I know it's quite possible to climb these big climbs in doubles and I see people doing it. They are of course athletic people and so on. But if you continue putting that kind of pressure on your limbs and back year in year out, you will pay in terms of arthritis, back pain etc. It makes more
sense
Quoted message said:
to gear down and just winch away.
That can work both ways. If I stay seated for long periods of time, spinning in lower gears, my back doesn't like me after a while. I find standing up once in a while in a higher gear does wonders to stretch myself out a bit and keep me cycling pain-free for mile after mile.
Back in the day I used to do moderate-length climbs (say 5 miles) standing up the entire way, but find I'm much more efficient now if I try to remain seated most of the time. I haven't noticed any cumulative negative effect from having done so (climb while standing) for so many years; my back has remained an area of my body that has given me very few issues over the years.
I have an Ultegra triple setup on my road bike. Lately, I've had to bring it in to the LBS every 2 weeks or so to have them tune the !##$!$# thing, because it grinds or can't get into the big chainring at all. It works ok for a while, then craps out again. I spent about 3 hours once trying to get it right myself -- to no avail (I admit: I'm mechanically incompetent). A few weeks ago it failed in a time trial.
I don't know if it's the triple or something more general, but I do know I never had these problems with a far less expensive double.
- Jens
"A Muzi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
"Steve Gerdemann" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
I'm going to buy a new bike soon (probably a Specallized Allez Elite). Should I buy the triple or stay with a double. I've always ridden doubles including riding a 100 mile tour that featured 10,000 feet of climbing. Occasionally it would be nice to have a lower gear but I understand doubles shift better. I know almost everybody is going with the triple even on higher end road bikes. Am I just being retro and should go for the triple?
Steve Gerdemann
Modern triples are not as finicky as classic setups. Test ride a modern Centaur equipped 3x10 bike before making a commitment. That system has a nice front changer trim feature so the cage is narrower that click-front systems. I think they're great.
I'm going to buy a new bike soon (probably a Specallized Allez Elite). Should I buy the triple or stay with a double.
If you are willing to spend money to get an odd double setup - 110 BCD front, long cage rear, 34ish largest rear sprocket - I would get a double. But if it's just going to be 42 front, 24 rear, or a similar stock Shimano double, I would get a triple. -- David Damerell <[email hidden]> flcl?
I have an Ultegra triple setup on my road bike. Lately, I've had to bring it in to the LBS every 2 weeks or so to have them tune the !##$!$# thing, because it grinds or can't get into the big chainring at all. It works ok for a while, then craps out again. I spent about 3 hours once trying to get it right myself -- to no avail (I admit: I'm mechanically incompetent). A few weeks ago it failed in a time trial.
I don't know if it's the triple or something more general, but I do know I never had these problems with a far less expensive double.
Check to make sure the front derailleur cable isn't slipping out of its guide underneath the bottom bracket. Also make sure it's nicely lubed in that area. Could even be that the cable is adjusted just a bit too tightly.
However, I must truthfully say that Q Factor, in the real world, seems to be a complete non-issue for most cyclists.
I wonder how many cyclists pedal with their toes pointing outwards and heels rubbing the cranks simply because they can't place their legs where they naturally want to go? ...Probably a lot more than have even heard of the term "Q factor". They may not realise they have a problem because they've been used to nothing else, but perhaps they might be better off with less Q.
If you jump in the air and land without manipulating your feet, you will see that very frequently your toes are angled outward. Same effect if you sit on a stool and let your legs dangle down. I'm not sure but runners I think call it pronate.
I don't think anything to do with Q but relative to cleat angle and placement side to side on shoe and brand of shoe.
Pete Biggs said:
I wonder how many cyclists pedal with their toes pointing outwards and heels rubbing the cranks simply because they can't place their legs where they naturally want to go? ...Probably a lot more than have even heard of the term "Q factor". They may not realise they have a problem because they've been used to nothing else, but perhaps they might be better off with less Q.
"Pete Biggs" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
Mike Jacoubowsky said:
However, I must truthfully say that Q Factor, in the real world, seems to be a complete non-issue for most cyclists.
Quoted message said:
I wonder how many cyclists pedal with their toes pointing outwards and heels rubbing the cranks simply because they can't place their legs where they naturally want to go? ...Probably a lot more than have even heard of the term "Q factor". They may not realise they have a problem because they've been used to nothing else, but perhaps they might be better off with less Q.
My toes always want to point out regardless of how far apart my feet are. As well as cycling with my toes out I walk and climb stairs that way. In my experience anyway Q Factor doesn't seem to have any effect on which way my feet want to go.
Bruce -- Bruce Jackson - Sr. Systems Programmer - DMSP, a M/A/R/C Group company
My toes always want to point out regardless of how far apart my feet are.
I realise that this is a natural position for many/most people but the angle of my feet is more exagerated like this when using a modern triple crankset. My feet are more parallel and feel more natural when riding older bikes with double cranks.
I don't think anything to do with Q but relative to cleat angle and placement side to side on shoe and brand of shoe.
To be as comfortable as possible, I have to position and angle my cleats so that my ankles only just clear the cranks whilst pedalling normally. In fact, with the pedal float, I can easy bash and graze my ankles if I "twist" in too far. I could easily move the cleats out but pedalling feels bad if I have them setup any other way. I'm not experiencing any terrible problems with this, it's just that it gets me thinking about the whole subject of Q, etc.
"Mike Jacoubowsky" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Ya need a lighter bike!!! Not that TREK 'anchor'...just kidding, seems
like we
Quoted message said:
need some comic relief these days...and warmer weather here in the
'republic'-
Funny how, for my Tuesday/Thursday morning rides, I go no matter what, almost enjoying nasty weather in a perverse sort of way. But even a hint of foul weather for an organized century and I'm thinking there must be something better to do with my day! Weather forecast for this coming weekend isn't great, and Sunday's the Primavera Century, traditionally my first of the year.
Huh? You're talking about this weekend, right? Chicagoland forecast from NWS is partly cloudy and 55, 65F for those two days.
"Paul Kopit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Get a 110 bolt pattern double and 48/34 rings with a
12/25 or 27
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
cassette. The 34/27 is same as 30/24 or 39/32. You
won't need a long
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
cage rear derailleur either. Ritchey makes such a
crankset and your
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
local shop can get Dimension cranks from Quality.
"Bruce Lange" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ggtja.332086$3D1.178404@sccrnsc01...
Quoted message said:
I agree, 110 BCD doubles are great. Look for a Sakae or
Sugino from an 80s'
Quoted message said:
road bike. Nice cranks and usually cheap as long as you
can find them. The
Quoted message said:
more recent Ritchey and TA Zephyr cranks are also nice,
but they have one of
Quoted message said:
the chainring bolts alligned directly under the crankarm,
which is a bit
Quoted message said:
aukward.
I think the question was about two particular choices available with a brand new bike -- a standard road double or a standard road triple. You guys are suggesting something else, which is probably not being offered, and would cost a lot of extra money.
Personally, I'd go for the triple. It's nice to have it when you need it, with no penalty when you don't.
Thankfully, we're out of the days when only doubles were considered cool, and triples were for wimps. These days even top racers use triples occasionally.
Matt O.
My current Surley is billed as a Cyclocross, but makes a really nice commuter bike and came with 36 x 48 (110 bcd) and 12 x 25. I hadn't had the pleasure of this grearing before, so before it left the shop, I had Harris Cyclery add a granny. I never use it. But then again, I don't live in the mountains.
