150 or so rpm's to be good. If you are sprinting out of the saddle, you are turning a gear at most likely 100 or so rpm's and that is way to slow to do anything. You can't accelerate properly with that low of a cadence and you won't top out very fast either. If you can turn over a 53x12 at 150 rpm's, you may be one of about 200 riders worldwide who needs that 11 tooth (the exception of compact chainrings being the only other reason to use an 11)


And you seem to be missing my point. The purpose of big gears for the amateur racer is not for sprinting or flat riding but for achieving high speeds where only minimal power may be required, e.g., downhill. 


russw19 said:


> You should really take a look at some sites like analytic cycling's website about going downhill fast. Once the road points downward with enough slope that you would spin out a 53x12, you don't need to pedal anyways. You won't go any faster.


I don't understand this. If I'm pedaling downhill putting 250W into the pedals, it seems obvious to me (and this is shown at analytic cycling.com) that I'll go faster than if I don't pedal. Specifically, for a 7% grade, 44 vs. 40 mph. This might be the difference between catching on or not. If I can put those 250W into the pedals at 120 rpm in the 11 but not at 135 rpm (or whatever the cadence would be for the 12) then I need the 11.


russw19 said:


> Pedal out of the apex of corners, but if the pack is in front of you and you are off the back, don't waste your energy spinning the pedals to catch them. You will be much better served to tuck your body out of the wind and out brake them in and out of corners if you want to catch back up.


What corners? Gates Pass is a 3 mile straight descent.


russw19 said:


> BTW, according to the model on analyticcycling, spinning a 53x12 downhill at 150 rpms gives a speed of 52.30 mph and the 53x11 gives a speed of 57.05. Spin the 12 at 164 rpms and you go faster than the 11 at 150. The amount you have to increase your cadence to match the speed of the smaller cog gets smaller as the cadence lowers. Your speed of 42 mph at 120 rpms with the 12 is accurate, but in order to go the same speed as you would hit at that cadence with the 11, you only need to spin the 12 at 130rpms. If you are going downhill and the hill is that steep, you should have ZERO problems spinning that 12 just that much faster.


Why shouldn't I have trouble. My maximum sustainable cadence is what it is. Once I reach that limit, I can't go any faster.


russw19 said:


> The whole thing about you using a downhill example where the resistance of the wind is less than the downward pull of gravity to show your point in your comparision also shows that you didn't think this thru very well. The point of leading out Petacchi, or anyone for that matter, is just to show that you have to be strong enough to turn the gear, which is what Kerry Irons said and I agreed with. Analytic Cycling even says on their website that you should learn to spin at 125 rpms before you buy an 11 tooth cog.


You say you have to be strong enough to turn the gear. But there are times when one needs to turn a gear at high speed but not extremely high power. That is precisely why I used the example of closing a gap on a steep downhill. That is a case where very high speed but only moderate power may be needed.

I never said anything about what gearing is necessary for sprinting or other circumstances. I never said an 11 cog is always needed. I only said that there are reasonable circumstances where an amateur rider may require this gear in contrast to those who say it is never needed.


----------



## Keeping up with Junior (Feb 27, 2003)

*More Thinking*



russw19 said:


> Actually, I have thought this thru very well. You don't really need an 11. anymore than you need a set of ksyrium wheels. ...spinning a 53x12 downhill at 150 rpms gives a speed of 52.30 mph and the 53x11 gives a speed of 57.05. ...Your speed of 42 mph at 120 rpms with the 12 is accurate...


More thinking yields more questions. Compare Lance vs. Jan going uphill. Lance dances on the pedals and spins a high cadence. Jan the diesel mashes away at a low cadence. Both accomplished cyclist, just different riding styles. From what I have heard spinning taxes your aerobic system more while mashing taxes your muscles more. 

A 53x11 at 90 rpm gives a speed of 34mph. A cadence of 90 is not all that slow and a speed of 34 is not unrealisticly high. Are there times when you have been cruising along and you still have the legs if your lungs could just keep up. You are on that long slight downgrade with a screaming tailwind and you just dont feel like spinning. Perhaps this would be the time you wished you had an 11? 

Not sure I would need an 11 but you need to consider more than top end, spun out cadence when discussing the theory.


