Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

Compact Crank Ring Differential

Started by VeloJon · · Last activity · 63 posts · 2,876 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
4 June 2007
Last activity
8 June 2007
Original author
VeloJon
Posts
63
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
2,876
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 61–63 of 63
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Bill Baka said:
    Dave van Tol said:
    Bill Baka said:

    Russell Seaton wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > 406mm tires are about 16-18" or so in diameter. I forget if 406 tires
    > are closer to 16" or 18". 73x13 with 406 gets you about 100 gear
    > inches. 52x28 gets you about 33 gear inches. Equivalent of a
    > sensibly geared compact double crankset today. I think 406mm is used
    > by Moulton bikes and foldable bikes. Bike Friday uses 406 I think on
    > their touring models. 420 on their racy models.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Got a picture? It sounds like the crank would be almost as big as the
    tires and you would have a ground clearance problem. I don't recall
    ever seeing something like that in either of my LBS's.

    Quoted message said:

    Now you've done it... Tom loves to post links to pictures of his
    bikes/trikes... check the archives. I'm 99.9% sure he's talking about a
    recumbent of some sort.

    Provoking a reaction from the "upright uptights" is fun - and not to
    be confused with trying to convince others to ride similar human
    powered vehicles!

    Quoted message said:

    I think that is likely the case, but it would still make for a good
    conversation starter, hopefully with a babe.

    That bike (Wishbone) with the giant chainring provoked more freak show
    reactions than anything else. My current bike is equally as odd, but
    much more cute.

    --
    Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
    The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

  2. Johnny Sunset said:
    Bill Baka said:
    Johnny Sunset said:

    On Jun 4, 10:38 am, VeloJon wrote:
    > According to Cyclingnews, several Giro riders were running 52/34 chain
    > rings for the big climbs. I thought the conventional wisdom was that
    > a 16-tooth differential between the 2 rings was the max for shifting
    > smoothness on the front der. Before I go and try a 52/34 combo,
    > opinions please?
    I used to run a 73/52 double on a bicycle with an ISO 406-mm drive
    wheel. Shifting with a Shimano RSX road derailleur was slow (no ramps
    and pins on the large chainring) but otherwise acceptable.


    If you were running a gear like that just what the hell did you have in
    the rear? 73/?? seems way unlikely.

    More likely than going downhill at 50 mph on a children's tricycle!

    Enough tricycle already. 23 felt like 50 at age 4 or 5 when I did it.

    Quoted message said:


    Note that I wrote ISO 406-mm drive wheel. With a Tioga Comp Pool tire,
    the 73/52 chainring and 11-28 cassette results in a range of 36 to 129
    gear inches.

    This is the bike, at the time of purchase <http://www.ihpva.org/
    incoming/2001/wbone2.jpg> and shortly after I sold it: <http://
    www.liegeradinfo.de/wisbone2.jpg>.

    --
    Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
    The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

  3. Johnny Sunset said:
    Bill Baka said:
    Quoted message said:

    On Jun 7, 12:57 am, Bill Baka wrote:
    > Johnny Sunset wrote:
    >> On Jun 4, 10:38 am, VeloJon wrote:
    >>> According to Cyclingnews, several Giro riders were running 52/34 chain
    >>> rings for the big climbs. I thought the conventional wisdom was that
    >>> a 16-tooth differential between the 2 rings was the max for shifting
    >>> smoothness on the front der. Before I go and try a 52/34 combo,
    >>> opinions please?
    >> I used to run a 73/52 double on a bicycle with an ISO 406-mm drive
    >> wheel. Shifting with a Shimano RSX road derailleur was slow (no ramps
    >> and pins on the large chainring) but otherwise acceptable.
    > If you were running a gear like that just what the hell did you have in
    > the rear? 73/?? seems way unlikely.
    > Bill Baka
    406mm tires are about 16-18" or so in diameter. I forget if 406 tires
    are closer to 16" or 18". 73x13 with 406 gets you about 100 gear
    inches. 52x28 gets you about 33 gear inches. Equivalent of a
    sensibly geared compact double crankset today. I think 406mm is used
    by Moulton bikes and foldable bikes. Bike Friday uses 406 I think on
    their touring models. 420 on their racy models.


    Got a picture? It sounds like the crank would be almost as big as the
    tires and you would have a ground clearance problem. I don't recall ever
    seeing something like that in either of my LBS's.

    See post below for picture. The big ring started life as an aluminium
    alloy plate, and was custom machined into a chainring - hence the lack
    of "ramps and pins" seen on modern mid to high end commercial
    chainrings.

    I looked, I saw, I'm still scratching my head.
    I'm not sure I would want to be seen on that thing.
    The big rings would be right in the line of sight.
    Bill Baka

    Quoted message said:


    --
    Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
    The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.