[evasive]

Maybe the front chainrings are irrelevant because most of them are 22, 32, 42t; it's the cogs on the back that make the difference for climbing, correct? Do I really have the same range on a 7-speed 14-28t that someone has on an 11-speed 10-46t? Again, you can argue math all day, but I notice a huge difference even between 14-28t and 11-30t. 14-28t is so bad that I like to double-upshift just to get anything meaningful out of the gears, so I often use 1, 3, 5, 7 in the middle gear and forget 2, 4, 6. Top speed on a 14t back, and high front ring is a pathetic 15 mph, it's more like 25 mph on an 11t. Is any of this news to you guys?

None of this is news to us, but it will be to you when you finally figure this out. This is the problem with the pages and pages of strongly held opinions you offer as advice in the Beginner forum. Your argumentative and even arrogant approach to discussing things you clearly don't understand is borderline impressive.

I think you need to stop for a second and think about what gearing is. There is no need to "argue the math" as it's very simple, even without doing basic division. How can you possibly think the chainring (in front) is irrelevant when considering how difficult it is to climb with a given drivetrain. The gearing ratio is the critical factor for how hard it is to climb in a gear combination, or how fast you can go at a version cadence. Cassettes used to be a lot smaller because they were paired with multiple chainrings. With a single ring, the cassette needs to have a much larger range in order for the drivetrain to have a useful range, because you aren't changing chainring sizes.

 

[chelboed]

Hahahaha... Yup, been around the block.

I was also a moderator on Bikeforums for a few years.

My history: I rode 20's from age 7 to early teens. Skateboarded street until 1996. Started riding 26" in 1996. Raced a bit on 2005-2007 (or 2008, can't remember). Been riding for fun again since I quit racing.

Been building bikes from scratch since 2005. Modding bikes since 1980's. Owned / built single pivot, faux bar, 4-bar and a bunch of rigid and hardtails.

I've also been a huge proponent of the 1x drivetrain since 2005.

Hardtails are my favorite.

 

[291748]

Been riding and building since 91-ish.
One thing I've learned very well in that time is that the bike and it's particulars are far, far less important than the rider. I've been left in the dust on so many different bikes by guys on so many other different bikes that it's ridiculous.

 

[Cornfield]

What happened while I was away at work? There's no way I'm reading all that, at least it's on the other page now so I don't have to look at all those words.

BTW, can anyone tell me the outer diameter of a 27.5" tire mounted and aired up, preferably a Chunky Monkey or an Ardent?

 

[mik_git]

Maybe the front chainrings are irrelevant because most of them are 22, 32, 42t; it's the cogs on the back that make the difference for climbing, correct? Do I really have the same range on a 7-speed 14-28t that someone has on an 11-speed 10-46t? Again, you can argue math all day, but I notice a huge difference even between 14-28t and 11-30t. 14-28t is so bad that I like to double-upshift just to get anything meaningful out of the gears, so I often use 1, 3, 5, 7 in the middle gear and forget 2, 4, 6. Top speed on a 14t back, and high front ring is a pathetic 15 mph, it's more like 25 mph on an 11t. Is any of this news to you guys?

OK forget all that, don't worry about what gears you have when trying to think about stuff, what you need to worry about when trying to figure out whats going on is a thing called Gear Inches,its a combo of the front chainring, the rear cog and the wheel size and tellsyou how many inches the wheel will travel depending on what gear you are in. You can find a few onine calculaters that will give you a chart and from that you can see the inches that each gear in a 1x will give you, but also a 2x and 3x.

but anyway as a general guidling (not a rule) for your 3x7 setup, you use the 3 easist (biggest size) gears at the back in combo with the smallest chainring, the 3 middle cogs at the back with the middle chainring and the3 hardest (smallest size) with the big chainring.. that is how the setup is supposed to work, with a little more overlap when you really need to.

But to add, yes 14-28 rear is pretty sucky, (but then I have a 12-28 9 speed on 1 bike and have no issues) but then thats what you get when you have a cheap bike, i have a 7 speed bike out n the back room with a 12-30 7 speed, but it has a 24-34-52 front on it from when I raced it DH back in 92, so plenty of top end.