----------



## lyleseven (Nov 15, 2002)

*11-23*

Actually, russ says he has finally thought it through. If he had maybe he could have stated his opinion in less than 24 pages! Just kidding, russ! I have an 11-23 on one of my bikes and I rather enjoy it for those long, flat rides. For racing, I'd probably never use it, but for touring or just cruising in the flat on those nice 30-40 mile rides, it is a nice option to have. For the hills, I would never consider it even if it gave me a slight bump on the downhills.


----------



## Spunout (Aug 12, 2002)

Rollers. The only reason why I probably need the 11. I can spin it up down the big hills at 70 kph, it feels just as fast as 65 in the 12.


----------



## AJS (Aug 7, 2003)

lyleseven - 

You're using 53x11 for "touring or just cruising in the flat on those nice 30-40 mile rides"?? I find that hard to believe, because if someone's in 11T with a 53 ring, they aren't just "cruising in the flat". Or else your cadence must be pretty darned slow.


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

His cadence = 50


----------



## lyleseven (Nov 15, 2002)

*Cadence....*



divve said:


> His cadence = 50


I never claimed I was spinning out in 11!!!! Obviously, I am pushing a lower cadence in this big gear. But, it's not like it's my only gear!


----------



## AJS (Aug 7, 2003)

> But, it's not like it's my only gear!


No kidding! 

But the point is: you don't _really_ need that 11T -- c'mon lyle, admit it!!!


----------



## MR_GRUMPY (Aug 21, 2002)

*Time trial*

One valid reason to use an 11 on a cassette to keep a straight chain line. If you are "damn fast" and ride in a 53 X 13, your chain line will be a little better off than if your cassette started with 12. If you slog along in a 53 X 15 or 16, you might be better off with a 12 as your big gear. 
I would never use an 11 in a crit., but if you had a windy road race where you had a tail wind sprint, an 11 could come in handy in a sprint that STARTS at 37-38 mph.


----------



## lyleseven (Nov 15, 2002)

*Of course! I always start my sprints at 37-38 mph!*



MR_GRUMPY said:


> One valid reason to use an 11 on a cassette to keep a straight chain line. If you are "damn fast" and ride in a 53 X 13, your chain line will be a little better off than if your cassette started with 12. If you slog along in a 53 X 15 or 16, you might be better off with a 12 as your big gear.
> I would never use an 11 in a crit., but if you had a windy road race where you had a tail wind sprint, an 11 could come in handy in a sprint that STARTS at 37-38 mph.



......just kidding. But it is a valid point. I have had a strong tailwind near the bay and the 12 has spun out on me but not the 11, but I was closer to 32 mph than 37-38...It also comes in handy on screaming straight descents, like the one I broke my neck on!


----------



## russw19 (Nov 27, 2002)

*Sprints that start at 38 mph...*

That just goes back to my half-joking statement about leading out Petacchi. I think for most people, it would take a Hurricane at their back to get them to spin out a 53x12 and NEED the 11. 

I don't mean to insult anyone here, but I don't think anyone who actually thinks they need an 11 tooth cog really understands gearing. Examples of compact gearing, and chainline (something I admit I didn't think of...) aside, I don't think anyone choosing an 11 tooth really knows why they chose it. They put it on the cassette body because that's what Shimano, SRAM, or Campy told them to put on. They put it on the body because it's an ego cog. Real men (and maybe some super women) put it on their bike and then turn the pedals at ungodly speeds... maybe if I ride a team edition bike with the same gearing, I can go that fast too. Ego cog....

It takes less force at the pedals to turn over a gear at a higher rpm. That means that in real world terms, you are not only more likely to be able to do it, but it would be easier to turn a 53x12 at 150 rpms than a 53x11 at 120 rpms, but you will still be faster turning that 12 tooth at that cadence. This is exactly why there are gearing restrictions for juniors... so they don't blow out their knees turning an 11 tooth at 50 rpms, and so they learn how to really sprint.... in the saddle, with a high cadence. But what do I know? I just raced at the Cat 2 level for 4 years, and all 4 on a 12 tooth cog.

Russ


----------



## MR_GRUMPY (Aug 21, 2002)

That was the one time in my entire life that I could have used an 11. There was a 20-25 mph direct tail wind for the last 6 miles. 5 of those miles were at about 35 mph. From there, the speed went up. The chances of that happening again are somewhere between slim and none.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

*What am I missing?*



russw19 said:


> I don't mean to insult anyone here, but I don't think anyone who actually thinks they need an 11 tooth cog really understands gearing.
> Russ


I think I do understand gearing and after my previous long posts, I think I can say it succinctly now. What is the fastest speed you think you will need to pedal for several durations - 5 sec. 20 sec., 1 min, 10 min*; taking grade, tailwind, etc. into account? What is the fastest cadence you can maintain for those durations? For those speed/cadence pairs what gear do you need to get the desired speed at the desired cadence? What is the smallest cog you found you need.

