My beat-up old 8sp 105 reluctantly handled 56-42 on the rollers (I was experimenting) but I had to beat the crap out of it and shift to the outside of the rear cluster to get it up unless I was really moving. From this I would suggest that beat-up old 8sp 105 front derailleurs would be insufficient to handle this shift.

Maybe an old friction derailleur?

what you do on downhills is really a matter of personal preference. I don't pedal much over 35mph these days and will coast up to about 45. Depends a lot on the downhill.

Here is the chart I just made up on the 50/34, using an 11/21 9 speed cassette, taking out the obvious cross over and using 650 wheels and assum ing a cadence of 85rpms. For the sake of the gear inch formula I used 26 inches for wheel size.

50/11 = 118.2 inches, 30mph @ 85rpm's

50/12 = 108.3, 27.5mph

50/13 = 100, 25.4mph

50/14 = 92.9, 23.5mph

50/15 = 86.7, 22mph

50/16 = 81.3, 20.6mph

50/17 = 76.5, 19.4mph

34/13 = 68, 17.2mph

34/14 = 63.1, 16mph

34/15 = 58.9, 14.9mph

34/16 = 55.3, 14mph

34/17 = 52, 13.2mph

34/19 = 46.5, 11.8mph

34/21 = 42.1, 10.7mph

On downhills I usually spin out around 130 cadence which in this set up would put me still pedaling at 45.8mph. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not rushing out to replace my 56/42 on my tri bike, but I think it is worth considering.

---

Mike Plumb, TriPower MultiSports
Professional Running, Cycling and Multisport Coaching, F.I.S.T. Certified
http://www.tripower.org

heh heh. certainly we shall not hold packing a few extra lb's on against a guy. but, we have come full circle. in this doughnut loving triathlete my pointis made. for most of his riding time, home races, training, life in general out upon the open roads a 34 would be unused, too much trouble to shift properly, and would in fact LIMIT the number of usable gears he had available in a practiacal sense.

for that one week when he goes to LP he needs a 34.

OEM spec should not be based on raceday needs in a specific application for a once a year event - nor unusualy from the norm demanding locales - nor obtuse shifting patterns that you ned to be a 20 year riding veteran to grasp. thassit, out.

oh wait, one last thing - i'm doin MOO on a fix next time. whaddya think - 44X18 be OK ???

Re: What front derailleur would work with a 50/34? I think Ultegra and DA spec a max difference in chain rings of 14 teeth. Would they work with this gap of 16 teeth? I just don't know, and I don't know what would work. I would hate to spend a fortune on a new crank only to find it wouldn't shift.
-------------------------------------

Some while back Gerard (I think it was Gerard) had mentioned that Tyler was using a 36t inner ring in the big mountain stages so he could spin easier. I asked essentially the same question since a 52/36 is a 16t jump like the 50/34. His response was that the DA 9sp front der was designed to shift optimally with up to a 14t gap, but it will still shift OK up to a 16t gap. Not as smooth, but not too bad. I believe the Ultegra front der is designed to shift optimally with up to a 10t jump.

With all due respect -- why do you keep saying "why a 34?" It's a CLIMBING gear, that's why. Back to the math. I know from (painful) experience that 8 mph is plenty fast for an AG triathlete on a 6% grade of any length. I'm not a weak cyclist, but my "all-out" pace up a 2-mile hill of that grade is only 10 mph. So, let's say 8 mph in a triathlon.

A 39x23 is spun at 57 rpms up that hill at 8 mph (28" wheel+tire). A 34x23 is spun at 65 rpms. I'm gonna bet that we'd all rather go uphill at 65 rpms when confronted with a 6% climb.

Finally, you ask, "of what use is a 34 in fla,...?" Well, the only reason I'd want a 39 on flatland is IF I DIDN'T HAVE A 50. The 50 obviates the need for riding along in the 39! If the 34 just sits there gathering dust, so be it.

