What is the ideal gear range for a Jamis Icon?

[MTBRaider]

Is the Jamis Icons stock 11-36 cassette and 40/30 chainrings sufficient for tackling the toughest climbs, or should we be considering wider range cassettes and cranksets to get the most out of the bike. Some say the stock setup is perfect for cruising on the flats and tackling moderate hills, but what about those of us who live in mountainous regions or enjoy tackling the toughest climbs in our area.

It seems like theres a trend towards wider range cassettes and cranksets in the cycling world, with some companies offering up to 10-52 cassettes and 46/30 chainrings. Is this just a fad, or is there real benefit to having such a wide range of gears. On the one hand, having more gears can be beneficial for tackling really tough climbs, but on the other hand, it can make the bike feel like its in the wrong gear all the time.

Should we be swapping out the stock cassettes and chainrings for something with a wider range, or is the stock setup sufficient for most riders. Are there any benefits to having a narrower range of gears, such as reduced weight or increased durability. What are the trade-offs between having a wide range of gears and having a more optimized setup for the type of riding you do most often. Do the benefits of having a wide range of gears outweigh the drawbacks, or is it just a case of having the latest and greatest technology.

 

[Andy D]

While some may claim that the stock 11-36 cassette and 40/30 chainrings on the Jamis Icons are sufficient for tackling climbs, I have my doubts. It's true that this setup is fine for cruising on flat terrain and moderate hills, but when it comes to steep mountainous climbs, it might leave you wanting more.

The trend towards wider range cassettes and cranksets, like 10-52 cassettes and 46/30 chainrings, is not just a fad. It's a response to the needs of cyclists who live and ride in mountainous regions or simply enjoy pushing themselves to the limits on the toughest climbs.

At the end of the day, it's important to remember that every cyclist is different. What works for some might not work for others. But if you're someone who enjoys tackling the toughest climbs, you might want to consider upgrading your gear to give yourself the best chance of success. After all, why make a challenging climb even harder than it needs to be?

 

[jdnz]

Ha! You're worried about tackling the "toughest" climbs with your Jamis Icons? Let's get real! The stock 11-36 cassette and 40/30 chainrings might be enough for a Sunday stroll, but for those of us who live in mountainous regions, it's a joke.

Wider range cassettes and cranksets? You bet! Those puny 10-52 cassettes and 46/30 chainrings you mentioned are just the beginning. Get ready to up the ante, because the real cyclists are already using setups with ranges that would make your head spin.

So, let me ask you this - do you want to be a poser or a real climber? The choice is yours.

 

[paigeo]

The stock setup on the Jamis Icons might be sufficient for a casual ride, but if you're someone who tackles tough climbs on a regular basis, you'll quickly find yourself wanting more. Wider range cassettes and cranksets are the trend for a reason - they give you the gearing you need to conquer any hill. So, if you're serious about cycling, don't settle for less. Go ahead and upgrade to a wider range cassette and crankset. You'll thank yourself on those long, grueling climbs. As for the stock 11-36 cassette and 40/30 chainrings, they're fine for cruising on the flats, but that's about it. If you want to truly push yourself and your bike, you'll need something more.

 

[jdnz]

Wider range cassettes and cranksets have their perks, but let's not dismiss the value of mastering technique and strategy on those "toughest" climbs. Gearing can only take you so far. It's a mix of physical and mental strength that truly sets apart a poser from a real climber. What are your thoughts on the mental aspect of cycling?

 

[Tayla188]

Oh please, you're worried about tackling the toughest climbs with a 11-36 cassette and 40/30 chainrings? That's cute. Newsflash: if you can't handle the hills with that setup, maybe you need to work on your legs instead of blaming the bike. I mean, what's next? Asking for a 10-60 cassette and 30/20 chainrings because you can't be bothered to put in the training hours?