For a 53x12, 120 rpm gives 42 mph, 53x11 gives 46. 

So for me, given that 120 rpm is about as fast as I can spin for an extended period (several minutes), the fact that I may have to chase back to the pack at over 40 mph on the long, steep descent following a climb, and the power to pedal at 46 mph is only about 250W (around my LT) for that downhill grade, it makes sense for me to carry an 11.

I just don't see, given my requirements and limitations, why I shouldn't carry an 11. What am I missing in my understanding of gearing?

*These choices are arbitrary, but I recognize that max cadence is a function of duration; and so, gearing choice should take into account the duration for which the cadence must be maintained.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

MR_GRUMPY said:


> That was the one time in my entire life that I could have used an 11. There was a 20-25 mph direct tail wind for the last 6 miles. 5 of those miles were at about 35 mph. From there, the speed went up. The chances of that happening again are somewhere between slim and none.


That would depend on where you ride. On the Tues./Thus reaper ride, the wind is usually out of the west, but an east wind is not uncommon. On those days, the speed does not go below 35 mph for the six miles back through the canyon. Then there's a sprint at the end. 

The point is there are all kinds of conditions and types of riders. It's dangerous to generalize from one set of experiences to everyone else. Sure we can say this is what is generally recommended, or this is the best choice for a range of conditions, but I think it is wrong to say that based on one set of experiences, a certain equipment choice is wrong for everyone else.


----------



## AJS (Aug 7, 2003)

asgelle and the rest of ya's - 

There is no phucking way, at the level you're at, (and I'm not belittling your efforts) that you NEED an 11T. I don't give a sh!t if you just climbed the Ventoux, Tourmalet, or Alpe de Huez - you're going to come down the other side TOO FAST anyway, and you'll be lucky to make the descent without killing yourself. WHY do you need to pedal harder at 45+ mph downhill???

I'm sure if there was a 10T, some of you idjits would find a "reason" to have it. I can say that on my CX rig, I don't really need the 12T because I seldom use it. 13T would be fine as the top gear on that bike. And yes, I've been a serious cyclist for years and am in shape, and I routinely haul ass on many of the younger guys I encounter.

Give it up, gentlemen...11T is definitely just an EGO gear as other's have said. There are some of us here that KNOW that, and so you're NOT going to get away with it in the long run!! LOL!

Get OVER yourselves!


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

AJS said:


> asgelle and the rest of ya's -
> 
> There is no phucking way, at the level you're at, (and I'm not belittling your efforts) that you NEED an 11T. I don't give a sh!t if you just climbed the Ventoux, Tourmalet, or Alpe de Huez - you're going to come down the other side TOO FAST anyway, and you'll be lucky to make the descent without killing yourself. WHY do you need to pedal harder at 45+ mph downhill???


So that's your counter-argument, "no phucking way, ..."? As I've explained twice now, the reason to pedal at 45 mph was to catch back on to the pack over the top of a climb with a steep, straight descent. Given that this only requires 250W, it's not beyond virtually every racer's capability.


----------



## lyleseven (Nov 15, 2002)

*You have your reasons...*



russw19 said:


> That just goes back to my half-joking statement about leading out Petacchi. I think for most people, it would take a Hurricane at their back to get them to spin out a 53x12 and NEED the 11.
> 
> I don't mean to insult anyone here, but I don't think anyone who actually thinks they need an 11 tooth cog really understands gearing. Examples of compact gearing, and chainline (something I admit I didn't think of...) aside, I don't think anyone choosing an 11 tooth really knows why they chose it. They put it on the cassette body because that's what Shimano, SRAM, or Campy told them to put on. They put it on the body because it's an ego cog. Real men (and maybe some super women) put it on their bike and then turn the pedals at ungodly speeds... maybe if I ride a team edition bike with the same gearing, I can go that fast too. Ego cog....
> 
> ...


and I have mine! I chose the 11 for the reasons stated. Had nothing to do with ego. I never let ego interfere with those choices as I am too old for that crap. It is different; it is a slightly taller gear and I enjoy it on the flats and downhills; and, I could afford to buy it and try it. Cycling to me is all about trying different things and breaking up the routine. It is that simple. I don't need anyone doing a psychoanalysis on my choice of cogs, especially someone who doesn't know my level of cycling, terrain, miles, etc. No offense. But all of your reasons may be good reasons, but they don't fit me....as for your racing at the Cat 2 level...I am happy for you too....