 

[chazpat]

Easy way to compare two set-ups:

Bicycle Gear Calculator

 

[Steve Adams]

Ha ha...DAMN I'M OLD!!!!! I started riding when I was six, bmx freestyle until I was 14, then moved to Mountian bikes. Raced competitively in 1995-1996, won a couple of races, placed 2nd or 3rd in many. All on my specialized I am riding now. Been around the block a time or ten for sure. also skateboarded street while riding freestyle as well. I should never have sold my Haro freestyle, or GT pro performer I had! they would be worth a lot now!!!!

 

[richj8990]

Super busy at work so need to make this reply quick. About the pedals, you guys are RIGHT and I'm WRONG. Got the 26" bike back from the shop (installed different shifters, could not do it myself for some reason), the bottom pedal at the lowest point is 4.0 inches from the ground. The 27.5" pedal is 3.75 inches from the ground. WTF!?! Why does a higher pedal scrape more? My new theory: I roll over the rocks on the 27.5" quickly enough that the pedals pass over the rocks before they hit them. With the 26", I consciously avoid rocks so I'm in-between the rocks, therefore the rocks on the side of the tires end up scraping the pedals. Maybe that's too much of a stretch, I don't know.

 

[Steve Adams]

I think it's placebo effect....that's all!

 

[richj8990]

LOL, my pedals scrape more on the 26" period. They didn't scrape today. Took the 26" on the nearest 'real' downhill trail for the first time since I installed hydraulic brakes on both ends. Sooooo much nicer down the hill than mechanicals. However, the 27.5" does the trail end to end in 4 minutes flat, the 26" in 4 minutes 50 seconds. If and when I get a wider tire on the front that time may improve 10-15 seconds but it will not catch up to the 27.5"s time.

 

[Mudguard]

LOL, my pedals scrape more on the 26" period. They didn't scrape today. Took the 26" on the nearest 'real' downhill trail for the first time since I installed hydraulic brakes on both ends. Sooooo much nicer down the hill than mechanicals. However, the 27.5" does the trail end to end in 4 minutes flat, the 26" in 4 minutes 50 seconds. If and when I get a wider tire on the front that time may improve 10-15 seconds but it will not catch up to the 27.5"s time.

I'd say there's something wrong if you have nearly a minute of difference on a 4 minute trail. I've ridden the same bike in 26" and 650B configurations and there was no measurable difference for me. And that was on a 5-6 minute downhill.

 

[291748]

I give up.

 

[Steve Adams]

I'd say there's something wrong if you have nearly a minute of difference on a 4 minute trail. I've ridden the same bike in 26" and 650B configurations and there was no measurable difference for me. And that was on a 5-6 minute downhill.

I say I agree. Either the brain chickens out because he's riding a 26r or his brakes are on all the time..ha ha.

 

[chelboed]

Ha ha...DAMN I'M OLD!!!!! I started riding when I was six, bmx freestyle until I was 14, then moved to Mountian bikes. Raced competitively in 1995-1996, won a couple of races, placed 2nd or 3rd in many. All on my specialized I am riding now. Been around the block a time or ten for sure. also skateboarded street while riding freestyle as well. I should never have sold my Haro freestyle, or GT pro performer I had! they would be worth a lot now!!!!

GT was and always will be the SHIZZLE in my book! Martin Aparijo BEEYOTCHES, YEAH!! I had a GT Vertigo street. Started riding freestyle during the Rad period in the 80's. Good memories!

LOL, my pedals scrape more on the 26" period. They didn't scrape today. Took the 26" on the nearest 'real' downhill trail for the first time since I installed hydraulic brakes on both ends. Sooooo much nicer down the hill than mechanicals. However, the 27.5" does the trail end to end in 4 minutes flat, the 26" in 4 minutes 50 seconds. If and when I get a wider tire on the front that time may improve 10-15 seconds but it will not catch up to the 27.5"s time.

They scrape more "period" because the geometry of the bikes. Not the wheel size. As far as times...I would probably lay down similar faster times on my local technical trails with a 29+ versus my 26 just because I have to actually pedal through tons of flat sections littered with softball-basketball sized rocks and rock formations / roots, etc...

The rollover efficiency is undeniable. When the trail points down though...if there's a place here and there to catch some flow and be able to bump over / launch / jump rock sections...the difference is very small.

