Cassette compatibility

Dan said:

Bear in mind that if my wife (45 mother of 2) wants really low gears, it is
my only available option to provide them.

I somehow sense that this is the important part.

Mountain Bike Rear Der, if all else fails. I honestly know nothing of the
spacings between cogs and the steps the shifter makes and what corresponding
movement of the jockey wheels that causes but I know there are bikes out there
that do this and make it work.

Good luck.

Ron

RonSonic said:

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 08:07:22 -0800, "Dan" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

My wife has a Trek 2200 with 105 front DR (52-30 triple) and Ultegra
rear DR (12-25 9-speed). She wants lower gearing for the hills. I have
in the garage a HG70 11-32 9-speed cassette. Sheldon's site seems to
suggest that this will work if the chainline is kept fairly straight. I
will put the big cassette on this weekend and see how it behaves.

Will the 11-32 work?
What problems should I watch for?

Your wife's ability to keep the bike vertical at extreme low speeds.

30 front 32 rear is hardly what you'd call a super-low gear. I have
several bikes with 24 front 30 rear and one with a 20 front 27 rear and
have absolutely no difficulty "keeping the bike vertical at extreme low
speeds". Using a super low gear like that is, of course, easier when you
are climbing a very steep hill, but then, would you want a super low gear
except on a very steep hill? A 30T granny is hardly worth having, when you
can fit a 24 T on the same bolt circle.

One other observation: not that many years ago, 52x14 was a high enough
high gear to win the Tour de France. I have trouble believing your wife
actually needs a 52x11.

"Steve Palincsar" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 10:26:22 -0500, RonSonic wrote:

30 front 32 rear is hardly what you'd call a super-low gear. I have
several bikes with 24 front 30 rear and one with a 20 front 27 rear and
have absolutely no difficulty "keeping the bike vertical at extreme low
speeds". Using a super low gear like that is, of course, easier when
you are climbing a very steep hill, but then, would you want a super
low gear except on a very steep hill? A 30T granny is hardly worth
having, when you can fit a 24 T on the same bolt circle.

One other observation: not that many years ago, 52x14 was a high
enough high gear to win the Tour de France. I have trouble believing
your wife actually needs a 52x11.

I agree. I really don't understand the bike industry and the gearing that
they sell. The percentage of the cycling population, even road cyclists,
that needs 52x11 must be very small. The percentage who could use a gear
lower than 30x25 must be very large.

There are bike builders who get it - Rivendell for example with a 48-36-26
triple and 12-27 cassette on their Rambouillet. I think that they would
benefit from one of Sheldon's 13-30 Century Special cassettes.

I think it boils down to image. the high-end cycling Walter Mittys picture
themselves needing the same gearing as LA and think anybody on a triple is a
wuss. Image is of course everything - isn't it?

Dan said:

"Steve Palincsar" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

One other observation: not that many years ago, 52x14 was a high
enough high gear to win the Tour de France. I have trouble believing
your wife actually needs a 52x11.

I agree. I really don't understand the bike industry and the gearing that
they sell. The percentage of the cycling population, even road cyclists,
that needs 52x11 must be very small. The percentage who could use a gear
lower than 30x25 must be very large.

There are bike builders who get it - Rivendell for example with a 48-36-26
triple and 12-27 cassette on their Rambouillet. I think that they would
benefit from one of Sheldon's 13-30 Century Special cassettes.

I think it boils down to image. the high-end cycling Walter Mittys picture
themselves needing the same gearing as LA and think anybody on a triple is a
wuss. Image is of course everything - isn't it?

Dear Dan and Steve,

You're absolutely right--that 52 x 11 will be the death of
her!

She needs a 53 x 11 like me--the extra tooth is vital!

A lower gear would require increasing my sloth-like cadence
up the Arkansas River and would spin out sooner on the
two-mile drop from the ridge west of town.

Lance Mitty

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 08:28:22 -0800, "Dan"

Quoted message said:

Dear Dan and Steve,

You're absolutely right--that 52 x 11 will be the death of
her!

She needs a 53 x 11 like me--the extra tooth is vital!

A lower gear would require increasing my sloth-like cadence
up the Arkansas River and would spin out sooner on the
two-mile drop from the ridge west of town.

Lance Mitty

Dear "one more tooth" Carl -

You got a chuckle from me.

I would be impressed but you don't have the new 10t cog on your cassette.

"one less tooth" Dan

The advantage of proper gearing ... Visual proof:
http://www.geocities.com/banquo_lives/hsfc.htm
As you can see, my campy 52-30 rings and 13-28 cogs were much better for the
"2004 High Sierra Fall Century" than the 52-30 rings and 12-25 cogs that my
wife and son rode.

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 09:24:08 -0500, Steve Palincsar <[email hidden]>

may have said:

One other observation: not that many years ago, 52x14 was a high enough
high gear to win the Tour de France. I have trouble believing your wife
actually needs a 52x11.