----------



## russw19 (Nov 27, 2002)

edited original post.....


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

I agree with what Russ says. Unless you can spin the 11 efficiently on a straight flat, it's useless cause in any other example you'll do better not spinning or intermediately with higher rmp in the 12....and claiming a tailwind that requires the 11 is just silly. I don't think anyone is outside at those times.

I'm looking forward to when they list the 12-23 Record in my neck of the woods. I think the 18 will be great for flat cruising at around 20mph.


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

Hey man where did it go? That was a great rant


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

*Too Late*



russw19 said:


> edited original post.....


I already saw it and was a little upset. One reason was you said I didn't use analyticcycling.com, though my earlier posts referred to it. Also, you never made it clear that you were proposing a series of microintervals over a steady effort for faster descending. The Socratic method doesn't work well in written exchanges. Be that as it may, I got over it and ran some calculations. Lets compare my way to Russ's. Calculations from analyticcycling.com

First coasting: 7% slope no wind, all other defaults. Steady speed: 17.80 m/s (39.82 mph)

My way: 250W on a steady 7% slope, no wind all other defaults. Steady speed: 19.96 m/s (44.65 mph). Speed at 120 rpm: 53x12 - 42.6, 53x11-46.4. Looks like I need the 11.

Russ's way: 10 sec @500W followed by 10 sec @0W (studies have shown that you can maintain the same average power for repeated microintervals as the average power for the total duration of the microinterval efforts).

Lets start at coasting speed (17.80 m/s) and pedal at 500W for 10 seconds (gear doesn't matter, we're putiing a fixed power to the pedals). At the end of the 10 seconds, the rider covered 192m at a final speed of 20.2 m/s

Now from 20.2 m/s coast for 10 seconds at 0 power. The rider covers 195m at a final speed of 18.9 m/s.

Calculate another 10 seconds at 500W starting from 18.9 m/s. This time the rider covers 200 m at a final speed of 20.6.

Next time through coasting starts at 20.6 and ends at 198m and speed of 19.1 m/s

The maximum speed was 20.6 m/s (46.08 mph) That's 132 rpm in a 53x12 so doable for the short 10 sec duration.

For the repeated intervals, the rider covers (200+198)m/20sec= 19.9 m/s average speed.

Compare this to my method which gives 19.96 m/s Looks like the two results are equal within the error of the assumptions and the model.


----------



## russw19 (Nov 27, 2002)

divve said:


> Hey man where did it go? That was a great rant



I pulled it. Lyleseven has past issues with my posts. I felt I didn't want to continue to try to help him understand gearing if he was just going to take personal shots at me. I think he said enough when he claimed he had spun out a 12 with a tailwind going 32 mph. It is obvious to me from that remark that he is just trying to pick an internet fight and that he has no idea what he is talking about and has no desire to learn it either. Lyle, for the record, if you spun out your 12 like you claim, with a tailwind and you going 32 mph, you did so at 93 rpms. If that is your idea of spinning a gear out, you need to remove yourself from this conversation as it is apparent you don't know what you are really talking about.

Asgelle, I am not trying to tell you how to ride, but only to give you advice on how to ride faster. I only replied to your post to give you that advice because you claimed you were chasing a group in a race. If you are racing, you probably have a desire to go faster, right? If so, then get past thinking that I or anyone else is trying to tell you how to ride, and think of it as us giving you free advice. You may not know it, and maybe you have never heard this before so it doesn't seem to make sense, but you are faster and more effecient if you spin the pedals before dropping the gear. But in your example, it wouldn't make a difference if you pedalled or not. You weren't going any faster.

If the hill you described was a 12% hill, even if you are pedalling, your terminal velocity on a hill that steep should be in the range of 52 mph. Spinning that 11 at 120 rpms won't make you go any faster. You would have to pedal faster than 150 rpms with the 11 to make any difference. Your mind was playing tricks on you, but you weren't getting any closer to the pack because you were turning an 11 tooth at 120 rpms. So like I have been saying over and over again, you really didn't need that 11. You would have been just as fast with the 12, and it would take less power at the pedals to turn it. 

