I use 11-30 with my road bike because we have some steep hills in PDX, while I use 11-28 on my tri bike because very few hills, if any, in triathlon require anything more

---

808 > NYC > PDX > YVR
2024 Races: Taupo

Triathlon

• Stayin' alive with 11-25
• flat and fast is 11-23
• mountains is 11-28
• Verve Infocranks 52-36 , 155mm length

Road Bike

• Crank: Shimano 105 R7000, 50/34 (compact), 172.5mm length
• Cassette: Shimano 105 R7000, 11-30, 11 speed

It depends on

• the type of terrain you live in,
• how strong of a rider you are
• whether you like to spin fast or not.
• the size of your crank.
• If you like prefer small gear jumps or don't mind large ones.

In other words, too many variables.

But if you're just taking a poll, I ride on mostly rolling terrain and am not particularly strong. I run 50-36 up front and 12-28 in back. I find 36x28 is enough for most climbs and 50x12 is big enough for most downhills. I occasionally spin out on long steep downs but it's worth it to have the 16-tooth cog that I'd be missing with 11-28

My Cervelo came with a 12-25 that I use for everything. It does get tough when it's a 20% incline (!!) but that'll kill you no matter what your gearing is. On anything less than 15%, it's no problem for me. I forgot what the front was though.

I use all the gears on this setup, regularly all the time as well, so no wasted gears.

12-25 / 53-39 up front. I could probably use a 12-28 (which was a mountain bike cassette when I started).

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

Gearing totally depends on your: strength, preferred cadence, and terrain.

When I trained in Ohio (flats with short rollers), and 11-23 was fine (with a 52/42 front). Many of us even considered taking the inner ring off to save weight. Many guys ran an 11-19 "corncob."

Now living in California (rolling with lots of long, steep climbs) I run an 11-28 (with a 50/34 crank).

These days I'd say an 11-28 or 11-30 is standard issue for many road bikes, but it may not be enough for hilly areas/weaker riders, or not closely spaced enough for strong riders in places like FL. Gearing has gotten slacker over the years as the # of gears has increased (so you can have a wider range w/o big jumps) and higher cadence climbing has come into style (guys like Lemond climbed at 70-74rpm, not 90-100).

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

Why would 20% be problematic even when your gearing is adequate? On chunky gravel, sure, it can be a challenge to power through nasty spots. But I'm assuming we're talking about pavement here.

Appreciate all the information. I think that I am going to at least try an 11-28 and maybe even go 50-36 up front. The bike is definitely my weakness but here in Iowa there are not a lot of long climbs so this might be something to try. I try and ride around 85-90rpm and I think that would still be in that gearing range for me. Trial and error I guess.

What gearing would you find optimal for 20%? I'm sure it exists, but is realistic to use outside superspecialized situations?

11-28 with 52-36 crank. Same on all my road and TT bikes.

Depends on the rider and the intended intensity.

But I'd note that 20% only requires a ~3/4 reduction in gearing compared with 15%. You wrote that you were "fine" on a 12-25 on 15%. So for example, per your own numbers, you should be "fine" on a 20% gradient if you swapped your 12-25 cassette out for one that had a 33T or 34T big cog, even without changing your rings. And 11-34 cassettes are hardly "superspecialized" in 2020, they're common and explicitly supported by current Shimano mid-cage road derailleurs.

For many riders, sustained 20% gradients will require lower gears than are officially supported on most "road" groupsets. But this can be bypassed by changing to subcompact cranksets, and/or by just using a bigger cassette than the rear derailleur can supposedly take. These sorts of solutions are commonly employed by people who do mountainous gravel riding, for instance.

This is a pointless debate, but I'll venture to say that climbing a sustained 20% even with 11-34 will still be quite challenging for the typical AGer.

At 20-22%, it takes me 300 watts just to stay moving at a crawl. Going any slower is barely possible, and it'll definitely suck.

