Guitar Ted’s thoughts on gearing: Guitar Ted has been talking about lower gearing for 29″ers almost as long as Twenty Nine Inches has been around. Here is his latest piece on the subject.
With the spec that Shimano’s 12-36T cassette is getting on 29″ers these days, there is a lot of chatter about gearing for the big wheeled bikes again. Not that there hasn’t been any discussion of this, it goes all the way back to the dawn of the modern 29″er. However; now that the gearing choices have been more equalized, the chatter hasn’t been all praises. Here are my thoughts on the matter…………
The Gary Fisher Rumblefish I is one of many 2010 29″ers that will be spec’ed with the Shimano 12-36T cassette.
Why The Low, Low Gears?: These 12-36 cassettes and previous to that, any talk of 20T granny gears, got a lot of folks wondering why? Couldn’t you just get stronger, lose some weight, or walk faster than that low a gear? Well, maybe the answer to that is yes, but maybe it is something different. I used to adhere to the “walking is faster” train of thought, but after talking to some high mountain riders and bikepackers, I suddenly saw where the really low gear made sense. Then there is personal pride in conquering an obstacle without setting a foot down, or in old school parlance, “without dabbing”. This is an old badge of pride that you either get or don’t, but I can certainly respect those who want to do it all on two wheels if possible. Maybe one could get more fit than they are, or maybe “life is getting in the way” of that goal and low gears allow that person to more fully enjoy their riding. Who is to say that is wrong? I say, if it makes you want to ride your bike more- go for it!
Is it a marketing ploy to play on the 29″er thing?: The whole thing is cooked up just to sell more product to whining 29′er freaks, eh? There will always be conspiracy theorists, but really, this goes far beyond 29″ers. Back in the early 90′s you could buy all sorts of gizmos to reduce gearing to wall scaling ratios. And that was on 26″ers! Maybe the desire for low, low gears isn’t as tied to the wheel size as we might think. Is it psychological then? Maybe it is, but so what? If it gives that person an edge to do more than they would have without it, no big deal. And although it may come as a surprise to some, Shimano and possibly others to follow are in business to make money. If they feel there is a viable market for a product they can sell to make money, why shouldn’t they? If that is a marketing ploy, then I’m all for it.
Exercise Your Options- Or Not: So what of this 12-36T cassette?, (or any other gizmo for mountain biking, for that matter) Bottom line: It is another option. A viable option, one that you can vote for with your dollar, or not. If it doesn’t make sense to a particular person on any level, than no one is going to force you to get on board with it. Even if you buy a 2010 rig with one of these cassettes on it, you are getting it at a below wholesale price, and you should be able to take off the offensive bit and replace it, while selling the 12-36T to cover your “upgrade” piece. That sort of thing happens all the time with mountain bikes.
Choices Are Good: In the end it is just another choice that gives the 29 inch wheeling mountain biker another tool to use. Maybe you want a killer range on a 1X9 set up, or you want a great 2X9 set up that will allow you to stay in the big ring more. Maybe you are a rock crawlin’ high alpine rider with a bent towards bikepacking. These and other uses are a great place to think strongly about a 12-36T cassette, or different choices for crank gearing. It’s just another choice to help some of us get around off road, and that’s all good.
Guitar Ted
Hi GT, I have heard that discussion over and over but really enjoyed reading through this editorial: “You didn´t say anything new but you sure said it well.”
Ted, if you have the spec, could your share the tooth count per cog?
i34 should be enough. Where I live, most of the good trails go straight up. Anyone with OK fitness should be fine on a 34 cassette. Just my two cents
when compact chainrings came out for road bikes, it was a signifigant difference going from a standard double with a low gear combo of 39/27 which gave you a 39in climbing gear, compact offered a low gear combo of 34/28 which gave you a 32in climbing gear, 7 gear inches is a huge difference. for 29er’s, the difference between a 22/34 combo or a 22/36 is less than 1 gear inch. That’s nothing, that’s less than the difference between shifting from your 32 to your 34 that you have now. IMO it’s poinless.
Agreed. Anything that makes life easier for someone who drags his or her big butt up a mountain, along with a heavy bike, a tent, sleeping bag and food & drinks for a few days, is probably a good thing
.
However, I think it’s much more simple than that. A big range cassette makes for a great selling point for anyone who thinks of themselves as less fit.
If I was a bike salesman, I would tell every ‘I’d like to pick up cycling to get fit’ customer that cannot decide between a road/semi-offroad ‘sports bike’ and a mountainbike to buy the 29″ mountainbike. Why? Because the flashy world of mountainbiking is now within range of YOU, because of these new gears and the bigger tires. No matter how steep or loose, at last, now YOU can climb these hills too and be comfortable at the same time. They would find out I lied about that last bit, but probably are too ashamed of their form to come back and argue
.
In the end, the gear difference is minimal indeed, but it makes for a great selling point.
The only part I disagree with is the 1×9 gear range, at least with 12-36. With 11-36 this would be true, but 12-36 is hardly different to 11-34 with a slightly smaller chainring up front.
