Cadence. Speed.90 rpm at 5km/h90 rpm at 10km/h90 rpm at 15km/h90 rpm at 20km/h90 rpm at 25km/hI've been thinking about gear ratios and this seems the minimal amount of gears on could get by with.It will allow me to tackle hard climbs and headwinds at a healthy cadence. And I rarely exceed 25 km/h on a touring rig with 4 loaded panniers and two top loads on the flats. Heavy speeds with heavy loads are dangerous as well plus I just coast downhill. I find low gearing is much more important to save the knees, big gears are redundant for me.Now what are the gear combinations I need to achieve this?
>>1798464Is there even a derailleur that can handle that kjnd of range
>>1798455Better focus on achieving this and more with a 10, 12 or 14 speed with 5,6,7 in the back and 2 in the front
>>1798468
>>179846428t to 46t jump lmao, OP will go from grinding on a climb to spinning like a hamster.
>>1798455stop thinking so hardget a mountain double and an 11-36 cassetteif you want to get weird replace the 11-36 with wide range 11-42
>>1798583what's a "mountain double"? MTBs have either one or three chainrings. or are you talking about a sub-compact crankset?
>>1798588> Shimano XT FC-M785 / 26-38 zoom zoom
>>1798591I'm 33 and I've literally never seen a MTB double crankset before
>>1798592That's strange. They were on almost every high end MTB before 1x arrived
>>1798455i'm all for gear autism discussion and whacky setups but this purely hypothetical, extreme niche custom idea for no discernable reasonits basically just shitposting
>>1798455go watch pathlesspedaled on YouTube he just did a video about this
>>1798455>Now what are the gear combinations I need to achieve this?what wheel size and tire width?
Why would you need 5-20 kmh
>>17984555km/h is dangerously slow with a loaded bike.
>>1798592That's strange. I'm 35, and remember when mountain triples were common.>>1798598>go watch pathlesspedaledHard pass.
>>1798464This is terrible. Please delete this file.
>>1799737"Mountain double" is very rare. Mountain triple is absolutely everywhere, retard boomer
>>1798455I know that you think your are capable of build bike 5 swed for tour an dyiu know that it is possible yes of course to your any how much distance is only a questions of will you. Know I known a. Nwmbwhonisnofn75 hey riDes almost t 100 miles per hour and he think he is professional your. But you know what eh leack ati a he SPORIJ T OF THE TOUR HE SOES NOR HAVE SPIEIT because is who feel ok feel good feel comfortable feel like I eid bfor fun and by ej n I'll tnhabd. That becau see e speed because fatt no feel no feel no see
>>1798476Kill Yosemite you fucking homo
Guys I already solved it lmaoI am going with a 32t front and a 7 speed 13-34 in the back. Now bye
>>1799871This is the most realistic route I could have taken financially
you'll likely have to disable Hyperglide alimentsome shifts will be more clunky than others
>>1799873>>1799871>32X12 max gearyou WILL regret this
>>1799921>>1799921No. This is for a touring bicycle with a +30 kg load, 4 panniers and a very upright seating position. Average speeds between 10 and 20 km/h. I used to ride a single speed with a single gear equivalent to a 32x13, around 90 rpm at 27 kph. it was perfect gear for me, I never desired anything higher for that singlespeed. So it's the perfect top gear for me. Bicycles tend to have gears for way too high speeds. Stop pretending like a bicycle is a vehicle. I am not a cyclist, but a wheeled pedestrian. You need to embrace unracing and stop pushing your knees.
I would unironically go down to a 28t front chainring if I had the possibility in fact. For a heavy loaded uprigh touring bike I just don't need gears beyond 25 km/h.
>>1799936Anyone who thinks he needs gears for beyond the 25km/h 30 km/h range on a +30kg loaded touring upright bike has obviously never ridden a heavy loaded touring bike.You cannot compare this to riding a road bicycle without panniers. Not even to a lightweight bikepacking setup. This is bicycle touring more akin to bicycle hoboíng.
>>1799939nah thats bullshitif you're real nigga touring youre on big boy topography you can spin a gear down a literal mountain
>>1799951Bro just coast downhill, it's so easy.
>>1799965This. With a 40 kg load you are not gonna pedal down hill. You are gonna coast and focus on breaking and balancing the bike so you don't fly out of the turn
>>1799966Based gravity gear !!!
>>1799966my touring bike has a 53x11 top gear and i spin out down hillsget good
>>1798455lmao at pedalfags
>>1799975Thank you for posting an off-topic drivetrain with regards to OP's question. Feel free to start your own thread about how much you like your touring bike's gearing!
>>1799998you wish you had 27 gears
>>1800000I still fail to see the relevance of your bicycle's drivetrain in this thread. Feel free to create another thread discussing the benefits of 53x11 on a touring bike! I'm sure we'll have some invigorating discussions there!
Buy a rohloff transmission.Requires oil changes every now and then. It is also expensive but a very nice design
>>1798591>not 22-36ngmi
>>1800000Not him but you don't though, it's more like 10-14 actual distinct ratios. most of them are so similar as to be essentially the same, and there's a lot of overlap. You already know this, so please stop being a cunt.
>>1800000Nice.>>1799998>off-topic>>1800004Yeah, you're in the wrong here. OP said some dumb stuff, but this is a "touring bike gearing thread". You're delusional if you think otherwise.>>1800050I don't think you're making the point you want. Even if you guessed his gearing correctly ("if"), a 4 or 5% difference is noticeable on a loaded bike.
>>1799867Damn you're fucked ahahahaha
>>1800055>Even if you guessed his gearing correctly ("if")ok samefag, never said I did. I just picked some typical numbers from one of the presets, and you already know that.also triple crank with anything more than 8 gears is rslur-tarded, but you clearly aren't ready for that discussion.
>>1798455>Cadence. Speed.>90 rpm at 5km/h>90 rpm at 10km/h>90 rpm at 15km/h>90 rpm at 20km/h>90 rpm at 25km/h5km/h to 25km/h is 500% gearing range, getting that off a single ring drivetrain is impossible without going into the 12 speed 10-5x territory.Moreover, 5km/h @ 90rpm _requires_ 22/52 gear ratio. Coupled to a 22T front ring, you'd need a sram 10-52 cassette to get to 25-ish km/h @ 90rpm. Provided you'd actually do it, it would get exceedingly expensive to run. Small rings imply higher chain tension, which leads to high chain wear.Even in your fantasy world, where you get your five gears, you'd be murdering the two fastest ones pretty goddamn fast.If you are the the 'contrarian' type who needs to have everything different and retro-grouchy, consider 2x8 or 2x9 with 11-42 cassette and a 22-30 or 22-32 crankset. Nothing is available off the shelf with this arrangement, but you can cobble it with bits and pieces yourself.
>>1798476That would not work. 11-46 over five cogs is a different cassette to 11-46 over 11 cogs. The cassette profile ( the slope ) is radically different.
>>1798588Mountain double is what MTBs were progressing to from the 9 speed era forwards, but it was cut short by 1x with wide range. They arose when people found out that 4x pie plate was rarely used and could be ditched, so they did, being left with the two remaining chainrings.They are widely available still.
>>1799975whats your lowest gear are you good going uphill
>>1798455But why? Why only 5 gears? Having more gears isn't even more work, the technology exists anon.
>>1800297It would work, the derailleur is completely passive, the cogs make it open or close as needed.What would be hard to find is a shifter.
>>1804024friction barends bro, it's a touring bike
