need some advice on gears

zander said:

i was wondering about the definition of cadence

No. of times you turn the crank around per minute - or the number of times one of your feet pass through the same spot during one minute , if you prefer that.

zander said:

.. what gear ratios are optimized for cycling ..

Depends on where you ride, what you ride, how much you ride and how fit you are. Look at some bike specs and you'll be able to figure out what works for most people.

zander said:

.. what gear ratios are likely to damage your knees.

The ratio by itself is perfectly harmless, it's how hard you're pushing that carries the risk.

zander said:

.. any input would be greatly appreciated, especially about the cadence thing and revolutions per minute stuff,

RPM is usually used for things that are rotating, so cadence gets used to describe what your legs are doing. For the cranks its obviously same difference.

I think the basic recommendation is to aim for a cadence between 70-110, with some preference given to the higher end of the range.

zander said:

..is there an rpm value that, if you cycle below that value you will be damaging your knees?

It's how hard you're pushing that carries the risk. You could potter along all day at cadence/RPM of 20 or lower without any risk as long as you aren't putting much weight on the pedals.

Quoted post said:

It's how hard you're pushing that carries the risk.

thats the grey area, all the gear ratio calculators don't seem to calculate the wieght needed to push the calculated gear ratios. the thing is i used to push a 61 - 12 at the highest, now i'm pushing a 57 - 12 as the hardest gear, not out of choice. everyone including the owner of the bike shop i go to, says i'm pushing too hard a gear, he's even went as far as to refuse buying a 55 and 58 chainring. my argument is that, if my legs get used to it, i'll be fine, obviously i won' be pushing a 61 - 12 up a hill.

Crazy to go to 61 chainring. :eek:

The established knowledge says that recovery is faster with higher cadence. A bigger chainring doesn't turn the rider into DA MAN...

zander said:

everyone including the owner of the bike shop i go to, says i'm pushing too hard a gear

For the most part, I believe you will also get the same response on this forum. Especially because you mentioned having knee problems in a different post, I would heed the warnings of pushing big gears at a low cadence.

Yeah, if you continue to try and push the monster gear you are now, you're going to injure yourself and be unabe to ride alltogether. You need to get a more normal chainring set in the front, along the lines of the basically standard 53/39.

Bigger gears DO NOT mean faster!

i forgot to mention that i did only ride it downhill, and i admit it is too hard a gear, but personally a 57 and below is definately possible and possibly faster.

and its nothing about being 'da man' (terrible grammer) i was curious as to why they made them and why they sell them and nobody used them, my legs spun, at a guess, over 90 RPM without exhaustion on a 53, thats why i went to a higher gear. and with the right diet and technique the 57 ring would definately be really quick.

another fact that you have to take into account as well is the cassette size ratios. a 57 - 20 gear is enough to get up a 70 - 85 degree hill (glasgow city centre) actually i did manage it in the 61 chainring, not really deployable in a race context though...

thanks for all your input, much appreciated.

hmmm id be waiting for some kinda of pop sound comming from my knees if i was riding a 61 🙁.

zander said:

thats the grey area, all the gear ratio calculators don't seem to calculate the weight needed to push the calculated gear ratios.

How could they? The gear ratio calculators don't know if you're riding downhill or uphill, with a headwind or a tailwind. They don't know if you're riding a fully kitted out tourer, a stripped down track bike or a super slick time trial machine. All of these and more influence how hard it will be to get/keep the bike moving.

Measuring cadence is far easier than measuring how hard you're pushing, so with the simple assumption that the rate you're spinning at will influence how hard you can push you eventually end up with a ballpark value of a recommended cadence.

zander said:

..the thing is i used to push a 61 - 12 at the highest,

The gear you're pushing is not important unless you're spinning out. And if you feel that you're spinning out below 100 cadence training would be far better for you than going to monster gears, unless you're some sort of anatomical freak.

Quote from here:
PEDAL CADENCE (spinning)

While training, it is important to consciously work on your pedal cadence (revolutions per minute). Think about the physics for a moment. You are moving yourself and your bicycle a certain distance (therefore expending a certain amount of energy) every minute. If your pedal cadence is twice as great (keeping the total distance and time to cover it the same) the amount of energy imparted to the bicycle/rider combination per revolution of the pedals is 1/2 as much - and the strain on the knees and ligaments in the legs is less per revolution as well. Most regular riders will use a cadence of 80 to 100 per minute on level terrain. If you are getting knee pain, it may be that you need to increase pedal cadence from your current 50 or 60 per minute (a favorite for occasional riders).

zander said:

..... everyone including the owner of the bike shop i go to, says i'm pushing too hard a gear, he's even went as far as to refuse buying a 55 and 58 chainring.

Well, if you ride your knees into oblivion he'll lose a customer, won't he?