I can see some use for this cassette on my Pugsley, but on the 29er? No way. I get the challenge thing, and making it up something w/o dabs. Truth be told though, I’d rather get off and walk a bit.
I was inquiring above about the cog teeth to find out how the gear ratio are distributed. If there are large gaps between them, then the price for a large cog (36t) is a degraded ride quality.
i think it’s great for 1×8 set ups. now there’s a lower bail out option without the need for additional rings up front.
er, 1×9
Great view on gearing . I like the wide range of thoughts,if it motivates you ride whether its 1 speed or 11 . fantastic ! Lets not forget the mountain tamer quad . if 3 is good 4 is better and you have a 4 by 1 set up.talk about wide ratio ! Happy trails
I wonder how many people that say that 36 tooth is too much, are riding a rigid singlespeed. I mean, why would you need any gears at all. You should only need one. But wait, you mean that having more than one gear is a good thing.(Then what is the big deal over one or two more teeth?) What does it matter who uses how many teeth? As long as the person using it is happy. And as for suspension. None of us should be using it. It is for sissies. Only real men ride 26 inch wheels on a rigid bike….. I personally think anyone on a rigid, or hardtail bike is crazy when there is the comfort of full suspension. Why would you chose a single speed when you can use gears that will make the ride easier. These are all choices that we EACH have to make. If you want to use it, go ahead. If you don’t… Why worry about someone else that does. Me personally…. I’m looking forward to getting my fat butt on my Rumblefish and slowly climbing up some of the hills I may not have made it up before. Bring on the extra teeth. I’m excited about it.
Everybody rides differently and I am certainly not telling anybody else how to ride, but I’ll tell ya what, on my geared 29er Full Floater I can grind up damn near any hill I find with the 22 ring up front and 32 in back.
Won’t be putting a 36 on my cassette any time soon.
@Randy:
“I personally think anyone on a rigid, or hardtail bike is crazy when there is the comfort of full suspension”
There are many reasons to ride HD and/or rigid. The fact that it does not suite your personal preference does not make their riders “carzy”. Much like any other market, the bicycle industry offers plenty of products to suit many riding styles and terrains.
The most important thing is your are having fun
Martini,
Yes for the Pugs for sure. Don’t discount it for other types of riding situation though.
Riding the Arrowhead 135 the first year, I quickly became aware just how much energy (and more importantly…muscle strain) was being induced by frequent dismounting and remounting. I could feel it in my hip flexors enough to influence my bike set up for the next year.
And that’s coming from a guy who actually doesn’t mind walking. Hope you are doing well dude.
Having been a gear dabbler, and having ridden the full gamut of 1×8, 1×9, 2×9, 3×9, 1×1 on all sorts of bikes over the years, it’s a crapshoot. DIfferent specs for different bikes, terrain, riding styles.
The part about fitness is a small part of the discussion. It really comes down to what you want . YOU + BIKE = ????
For example: I just set my Asylum with a 20-30-36 chainring set up on a 32t cassette. I wanted to try a triple (instead of a 22-32 double) that would still give me clearance over logs and step-ups, but allow me a “transportation gear” on the roads to the trail head. The lower gearing helped in a few places, but had very little effect on my overall ride. Just an experiment.
I really dug the 22-32 with a 32t cassette for most riding prior to that.
I used to run a 24-34-44 on my hardtail back in the day for racing, and loved that as well.
And of course, who hasn’t played around with their singlespeed gearing for different goals????
It’s similar to re-gearing the transmission/final drive on a car. My Outback is geared super-low and has a larger engine than my wife’s RAV-4. Her car gets better mileage and cruises the freeways faster, while mine will go up damn near anything it can get its wheels over.
I won’t buy one personally, but options are always good…. just like I wish they still mass-produced the old XT/XTR 8 speed group.
Finally, I will have a use for my 72t outer ring!
Larger cogs are universally better. Wear, friction. OK, not weight, but that’s overrated anyway.
What 12-36 really does, it make a standard crankset on a 29″er feel just like the same crankset on a 26″er with 11-32. People ride and see that everywhere, it feels like a base line of sorts. And if you like holding on in the middle ring, 32-36 really is a smooth turning gear, seperate of its length.
Pushing a 44x12x29″ is also a step up from 44x11x26″. You get the rolling resistance relief, and a smooth running gear. There is a reason why 10t hasn’t been made to work very often yet (it can be done) : it SUKKS. So, large is good here.
Not reducing front rings also helps combatting chain sukk, althoug the small ring lovers will tell you it’s fine when properly maintained, and not used in centain types of mud where bikes should not be plowing through anyway.
I still would like a more liberal cassette. More range. So, still a (sukky) 11t on there, and then up to 36 or more. In less steps than 9, also. But I am a bit of a singlespeeder, so consider that.
I race cat 1 on the road, and I’m all in favor of sissy gears–I can mash a big gear up any climb, but I’m often faster spinning a small one. But until recently I always raced with an 11×23 because, until SRAM, no one offered an 11-tooth cog with anything bigger than a 23. A 12×36 cassette has the same problem on the mountain that a 12×27 has on the road: if you need a 36 (or a 27) to get up, you’ll want an 11 to get down.
