'regular' vs 'compact' drivetrains - what's the diff?

Phillip Brown said:

Hi all

any comments/recommendations on 53/39 vs 50/34 cranksets?
--

phillip brown

"[censored] doesn't just happen. there is always an ass-hole involved"

Yes, here be the rant:

If you get out your little gear chart, you'll see that a 50/11
combination is actually a higher gear than a 53/12. SO you can still
toast your mates at the lights. A 34/25 is quite a useful combo for
going up Hotham, etc., or at the hallucinogenic end of an Alpine
Classic. If you're all cashed-up and going to France/Italy/Swiss
Chocolateland, then you don't have to shell out $1K (approx.) to
convert your Dura-Ace/Ultegra/Chorus/Record roadie to a triple. Shimano
say you can use the same front derailleur AND BB with their compact
crankset (there is now a 9 speed Tiagra compact c'set as well!), Campag
want you to change your f. der. You can swap your Shimano 10 speed
53/39 setup back for the flat stuff, just by undoing the l/h crank
bolts, slipping it out, and raising the derailleur again (check chain
length on cog/c'ring combo.). p.s. the 2007 Campag triple groupsets are
going to stick with square taper BBs, unlike the double g'sets.

Hope this helps

MH

Phillip Brown said:

Hi all

any comments/recommendations on 53/39 vs 50/34 cranksets?

This is a good article
http://slowtwitch.com/mainheadings/techctr/gearing.html

I moved from 53/39 to 50/34 a few months ago. I figured that I'd never
run in to a situation where I was looking for a higher gear but there
were plenty of situations where a lower gear would have been nice. But
then again 99% of my riding involves panniers and a rack, on a light
bike the gearing of a 50/34 might be too low.
--
Cheers
Euan

Euan said:

Phillip Brown said:

Hi all

any comments/recommendations on 53/39 vs 50/34 cranksets?

This is a good article
http://slowtwitch.com/mainheadings/techctr/gearing.html

I moved from 53/39 to 50/34 a few months ago. I figured that I'd never
run in to a situation where I was looking for a higher gear but there
were plenty of situations where a lower gear would have been nice. But
then again 99% of my riding involves panniers and a rack, on a light
bike the gearing of a 50/34 might be too low.
--
Cheers
Euan

gday,
yeah i went from 53/39 to 50/34 in nov last year..
just replaced my fsa normal cranks with fsa compact..no other changes
required (running ultegra 9speed)
it'll probably take some getting used to if you race and tend to stick
with a certain gear during the race, you'll need to find that sweet
spot again..

i rode the pyrenees last year using regular crankset and 12/27, most
the other guys i rode with either had triples or compact cranks and it
really showed🙂

at the moment, riding mt dandy i use the compact and a 12/21
cassette..its just fine
would not go back to regular crankset

quote='dej'Euan said:

Phillip Brown said:

Hi all

any comments/recommendations on 53/39 vs 50/34 cranksets?

This is a good article
slowtwitch.comgearing.htmlOpen ↗

I moved from 53/39 to 50/34 a few months ago. I figured that I'd never
run in to a situation where I was looking for a higher gear but there
were plenty of situations where a lower gear would have been nice. But
then again 99% of my riding involves panniers and a rack, on a light
bike the gearing of a 50/34 might be too low.
--
Cheers
Euan

gday,
yeah i went from 53/39 to 50/34 in nov last year..
just replaced my fsa normal cranks with fsa compact..no other changes
required (running ultegra 9speed)
it'll probably take some getting used to if you race and tend to stick
with a certain gear during the race, you'll need to find that sweet
spot again..

i rode the pyrenees last year using regular crankset and 12/27, most
the other guys i rode with either had triples or compact cranks and it
really showed🙂

at the moment, riding mt dandy i use the compact and a 12/21
cassette..its just fine
would not go back to regular crankset[/QUOTE]
I have a compact crankset on my 2005 Giant OCR1. On our recent Lands end to John o'Groats trip I put a 25 on the back and was able to make it up the majority of the hills, as did the guys running triples. In hindsight compact cranks with a 27 would have been perfect.

For commuting, touring and training, I find that the compact cranks are fine.

For racing, I still prefer to run regular cranks. I'm not sure how I'd go in a sustained surge or a sprint running 50/11 or 50/12.

cheers

Paulie G

Quoted message said:

Phillip Brown said:

Hi all

any comments/recommendations on 53/39 vs 50/34 cranksets?
--

phillip brown

"[censored] doesn't just happen. there is always an ass-hole involved"

Yes, here be the rant:

[snip].... Shimano
say you can use the same front derailleur AND BB with their compact
crankset (there is now a 9 speed Tiagra compact c'set as well!),

Is there? I could only see the FC-R700 on the shimano website which
is 10 speed compatible and splined. Is there really a square taper
chainset or does tiagra also come in splined nowadays?

best wishes
james

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Phillip Brown said:

Hi all

any comments/recommendations on 53/39 vs 50/34 cranksets?
--

phillip brown

"[censored] doesn't just happen. there is always an ass-hole involved"

Yes, here be the rant:

[snip].... Shimano
say you can use the same front derailleur AND BB with their compact
crankset (there is now a 9 speed Tiagra compact c'set as well!),

Is there? I could only see the FC-R700 on the shimano website which
is 10 speed compatible and splined. Is there really a square taper
chainset or does tiagra also come in splined nowadays?

best wishes
james

It's a new product- saw it at the 2007 Shimano launch in Melbourne last
Tuesday. Should be available soon-ish. Tiagra's gone all
integrated-spindle Hollowtech II on us for next season. Doesn't look
that diff from 105, except it's 9 cogs.

MH