Besides, if you end up damaging your knees with equipment and services provided by him there might be some backlash that he probably can do well enough without.

zander said:

..... my argument is that, if my legs get used to it, i'll be fine,

You might want to reread the physics bit of the quote from the link by now:
You are moving yourself and your bicycle a certain distance (therefore expending a certain amount of energy) every minute. If your pedal cadence is twice as great (keeping the total distance and time to cover it the same) the amount of energy imparted to the bicycle/rider combination per revolution of the pedals is 1/2 as much - and the strain on the knees and ligaments in the legs is less per revolution as well.
If you do a bit of googling you'll find that the web is surprisingly unanimous in the recommended cadence range. Why do you believe that this widely accepted recommendation wouldn't apply to you?

zander said:

..... obviously i won' be pushing a 61 - 12 up a hill.

A slightly intriguing thought for a commuter bike would be to set it up with big chain wheels and corresponding (mostly) big sprockets in the cassette. That should slow down chain and cassette wear some and might still give you the possibility to add a mile or two to your top MPH during a steep descent...

zander said:

.. i was curious as to why they made them and why they sell them and nobody used them,

Well, there are some people who ride bikes with smaller-than-average wheels and still want to maintain a decent pace(recumbents, foldable bikes..). Easiest way around that is to adjust the gear ratio accordingly.

Quoted post said:

Why do you believe that this widely accepted recommendation wouldn't apply to you?

well if your gonna be an ass about it. and you seem to treat this widely accepted recommendation as law, and that somehow i have broken this law and am now an illegal cyclist for choosing to try a bigger ring. i understand the advice given to me by the other members.

zander said:

...

i know its alot of stuff but would appreciate any input.

Forget all the preceding verbiage -- let me make this easier for you ...

ALL you need to do is to buy-or-"borrow" an 11t cog ..

Your 58t chainring & the 12t cog which you are currently using is just a little higher gearing than a 53t chainwheel & an 11t cog.

[center]58/12 == 53.166/11[/center]
[center]61/12 == 55.916/11[/center]

BTW. Based on LBS prices, it may be cheaper to buy an inexpensive MTB cassette [be sure it has the SAME number of cogs as your current cassette because the spacer is integrated on the smallest cog] & cannibalize/"borrow" the 11t cog from it ...

OR, of course, you can just buy a new cassette whose smallest cog is an 11t.

Quoted post said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by zander
...

i know its alot of stuff but would appreciate any input.

Forget all the preceding verbiage -- let me make this easier for you ...

ALL you need to do is to buy-or-"borrow" an 11t cog ..

Your 58t chainring & the 12t cog which you are currently using is just a little higher gearing than a 53t chainwheel & an 11t cog.

[center]58/12 == 53.166/11[/center]
[center]61/12 == 55.916/11[/center]

BTW. Based on LBS prices, it may be cheaper to buy an inexpensive MTB cassette [be sure it has the SAME number of cogs as your current cassette because the spacer is integrated on the smallest cog] & cannibalize/"borrow" the 11t cog from it ...

OR, of course, you can just buy a new cassette whose smallest cog is an 11t.

wow i think your the only person thats actually gave the advice i wanted, fantastic. so basically all i have to is whack an 11t cog on the back and swap my dinner plate for a 53 or 55, bloody brilliant.

actually i tried to get an 11t cog 9-speed ages ago and they kept sending an 8-speed cog, knobs, could've saved ma knees from pushing a 61, oh well...

thank you so much for the information, lifesaver, much appreciated. the admins could probably close this thread now. thanks for everyones input, very much appreciated.

zander said:

wow i think your the only person thats actually gave the advice i wanted, fantastic. so basically all i have to is whack an 11t cog on the back and swap my dinner plate for a 53 or 55, bloody brilliant.

actually i tried to get an 11t cog 9-speed ages ago and they kept sending an 8-speed cog, knobs, could've saved ma knees from pushing a 61, oh well...

thank you so much for the information, lifesaver, much appreciated. the admins could probably close this thread now. thanks for everyones input, very much appreciated.

The following should not be seen as anything other than trying to explain why you are getting the advice here that you are. If you don't like the advice, you will hurt yourself. That is your perogative... I will not give it my blessing.

First, if you go to the same gear ratio as you were pushing with the 60+ teeth, you will still be putting the same pressure on your knees.

The danger of a high gear to your body is not just the size of the chain ring, it is the overall gearing.

You don't like hearing it, and you can choose to go off and learn the lesson yourself (or not), but keep pushing too high a gear ratio and your knee problems will stay around, and probably get worse.

I had knee problems related to riding, and guess how I fixed it?

Any time I was cruising at a steady pace, until I conditioned myself to spin, I conciously went to a gear on my bike that felt just a little too easy, and then went down one more gear which felt way too easy. THis was counter intuitive, but guess what? The knee pain went away. You should feel almost no stress on your legs while pedalling.

Cycling is best on your body when done aerobically, when you press to the point of feeling the stress as if you are in the weight room, you are in an anaerobic zone... This is OK for short periods, but should not be the normal state, or you will do damage.