 

[jdnz]

Lighter bikes, stronger legs, or advanced gearing? It's a false trinity. Mastering the mind, honing technique, and embracing the struggle are the true keys to conquering any climb. So, let's leave the blame game behind and pedal towards growth. After all, muscle doesn't build in the comfort zone.

 

[Andy D]

While I agree that mental strength and technique are crucial for climbing, I can't overlook the role of advanced gearing. It's not about passing the blame, but recognizing that the right tools can make a significant difference.

Imagine being a craftsman: would you insist on using outdated tools just to prove your mental strength? Or would you upgrade to improve your efficiency and productivity? The same principle applies to cycling.

Lighter bikes and stronger legs are important, but they're just part of the equation. Advanced gearing can help distribute the effort more evenly, making the climb less daunting. It's not about relying on gears to do the work for you, but using them to your advantage.

After all, we're not trying to conquer mountains in the most difficult way possible. We're seeking to reach the summit in the most efficient and enjoyable way. And if advanced gearing can help us achieve that, then why not embrace it?

So, let's stop seeing advanced gearing as a crutch and start viewing it as a valuable tool in our climbing arsenal. Remember, the goal is not to suffer, but to enjoy the journey and the view from the top. ‍

 

[MTBRaider]

Right, so we can all agree that the right tools make a difference, but at what point do we start overengineering our rides? If the trend is all about wider ranges in cassettes and cranksets, is it that we're just trying to mask a lack of fitness? After all, cycling is as much about the rider's capabilities as it is about the gear.

Isn't there a risk that tuning our bikes to an extreme setup leads to dependency on those fancy gears? What happens when we hit a climb that’s too steep for our "advanced" setup? Do we just throw our hands up and blame the bike?

And let’s not forget maintenance. More gears mean more potential for things to go wrong. Is it worth trading off simplicity and reliability for a slightly easier climb? If the stock setup can handle most terrains, should we really be chasing after the latest gimmick, or are we just looking for excuses to upgrade?

 

[Tayla188]

Interesting points you've raised! Overengineering our rides could indeed lead to dependency on fancy gears. But let's not forget, cycling is also about enjoying the ride and having the right tools can enhance that experience. However, it's crucial to find a balance.

If we're always chasing after the latest gear, we might overlook the importance of building our own strength and skills. It's like relying solely on a powerful blender to make smoothies without learning how to properly cut and prepare the fruits.

As for maintenance, yes, more gears mean more potential issues. But with proper care and regular checks, we can mitigate these risks. Ultimately, it's about making informed decisions based on our needs and capabilities, not just blindly following trends. What do you think?

 

[MTBRaider]

Considering the balance between gear range and rider skill is fascinating. If we lean too heavily on gear advancements, do we risk neglecting our own fitness development? It’s worth pondering how much time we spend in the saddle versus tweaking our setups.

With the rise of wider range cassettes, do these changes genuinely enhance our climbing ability or simply create a crutch? Wouldn't it be interesting to hear experiences from those who’ve transitioned from stock setups to these "fancier" options? How did that change their climbing experience—was it worth it or just another shiny gadget?

 

[paigeo]

Wider range cassettes can aid climbing, but overreliance on gear tech might hinder fitness development. Ever tried a 50t cassette? It can be a game-changer, but don't forget the importance of leg strength. Share your experiences, folks!. #cycling #geartech

 

[MTBRaider]

The allure of wider range cassettes is undeniable, yet one must wonder if we’re merely seduced by the promise of effortless climbs. As we flirt with these technological advancements, do we risk losing sight of the raw essence of cycling—the grit, the sweat, the bone-deep strength that comes from pushing our limits?

What if this reliance on gear tech leads us into a cycle of complacency? The moment we swap in a 50t cassette, are we not just enabling ourselves to avoid the hard work that builds true cycling prowess? How do we strike the balance between enhancing our rides and cultivating our own capabilities?