The 50 is practically a do-everything ring for the <150-175 watt athlete in flat terrain. What sucks about 53/39 is that NEITHER ring works in the flats. They both give you a crappy chainline, and you're constantly hunting for the right gear. The 53/39 for the typical AGr is an uphill OR downhill setup. It simply stinks on the flats.

I know from whence I speak, and I had some solid results last year on flat courses riding the whole thing in a 42. The 53 was too big, the 39 was too small. A 50 might be even better than the 42, because I could hold that ring on slight downhills through rolling terrain.

The vast majority of bikes ridden by AG triathletes are wildly over-geared.

Obvioulsy I don't get as concerned about chainline as you as I have no issues riding a 39x13 on a cassette that starts with a 12! :)

But my point about JRA gears is that a 34t coupled with a 11-21 cassette gives you almost exactly the same gears as a 39t coupled with a 12-25 cassette. So even if you're picky about chainline and only use the 5 biggest cogs, you'll still have the same usability of the small ring. Of course, this assumes you ride a 12-25 cassette with that 39t small ring. If you already ride an 11-21 with a 39t ring, I agree that a 34t won't be used much and I can see your argument.

So when would I use the 34t? Primarily for climbing. I'd probably also warmup in it and do recovery rides in it but other than that, I suspect I'd be on the big ring. You don't need to use the 34t all the time! :-)

The Ultegra has the same spec as Dura-ace. I run 14t difference with my Ultegra front der. I thought the spec was actually 15t max.




I just looked it up on Shimano's web site: Dura-ace, Ultegra, and 105 all spec. 50-56T for big chain ring with a 15T capacity. So it seems like 34/50 with a road double front der. would be the best option.

right bob. for riding around the 34 and the 39 are both useless in the larger cogs. too low. i will not ride crossed all the way over a 9 spd cassette. i am a singlespeeder and a fix ride and that is just plain Bad Mojo.

as mike has pointed out, there is a very nice spread when the 50x34 is used as a proper gear freak ( that is what we used to call them.....) would, theoretically, do.

and, as julian notes, the 34 is a climbing gear that sits getting dusty in florida, among many other states ( unless you do not mind riding crossed, i guess).

the problems are these - gearing issues are always tradeoffs.

1. in order to access and use the spread as mike has shown you NEED to know exactly where your chain is at all times. also, you have to make a "fiple" shift at a crucial time transioning onto hills. if you lose track of the chain you will be up shit crick as you go over the huge big/little spread.

2. with no overlap you must ride the order of gears as they come. overlap is redundant, but more forgiving and also gives you a little break now and again. this ease of use in overlap is not to be discouted. as i say, this whole notion is not a new innovation by any stretch - people were riding bikes and thinking about this stuff before mr empfield had a website, ya know. and yet, it has never caught on, but for gear head types- think there might be a reason? user friendliness - explain to a new rider, or an experienced very tired one how fabulous it is to have to KNOW precisely what cog he is in at the bottom of every hill else he spin madly, hit the wall, or make his bike go screech/grind. not an easy sell - nor is the bit about how when he spins out in the parking lot in his 34 how it actually all a part of greater good. no, this stuff has not caught on because it is too hard to do in the real world. if you want to be a freak about it all, then a true half step plus granny is really far better, anyway - 44x48x30, orfor tri maybe 46x50x32 say. i have built and ridden that - even at one time understood WHY, believe it or not. it was perfect in theory and it sucked in practice most horribly - lesson to the wise?

--please note, julian, that i am not saying 39x53 is the way to go. generally do not like 39 53, muhself. i am saying a 34 is too low for MOST PLACES, and no usable overlap is too hard to access for MOST PEOPLE. and so, while a good choice for the brevet riding ( did somebody say freak ???) gonzobob, it remains a poor choice for OEM spec, just as it has always been, even before tri-heads found it all these years later.

oh yeah - where are you gear freaks on the fixed gear for MOO thing?? can't a fellow get some advice 'round h'yar? 44x18? 41x17? what, do you reckon ????? :)

I have 40x17 now, which is too low for a "performance" century but good for a recreational, reasonably hilly one. I was thinking of going 41, or 42x17 and see what happens. I asked you about the toughest hill on the MOO course (too far from home for me to check it out), and I never got a straight answer!