The loss of the 18 to gain the 11 is just one of a series of bonehead moves that component makers have made in the past few years. It started with Shimano putting it on their compact drivetrain ATB lines, and it is fine for compact drivetrains, but silly for other applications. Having tighter gear ratios is a better idea than having an 11 tooth cog.

Russ


----------



## russw19 (Nov 27, 2002)

Sorry man, I wasn't trying to upset you which is why I pulled it. I was only trying to give advice to help someone go faster... that's it. I stand by what I said, but the manner in which it was said was sure to be misinterprated and inflammatory.

Russ


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

russw19 said:


> Sorry man, I wasn't trying to upset you which is why I pulled it. I was only trying to give advice to help someone go faster... that's it. I stand by what I said, but the manner in which it was said was sure to be misinterprated and inflammatory.
> 
> Russ


But what about the analyticcycling calculations. First you beat me up for not using it now when I apply it and it shows I'm either right or not wrong depending on how you look at it - silence.


----------



## bill (Feb 5, 2004)

Well, I'll just say that I got an 11-23 cassette when I wanted to race, because that's what racers use, right? I've had that thing about three or four years, races, club rides, sprint drills, whatever. I don't think I've used it at all since my cruising cadence got up to around 90-100. Now, I know that I ain't the fastest guy in the world, but when you're on club rides and Cat 2's are winning the sprint with cyclocross gearing, doing it with leg speed and doing it well, besting other Cat 2's and 3's and whoever else is out there, you realize that nobody needs an 11 unless maybe you're sprinting to hold on to Petacchi's wheel. Maybe then, and only maybe. If you're going over 40 on a descent, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you're going to make up more time by descending well with aerodynamics and cornering than pedaling.
If you like it, use it. Keep it. Love it. Just don't try to tell anyone that you need it, because that's BS.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

bill said:


> If you're going over 40 on a descent, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you're going to make up more time by descending well with aerodynamics and cornering than pedaling.
> If you like it, use it. Keep it. Love it. Just don't try to tell anyone that you need it, because that's BS.


Here we go again. First the descent was straight for 3 miles then leveled off. There was no cornering to make up time. Next, you can be assured that the riders at the front of the race pack have the best aerodynamics in the pack (that's why they're at the front) so I'm likely to only equal them at best. Add on the benefit from drafting and rotating through and it's highly unlikely that a single rider will make up time relative to the pack by coasting.

Finally, I'm not saying what anyone else should do, but without knowing me how can you say it's BS when I say I need an 11. I presented a scenario where I need it. If you can show me an alternative where I don't fine, but just writing that I'm wrong really won't convince me,


----------



## lyleseven (Nov 15, 2002)

*Russ needs some valium or zoloft....*



russw19 said:


> Sorry man, I wasn't trying to upset you which is why I pulled it. I was only trying to give advice to help someone go faster... that's it. I stand by what I said, but the manner in which it was said was sure to be misinterprated and inflammatory.
> 
> Russ[/QUOTE
> 
> ]Problem is russ that if someone doesn't agree with you you claim to be the gospel. Sorry, but I still like my 11/23, as well as my 12/25 and my 13/29. I do know enough about gearing that I would never race on my 11/23, but so what. I enjoy it for the slow cadence and love it on the downhills. You are entitled to your opinions-- and that is all they are. End of case and last time I look at this thread. Live with it.....


----------



## kcon (Sep 30, 2005)

*it's about the legs*

I ride in the Baltimore area which has a fair number of steepish though not awfully long hills a few of which are quite steep. I've been running an 11-23 and find the 11 is fun on super fast descents and starts spinning out in the 48-52 mph range. However grinding up those billies wears on the legs after a few hours so I've just switched to a 12-25 and like the differance. I'll take more climbing options ahead of the extra few mph's on descents any day.


----------



## zac (Aug 5, 2005)

Spicoli said:


> I'm looking to buy a Shimano 7800 group and don't know whether to use a 11-23 or 12-23 cassette. I am a racer and always used a 12-23. Are there any advantages or disadvantages in either cassette or has anyone prefered one over the other?



Boy for all the time spent in this thread...I say get both of them, try them, and ride what you like. 

I have learned a few things in this post (and I have been a rider for almost 3 decades), but gentlemen and ladies, be aware that we all cannot spin up to the same cadences. For me going over 140 is not comfortable (nor stable or safe, maybe at one time, but no longer), and I certainly would not be attempting this at speeds in excess of 45 mph.