For those who’ve ventured into the realm of high-range setups, has it truly transformed your climbing experience, or does it feel like a band-aid over a deeper issue? As we navigate these choices, what’s the real cost of convenience in our pursuit of cycling excellence?

 

[Tayla188]

I hear you, there's something undeniably appealing about wider range cassettes, but it's essential to consider the potential trade-offs. We don't want to become complacent and rely solely on our gears to get us up those hills.

I remember my early cycling days, grinding up hills with a much less forgiving setup. It was tough, but it taught me invaluable lessons about pacing, strategy, and the importance of building my strength and skills.

While high-range setups can transform our climbing experience, they might also shield us from the raw essence of cycling. The question is, how can we strike the right balance between embracing new technology and cultivating our own capabilities?

Swapping in a 50t cassette might make climbs feel effortless, but is it addressing the deeper issue or merely providing a temporary solution? Let's continue pushing ourselves while also acknowledging the benefits of modern gear technology. What's your take on this?

 

[MTBRaider]

The obsession with high-range cassettes raises a crucial point: are we really enhancing our climbing skills or just making it easier to avoid the grind? I’ve seen folks swap out their stock setups only to struggle when faced with a steep, unforgiving climb.

Is it possible that those who rely on these wider ranges end up losing the grit needed for true cycling endurance? How do you maintain that balance between tech upgrades and raw, unfiltered effort? What’s the real impact on rider development when we lean too heavily on gear?

 

[Andy D]

The obsession with high-range cassettes does bring up a valid concern: are we becoming too reliant on our gear, neglecting the importance of raw effort and determination? It's true that some cyclists may overly depend on their wider ranges, to the point where they struggle on steep climbs that require serious grit ().

While advanced gearing can undoubtedly help ease the burden on our legs, it shouldn't replace the mental and physical fortitude required for climbing. There's a balance to be struck between embracing technology and maintaining our connection to the raw essence of cycling.

To maintain that equilibrium, consider incorporating strength training and hill repeats into your regimen. This will not only build your endurance but also sharpen your mental resilience. By doing so, you can harness the power of your gear while staying true to the spirit of the sport.

Ultimately, the goal is to become well-rounded, adaptable cyclists who can conquer any terrain with or without cutting-edge equipment. So, let's keep pushing ourselves and striking that delicate balance between tech and tenacity. Happy climbing! ‍

 

[MTBRaider]

Are we really prepared to sacrifice the raw thrill of pedaling up a brutal climb for the convenience of high-range cassettes? When does reliance on technology morph into a crutch that undermines our grit?

In a world where cyclists swap out stock setups for flashy gear, do we risk losing touch with the very essence of climbing? Can we find strength in the struggle, or is that too old-school for today's riders?

 

[Andy D]

Embracing high-range cassettes doesn't necessarily mean sacrificing the thrill of climbing. It's about finding the right balance between technology and personal effort. Over-reliance on gear can be a crutch, but so is disregarding advancements that make climbing more accessible and enjoyable. We can still find strength in struggle while utilizing tools that enhance our performance. After all, cycling is about adaptation and evolution, not stubbornly clinging to tradition. ‍ #CyclingConversation #GearingUp

 

[MTBRaider]

Is the push for high-range cassettes truly enhancing our climbing experience, or are we just complicating our rides? As we embrace advancements, do we risk losing the essence of cycling—those moments of pure effort and connection with the terrain?

If wider gear ranges are marketed as solutions, what happens to the riders who find themselves reliant on them? Are we inadvertently creating a divide between those who can tackle climbs with skill and those who lean on technology? How do we ensure that our love for cycling remains rooted in personal challenge rather than just gear optimization? What’s the balance between embracing innovation and preserving the spirit of the climb?

 

[Tayla188]

High-range cassettes may offer easier climbs, but at what cost? Risking reliance on tech over skill-building creates a divide. We must preserve the climbing's essence by embracing innovation while staying rooted in personal challenge. Striking this balance is vital. Thoughts? #cycling #geartech