Depends on your goals...I live in Illinois so a 53/39 - 11-25 is pretty much fine here. When I am in LP I put on a 12-29 but leave the crank. If I was to move to LP or to a state with more mountains I would go CT as I have more options with simple wheel swaps for alternate gearing more in the range I would want (meaning low range for better spinning) than I would get with the massive swings that happen with going from 11-25 to a 12-29 and the large cog to cog spans that are there. At LP I always feel like I need a gear that is not there, the 19 I think. Nothing tunes your shifting quite like a straight block.

Oh, and I have never heard of a higher gear inch with a CT over the standard 53/39 setup that is so common today.

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

I've switched to compact and love it. The main advantage over standard is that I can run a tighter rear cassette.

There are a bunch of advantages over standard cranks.
1) Better bottom end
2) Tighter gear grouping

Why would you want tighter gear grouping? You don't have to hunt for an appropriate gear for the effort you want to go. I found with the standard I was often hunting for gears the gear I was in was either just a bit too tough or too easy. But with the compact I haven't lost any speed but now I can find the right gear to be in.

I firmly believe that most triathletes should be using compact (unless you live in FLA) but the reason that most don't is ego pure and simple.

---

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."

Hunter S. Thompson (1937-2005)

Or money, why spend money buying a new set of cranks for a bike that came with standards from the get go. I know I'm in that position and I have no interest in dropping a couple hundred on a new set of cranks so I'll deal with the standard and 11-28 cassette that my bike came with.

for what it is worth...I live in an area with lots of rolling and steep hills...switched to a compact crank on my tri bike and love it. Better gears on hills, better selection on flats / rollers.

I got both , compact on my race bike and on training bike a standard with a 54 tooth FSA TT ring. have not been on the traing bike much since aug. (been riding race bike or spin bike.) Did a 30 minute ride on the training bike w/big ring today after a 10.70 mile run. It felt fat I mean real fast having the 54 t up there. Think the the compact leaves you fresher for the run after though.

---

__________________________________________________
Official Polar Ambassador
http://www.google.com/...P7RiWyEVwpunlsc2JtQQ

I look at it from the standpoint of watts/kilo at FTP. The vast majority of riders are far better on a compact until they are right around 4.0 watts/kilo or even a bit higher. You will run out of gears on any significant climb with a standard crank if you can't put out that power. My TT bike came with a standard and I changed it out to a compact right away. Best choice I made. Like others have said, it's nice to have tightly spaced gears. My FTP at that point was hmmm... about 3.0 watts/kilo. Several years of purposeful training and I could feel myself getting into the biggest gears more and more and eventually I reached the point where I would run out of gears on flats with the wind at my back. Keepinmind that is still 30+ mph even with a 50 tooth front. Another year and I was no longer using the smallest gears to climb anymore.

I switched over to standard when I was about 4.2 watts/kilo and it was immediately noticeable that this gearing was now more approporiate to my power levels. And I still ran out of gears on a 7 mile climb (State Champ hillclimb TT up Wintergreen Mtn) averaging for the ride 4.5 watts/kilo. 39-23 was the smallest gear for that climb with grades exceeding 10% for some stretches and a couple very steep hundred yard pitches.

This year I will go up it closer to 5 watts/kilo and I think I will be perfect, though I may be running a 12-28 Sram red cassestte just for insurance. My standard is a Sram red 12-23. Those two cassettes with the appropriate front rings are all I need. Pushing 340 watts on the flats at 28-29 mph I still haven't found myself wishing for an 11 tooth yet, though I may add that option simply for a cleaner chainline for some TTs this year.

The point being that the vast majority of bike riders are way overgeared, 95% of us belong on compact cranks. Tour riders are on 53-39 and in the range of 5.5 - 6.0 or more watts per kilo. 39-23 is the climbing gear for these guys. Consider probably 80% of all riders, triathletes and roadies combined are somewhere in the 2.5 - 3.5 range and what kind of cranks do you think you should be running now? I would take an honest look at you power to weight, the demands of your key events and your everyday riding habits. I think the answer for you will be clear once you do this.

