# How hard is it to pull 53 11 12 gearing all the time.



## Moretorque (Nov 25, 2013)

I am curious to how strong your legs have to be to pull 53 12 or 11 gearing like in single speed if you are in a fairly flat area but able to pull it in like slight grades like going up parking garage ramps and still not have to down shift. Does it take real strong legs or is that common? Thanks for any input. Obviously 12 is easier than 11. I am going to 53 12, I am at 46 11 right now.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

Moretorque said:


> I am curious to how strong your legs have to be to pull 53 12 or 11 gearing like in single speed if you are in a fairly flat area but able to pull it in like slight grades like going up parking garage ramps and still not have to down shift. Does it take real strong legs or is that common? Thanks for any input. Obviously 12 is easier than 11. I am going to 53 12, I am at 46 11 right now.


It depends on how fast you want to pedal ... 

At 50 RPM you will be going 17-19 mph
At 80 RPM you will be going 30-32 mph
At 100 RPM you will be going 36-39 mph

On flat ground with a good tailwind ... 80 RPM is pretty doable ... with no wind, I'm doubting you will hold it very long. Going up any inclines and unless you are "UBER" strong, forget about it.

Bikes have gears for a reason! Even on the track where they don't have to worry about wind, hills, etc. they don't run gearing close to that.

When I ran a single speed I ran 46x17 and it was good for most conditions up to about 30 mph for short periods of time and sprints to 36 mph ... but for general road riding purposes, I wouldn't go beyond that.

With that said, I went back to a geared bike because riding a single speed was both boring and a pain when not in a group ... bringing gears back made riding much, much better.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Moretorque said:


> I am curious to how strong your legs have to be to pull 53 12 or 11 gearing like in single speed if you are in a fairly flat area but able to pull it in like slight grades like going up parking garage ramps and still not have to down shift. Does it take real strong legs or is that common? Thanks for any input. Obviously 12 is easier than 11. I am going to 53 12, I am at 46 11 right now.


Heck if PeeWee Herman can do it, I'm sure you can. He can barely get up out of his special chairy -

The Pee-Wee Herman Show: You're my special chair - YouTube


----------



## Ali Kaplan (Jan 8, 2013)

50-12 not much different from 46-11,just %5.You can calculate with this site;
BikeCalc.com - Speed at all Cadences for any Gear and Wheel


----------



## Moretorque (Nov 25, 2013)

Ali Kaplan said:


> 50-12 not much different from 46-11,just %5.You can calculate with this site;
> BikeCalc.com - Speed at all Cadences for any Gear and Wheel


 Thanks, is it bad for your knees? I pull 46 11, so what you are saying is there is no need to go any taller than that and I should work on spinning more. I have really big boned legs and pulling this type of gearing is no problem for me but I do not ride over 20 to 25 miles at a time.
Am I asking for leg problems? Thanks for the help. My legs are real long and do not spin alot but make a lot of torque. Maybe 200 mm cranks?


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Why do you want to switch?


----------



## JCavilia (Sep 12, 2005)

Local Hero said:


> Why do you want to switch?


And why do you ride in 46x11 now? I understand you prefer to mash rather than spin, but that's a very tall gear to SS in. If you produce a fairly exceptional 300 watts at cruising speed, you're going about 23 mph, and turning only 70 rpm. Most likely you're usually slower than that. Most riders, even long-legged ones, find that inefficient and, yes, hard on the knees.


----------



## Moretorque (Nov 25, 2013)

JCavilia said:


> And why do you ride in 46x11 now? I understand you prefer to mash rather than spin, but that's a very tall gear to SS in. If you produce a fairly exceptional 300 watts at cruising speed, you're going about 23 mph, and turning only 70 rpm. Most likely you're usually slower than that. Most riders, even long-legged ones, find that inefficient and, yes, hard on the knees.


 I am putting road cranks on my MTB, I run a MTB set up as a road/off road trail cruiser do it all basher, The road crank I ordered has a 53 tooth ring. I just have no problem pulling that gearing so just wondering if I should go up, you all think I need to learn to spin more. Fare enough. What is the best crank for the money, I bought a used Shimano 7700 180mm just to get by but was thinking of getting a 7800 180 mm but they are pricey. Is there anything really good cheap in 180 mm? Thanks for the help!


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

Moretorque said:


> Am I asking for leg problems?


Yes. 

And 200 mm cranks are pretty much nuts too unless you are NBA height.

There is a reason that cyclists have determined optimum cadence to be around 90 RPM and it's not because they are too traditional to try what you're doing. We have over 100 years of experience telling us that mashing is a bad idea.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Moretorque said:


> The road crank I ordered has a 53 tooth ring.


Does the road crank you ordered also come with a 39T ring?


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

Best bang for buck in a 180mm crank is SRAM Rival.

If you're bent on mashing a big gear, at least get a bigger chainring and a bigger rear cog. Grinding an 11t wastes a lot of energy in friction. Pros don't ride 55t rings on TTs because they need a 55x11. They do it to stay in more efficient larger cogs (with smaller jumps in ratio between gears), more of the time.


----------



## Moretorque (Nov 25, 2013)

Local Hero said:


> Does the road crank you ordered also come with a 39T ring?