'05, you're thinking? $10 I have the ugliest fixie on the rack.

Dre'

---

-----------
...

pah ! what does somebody from cali know about ugly!? :)

steepest hill, what did i say - something about the perfect little hill to shoot a potato gun over ??? i will stand by that. talkin steep and short. put it in the 23 if you are road riding and just stand up and over you go, or over THEY go as you fall off the back and by the time you mke it up they are already out of sight. dunno grade - we don't have hills in wisconsin so howinthehell do i know what a grade xxx% looks like? short and steep, man. on any fixie you will have to weave. maybe run that mofo or three, have to practice up the toeclip 'cross dismount!!

looks like i will not go 'round it again this year, but next year the wife will be training and i will be doing some different gearing checks on my POS fixie. see you at the helix in 05! lets get a bunch of SS/fix riders, say i. make it the Official Fixed Gear Iron Distance Tri-Geek Championship of the Universe. that is what i am talkin about.

"please note, julian, that i am not saying 39x53 is the way to go. generally do not like 39 53, muhself. i am saying a 34 is too low for MOST PLACES, and no usable overlap is too hard to access for MOST PEOPLE. and so, while a good choice for the brevet riding ( did somebody say freak ???) gonzobob, it remains a poor choice for OEM spec, just as it has always been, even before tri-heads found it all these years later. "

Which is precisely why TRIPLES RULE! Best of everything for everybody!

27 gears! No crossovers! Perfect chainlines! You simply need to know how to make those combo shifts. Our Playstation-fueled ambidextrous youth ought to find the adaptation a piece of cake.

Don't know who mentioned juniors having limited gears, but it's true (atleast in my country).

My highest (ie 'toughest') gear is 52-16. Teaches you to spin a high cadence if you wanna keep up in group rides with those old people spinning 53-12 on 40 rpm.

> pah ! what does somebody from cali know about ugly!? :)

Dunno ... I'm from Montreal.

Dre'

---

-----------
...

Julian, What type of triple do you have? What size is each? As I am interested in the new 50/34 or possibly a triple...

Thanks....

---

"You're guaranteed to miss 100% of the shots you never take" - Wayne Gretzky

Well, Lon Haldeman rode single-speed (freewheel, tho) for PBP. A 42x15 did it for him! I rode with him a bit during the PAC Tour in the mountains of southern France and would occasionally pop it in a 53x19 on the climbs just to see what he was pushin'. Yowsa!!! I did see that he often had two freewheels threaded on (or a body that accepted two cogs) and I thought I saw three on the day we went up Ventoux!

I think a 44x17 oughta do'er. That should limit the downhill spinning to 150rpm and keep the uphills from bogging below 40rpm :-)

alright gonzo - now we are movin in the durn right die-rection. SS vs fix, indeed. i mean, i got SS freewheels aplenty, i guess i'll hold that out as an option, particularly with that lon reference - he is and always has been The Man. :) still, coast ?? it's a race, innit? what is with "coast"? have to check that 44x17 out got a sweet TA 44 right here, in fact. whatsay, you in on the OSS/FGIDTGC of the U ?

Ultegra. 52/42/30. The Dura Ace triple comes with a 39 middle ring, which is just dumb. It defeats the whole point of the triple.

If you ride in the 18-22 mph range on long flat bits (and slower uphill, of course) the 42 is your best friend. The 30 is there for when it's a real hill of 4% or better. The 52 is for...well...I don't know what it's for, but it's on there just in case.

And don't think weaklings ride triples. I had a top 10% bike split in two tri's on that 42 ring. One flat course (40k) and one very hilly one (30k).

50/34 sounds pretty good to me. It would put me down in the 14T on flat races and a 34 would give me more climbing gear. Smaller front ring, smaller back cassette = less overall spinning weight for the climb.