This. At 20%, I can’t get below 300W and still be moving. Gearing is pretty much irrelevant above 20%. My easiest cassette is 11-28 that I only use when I have a ride with sustained climbs above 10%.

I just checked my log for the numbers. There's a climb in Vermont I ride once or twice a year that averages 20% for over a mile. going as hard as I can I've averaged around 270 watts going up it. But if I were to hold back and go easier I think it would be less. I usually bring 34x30 as my easy gear for that ride and my average cadence usually comes out to around 50 rpm for it.

A 34 certainly buys you higher cadence if you want it, but I think most people can manage at 50 RPM

I really don't understand what you two mean by this. There's no such thing as a gradient requiring a certain amount of power in order to keep moving forward. No matter how steep the gradient, any power at all implies forward motion.

It's possible for your gearing to demand a high effort in order to keep the cranks turning fast enough to keep the torque-vs-cadence balance of your pedaling in a reasonable range. But that's explicitly a gearing issue, not an issue irrespective of gearing.

I've sometimes heard people claim that balance becomes an issue climbing at very low speeds. But in my experience, this issue rarely seems to actually manifest itself. Riding at walking speeds on flat ground can be tricky because you're not able to use the reciprocating roll of pedaling form against drivetrain resistance as a balance mechanism. But when you're riding uphill and pedaling normally, on a firm non-technical surface, even speeds considerably less than 3mph aren't especially difficult for most people.

It maybe depends on your expectations and what "manage" means. 50rpm is far below most people's self-selected cadence even on steep climbs, and when it's the average over a lengthy stretch, it's likely imposing a significant cost in power output and fatigue. But doable? Sure.

50/34 with 12-25 when flat and 12-29 when hilly.

Road Bike disc 11 speed 11-25 SRAM Red
Road bike aero rim brake 10 speed Red 11-23
Cyclocross/gravel bike 10 speed Red 11-25
Fat bike 12 speed 10-50.

They are saying it would take 300 watts to ride at a rate where the bike can still stand up. I don't think many people can ride up a hill at .2 mph and not put a foot down.

What's the slowest you are capable of riding and still stay up? 2 mph?

The last time I went up Brasstown Bald in the Georgia Mountains I tried to go straight up "the wall" with a 34 chainring/36 cog on the cassette, on 650c wheels and wasn't strong enough to do it, and that's a lot of gear. At 300 watts I couldn't keep the bike moving forward at a rate I could handle so I weaved across the road.

https://pjammcycling.com/...600.Brasstown%20Bald middle of the page is the profile and the steepest grade is 15 to 18%

https://pjammcycling.com/...600.Brasstown%20Bald

There is no correct answer for everyone.
It's a matter of individual circumstances and preferences.
If you don't know what you want, then in the absence of better info the combo you've got is more or less what I would have suggested. It's perfectly good combo to allow most riders to maintain a reasonable cadence on a variety of terrains at a variety of intensities.
No one can give you more guidance than that without knowing your circumstances and preferences.
What terrain do you ride on?
How strong a rider are you?
Do you like to maintain high cadence or happy to grind away at low cadences on climbs?
Is it an 11 speed groupset or something else?
These are the fundamental questions, there are others!

I ride both flat and mountainous routes on both my road and tri bike. But it's mostly the road bike in the mountains.
I don't tend to use a very high cadence compared to most. I want the ability to do half hour long climbs at 6%+ without having to ride at threshold, especially on the road bike.
My setups are both 11 speed and as follows:

Tri bike
Chainrings: 36/52
Cassette: Default is 11-28, I'll change to 12-25 for flat races or time trials.

Road bike
Chainrings: 34/50
Cassette: Anything from 11-28 to 11-32.

