group poll; cogsets

Art Harris said:

gds said:

Quoted message said:

As a matter of principle, I will NOT go to 10!

Quoted message said:

What is the principle involved here?

That I'm not going to buy something I don't need just because that's all
that's currently made. Where does this madness end? 11? 12? 15 cogs? If
people keep buying it, the manufacturers have every reason to keep
increasing the number of gears.

People buy what they're offered. There is no choice. If they seek out
last year's stuff with one less gear, it's because it's cheaper.

I think a lot of marketing folks overestimate the impact of their efforts.

Matt O.

Ozark Bicycle said:

Of course, racers and racer wannabes might feel they really do need a
10SP corncob.

Some do, but not everyone. Racers wear stuff out. With team discounts
it's cheaper to just buy a new bike every year or two, and sell the old
one. Racers buy Ultegra or better because they think it's more durable
and lighter. With that they get whatever the latest/greatest fad is,
whether they want it or not.

Frankly I see fancier gear among the recreational crowd. Racers are
usually more practical, especially if they're younger and/or poorer.
Racing itself is expensive, with all the travel, etc. Racers have to
budget for that first, or there's no racing.

Matt O.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Ken M. said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>At what point do you think they should / should have stopped?

8 with a triple was fine for road biking.

30-40-50 x 13-14-15-16-17-18-19-21 is enough for anything with nice tight
spacing.

Maybe 10 or 11 with a compact double.

34-50 x 13-14-15-16-17-18-19-21-23 works well with enough, but it would be nice
to have a 26 on the end for a little more range and overlap, maybe another
cog for overlap.

At least 11 with a conventional 39 small ring.

Add more to these numbers if you think you need a 12 or 11.

--
<a href="http://www.poohsticks.org/drew/">Home Page</a>
In 1913 the inflation adjusted (in 2003 dollars) exemption for single people
was $54,567, married couples' exemption $72,756, the next $363,783 was taxed
at 1%, and earnings over $9,094,578 were taxed at the top rate of 7%.

In article <[email hidden]>,

David L. Johnson said:

Quoted message said:

3x5 or 3x6 can provide a wide range of useful cogs with some
surprisingly close ratios.

At the cost of going to a triple, which is going to be more finicky about
shifting than a double.

My 30-40-50 Racing-T setup shifted faster and more smoothly than the 34-50 FSA
compact + Campagnolo compact front derailleur I replaced it with. I think the
smaller difference in chain rings helped.

I could also use all 8 cogs off any ring (about 4 gears of overlap with
the adjacent ring) without rubbing.

Before I shimmed the compact chain rings, I couldn't use the two small
cogs (one cog overlap, lots of slow ring changes). A little spacing fixed that
but upshifts to the big-ring are a little worse. Yuck.

--
<a href="http://www.poohsticks.org/drew/">Home Page</a>
In 1913 the inflation adjusted (in 2003 dollars) exemption for single people
was $54,567, married couples' exemption $72,756, the next $363,783 was taxed
at 1%, and earnings over $9,094,578 were taxed at the top rate of 7%.

Claire Petersky said:

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

Quoted message said:

jon

Jon! You're back!

Now, if we could just get Rick Onanion and Luigi to start posting
again. [1] I sort of miss Eldred as well. I wonder if he continued
cycling after he made his 1000 (100?) miles post.

[1] Luigi's still alive and online, just not doing too much cycling.

--
Dane Buson - [email hidden]
A few years ago, Friday, October 14 was World Standards Day. Or, at
least, it was World Standards Day in *some* countries. However, in
America, the celebrations were held on October 11th. In Finland,
World Standards Day was marked on October 13th. Italy planned a
separate conference on standards for October 18th. - Shakib Otaqui

Drew Eckhardt said:

My 30-40-50 Racing-T setup shifted faster and more smoothly than the 34-50
FSA compact + Campagnolo compact front derailleur I replaced it with. I
think the smaller difference in chain rings helped.

I agree. The Ultegra triple (30-42-52) is often criticized for
lack of range, but it shifts so easily I can make a front shift as easily
as a rear one. For small shifts I use the rear, for big ones I use the
front.

Matt O.

In article <[email hidden]>, Matt

O'Toole () said:

I agree. The Ultegra triple (30-42-52) is often criticized for
lack of range, but it shifts so easily I can make a front shift as easily
as a rear one. For small shifts I use the rear, for big ones I use the
front.

If you want more range you can always bung a 24 on the inner :-) Makes
things a bit noisy coz the chain rattles against the ramps, pins and
other bobbins on the inside of the middle ring, but it all works...

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
Every establishment needs an opposition.

gds said:

Peter Cole said:

Quoted message said:

To be clear the competion is always with my myself. I enjoy pushing
myself and just seeing how well I can do something. But I also enjoy
riding a nice bike!

Me too, on both counts, but I feel sometimes cyclists get too obsessed
with equipment, to the detriment of riding. As you described, learning
to pace is a critical skill, more important than expensive doo-dads.
It's all to common to see riders with bad set up and skimpy riding
skills on very expensive bikes -- often those riders are only concerned
with what they're going to buy next, convinced that equipment upgrades
are the way to improve. I don't really care what people spend their
money on, but I think that approach diminishes the sportsmanship and
turns cycling into another exercise in consumerism. It's a fine line...

It looks like once we understood what each really meant the differences
are pretty trivial.

I declare world peace

Quoted message said:

gds said:

It looks like once we understood what each really meant the differences
are pretty trivial.

I declare world peace

Great!

Next job: Usenet peace!

- Frank Krygowski

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

gds said:

It looks like once we understood what each really meant the differences
are pretty trivial.

I declare world peace

Great!

Next job: Usenet peace!

"The impossible we do at once, the miraculous takes a little longer."
;-)