I have ridden an 11t cog, but for all practical purposes, MY (current individual) need for it is almost non-existent. I much prefer the straight block to 19 (the 12-23 gives you that all important 18t cog). As has been said here, the 17-19 jump is too big, especially when you are in the zone. You dont want to be jumping down to the small ring to hunt for that in between range.

In conclusion, if getting both is not an option, then 12-23 hands down. You will be finding yourself wishing for that 18 much more than you would ever be needing that 11.

peace
zac


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*what?*

I have indeed read this entire thread and IMO, again, IMO, there are some assertions that have to be eye balled here

1)IF someone would look at the gear ratios and their respective inches at the stated RPMs I have to say, it is either complete and ueet BS or there are truly super men among us. If you can routinely spin out a 53x12 at over 100 rpm in "normal" NON downhill situations, you are hitting speeds exceeding 30 mph routinely. I call BS. I do not believe it. No. Why? Merckx set the hour ib a 52x14 at ~110 rpm. I really really have a problem with yeah I need the xtra tooth because.....Oh well, its IMO

2)1 less tooth will make a diff t higher rpms. Yes. HOWEVER, again out of context this is useless. In fact, its much like the I sprint at the speed of light and can hold 30 mph for days on end in my group thread with my heart rate at 199% of my max. NO. AINT SO.

3)How are you folks counting your cadence? 140?? I keep 120 while just doing that spinning. Above that and its a no go. I understand thats for me. However, I have a reservation about the 140+ rpm crowd. Olympians barely hit that rpm on a sustained nd regular basis without years of training. Going downhill at that speed and rpm MIGHT NOT be something that has any value for the total ride. IMO. 

4)If you want to descend at speed, a big gear will NOT DO IT. Descen well and then get speed. Otherwise, IMO, team Organ Donor will want you fast.

Ride well but above all, ride on this planet....


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*okalee do kalee*

SO, I did some rough gear inch cals at the provided rpms

53x11 at 120 rpm is ~47 mph. Look its super man!!!!!!!!!

53x11 at 140 rpm is ~55mph Look, its super man in a hurry!!!!!!!

IF we take this going downhill, yes, it makes sense. BUT, if you are trying to say, yeah, I sprint and spin this gear out at 140rpm. You are telling a bald faced fabrication.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

From analytic cycling.com using all defaults (which uses a low frontal area) 47 mph = 1480 W. That would be very good (but possible) for a strong amateur sprinter for a few seconds.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*Low????*



asgelle said:


> From analytic cycling.com using all defaults (which uses a low frontal area) 47 mph = 1480 W. That would be very good (but possible) for a strong amateur sprinter for a few seconds.



LOW frontal area???? Come on, the guy would have to look like the Ethiopian kid that beat Sally Struthers to the table....

1480 watts??? OH MY GAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWDDDDDDDDD that is on the freakish edge. Sorry. I do not buy the I have the frontal area of a used tampon and legs that just so happen to jack up to just under 1500 watts. Yes, I know what the model creates..However, how many people fit that model? I would say maybe just maybe a very select few. 

I am not disagreeing at the model, I disagree that this person is the norm and hey, I gotta get a better casette to do that. No sorry. Thats incredible talent and I have yet to see many if any recorded stats to get near that number. The local speed freaks who are STRONG CAT2s do windgate tests that barely hit 1400+. Sorry I doubt this.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

ttug said:


> The local speed freaks who are STRONG CAT2s do windgate tests that barely hit 1400+. Sorry I doubt this.


How long do you think a Wingate test is? What do you consider a few seconds?
Your data (low area, 1500 watts) seems to support the need for an 11.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*how*



asgelle said:


> How long do you think a Wingate test is? What do you consider a few seconds?
> Your data (low area, 1500 watts) seems to support the need for an 11.



My data?

OK, lets make it fast, this is well....not quite real any more.

I respect your choice of any equipment you want. Go nuts. I also respect your viewpoint. NOW, I do have a question about why or how you go to the assumption that my "data etc etc"

Lets see....IMO, the "need" for an 11 is again, IMO a crock of fermented cabbage. The windgate test I recall was a lot longer than a few seconds. In fact, it was about 30 minutes. If you are at the physical level where you can indeed put that kind of wattage out, I doubt highly that wow, I have to have an 11 is the answer. I also recall a big chain ring near the BB that looky looky can get some monster sizes as well.