I used to use 11-28 as default on the road bike but I've had 11-32 on there for a long time now having found no real to change it after putting it on for a long day of alpine climbing. I've an 11-30 ready to go on with a new chain shortly. The chain is due a change and the cassette has ~15,000km on it. I'd be fine with 11-28 or 11-32, but I've gotten used to having that really nice steep climbing gear available, while also being a little irritated with the 4th sprocket gap on the 11-32 (14T to 16T). the 11-30 seems a good compromise as it doesn't change to 2T gaps until 15T-17T so it's identical to 11-28 except for the largest 3 sprockets.

How common are 20% grades? I have never ridden up anything that steep in my life.

Oh, and gear ratio's have nothing to do with the power requirements to ride at a given speed. They affect the force at the pedals, not the power.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

"How common are 20% grades? I have never ridden up anything that steep in my life."

"Oh, and gear ratio's have nothing to do with the power requirements to ride at a given speed. They affect the force at the pedals, not the power."


Not very common so when I know I'm going to be doing something close I bring the gear for the job.

Yes, sure but I cannot produce 300 watts at 20 rpm for more than a few seconds.

Going uphill at Xterra Champs in Maui I was pedaling 50 rpm with a 32/46 because it was so steep, because of that I didn't make it up the climbs without putting a foot down. Had I been running a 30/50 like a lot of others had, I would have been spinning 10 rpm faster and possible making it uphill without stopping.

The big issue that I find is that in a mountain bike scenario, it's typically fine in the harder gear at 50 rpm (other than the quads screaming at you to stop, of course), but it's way easier for terrain features to stop you because you can't pedal through the low power zones of the pedal stroke as easily. I never have an issue when the cranks are level, its at TDC. That really applies to any slow speed sections, whether flat or climbing.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

11-28

My setup is virtually identical to this for triathlon and road.

Triathlon, my only difference is I'll go 11-30, 11-32, or 14-32 (cassette mash-up) for mountains. I'm 94kg and train recreationally ;)

For road, I have 53-39 up front because it's what came on my bike at purchase. Same 172.5 cranks. I've made up for the loss of climbing range with an 11-32 (11sp) cassette.

---

Dr. Alex Harrison | Founder & CEO | Sport Physiology & Performance PhD
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📱 Check out our app → Saturday: Pro Fuel & Hydration, a performance nutrition coach in your pocket.
Join us on YouTube → Saturday Morning | Ride & Run Faster and our growing Saturday User Hub

For a road bike i'd agree thats pretty optimal. For tri/tt I'd go for an 11-25

Haven't used one in a while though
[I DID recently find a boxful of mixtapes in the basement]

---

"What's your claim?" - Ben Gravy
"Your best work is the work you're excited about" - Rick Rubin

I wouldn't swap out a 52 for a 50 unless you're going to change the small ring too. It's probably cheaper to buy both an 11-28 and a 12-25. Then replace the 11 and 12 in the 11-28 cassette with the 12 and 16 in the 12-25 cassette. You'll still get the range, but you'll have smaller jumps. (I'm assuming you're on 11 speed).

My gear ranges for mostly rolling hills with a few sustained climbs:

Allroad/Gravel bike: 46/33 with 10-33 or 10-36 (pending wheelset)
Tri: 48/35 with 10-28 (use to be 52/36 with 11-30 or 11-25 depending on course)
Road: 52/36 with 11-32

11-28 in hilly races. 12-25 for flat races. Takes 5 minutes to swap out.

Cyclists get panicky when the cadence drops too low. I've had a few experiences when I thought I was going to fall over but eventually, at some really low cadence I didn't enjoy at all (like 30s and 40s), I hit an equilibrium and it became manageable; I could at least keep going in a straight line and temper my power. But only when I didn't overdo the lower part of the climb. If you blow a gasket, it doesn't matter how low a cadence you could otherwise handle.

When I started riding (with a strong running background), I bought a Cervelo tri bike that came with 53/39 and 11/23 cassette. I never knew those could be changed and just dealt with it.. if it was hard then just suck it up.