 It comes with a 42


----------



## Moretorque (Nov 25, 2013)

davidka said:


> Best bang for buck in a 180mm crank is SRAM Rival.
> 
> If you're bent on mashing a big gear, at least get a bigger chainring and a bigger rear cog. Grinding an 11t wastes a lot of energy in friction. Pros don't ride 55t rings on TTs because they need a 55x11. They do it to stay in more efficient larger cogs (with smaller jumps in ratio between gears), more of the time.


 Thanks, that is what I thought, I will run 53 12. How do the 7700 compare to the sram ?


----------



## Moretorque (Nov 25, 2013)

Kerry Irons said:


> Yes.
> 
> And 200 mm cranks are pretty much nuts too unless you are NBA height.
> 
> There is a reason that cyclists have determined optimum cadence to be around 90 RPM and it's not because they are too traditional to try what you're doing. We have over 100 years of experience telling us that mashing is a bad idea.


 My legs are NBA height. Zinn promotes the 200 mm cranks. I am 77 inches tall but my legs are unusually long.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

I used to ride at really low cadence and spent a lot of time in a 50x12. Didn't take me too long to wear out the 12 cog. It was Campy, so I could replace the cog without havnig to replace the entire cassette. Not worth it.


----------



## RaptorTC (Jul 20, 2012)

I just don't understand why you are so fixated on running such a tall gear. Unless you are riding around everywhere at like 30mph then your cadence is too low and its taking a toll on your knees. And if you are riding around at 30 then you need to hang up that singlespeed and go get yourself a pro contract.


----------



## Moretorque (Nov 25, 2013)

RaptorTC said:


> I just don't understand why you are so fixated on running such a tall gear. Unless you are riding around everywhere at like 30mph then your cadence is too low and its taking a toll on your knees. And if you are riding around at 30 then you need to hang up that singlespeed and go get yourself a pro contract.


 That is what I am doing for the most part, I am getting fairly fast and tall gears just feel right to me, my legs do not complain. My legs make a lot of torque and do better just changing the gear rather than my cadence. My legs are like my Cr 500, they have no top end so you have to change the cassette to get them to go. When I spin all it does is wear me out faster. I am much more effective torqueing. The reason I am here posting is to get a feel to see if there are others who are like me. I am a very unusual build and it equates to a different standard I guess. Thanks for any help.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

Im not sure why you want to do this, but its do able. My wife use to ride for hours at a time in her 53-12 to build leg strength, she did this mostly on flat roads at the beach but she did up some bridges. I use to do the same thing in my 53-15 doing repeats up Hawk hill north of San Francisco not sure what my cadence was but it was really low. Aside from strength drills this its sort of pointless tho.


----------



## Moretorque (Nov 25, 2013)

Not everybody is the same, Sanfransisco there would be no way for me to ride like this. Fl is flat, I am getting to the point where I can accelerate up parking garages with this gearing so I can make it work, I will see if it starts to bother my old knees. Like I posted spinning does not work for me, just wondering if there were others.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

Moretorque said:


> Not everybody is the same, Sanfransisco there would be no way for me to ride like this. Fl is flat, I am getting to the point where I can accelerate up parking garages with this gearing so I can make it work, I will see if it starts to bother my old knees. Like I posted spinning does not work for me, just wondering if there were others.


Spinning does not work for you because you have chosen not to develop that skill. New riders nearly always default to mashing, often saying that they want to feel the force they're putting into the pedals. 

It is NOT an accident that all skilled riders develop a cadence in the range of 90. Those who choose not to develop the skills of cycling are ignoring over 100 years of accumulated wisdom regarding cadence and the associated ability to ride long distances, recover quickly, accelerate quickly, etc.


----------



## Moretorque (Nov 25, 2013)

I will figure out what my cadence is and work from there. Thanks.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

Moretorque said:


> Thanks, that is what I thought, I will run 53 12. How do the 7700 compare to the sram ?


A Shimano 7700 is a nicer, lighter crank but unless you find a really good deal on a used one, they're still a good bit more expensive than a SRAM Rival.

FWIW, there are plausible, medical reasons to learn to pedal at a higher cadence/lower load. Your muscles are less loaded, for shorter intervals. This means they circulate blood better, oxygenating your muscles more effectively.


----------



## serious (May 2, 2006)

More torque: *How hard is it to pull 53 11 12 gearing all the time.*

It is not hard if you putz around flat terrain and "climb" the odd parking ramp.  I am still wondering if this is a joke or a serious question.


----------



## mikerp (Jul 24, 2011)

Kerry Irons said:


> Spinning does not work for you because you have chosen not to develop that skill. New riders nearly always default to mashing, often saying that they want to feel the force they're putting into the pedals.
> 
> It is NOT an accident that all skilled riders develop a cadence in the range of 90. Those who choose not to develop the skills of cycling are ignoring over 100 years of accumulated wisdom regarding cadence and the associated ability to ride long distances, recover quickly, accelerate quickly, etc.


LOL,
Kerry the easiest way for someone to learn the lesson is for them to be in a fast moving group with surges, those that spin keep up, those that don't get dropped.


----------

