What's your favourite gear ratio?

48-19 is just such a fun gearing. Urge to wheelie like a dick is constant.

I'd been trying to decide whether to rock 48/18 or 19 on my new braekless HHSB tarck weapon.

This comment has made my mind up.

This and max skid patches.

So, I've been running 46/17 for the last... year or so, first singlespeed, now fixed.
I like it very much, it's reasonable uphill and I don't spin out on flats. I can't really skid on it though.
But as winter is approaching I'd like something lighter and easier controllable on wet and slippery surfaces. So...
44/17? or even 42/17?

46/18 would give you approx 67GI (same as 48/19), which is the recommend ratio for all season.

The other recommendation is to keep the ratio, but add a rear brakes to allow more control on poorer surface.

Thanks.
Sheldons calcuator gives me 72GI for 46/17 on 28-622 and 165mm cranks.
48/19 would be 67GI
42/17 would be 66GI
44/17 would be 69GI

so maybe 42/17?
I'm not too keen on changing the sprocket for one with even numbers of teeth, and would like to change only one component of the drivetrain.

re rearbrake:
The problem is not slowing down, it's accelerating. If I have to use more force to accelerate, I'm more likely to loose control (or so I think)

I did all of my winter riding last year on 44/17, it's a nice gear.

Yeah I think 70" is where most people end up.

I settled on 48x18 (70") and rode that for three years without feeling the need to change.

The problem is not slowing down, it's accelerating. If I have to use more force to accelerate, I'm more likely to loose control (or so I think)

You mean lose traction on the rear wheel (climbing etc)?

A lower gear will let you stay seated longer, putting your weight over the rear wheel for better traction. The higher cadence through slippery corners is an acquired taste, but it's all good.

A lower gear will let you stay seated longer.

Heh, very difficult to stay seated on the descent if your saddle height isn't set correctly.

Bouncy bouncy, oh such a good time.

You've gone wrong! Best to stay sat down for that type of thing :-/

#protip

So.... 44t or 42t chainring? Such decision, many headache.

@miro_o Yes, that's what I meant. If I have to push harder while accelerating I'm more likely to loose traction. Did that once last year. First the rear slipped, then the front, then I landed on my ass looking like an idiot.

@edscoble spinning out on descents works quite well, I think I got the saddle height covered.

Now what chainring to buy....

Now what chainring to buy....

Or which sprocket? 46/19 is an option.

Yes, but 46/19 is about 64GI, which is really not a lot...

How much do you "feel" the difference in speed anyway?

64" with 165mm cranks is less than 0.1% difference in gain ratio compared with 66" and 170mm.

So "only a little bit" then?

;-)

Thanks, but why would I change the crank length? I know that different crank lengths influence the gain ratio, but as I don't want to change the crank, I don't see where that's relevant?

I'm using Sheldons calculator which should factor in the crank length.
I'm at 72" at the moment, and would get to 69" or 66" with 44t or 42t chainrings respectively, or 64" with a 19t cog.
All with 165mm cranks.

Just stick on 48x19, it's been everyone's winter gear for the past 70 years. I wouldn't use a 44t all winter again, big rings just feel nicer.

Thanks, but why would I change the crank length?

I'm not suggesting that, I'm just pointing out that you're making 2" difference into a bigger deal than it is, at least in terms of a gear ratio for general winter riding.

Sheldon's gear inch calculator ignores crank length, you need to be using his gain ratio calculation to include that.

48/19 4lyf

Sheldon's gear inch calculator ignores crank length, you need to be using his gain ratio calculation to include that.

Thanks, did not know that.

I'm not suggesting that, I'm just pointing out that you're making 2" difference into a bigger deal than it is, at least in terms of a gear ratio for general winter riding.

Overthinking is very much my style. I'll just try something out with cheap chainrings, and If I don't like it I'll just change it back.

Thanks everyone.

I'll just try something out with cheap chainrings, and If I don't like it I'll just change it back.

From where you're starting, I'd have gone with 46/19* for this winter, and if you still think 2" is a big difference you can get a 48T chainring in the spring.

*What I've actually got on my hack bike is 46/18 (about 67.5" with my tyres), but I have two brakes :-) & 170mm cranks and live in the countryside, so I do less stop-start than most. I'd probably drop down to 63" for town.

So I went with 42/17 in the end.
I didn't want to faff about with chainwhip and hook wrench, and I found a nice and cheap 42t chainring online.

42/17 feels great accelerating and decelerating and for anything around town. Only on long flat straight roads it feels a little slow/spinny.
I feel the urge to raise the bars a bit and mount a front rack.

Just changed from 46/16 to 46/17. First day commuting on it today Sydenham - Aldgate, think my knees prefer it, doesn't seem much slower either.

I am moving out from greece into london with a 48x17 gear n breakless. I see many people here playing around 46x16. how could anyone describe the roads of london? I am going to live around hyde park if this helps.

Renewed love for 47x17.

Two prime numbers, skid patches galore, a perfectly speedy yet pleasant cruising ratio.

And @jimmyflysuppah London is flat. There's a couple of small steep hills South East (around Black Heath), North (around Hampstead Heath) and that's about it.

The lower gears are just because traffic is a mess, pedestrians are a hazard on the road, and emergency braking is needed too frequently even if you're paying attention. Somewhere between 69" and 79" is what most people ride in London, with a slight bias toward the lower end of that range.

.