AGAIN, we are talking out of context and as such, my "data" would be worthless UNLESS you could provide the instance where you can prove, wow, I would have lost the day if it were not for my 11 toooth etc etc etc as it pertains to the every day person and NOT the edge of human ability. Thats a pisser for me because when you have "data" and then say, see, it can be done, I am right, its the equivalent of saying, what is 3 miles north of the north pole? The missing piece of data is (oh by the way, we used an individual who is in no way shape or form part of a regular population in their watts. Face it, we had to use a freak) makes the point worthless.

That means that the data and the model and the proof is by and large 100% total mule muffins. Odds are, the average person on a bike wont be cranking near 45 to 55 mph. How about that?


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

ttug said:


> The windgate test I recall was a lot longer than a few seconds. In fact, it was about 30 minutes. If you are at the physical level where you can indeed put that kind of wattage out, I doubt highly that wow, I have to have an 11 is the answer. I also recall a big chain ring near the BB that looky looky can get some monster sizes as well.


A wingate test is 30 seconds not 30 minutes but still more that a few seconds. But solely based on what you wrote, you believe a strong Cat 2 (hardly Superman) can put out 1500 watts for 30 minutes (an impossibly large number); 1500 watts is about what it takes to ride 47 mph; 47 mph converts to 120 rpm in a 53x11 gear. Therefore, it would seem from these numbers that anyone at the level of strong Cat 2 or better who is limited to 120 rpm (a very high average to maintain for 30 minutes) needs a 53x11 to get the full potential of their power. Hey you wrote it, not me.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*thats it*



asgelle said:


> A wingate test is 30 seconds not 30 minutes but still more that a few seconds. But solely based on what you wrote, you believe a strong Cat 2 (hardly Superman) can put out 1500 watts for 30 minutes (an impossibly large number); 1500 watts is about what it takes to ride 47 mph; 47 mph converts to 120 rpm in a 53x11 gear. Therefore, it would seem from these numbers that anyone at the level of strong Cat 2 or better who is limited to 120 rpm (a very high average to maintain for 30 minutes) needs a 53x11 to get the full potential of their power. Hey you wrote it, not me.


Now you crossed that line. I said a CAT 2 did Windgate test where they did NOT hit 1500. In fact, they barlely hit 1400. They did not hold that for 30 minutes. Who gave you a windgate test? If you are making this up, fine. BUT, again, live your fantasy out somewhere else. 

1)I did not say anybody could sustain that for 30 minutes. You did. I did not.The test was 30 minutes, it was not at their max for that time period. 

2)My wind gate test was 30 minutes. I wanted to test other things besides my max which is what most youger studs with big 11 gears need to have and know. Thats a goody. While yes, my max was one thing, I dont believe that any test woul have the subject jump on the machine and go all out. In fact, they have you ramp up and then recover and then you can if you want repeat using that it was 30 minutes

3)Nobody needs a 53x11 to the max of their power. Thats Star Wars talk and not reality. You give no context, you are starting to misquote me and its a bit irksome.

4)Who said a limit of 120rpm? Again, you state that these are assertions on my part which are again wrong and out of context.

Did you ever think that if a person has to make things up to feel better about their equipment choices that maybe just maybe they have another issue? I know I would think just that. 

If you go to a lab and they have had you do what you desctribe as a test, avoid that lab. 

This is the end of my contribution to your fantasy life on the bike. Welcome to the ignore list...


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

ttug said:


> 2)My wind gate test was 30 minutes. I wanted to test other things besides my max which is what most youger studs with big 11 gears need to have and know. Thats a goody. While yes, my max was one thing, I dont believe that any test woul have the subject jump on the machine and go all out. In fact, they have you ramp up and then recover and then you can if you want repeat using that it was 30 minutes.


For anyone still reading, what is described here is a ramp test used to determine lactate threshold and VO2_max and usually lasts a several minutes depending on the ramp rate, though usually not 30. A Wingate test is indeed an all out effort for 30 seconds and is used to determine peak anaerobic power, anaerobic capacity, and anaerobic fatigue. It should be noted that peak anaerobic power is the highest power over a 3-5 second interval. http://www.sport-fitness-advisor.com/wingate-test.html


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

To put this into perspective, the typical sprint speeds of guys like Petacchi is about 41-43mph. The pros rarely sprint above 44 at all.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*yes*



divve said:


> To put this into perspective, the typical sprint speeds of guys like Petacchi is about 41-43mph. The pros rarely sprint above 44 at all.



I recall that as well. In fact, I recall some of the top track sprinters in the world barely making those speeds as well. In fact, I recall a 30+ time National Track , Olympic Track and World Track Champ hitting those speeds(yes, it was the same guy). BUT I am sure there are amateurs from planet Krypton who do this all the time...


