Dumb singlespeed(sort of) question. Tire circumference/diameter.

ChrisG said:
I’m sure the engineer/physicist types among us can better explain why physically larger gears are more efficient.
Click to expand...

technically yes, but so marginal its not even worth talking about(this is one of those things engineers refer to as 'negligible' and then proceed to ignore), you have less friction from the flexing of the chain links since they have to bend less around a bigger cog . . . .
 
1speed said:
Not what I am saying at all. You might be faster on a 34:22, while someone else might be faster on a 34:20. So ... who wins? You don't know, do you? Of course you don't. Because you don't have the most important piece of information, do you? You don't know who is on that 34:20. I don't (necessarily) disagree that everyone has an "optimal cadence". But so what? You take the best, fittest rider out there and force him to race on something other than his "optimal cadence" while you put all your time and effort into figuring out every marginal gain you can bring to the table, and you know what? He still beats you. Because he's better than you. Which means, sure, work out all the marginal gains you want with your equipment and your tire width and your optimal cadence and all the other secondary or tertiary stuff. Then show up to a race where guys like Wadsworth or Harding are lining up and you're still at best racing for third. Because the factors that really matter (like just plain fitness and skill) operate on a scale all of those things together will never come close to touching.
Click to expand...
This sounds like someone that settles for a position in a race.I'm only trying to beat myself. I want to leave the best me out there. Guess what, when Wadsworth or Pflug aren't there who's in 1st? The 3rd place guy. I played my cards wrong this last race and ended up 3rd. Between a course glitch on my Garmin and burning matches the wrong time I lost second by 2 minutes. I did this 3 min faster than last year on an identical course and saying 10 lbs more. Why? Marginal gains. What I have learned over the years of racing these. I could have settled for 5th but I passed 3rd and 4th at the last aid station. Then the little guy passed me on the last climb and dropped me by 2 min. I knew the end of that course I was fast for me(hike a bike, downhill and flat). So I hammered all that was easy for me, caught up and passed back into 3rd in the last mile.I was locked up and cramping but in my mind 3rd is better than 4th. What if 1st flatted out? Or maybe 1st and 2nd did?
 
ChrisG said:
Oval rings drive me crazy. I don’t question their effectiveness for other users, but they’re not for me.
Click to expand...
I just bought Ricks Salsa that has an oval ring. Feels ok seated, but if I stand and sprint, it feels crazy weird to me!

As for the bigger rings thats a thing in BMX racing also. Called “California gearing” which is just using bigger rings to achieve the same rollout as smaller rings. Never tried it and never read any explanation that convinced me it provides an advantage other than chain wrap, but some people swear it feels better and provides some type of advantage so maybe there is something to it.
 
Hey Dave, it's been a minute. I'll jump in for sec with a quick thought. At first I was with @Mitch's zzz's. I mean, the trouble with over analyzing is that you better not skip over any contributing factor. It's easy to miss the target. Trying to pen out a calculated comparison seems in vain compared to real world testing due to the nuances of some of the variables. I think you're right on the money with your idea of measuring distance traveled for x amount of revs (I'd certainly do more than 1 rev. say 10 revs and draw a line in the dirt). All all things considered, I'm willing to wager - go up one tooth and you'll be fine. And shave your legs.

From another perspective - how may options do you really have..two..three tops? Give each gear a few rides if you have time.

I also fully support your effort for laying out all the maths and in hindsight you'll see how close your analytics came to reality. Then you can go crazy trying to apply correction factors to individual variables all at once ;)
 
While I agree, socks are a 30x more expensive investment over a razor and 3 minutes of your time
 
Chiming in with my recent SS gearing experiment. With the Summer Sizzler coming up, where I've run 32x18 in the past, put on 34x19 for a few pre-rides and felt I could stay on top of my pedal strokes without feeling I was spun out or working too hard. So I hope this helps @Matt_
 
JDurk said:
Chiming in with my recent SS gearing experiment. With the Summer Sizzler coming up, where I've run 32x18 in the past, put on 34x19 for a few pre-rides and felt I could stay on top of my pedal strokes without feeling I was spun out or working too hard. So I hope this helps @Matt_
Click to expand...
That should help a lot, especially at a place like sizzler. Getting momentum into those punchy climbs is key. Looking forward to seeing you Sunday 🤘

Edit: to stay on topic.... I don't shave, I wear baggy shorts, and my idea of training is drinking beer after a fun ride. My SS "philosophy" isn't as complex as DT, but I also don't do endurance races like him. I typically go into every race wondering if I'll be able to finish without blowing up 😅
 
Matt_ said:
That should help a lot, especially at a place like sizzler. Getting momentum into those punchy climbs is key. Looking forward to seeing you Sunday 🤘

Edit: to stay on topic.... I don't shave, I wear baggy shorts, and my idea of training is drinking beer after a fun ride. My SS "philosophy" isn't as complex as DT, but I also don't do endurance races like him. I typically go into every race wondering if I'll be able to finish without blowing up 😅
Click to expand...
You kill it either way Matt! I gotta LOL at “thise punchy climbs”. What climbs? I drink too much beer but as they say in Germany while pointing at the belly….Das ist mein Tank für mein Kompressor!
 
shrpshtr325 said:
technically yes, but so marginal its not even worth talking about(this is one of those things engineers refer to as 'negligible' and then proceed to ignore), you have less friction from the flexing of the chain links since they have to bend less around a bigger cog . . . .
Click to expand...
Have you watched any of Dylan's YouTube videos? They discuss why 12 speed drivetrains are actually less efficient. Basically a 34/52 loses efficiency because of the chain angle. It's actually better to run a 32 front and use the next cog down. Same goes for the 10 tooth. The lack of chain wrap outweighs the effect of a lighter front front chainring.
 
Dave Taylor said:
Have you watched any of Dylan's YouTube videos? They discuss why 12 speed drivetrains are actually less efficient. Basically a 34/52 loses efficiency because of the chain angle. It's actually better to run a 32 front and use the next cog down. Same goes for the 10 tooth. The lack of chain wrap outweighs the effect of a lighter front front chainring.
Click to expand...
This actually makes a lot of sense to me. Maybe this is why I like the MicroShift AdventX 10-speed setup so much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom