Different Cassette?

[Veronica]

Yeah, I saw those.

I've got six weeks until my HIM. I'd like to lose a pound or two before then. Grumbles...9 weeks of training and I haven't lost a single pound.

V.

[jobob]

Hm. Seems to me that several of us drive subarus...

Like I said, I'm clearly hanging out with the wrong crowd.

[snapdragen]

Like I said, I'm clearly hanging out with the wrong crowd.

Harumph. I resemble that remark......

[aicabsolut]

Ok, first of all, I do not claim to be a great climber. If you read my last comment carefully, you will realize that I wish I had a much easier gear when facing a 22% grade after a month off the bike. I felt that I was about to topple because I couldn't go faster (because of the amount of force I had to apply). I was also too scared to put a foot down, because I slip all the time stopping on a downhill grade on my cleats. I also do not do super long endurance rides. My strengths are crit racing and time trials (not the hill climb kind). So I can sympathize with the ability to need a little extra help going up hills. I am not an endurance cyclist. When I used to run, I was never a distance runner. I am really impressed by those who can go for a couple hundred miles, because I am not built to do that. My training rides tend to be in the range of 40-70 miles with maybe a max of around 5000ft of climbing. Most of the terrain is rolling, but some areas have a general upward trend for maybe 30mins, and I will do hill repeats on hills about a mile long with an grades of around 8%-12%.

My comments were not meant to be derogatory. I wasn't trying to call anyone a weakling or lame or whatever because they may or may not have a big cassette and little front ring. Most of the offended have replied defending their gearing that is very near 1:1. My comments were directed towards the suggestions for comments that something like a 26/34 gear (rear/front) would help the OP. My comments were based on a combination of 2 things, mainly. 1) my experience training on gradients ranging from 6% to 15% regularly (over a variety of distances) and the occasional encounter of some steeper climbs I'd prefer not to revisit. I am also still fairly new to this, and I remember how hard it was to work up to longer rides with lots of climbing. 2) I have recently discussed climbing setups at length with more experienced people, because I have an extra frame laying around, and I'm trying to think about how to build it up. I was contemplating what cassettes I might put with a 34T ring. I was comparing that with some triples and with what I currently run. The most I heard was not to go even all that close to 1:1 and definitely not past it, because to use those gears, I'd have to pedal so much faster to maintain a reasonable speed. By reasonable, I mean something where I'd feel stable. Maybe it's part of not being a good climber, but I don't feel stable going 4mph uphill. I can go 6mph just fine.

Part of what made me unstable at 3+mph on the steep climb I referred to earlier was the force I put on the pedals. Part of it was the feeling that if I let up at all, gravity would instantly stop me because of my lack of momentum and down I'd go. What my friends and teammates told me about gearing made sense in light of all this. You don't want to have to work too hard at either a) spinning faster than you want to or b) putting out more power than (a hypothetical) you can sustain. It seems like with a road bike's light weight and the way it runs (vs. a mtn bike for example), you can avoid both by staying above 1:1 most of the time.

So, by overkill, I meant that the need to easily get some speed (and thus forward momentum) per pedal stroke would outweigh the need for a gear that would require such relatively light force to move. I also don't see where the OP said anything about wanting to do endurance riding and spend hours climbing mountains. She just wanted to make the hills (of whatever sort, she didn't say) she does easier so she can go longer than "a few miles." Clearly, my observation is based on a totally different demographic of cyclists.

[SadieKate]

The answers you were given were based on your terrain. Momentum is a huge factor on rolling hills and you can use a much higher gear to get over them. A 20 mile long grade like the coast California mtns or the Sierras requires you to grind up. I can easily ride at 3-4 miles an hour at a comfortable cadence because I've chosen the right gear, not too low, not too high (you have to be Goldilocks). Factor in the horrible potholes in many of those roads and that they are steepest at the top, and those extra low gears can be really important. And, a 30 min climb isn't all that long for some areas.

Your comments specifically referred to "most people" so you widened the net beyond the OP. That is why we responded as we did. The 1:1 ratio may be perfect for someone of your fitness in your terrain and maybe even riding in a pack. Spinning wildly is more about choosing the wrong gear at the moment than having the low gears. If the hill doesn't warrant a 26x34, don't use it. But if you don't have it, you can't use it when you need it. You may not need it but a lot of us do. And a lot of us simply have limits to the amount of force we can put on a pedal.

As far as learning to be comfortable at 4 mph, may I suggest slow races in a big gear? Last one over the line wins. These will really help you feel more stable at low speeds.

aicabsolute, road racers of your ilk (as in the types of races you do) need completely different gears than the average rider. Your discussions were focused on answers for you, your terrain in your corner of the universe.

[OakLeaf]

Sorry, when I'm turning 55 rpm going 5 mph over an 18% grade, I don't consider that "spinning wildly." I consider that "wishing I had another gear."

[jobob]

I've zoomed up the 16% or so grade of Pig Farm Hill at a whopping 2.6 mph and haven't tipped over yet.

[smilingcat]

Disclaimer first:

I'm not a sprinter. I'm not particularly strong on flats. But I do love to climb.

fun rides you can look up on the web:
Breathless in Agony, 114miler with 12,000 feet of climb Brandi did the ride this year.
ride around the bear 100miler with about 10,000 feet of climb

death ride (not much need to be said)

climb the kaiser people who do this poo poo the death ride at 150miles with 13,500feet of climb. Oh one more thing. They have 13 hour time limit...

and yes the Diablo challange, Mt Tam...

If you are a red polka dot jersey kind of rider, what aicabsolut said is true. However, most TE members are not, so it's NOT really applicable. Only thing I would say is, if the hill gets really steep, forget about your form.
If you need to mash gears, mash'em.
If you need to stand, do so.
And if you need a granny gear with smaller chainring than a cog, then do so.

with the exception of death ride, the other three are timed (unofficially-officially what? yes its timed) And your time is posted. It's not a race though... Now "to do well", you can't be using a granny gear with big cog in rear. If you have to use granny gears, you are not strong enough for these rides. Doesn't mean you can't finish, you just wont place.

case in point: Climb the Kaiser starts in town of Clovis, start time around 6:30AM. We get police escort out of town and they give us the right of way at the stop lights. Speed off the line is 24-28MPH. Lead pack of about 40 guys (mostly pros, cat1s & 2s) usually hit around 30MPH. I thought I was doing well at 24-25MPH avg. I was at the tail end of the riders last 10 or 20 riders. Its rare for me to be in such spot... We reach the foothill of Sierra Mountain range by 8:00AM and YOU HAVE to GET PAST the TOLL HOUSE GRADE by 10:30AM otherwise you will not finish. and so it goes.

This situation is very very different than what most TE riders are willing to do. It's whole another world. We need to take into account of who is asking the question, and who is answering the question.

And yes I will confess, from big creek rest stop to the next rest stop on the kaiser ride, my avg speed was around 5MPH with avg grade of 15%. We climbed over 3000 feet. Around 4 miles of riding.

Only right way for riding hill is "getting to the top without blowing up" and have fun on your way up.

smilingcat

[OakLeaf]

Only right way for riding hill is "getting to the top without blowing up" and have fun on your way up.

Hear, hear! Hear! Hear!

[Aggie_Ama]

Whoa my thread took on a life of it's own! Hopefully it will help others as well. I still haven't taken my Cannondale in, in fact the poor thing hasn't seen any miles since Fort Davis. That being said I think the Cali girls are more on the mark with what I am thinking. Spinning as long as possible, saving the knees (I have some issues with them) and long distances.

I am going to have to make a choice on what I want to do. Many of my rides locally do not require such gearing but I don't want to stay local. I sure as heck want to make it up the .5 mile, 17% grade suffer fest known as Jester Blvd. I probably won't go to anything drastic (just what my derailers will allow), since I am making it up most climbs but I haven't talked to the LBS yet.

I like climbing rides, I just wasn't born a mountain goat.

[SadieKate]

I am going to have to make a choice on what I want to do.