----------



## SilasCL (Jun 14, 2004)

Isn't this all a bit silly?

This thread has been dug up from almost two years ago. No one is reading through the earlier argument, or they would feel no need to add on, as pretty much everything was hashed out between russ and asgelle.

Knowing that one of the main posters in this thread (russ) has since passed on, can't we also let this thread rest in peace.

Silas


----------



## Prick (Apr 14, 2005)

Spicoli said:


> I'm looking to buy a Shimano 7800 group and don't know whether to use a 11-23 or 12-23 cassette. I am a racer and always used a 12-23. Are there any advantages or disadvantages in either cassette or has anyone prefered one over the other?


I'm on 10-sp, and I use 12-23. I rarely need the 11T, and I like having the 18T on the 12-23. I'm in the mid range a lot more than I'm on the extremes of the cassette, so the 18 is much more useful.

YMMV.


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

Aside from sprinting, the pros do however often need/use the 11T in the final stages of a race for pulling a large group or the peloton at around 36 - 37mph. Riding alone a pro is pretty much maxed out in the 12 at about 34 - 34.5 for a 5 - 8K breakaway. That pretty much also explains why you'll never get away from the peloton unless they make a mistake or let you. No aero wheels will help you in that either...sorry for debunking those for normal racing as well


----------



## Prick (Apr 14, 2005)

divve said:


> Aside from sprinting, the pros do however often need/use the 11T in the final stages of a race for pulling a large group or the peloton at around 36 - 37mph.


Right. Well, it's not like I'm going to race or anything.


----------



## Cruzer2424 (Feb 8, 2005)

MR_GRUMPY said:


> One valid reason to use an 11 on a cassette to keep a straight chain line. If you are "damn fast" and ride in a 53 X 13, your chain line will be a little better off than if your cassette started with 12. If you slog along in a 53 X 15 or 16, you might be better off with a 12 as your big gear.
> I would never use an 11 in a crit., but if you had a windy road race where you had a tail wind sprint, an 11 could come in handy in a sprint that STARTS at 37-38 mph.



Excuse my ignorance... but why is keeping a straight chain line better than not?


----------



## alienator (Jun 11, 2004)

Cruzer2424 said:


> Excuse my ignorance... but why is keeping a straight chain line better than not?


If the chain line is straight, then tension is directed down the centerline of the chain, the way it was designed. If the chain isn't straight, then some component of tension is directed through the side plates, perpendicular to the chain centerline. This increases wear and the risk for chain failure.


----------



## Al1943 (Jun 23, 2003)

If you're keeping score, my vote is for the 12-23 (or bigger if needed).

Al


----------



## Cruzer2424 (Feb 8, 2005)

alienator said:


> If the chain line is straight, then tension is directed down the centerline of the chain, the way it was designed. If the chain isn't straight, then some component of tension is directed through the side plates, perpendicular to the chain centerline. This increases wear and the risk for chain failure.



Chain failure? Is it just me? I've never busted a chain like that... Thats about what was going through my head.... lol.

I guess I was looking for answer like "smoother shifting" or something. Oh well.


----------



## alienator (Jun 11, 2004)

Cruzer2424 said:


> Chain failure? Is it just me? I've never busted a chain like that... Thats about what was going through my head.... lol.
> 
> I guess I was looking for answer like "smoother shifting" or something. Oh well.


Chain failure is the bad chainline taken to an extreme. Increased chain wear/cassette wear is what you'll see w/ a bad chainline. That wear could be very small, maybe so small all you hear is just a little extra noise.


----------



## MarcD (May 27, 2005)

Ahh- all this crazy technical info getting thrown around 
I have two bikes- one with DA 10spd with a 12x23 combo the other with an 11x23. I hardly ever use the 11 so for that I would say I prefer the 12x23. But, I can say I have found it handy on occasion on long fast, straight downhills. Not that I was spinning out in the 12, but the 11 gave some extra room to grind out. I have used t in a few sprints when feeling extra strong.


----------



## Gnarly 928 (Nov 19, 2005)

*I use an 11/53.*



lyleseven said:


> russw19 said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry man, I wasn't trying to upset you which is why I pulled it. I was only trying to give advice to help someone go faster... that's it. I stand by what I said, but the manner in which it was said was sure to be misinterprated and inflammatory.
> ...


----------