A 53 is great if you love to push hard down a hill. In a road race were you are drafting that might be needed, in a tri, not really. I had a good 10 or so folks pass me on decents at WF this year. They put a massive 5-15 seconds into me at the base of the descents. I personal spin a bit down the hills, but like to recover a bit. It was not very long before I passed them back.

What I am trying to get across is, unless you are a guy that pushings a huge gear (I know there are a few) there is no need for the 52/53. Also most folks have enough problems pushing a 39 up a hill. I cannot count how many people I see climbing little 7% grades in there 39/23-27 that are standing up and not going very far. Tris, training just about anywhere (except a road race).

All I know is, I am getting a 50/36-34 on my P2K when I get it next month. I have three cycling teammates that are getting the same gear for there RR bikes.

A 34-36 standard on a tri bike, I can see that as a good thing. I would gather that 99% of the folks buying a tri bike race. So they would have an idea of what gear to be in. Plus us tri folks are not well known for our climbing ability. Just remember, sometimes it is faster to get off and run (yes, I did it at a RR).

Mike Plumb thank you for posting numbers. Saved me some time for typing them in for my teammates.

Off to bed for me, no IM, but a 160k ride tomorrow. No need for a 34 though.

---

Reverend Dr. Jay
Lake of the Pines Triathlon fastest bike course record holder - Golden State Super Sprint fastest tri course record holder - Wildflower Long Course slowest run course record holder (4:46:32)

---

"If you have a body, you are an athlete." -Bill Bowerman

[reply]Interesting thread, but how about getting back to the original question. What front derailleur would work with a 50/34? I think Ultegra and DA spec a max difference in chain rings of 14 teeth. Would they work with this gap of 16 teeth? [/reply]

Well, I run a 55/39 combo with Ultegra front/rear derailleurs on my time trial bike (all stealth black Cervelo P2 you can't pry away from me) and that 16-tooth jump hasn't been a problem. I do try to stay in the big ring in races like last week's just so I don't test the setup at the wrong time, but in training it's worked just fine. I run 650c wheels so I like the 55-tooth mega ring up front, but it's hillier here than Dollyland so I kept the 39 from my original setup.

---

The deeper you get the sweeter the pain. Don't give up the game until your heart stops beating.
--New Order

can someone direct me to slowman's article that started this riot? I can't find it on the homepage.

mr mike. it was in the interbike piece. it was, oddly, just an off-hand comment. :)

anyway, i was talking to some guys about it over the weekend - my buddy pointed out that the "fiple" shift that you must hit to make it all work decently between the yawning gap from the 50 to 34 comes at 17-19 mph. for general use, lots of people spend a lot of time between 17 and 19 mph - having them be forced into a fiple shift everytime they transition thru there . . . . . . . . .(?). bless the gear freaks - they wanted half step plus granny to take over the world, too. :)

If you are using bar end shifters, why would a fiple shift be a big deal?

aj. think of it, man. even with the bar ends, say you are cruising along to an enthusiast type AG 5.5 to 6.5 hr bike split (average enuf, i'd say) - you are basically dipping under and over 19 mph all day long as you hit wind, or rises, or whathave you. do you REALLY want to have to mow thru five gears total, front and back shifters everytime you transition thru there? talkin EVERYTIME - 4 clicks here, and one there. one there, and 4 clicks here, four indexes right, one left, etc etc. i think it would get old. maybe you think it sounds perfect, could be, and there you are.

but, as OEM spec condemning people to the fifple shift right in the heart of the gear range every time seems like something that just would be a tough sell, and more frustrating and a niusance than beneficial. that is why, after being available since ....well, how long did they make the TA crank ?? ...it has never caught on past old guys who have lots of time to think about this stuff. gear freaks. it is worth noting tho, that the fiple shift was likewise not a problem with friction shifting - similar to bar-ends . . . . and it still never gained traction. it is just a pain to have to do all the time, sitting there at 18 mph like it does. so it was then, and so it will be for most in the future, say i. thanx for the conversation, tho - always a pleasure.