Wouldn’t the chain rings be an easier place to start?
@Willie: The current 104/64 BCD cranks that SRAM and Shimano sell, and are the predominate spec on bikes these days is already at minimum with the 22 and 32 tooth rings. Going smaller is possible, but not without what these companies consider “serious” compromises.
The “granny ring” is pretty much stuck where it is at, and the big companies don’t see going to a 30T, lets say, is a good split of the available gear ratios from large ring to small.
It is true that a rider could do this on their own. Smaller middle rings do exist, but the cost of these and time and labor to install make them about equal or worse than just popping on a cassette.
In reality, most folks interested in 12-36T cassettes are probably going to go to work on both ends of the drive train.
I do a 2×9 setup. I ran an action tec 20t small ring with a 32t middle ring a 11-32 cassette and that shifted great. Just two problems though, I had to grind the tabs on my xt crank to fit the small ring. Also there was a slight drivetrain pulse due to the teeth that were not fully cut to work with the 64mm bolt circle diameter. I think that the 21t ring would be the way to go. Normal teeth and just low enough with an 11-34 cassette if you need it. Right now I am doing a 22/34 up front and a 13-34 out back and that has been great. Good pedaling and all the gear range I need.
I like the option of other ratios out there and welcome the 36t cassette. Looks like it would be good for 1x9s. Some people have been complaining about the gaps between gears being too big. They aren’t. They are the same as an 11-32 cassette minus the 11 and plus a 36.
I need to spin those pedals on the long and steep climbs to not go into overload on my marathons. So I just got me a 12-36T in combo with 22 up front. According to my rough calculations it works out about 5% heavier than a 22/34 combo on a 26er (or about 1% lighter than a 22/32).
Now I can control my pulse better on climbs and I last longer. Works for me. BTW, the 12-36T weighs in at 424g.
Just one of those old guys who likes to clear stuff “without dabbing”. That said, I’m looking forward to a 36t on my 26″ wheels.
Choice is nice. Real choice that is. Functional choices. and if part of ones choice is a demand for gear options and reduced weight then so be it and let the record show to all these companies that function and options drive sales and innovation perhaps more than the insider industry elite
Consumer demand can drive innovation as well as the elite racers in each discipline. bring on the color too if that is what people want
The thing about 29ers is that it is indeed consumer demand driving this niche.
I like this discussion, however trying to have this discussion on MTBR or any uberbling boys club we get chest beating and name calling who is super gnar and who is not and who worries about weight on bike vs weight on gut and who is more core who was the first member of the forum. blah blah
thanks for the opinions GT
As a big dude my riding style has changed over the years. I have gone from an early 90′s 6’4″ 180 pound sick fitness roadie and XC mtb hardtail driving climbing machine to a 225 base pedaling roadie who bounces up and down on his FS. I have never really embraced the FS apart from the obvious advantage in rough terrain on the down side of a climb because of the pedal bounce and yes I have tried them all. but that is me
I to this day am not comfortable spinning up hill in a granny gear because of my size on a 26er. Balance is an issue. I am on top of the bike. I rode a 29er and felt I was in the bike and the need for travel in the back was a non issue for my slow ass and that was that. never went back. and i could comfortably have my hardtail option back
Now that I am in the bike and balance is better I look for that spin gearing and the 36 might just work. I might be in the minority but I appreciate the option and demand less weight in the future
Especially on a 1×9
With that said the 1×9 is new to me so can someone point me to 1×9 set up option articles so I don’t have to read through all the uberwankers on mtbr.
Regards
Chris
To add
I want my dinner plate on the table and in my cassette
out
@Big Chris: On a 1 X 9 set up, your focusing primarily on the chain ring placement and chain retention on that front chain ring. Chainline should be such that on the middle of the cassette your chain should be straight to your front chain ring, ideally. Usually this would equate to the middle chain ring position of a triple crank, or the inside of the spider on single speed cranks. (Might be different if you are using old school square taper cranks, or adjustable chain line BB’s)
Then you would want to have a device that keeps your chain from jumping off the front chain ring. Paul Components has an excellent one and I suggest you check that out for a great example. A good cheap way to go is to use a front derailluer and lock its position in with the limit screws. (Basically a less elegant solution that is the same as the Paul Component one)
Some folks get away with nothing more than a “jump stop/chain watcher” type device. A great tip is to always use a single speed specific front chain wheel as it will have no profiled teeth and taller teeth which helps greatly with the chain retention issues.
Hope that helps!
in reality, the 12-36 isnt going to cause any issues, but only creating options and choices. From a 1×9 perspective it creates something i have been longing for, to throw a monster ring on the front and still have decent high end and low end options. i feel like i can run at 36 or even a 38 front ring and still have plenty of options for climbing and sprinting,
Bring on the hubcap gearing
GT
Mountainbike Action, new issue, reports that Shimano has a 29er specific drivetrain in the works, any info from your sources?