For all we know, his wife might have thighs that would have made Tanya
Harding insanely jealous. (And not everybody enjoys high-rate
cadences; a 52x11 might be just the ticket for a little downhill or
downwind running in that case.)

--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

Dan said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 08:28:22 -0800, "Dan"

Quoted message said:

Dear Dan and Steve,

You're absolutely right--that 52 x 11 will be the death of
her!

She needs a 53 x 11 like me--the extra tooth is vital!

A lower gear would require increasing my sloth-like cadence
up the Arkansas River and would spin out sooner on the
two-mile drop from the ridge west of town.

Lance Mitty

Dear "one more tooth" Carl -

You got a chuckle from me.

I would be impressed but you don't have the new 10t cog on your cassette.

"one less tooth" Dan

Dear Dan,

There's a 10t? Hmmm . . . I wonder if it will fit on a
Shimano 7-speed cluster.

No, I'd better hold out for that Moulton 9-tooth rear cog.

Intrigued,

Carl Fogel

Werehatrack said:

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 09:24:08 -0500, Steve Palincsar <[email hidden]>

may have said:

One other observation: not that many years ago, 52x14 was a high enough
high gear to win the Tour de France. I have trouble believing your wife
actually needs a 52x11.

For all we know, his wife might have thighs that would have made Tanya
Harding insanely jealous. (And not everybody enjoys high-rate
cadences; a 52x11 might be just the ticket for a little downhill or
downwind running in that case.)

Dear Werehatrack,

I just had a mercifully brief image of Jim Beam lunging out
of the bushes in the Bay area to kneecap Jobst Brandt with a
tire iron while shouting, "Now maybe you'll try a lower
gear, Thunder Thighs!"

Oh, no, now I'm seeing Nancy Kerrigan doing the same thing
to poor Jobst and cackling, "Take that, you masher!"

Jeff Gillooly

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dan said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 08:28:22 -0800, "Dan"

Quoted message said:

Dear Dan and Steve,

You're absolutely right--that 52 x 11 will be the death of
her!

She needs a 53 x 11 like me--the extra tooth is vital!

A lower gear would require increasing my sloth-like cadence
up the Arkansas River and would spin out sooner on the
two-mile drop from the ridge west of town.

Lance Mitty

Dear "one more tooth" Carl -

You got a chuckle from me.

I would be impressed but you don't have the new 10t cog on your cassette.

"one less tooth" Dan

Dear Dan,

There's a 10t? Hmmm . . . I wonder if it will fit on a
Shimano 7-speed cluster.

No, I'd better hold out for that Moulton 9-tooth rear cog.

Intrigued,

Carl Fogel

I think that I shall apply for a patent on the one-tooth-cog. I'll sell
millions of em.

Quoted message said:

"Steve Palincsar" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

attributions?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 10:26:22 -0500, RonSonic wrote:
30 front 32 rear is hardly what you'd call a super-low gear. I have
several bikes with 24 front 30 rear and one with a 20 front 27 rear and
have absolutely no difficulty "keeping the bike vertical at extreme low
speeds". Using a super low gear like that is, of course, easier when
you are climbing a very steep hill, but then, would you want a super
low gear except on a very steep hill? A 30T granny is hardly worth
having, when you can fit a 24 T on the same bolt circle.
One other observation: not that many years ago, 52x14 was a high
enough high gear to win the Tour de France. I have trouble believing
your wife actually needs a 52x11.

Dan said:

I agree. I really don't understand the bike industry and the gearing that
they sell. The percentage of the cycling population, even road cyclists,
that needs 52x11 must be very small. The percentage who could use a gear
lower than 30x25 must be very large.
There are bike builders who get it - Rivendell for example with a 48-36-26
triple and 12-27 cassette on their Rambouillet. I think that they would
benefit from one of Sheldon's 13-30 Century Special cassettes.
I think it boils down to image. the high-end cycling Walter Mittys picture
themselves needing the same gearing as LA and think anybody on a triple is a
wuss. Image is of course everything - isn't it?

Yup. Your average guy new to cycling slogs along at 40rpm
and (check this with any bike shop employee) is more likely
to ask for 53x11 (and higher!) than a sensible 48x14. We
sell 58 rings. And we actually do sell them. I, for one,
gave up arguing with that kind of rider long ago. On the
first warm weekend we'll be asked several times each day for
'faster gears' by riders who want to 'push harder'.

Bike designers cater to that. And to the Mitty-like 'wanna
be just like the pros' market.

OTOH there are more riders now who actually ride, think
about their gearing and conclude that a 26-36-48 will give
them more useful gears than their former big setup. There's
hope.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

A Muzi said:

...We sell 58 rings. And we actually do
sell them. I, for one, gave up arguing with that kind of rider long ago....