You are a wise woman.

I fall in love with my little bitty gears all over again when I'm "trying" to ride at 10,000+ ft.

[aicabsolut]

The answers you were given were based on your terrain. Momentum is a huge factor on rolling hills and you can use a much higher gear to get over them. A 20 mile long grade like the coast California mtns or the Sierras requires you to grind up. I can easily ride at 3-4 miles an hour at a comfortable cadence because I've chosen the right gear, not too low, not too high (you have to be Goldilocks). Factor in the horrible potholes in many of those roads and that they are steepest at the top, and those extra low gears can be really important. And, a 30 min climb isn't all that long for some areas.

aicabsolute, road racers of your ilk (as in the types of races you do) need completely different gears than the average rider. Your discussions were focused on answers for you, your terrain in your corner of the universe.

One of the routes I routinely do has an upward trend for about 7 miles. It takes me about 25min. I am pretty much the only one I know who races on a compact crankset. My teammate with a triple on her WSD bike never touches her granny ring or the top half of her cassette when she's in the middle. For my "corner of the universe," I use easier gears than the average rider. I also was getting advice on gearing from good climbers. My conversation with them was about determining a rig that I could take with a friend to the Bay Area, for example, and survive a full day of riding. FWIW, racers would never race on anything close to a 1:1 gear ratio. They weren't advising me on how to race out in Cali, but what they thought was the lowest practical gear combo I (or anyone--in their opinion) ought to put on a climbing road bike. The only ultra-distance cyclist I know who still does those rides (she does things like rides out to and climbs Mt Etna on her bike) runs a standard crankset and something like an 11-25 in the back. She's a billy goat.

Based on Aggie's latest post, maybe the rest of you are more on point than I was. However, it wasn't totally clear from her original post what she was climbing exactly. I also feel like there's some huge war going on between those who use light gearing and have to make mountain bike component modifications and those of us who stick with more stock setups. Most of the time here, the latter group is being attacked by the former (who somehow feels as though they've been attacked first). You all take it too personally. Just because some of us advocate one approach doesn't mean that we're saying the rest of you don't deserve to be on road bikes. Good grief.

In addition, many of my comments (here and on violette's thread) take cost into account. That is something I consider strongly when making component changes. What's the easiest and cheapest thing to try out first? A cassette that will work with no other changes. Next? Depending on the group, either going for smaller rings or something like the large range cassette. Because of my place in the sport, I wouldn't consider a mtn bike cassette personally, but I could get pretty close if I ran Campy, so I still support cassette and derailleur changes. Lastly, the most cost would involve an entire group overhaul (from double to triple or from shimano to campy or whatever).

Since the OP doesn't do the monster climbs very often, I figured she'd want a change that I'd advocate for newer riders. Go with an inexpensive change that will let you hang on, and if you want to do that type of riding more often, then go with the next level of change if you don't just get better at it from practice. There's also the consideration that a good climbing rig might become kind of annoying for the more frequent rides on flatter ground, especially if you remove some of the harder end. Remember that part of the question here was if she was going to lose much high end for descending. That means she'd like to optimally keep her big ring and some high end on the cassette.

[lph]

Wow. I just read this thread and I'm a little baffled at the ruffled feathers. I saw lots of good advice, well documented and politely given, based of course on the experience of the person giving it. If I had trouble with a 1:1 ratio then I wouldn't recommend it either. As it is I haven't a clue what kind of ratio I ride but that's why I haven't been giving any advice either.

Please, gals, I think it's all good.

[jobob]

lph, since you feel the need to rehash this, I took issue with the "most people don't need" statement.

She was delivering a blanket pronouncement based on her own limited experience and her own particular set of circumstances, hardly a basis on which to determine what "most people" need.

But glad it didn't ruffle your feathers any.

[lph]

I hear you jobob, and I know it can be irritating when people make blanket statements. But in my opinion it was carefully and well put, and fodder for a good discussion, not inflammatory or condescending. From the point of view of a relative newbie to the cycling community: this looks like a "hot topic" I didn't know existed.