Then I signed up for St. Croix 70.3 which I think has like 23% the "the Beast"... their website strongly encouraged an 11/26 at least unless you were a pro. That's when the light dawned I had options - I swapped it out and it was like a whole new world out there. Nowadays I mostly ride my road bike with a compact crank and I love my granny gears! (Of course I'm also 15 years older than when I bought that bike!)

I chose 52/36 chainrings when I upgraded the groupset on my road bike. I went with a Shimano 11-30 cassette at first.

Living in Minnesota, I don't face a lot of extended climbs. There are some short steep ones not far from me. In general, I've basically never used the 11t. I dislike the 15-17 jump, and I frequently wish for a 16t. It's not so bad, but I find the 21-24 jump to be a bit large also. So, I would like a 12-28 cassette. The interesting thing is that with Shimano, you can take a 12-25 cassette, extract the 12-17 cogs, and mate those to the 19-28 cogs from an 11-28 cassette.

I chose 52/36 up front because it was a bit closer to the 53/39 I was coming from and because I expected the bigger rings to translate to slightly lower chain friction. I'd consider a 50/34 in the future, but in that case I think I'd be more inclined to get an 11t small cog, just in case.

Echoing a few comments above, I rarely use my 11t cog. IMHO, that is a waste of realestate. My perfect cassette would be a 12-23 for flat courses and a 12-25 for hillier courses.

My primary cassette is a 11-23, and my occasional use cassette is 11-25. I have only raced on a 11-28 once, and that was the WC in Nice. If I could ditch the 11 tooth across the board, I would be a happy camper.

Why not get the 12-28 cassette then? You don't have to mix two cassettes to get it. The 12-28 range is s a standard Shimano cassette - at least for 11 speed

The number of times you'll miss the 11-tooth ring absolutely pales in comparison to the number of times you'll miss that 16. And I only run a 50 up front.

.2mph on a 20% gradient for 300W would imply that you weigh around 3500lbs, though.


I'm not entirely sure, since I haven't run into the limit on smooth firm surfaces before. I've certainly had trouble on rough off-paved stuff, but there's more to that than just the gradient.

If my limit were 2mph, I'd note that that's in the 2.2-ish W/kg ballpark for someone riding a 20% gradient on a road bike. It's unlikely to require 300W unless a rider weighs more than 300lbs. For a 180lb rider on a 20lb bike, it's in the ~175W neighborhood.


Would you have shifted to a lower gear if you'd had one, though? If the answer is yes, then I'm not sure that your conclusion is valid.

When your gearing is bottomed out, speed is necessary to balance not just because it directly aids balance, but also because when you're torque-limited, speed (being proportional to cadence) is necessary to power production. That is, when your gearing is bottomed out, dropping your speed makes it more difficult to produce enough torque to maintain a given power, and thus, maintain speed. A nasty feedback loop.

So the complicated question becomes: was 300W your lower balance limit because you actually couldn't balance at speeds lower than what you achieved at 300W, or was 300W your lower balance limit because 300W was the minimum power that could be sustained on those gradients at the torque delivery that your legs can deal with? Zigzagging can help with both the former and the latter due to increasing speeds, but it can further help with the latter by effectively "lowering" your gearing and making it easier to provide power.

That was an exaggeration I thought was obvious

So you don't know how slow you can effectively ride

4.5mph at 20% for a 75 Kg rider+bike is 300 watts, again an exaggeration on my part, my fault

Don't know what conclusion you're referring to, if it was about weaving across the road, you should try riding 20% straight up for 10 min. If you don't have an FTP of 5W/Kg (which you may have) you aren't going straight up

Yes, that's the point

Your last statement doesn't make much sense to me without considering someone riding with a cadence of 50-55 rpm, which is what the posts from exxxviii and lightheir were all about (300 watts to keep moving)

I believe the 12-28 is only offered in Dura Ace. Shimano’s own page for its Ultegra cassettes lists 12-25, 11-25, -28, -30, and -32. I would expect the ti cogs to wear way too fast, plus it’s actually cheaper to buy two separate Ultegra cassettes as far as I can see.