You can probably sell what you have and go to a compact for very little net expenditure if you are smart about it. I rolled through 4 different cranks lengths last year, tinkering about. Alll SRAM rival. Next expenditure after settling on 165's was like 50 bucks after buying cheap used and selling on Ebay.

Thanks guys. The reason i asked the question was two fold - first was because of money (i have little) and second was just to learn more.

I've searched a lot on the forum and I think I am going to go with a compact set up - a 48/34 up front and a 12/25 in back. I think this will really tighten up the gearing and ensure I am never wishing for that missing gear. I can always switch out to the 50 on the big ring if I feel like I am spinning out.

I live in Atlanta, so we have a lot of rolling hills. I never spin out on my 53 ring and always feel like there are a set of gears I am missing. Plus this will help me keep my cadence high.

I am not a good cyclist. It's one of my goals for this year.

---

___________

use this:

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/

or this:

http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...rch_string=;#2638117

you can get a higher top gear by changing the cassette as well. As the Sheldon Brown tool shows z 53x39 set-up with a 12-21 block gets you 116.1 inches at the top and 66.3 at the bottom. if you change to a 50x36 and an 11-21 you get a much lower low gear (45.1 inches) but you also get a bit bigger top gear (119.5 inches.

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

Let's get something straight. I do not need a bigger top end.

---

___________

understood - just thought I'd clarify because you mentioned it in your first post and may have been throw by Chip's reply re. never having heard about that being possible

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

If all you switch is the crank - it is impossible to get a higher gear inch going to CT. You would have to also get an 11T cog and not have had an 11 prior for the equasion - but that was not the OP's question it was crank OR cogset swap ;-)

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

I asked myself the same question last year. I decided it was cheaper and easier to just change the cassette. I went from a 25 to a 27 and noticed a difference immediatly. I didn't get dropped on hills anymore and had a little left at the top end. The total cost was under 100.00 (used Ultegra on Ebay) including a new chain. I am still considering compact but the cost of the equipment plus install is currently prohibitive.

I can't possibly add any more to the technical discussion (Dave Luscan, as a new "wattage" devotee you give me inspiration!). I can however tell you what the practical implications of switching to compacts have been for me.

I ride in a very hilly area, with very few flats, and a lot of 1/4 mile long steep hills as well as longer/more shallow climbs. We are never on flat ground for very long. I switched to a 50/34 / 11/23 combo a few years ago. I immediately loved it as I could stay in the big ring for nearly all of my riding, with a decent cadence. It is SO nice to not have to shift from big ring/small ring, even most of my climbing other than long steep stuff can be done in the big ring. 2 years ago I moved to an 11-27 because I was going on a mountain tour. That proved even nicer! The gigantic range of riding options possible while still in the big ring is really sweet. I never moved back to the 11-23 thereafter. I can actually ride in the entire stack in the big ring, but the cross chain issue on the inside most makes me get in the small ring for that gear only.

I have been riding a fixed gear bike for the past 4 months or so with a 48/18. That has me of course standing on all of the hills. It has taught me, however, that I can push a bigger gear than I previously thought, and that in fact I get over the hills more quickly and with less exhaustion by going over them faster in big gears. (THAT WAS A HUGE SURPRISE and contradictory to what we're usually told) When I move back to the road bike, I wind up in bigger gears now on the climbs, making the compact 50 big ring even more useful. I can't see a reason I would ever move to standard cranks again unless I somehow wind up in the 5w/kg. class of big Dave. I think I could do that by cutting off my arms.

If for no other reason than staying in the big ring most of the time, I'd go with compacts just for that. It is really nice.

---

--------------
Elivis needs boats.

One advantage for me that does not seem to have been mentioned here was that, when I went to a compact, I was able to stay in the big ring longer. That by itself is, of course, not very useful but solved a problem for me in which I would find myself too often having to shift between big and small right with a 12-25 cassette.

With the compact (and an 11-26 cassette), I am able to ride very long portions of most courses in the big ring, not needing to switch down except when things really kick up. That really helped me.

I hated spending the extra money on cranks too but an 11-28 cassette with standard cranks was not the solution for me. Too much room between gears and it wasn't even recommended for my derailleur anyway.

When in the 34/25 isn't walking faster?

Michael