If you don't like the rule, then do what you want. Just know that this isn't a rule set in place to limit your fun. It is based on decades of experience by thousands of riders.

Professional racers don't usually ride anything bigger than 53 tooth chain rings, do you really think that you have better muscle tone than they do? Do you think that the scientists that coach them and set up their equipment based on wind tunnel, cardio-vascular and other high technology testing might have some information that you don't?

The reasons people have tried to guide you are not because this is the way it has always been done... a lot of us have suffered through leg problems before we were helped in finding the solution... We don't pedal at 90 RPM because it is cool, we do it because it works.

If you think knee injuries are the way to go, then enjoy it. However, you have been told how to avoid it in the previous messages... over and over and over.

You can learn from other people's mistakes, or continue to make your own. Either way, I hope you learn before the damage to your knees is permanent.

zander said:

another fact that you have to take into account as well is the cassette size ratios. a 57 - 20 gear is enough to get up a 70 - 85 degree hill (glasgow city centre) actually i did manage it in the 61 chainring, not really deployable in a race context though...

Hmmm.

An 85 degree hill is close to a sheer vertical cliff.

I didn't know Spiderman rode a bike....

SCotty

That troll alert is still on...

Quoted post said:

The following should not be seen as anything other than trying to explain why you are getting the advice here that you are. If you don't like the advice, you will hurt yourself. That is your perogative...

ok, i'm now being criticised for having a 53/11, if it was up to you people i'd be riding a tricycle. that gear ratio is perfectly fine, my inside would be between 46 and 49, with some duplicates, obviously but i'm sure out 18 gears i should be able to find one thats suits every situation.

Quoted post said:

I will not give it my blessing.

and i thought you were on a pedestol before... now you think your a priest...?

Quoted post said:

You don't like hearing it, and you can choose to go off and learn the lesson yourself (or not), but keep pushing too high a gear ratio and your knee problems will stay around, and probably get worse.

ok, now you just like the sound of your own voice, you did read the previous posts, right? y'know the bit where i said ok i'll change my gearing because its too big?

Quoted post said:

I had knee problems related to riding, and guess how I fixed it?

oh please tell me.

Quoted post said:

Any time I was cruising at a steady pace, until I conditioned myself to spin, I conciously went to a gear on my bike that felt just a little too easy, and then went down one more gear which felt way too easy. THis was counter intuitive, but guess what? The knee pain went away. You should feel almost no stress on your legs while pedalling.

that'll be the 5th tally mark on the wall, lets try and get into double figures for the amount of times i've been told that.

Quoted post said:

Cycling is best on your body when done aerobically, when you press to the point of feeling the stress as if you are in the weight room, you are in an anaerobic zone... This is OK for short periods, but should not be the normal state, or you will do damage.

hey thats actually good advice, was it so hard?, it only took till halfway through your post to get to it.

Quoted post said:

Professional racers don't usually ride anything bigger than 53 tooth chain rings

ok then why am i still beiong citicised for having a 53 being put on? and i'm the one that's trolling

Quoted post said:

If you think knee injuries are the way to go, then enjoy it. However, you have been told how to avoid it in the previous messages... over and over and over.

oh, so you did read the previous messages? am confused...

Quoted post said:

You can learn from other people's mistakes, or continue to make your own. Either way, I hope you learn before the damage to your knees is permanent.

oh why thank you, I GET IT don't worry, posting the same blurb over and over again by different members is really quite annoying. and if you didn't notice i'm pretty new to the whole terminology of road bikes, i've ridden a road bike for years, yes, but as you could probably tell by the other posts in the forum, i'm not that proficient in the teachings of cycling.

instead of giving me vague quotes like 'we have a wide enough variety of gear ratios today to avoid going for monster rings' and 'your going to damage your knees doing that', thats a classic, or giving me an extract from some scientist that you can only understand if you have at least semi-learned the technical aspects of cycling.

your advice was way too vague for a beginner, next time try and answer the question, instead of sitting on your high horse preaching the obvious.

thats me done, since no one else will probably join me in a hallelujah,

HALLELUJAH, AMEN BROTHER!

I was gong to post pictures of the 61 for scotty dog, cos he didn't believe me, but more than likely i won't have enough time...

zander said:

ok, i'm having a 53/11, top slot & a 39/ 23 or 25 low

Now you've got it about right 🙂

Quoted post said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by zander
ok, i'm having a 53/11, top slot & a 39/ 23 or 25 low

Now you've got it about right 🙂

ha ha, you [censored], that's blasphemy to my ears.

zander said:

ha ha, you [censored],

Oh well !!!! You've added a bit of interest here the last few days🙂.
Their not a bad lot on this forum. Collectively there is a lot of knowledge among the posters & if you keep your ear to the ground even good ol' zander might learn a thing or three 😉.