I did a test on a really hairy loop on my rigid aluminum 26 versus my hardtail. Tons of chunk, very pedaly. I was able to complete the loop 8-minutes faster with a 140mm-forked hardtail. I never timed it on my Heckler, but I think another few minutes faster adding the 150mm rear suspension as well.

Technology is there for a reason, but the difference in a 26x2.4 versus 27.5x2.4 with all else the same wouldn't really be all that noticeable to me. Bump to a 29er, 27.5+, or 29+ and the difference would be noticeable when momentum is used appropriately.

Like I already stated some weeks earlier...you need to put yourself into other peoples shoes to really be able to make a blanket statement regarding whether or not this stuff is really worth the money.

My previous trail network was fastest on a 26" rigid 22# rocket. My current trail network is much faster (as stated above) on my hardtail...and would be ideal for a Stumpy FSR 29 or Stache type setup. Throw in more rock shelf type structures, downhill, and ways to bounce through instead of pedal through chunky flat sections...and the 26" comes back to life for me.

I give up.

Never give up, it's too much fun.

 

[Zowie]

I'd say there's something wrong

I am inclined to agree with you.

 

[291748]

Never give up, it's too much fun.

 

[chelboed]

Nothing is impossible?

 

[291748]

... but sometimes you just gotta know when to stay down.

 

[Steve Adams]

GT was and always will be the SHIZZLE in my book! Martin Aparijo BEEYOTCHES, YEAH!! I had a GT Vertigo street. Started riding freestyle during the Rad period in the 80's. Good memories!

They scrape more "period" because the geometry of the bikes. Not the wheel size. As far as times...I would probably lay down similar faster times on my local technical trails with a 29+ versus my 26 just because I have to actually pedal through tons of flat sections littered with softball-basketball sized rocks and rock formations / roots, etc...

The rollover efficiency is undeniable. When the trail points down though...if there's a place here and there to catch some flow and be able to bump over / launch / jump rock sections...the difference is very small.

I did a test on a really hairy loop on my rigid aluminum 26 versus my hardtail. Tons of chunk, very pedaly. I was able to complete the loop 8-minutes faster with a 140mm-forked hardtail. I never timed it on my Heckler, but I think another few minutes faster adding the 150mm rear suspension as well.

Technology is there for a reason, but the difference in a 26x2.4 versus 27.5x2.4 with all else the same wouldn't really be all that noticeable to me. Bump to a 29er, 27.5+, or 29+ and the difference would be noticeable when momentum is used appropriately.

Like I already stated some weeks earlier...you need to put yourself into other peoples shoes to really be able to make a blanket statement regarding whether or not this stuff is really worth the money.

My previous trail network was fastest on a 26" rigid 22# rocket. My current trail network is much faster (as stated above) on my hardtail...and would be ideal for a Stumpy FSR 29 or Stache type setup. Throw in more rock shelf type structures, downhill, and ways to bounce through instead of pedal through chunky flat sections...and the 26" comes back to life for me.

Never give up, it's too much fun.

YESSIR....the reason I bought my Pro performer was Martin!!!!! and I wore out 3 RAD VHS tapes!!! "SEND ME AN ANGEL!"

 

[richj8990]

Maybe this belongs in the drivetrain section but if a 7-speed freewheel can only go up to 11-30t for climbing (the 14-34t freewheel supposedly sucks because it doesn't thread on right), then can you buy a triple crankset for the front that's less teeth? The smallest I've seen is 22-32-42 and I already have that. The smaller ones than that are for 9-10 speeds. Is there any 7-8 speed triple crankset that's smaller than 22-32-42? That way it could climb hills better without having to do a big wheel/shifter/cassette conversion.

BTW the 2nd time with the 27.5" downhill on the aforementioned trail was 4 minutes 20 seconds, 30 seconds faster than the 26". The 27.5" has a front tire that is right now 0.55 inches wider, and the Tektro brakes seem noticeably stronger than the Hayes/Deore mix on the 26". That may account for most of the remaining time difference. The Deore also tends to lock up the rear tire a lot more than the Tektro does. I wish someone made a rear wheel-specific tire that had more lateral tread instead of front-back radial tread. The Continental Trail King and Mountain King visually are the closest to what I'm wanting but I actually had the Trail King on a previous bike and it was pretty disappointing on the back. Oh well.