A 58x11 top gear sounds about right for an ISO 451-mm wheel folder. 🙂

--
Tom Sherman - Near Rock Island

Quoted message said:

A Muzi said:

...We sell 58 rings. And we actually do
sell them. I, for one, gave up arguing with that kind of rider long
ago....

Tom Sherman said:

A 58x11 top gear sounds about right for an ISO 451-mm wheel folder. 🙂

And if you 'needed' the equivalent gear to a 58x11@700C on
your twenty, you'd end up with . . . uh, a 78t ring?

(My 20" fixed is 42x17)

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

A Muzi said:

Quoted message said:

A Muzi said:

...We sell 58 rings. And we actually do
sell them. I, for one, gave up arguing with that kind of rider long
ago....

Tom Sherman said:

A 58x11 top gear sounds about right for an ISO 451-mm wheel folder. 🙂

And if you 'needed' the equivalent gear to a 58x11@700C on your twenty,
you'd end up with . . . uh, a 78t ring?

(My 20" fixed is 42x17)

When I owned this bike <http://www.liegeradinfo.de/wisbone2.jpg>, it had
a 73/52 double crank, which was approximately equivalent to a 54/40 on a
bike with 23-622 tires.

--
Tom Sherman - Near Rock Island

Quoted message said:

There's a 10t? Hmmm . . . I wonder if it will fit on a
Shimano 7-speed cluster.

It (a TNT or Goldtec-Moulton 10t sprocket) will replace the lockring of
your 7-speed cluster, turning it into an 8-speed.

Shimano Capreo is the way to go if you want a 9t.

James Thomson

In article <[email hidden]>,

James Thomson said:

Quoted message said:

There's a 10t? Hmmm . . . I wonder if it will fit on a
Shimano 7-speed cluster.

It (a TNT or Goldtec-Moulton 10t sprocket) will replace the lockring of
your 7-speed cluster, turning it into an 8-speed.

any idea where these might be available? I'd really like the 11 tooth
TNT but I couldn't find it in searching the net.

thanks,

Baird
[email hidden]

Baird Webel said:

any idea where these might be available? I'd really like the
11 tooth TNT but I couldn't find it in searching the net.

I can put you on to a couple of likely sources for the Goldtec-Moulton 10t,
but the TNT hasn't been made for some time, and eBay is probably your best
bet. Sorry.

James Thomson

(posted and emailed)

I'm an Alex Moulton dealer in USA -- see <www.alexmoulton.co.uk>

10T "lockring replacement" cogs are in stock -- email for price (not cheap,
low volume production).

Note that these are meant for use with normal road sized chainrings to get
a high gear (for small wheel bikes). If you use them with a granny there
is a good chance you will pop off a tooth. Likewise if your rear der
placement doesn't keep 4 or 5 of the teeth in engagement.

-- Doug Milliken [email hidden]

Baird Webel said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

James Thomson said:

Quoted message said:

There's a 10t? Hmmm . . . I wonder if it will fit on a
Shimano 7-speed cluster.

It (a TNT or Goldtec-Moulton 10t sprocket) will replace the lockring of
your 7-speed cluster, turning it into an 8-speed.

any idea where these might be available? I'd really like the 11 tooth
TNT but I couldn't find it in searching the net.

thanks,

Baird
[email hidden]

quote='James Thomson said:

There's a 10t? Hmmm . . . I wonder if it will fit on a
Shimano 7-speed cluster.

It (a TNT or Goldtec-Moulton 10t sprocket) will replace the lockring of
your 7-speed cluster, turning it into an 8-speed.

Shimano Capreo is the way to go if you want a 9t.

James Thomson[/QUOTE]

What effect does this eighth cog on a 7 speed hub necessitate with respect to spacers and dropout width?

Is SIS shifting still feasible or does one need switch to friction mode?

Does one still use the 7 speed shifter on the 8 speeds on 7 body?

Is there are practical use of this on an 8/9 speed hub?

meb said:

What effect does this eighth cog on a 7 speed hub necessitate
with respect to spacers and dropout width?

It requires about an extra 5mm of space on the right. That can be
transfered from the left, keeping the dropout width the same, or added,
increasing the dropout width. In either case, the wheel dish increases.

Quoted message said:

Is SIS shifting still feasible or does one need switch to
friction mode?

Quoted message said:

Does one still use the 7 speed shifter on the 8 speeds on 7 body?

The TNT sprocket was intended to make use of the overshift available in
Deore XT 7-speed thumbshifters.

The Goldtec-Moulton (and Goldtec-Hope) 10t sprockets were designed for
special short freehub bodies that were actually close to the width of a
Shimano 7-speed but took 8 9-speed spaced splined sprockets, with the 10t
making up a 9-speed cassette. This system was intended for indexing with
Shimano 9-speed shifters.

Quoted message said:

Is there are practical use of this on an 8/9 speed hub?

I know it's been done. Whether it's practical or not is another matter.
There are probably HPV riders who can make use of a 10-speed 10-34t
cassette.

James Thomson