^This.

My hunch is that HTupolev does not have much experience riding very steep grades. My "300W" was a little hyperbole, but not much. I am a fairly powerful 80kg rider, and I recall being around 5 MPH on >20% grades and at or above 300W.

The other key thing behind my "gearing is irrelevant" comment is that at >20%, low speed, and low cadence, going from a 28, to a 30, to a 32 cog only changes your cadence by around 5 RPM when you are down in the sub-60 range. At that point, as you said, you are not going straight up, and the gearing won't solve that.

That's a bummer. I never realized that.

Shimano's cassette choices (i.e. which ones to make in which combinations) have always perplexed me.

With my 52-36 rings:
12-25 for general training
11-23 for racing on a flat course (e.g. Steelhead)
11-25 for racing a rolling course (e.g. IMWI)

I love the 52-36 with 11-30 cassette combo on the road buke- the range is absolutely fantastic! Sure I don't spend much time in the 30, but any time I hit a sustained grade of 10%+, I am sure glad that I do have it. If you're racing, this also allows you to stay in the big ring on short punchy climbs. I don't live too far from the blue ridge mountains and while I don't need the 30 on most of the climbs, I would rather have the extra gear than be stuck with only a 28 when my legs are fried.

To this last point, one of the dumbest things I've ever done is Everest on a climb with .6 miles at 12% avg (15% max). My 36-30 was NOT low enough for third quartile of the ride- I was grinding away at 50rpm using my whole body. My back hurt hurt than anything the next day. I really wish I had a 50-34 with an 11-32 or an 11-34 that day.

On my TT bike, I have a 55-42 Q rings with 11-28 on the training wheels and 11-25 on the disc. That is the perfect gearing for me, especially because I tend to ride at ~80-85 cadence on long distance tris. I previously had a 53-39 and found that I was spinning out or spending a lot of time in the 11-13 (I live in an area with a lot of rolling hills). It's not a massive difference, but I do think the Q rings help me to pedal more smoothly in the TT position, especially when going uphill at lower cadences. I would be comfortable racing the 11-25 on any races with sustained climbs up to 6%, and the 11-28 on sustained climbs up to 8% before I'd start looking for other gearing options.

12-25 on all road wheelsets. Bad that Campagnolo dosen’t have 13-25/26 11-speed Record cassette - would take it immediately. (Terrain is mostly flat with some occasional sharp few hundred meters hills).

Well no, because I haven't specifically tested my limit. I do know for sure that I can sustain <3mph without trouble, because that happens sometimes while riding mountainous gravel.


Assuming riding the steep 10-minute section at threshold, 5W/kg on a 20% gradient is going to land most cyclists at about 4.5mph. If I can balance just fine below 3mph on gravel, why do I need to go 4.5mph in order to ride straight up a 20% paved road? That doesn't make any sense.

Unfortunately I don't know of any stretches in my area that sustain 20% for a length that takes me 10 minutes to ride up. But on 20% stretches that I have ridden, I do know that I don't need to go anywhere near 4.5mph to stay balanced.

The steepest 1-mile stretch that I know of nearby averages about 16%. It's rutted gravel double-track, which makes staying upright trickier than on pavement, and it does have spots that get into the 20% ballpark. But my FTP is less than 4W/kg, and I do not need to put out a maximal effort to ride straight up that stretch.


Right. I'm examining the example of someone needing high power (i.e. 300W on 20% gradient), and suggesting that this is in part due to the gearing (and thus cadences) involved. This is in response to yourself and others suggesting that reduced gearing would not help.


Okay. As I explained here, my comments have not been assuming typical race gearing.

On my gravel bike, for instance, my lowest gear is around 19". For context, on a bicycle with 700x25 tires and a 34T small ring, that would take a big cog of around 47 teeth.