Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner

Switch from 53/39 to 52/36?

53K views 102 replies 28 participants last post by  SystemShock 
#1 ·
I'm debating a move from a standard double to a 52/36. I live in Utah and ride a lot of mountains. I'm a big guy, and on some of these 8% + grades, even when using my 29 tooth cog in the back my cadence drops...sometimes all the way down in to the 50's. On a favorite climb, I have to push 350+ Watts just to keep a cadence of around 70...and i can't push that power consistently for an hour. I'm wondering if I wouldn't benefit from a 52/36.

In normal riding, I keep my cadence around 90. One side of me thinks if I could keep my cadence higher I could keep the same speed with lower effort, or matching my effort increase my speed. The other side of me wonders if I wouldn't just keep the same cadence and go slower because I'm in a lower gear!

What do you guys think? Has anyone made a similar change? Did it help your climbing?

Thanks in advance...I'm about to pull the trigger but haven't convinced myself it will improve anything yet.
 
#2 ·
well it's clear going from 39 -> 36 will cause an almost 8% shriveling of your nads.
Other than that. As long as you can push yourself, why would you end up going slower by having a lower minimum gear?
If you are uncomfortable with your current gearing I don't see what you have to loose. Might as well go to a true compact though while at it. you can still just put on a smaller cassette for flatter rides if that is a concern.
 
#3 ·
Climbing is never easy. The same amount of total effort is needed to get up an incline regardless of the gearing. With compact cranks it is easier to turn the pedals, but, you go slower. With a higher cadence you may find that you don't have muscle cramps as much because you aren't mashing for long periods of time.

I live in North Carolina and ride in the mountains quite a bit. I started out with a standard double and later got a compact crank 50/34. If you do crits or road racing, you might need the 53 or 52. If not, just do it and get a 50/34.

Two things make you faster on climbs: 1. Training 2. Weight loss
 
#4 · (Edited)
Keep in mind that the change from the 53 to the 52 will be almost imperceptible and that the change from the 39 to the 36 is the same gear percentage change you would get by making a 1-tooth change around the middle of the cassette with your shifter. Point being, don't put too much hope into this proposed change.
 
#5 ·
Thanks for the input thus far guys.

I guess I should add a few things. This is my main road bike, and I ride it quite a bit. Last year I put about 7,500 miles on this bike. I don't do crits, but I do a fair amount of road races.

I realize weight loss will help, and I realize that training will help too. I'm just wondering if the ability to keep my cadence up might help me last longer. I have a road race coming up that is 118 miles and has over 12,000 feet of climbing. It's not for about 4 months, but that has me a little nervous with the gearing I currently have. The race ends with an 8 mile, 7-9% climb with a summit finish. That's after two long hard climbs (one being 15+ miles), and several shorter (1-2 miles at 10%) hard climbs.

I've just been thinking that I may be able to stay off frying my legs that much longer if I could keep the cadence up higher.

Like wim said...maybe I'm over thinking it. I know I don't want a standard compact...my rear cassette is a 12/29 and in order to get an 11 (which I would have to have going to a 50T front ring) my biggest rear cog can be a 25, which won't work for me.

Actually...that has me thinking. I wonder what the difference in gear inches is on a 34x25 vs. a 39x29...off to do some math.
 
#7 ·
#8 ·
One side of me thinks if I could keep my cadence higher I could keep the same speed with lower effort, or matching my effort increase my speed. The other side of me wonders if I wouldn't just keep the same cadence and go slower because I'm in a lower gear!
You will likely keep the same cadence and go slower because you're in a lower gear.

Switching to a 53/36 or 50/34 will not make climbing easier, but you likely will be able to increase your cadence above the 50s. Whether you can maintain a cadence around 70 for an hour with higher gearing is doubtful. That has more to do with your fitness level.
 
#10 ·
I've traditionally ridden/raced 53/39. I'm building a new bike up with Dura Ace 9000 11-speed and opted for the 52/36 with a 12-28 cassette. I had a 50/34 in the past which I didn't like because I always felt like I was between the rings. I felt like I shifted the FD much more often with the 50/34. I think with the 12-28's range that the 52/36 shouldn't have that issue.

My biggest concern is about the number of cogs I'll need to shift when changing rings to get an equivalent gear ratio. This only concerns me during a race. On a casual ride it's of no consequence. Many time during a race I'll change rings in anticipation of a big change in speed. So I'll quickly shift the front and almost simultaneously shyift 2 or 3 cogs in the back to get to the same ratio. With the 52/36 and 12-28 I'm guessing I might have to shift up to 4 cogs to get back to the same ratio.
 
#13 ·
With the 52/36 and 12-28 I'm guessing I might have to shift up to 4 cogs to get back to the same ratio.
"Guessing"? "Might"? There shouldn't be any guesswork. It's ratios. It's math. Put the numbers in that nifty calculator that Wim linked to, and you can see it in simple graphic form.

Your guess is correct, BTW. You have to shift four cogs to get close to the same gear when you switch between the 52 and and 36. However, with the 53-39 it wasn't that different, requiring 3 or 4, never 2.
 
#11 ·
Doc_D; said:
With the 52/36 and 12-28 I'm guessing I might have to shift up to 4 cogs to get back to the same ratio.
Your estimate is reasonable. I have a 52/36 with a 11-28 and usually shift 3 cogs to maintain the ratio. I ride on mostly rolling terrain.
 
#14 ·
If your cadance is 50 with a 29 pie plate in the back now you'd probably be better off getting a 34 ring in the front so you can use a more reasonably spaced cassette in the back.

It'll be okay. Women won't start looking away from you and men won't kick sand in your face if you get a compact. Mountains of Utah are different from the internet and people who know what a gear ratio is realize that.
 
#19 ·
A lot of the Pros including Contador are using pretty low gears on hilly races.
Even Chris Froome said recently he was over geared using a 36x28 although that was with a 27% grade on Tirreno Adriatico.
I would go 50/34 with a 11-28 on the back.
It does take some training to spin a higher cadence uphill.
 
#21 · (Edited)
I'm debating a move from a standard double to a 52/36. I live in Utah and ride a lot of mountains. I'm a big guy, and on some of these 8% + grades, even when using my 29 tooth cog in the back my cadence drops...sometimes all the way down in to the 50's.

On a favorite climb, I have to push 350+ Watts just to keep a cadence of around 70...and i can't push that power consistently for an hour. I'm wondering if I wouldn't benefit from a 52/36.
All I can say is, a climbing cadence in the 50s really sucks (been there done that), unless you're talking short efforts out of the saddle, which it sounds like you're not.

At a certain point of low cadence/being overgeared, you just sort of bog down and your watts drop off a cliff. So yeah, I think a lower bottom gear for climbing could easily benefit you... and you'd likely go faster with it, not slower, because it'd allow you to climb at something closer to your optimal cadence, which is going to be higher than 50-55 RPMs or whatever.

It's a bit like cars... there's a certain engine speed (RPMs) at which you get maximum power. Be sharply below that, and you don't get the power.

Lemond (in his book) has said that anything below 75 RPMs when climbing ends up being inefficient. Even Hinault, in his later professional seasons when he became a more efficient climber instead of an 'out of the saddle for miles' kind of guy, tried to keep it at 70-90 RPMs when climbing.

Of course, going to a 36t ring instead of a 39t may not be enough (only an 8% difference), but it could definitely help some (i.e. suck less).

So I'd test ride one and see, assuming you can get ahold of one with the 29t cog you seem to like. And/or perhaps consider a mega-range cassette (IRD makes Campy-compatible ones, I think), if you can live with the wider jumps between gears and possibly slightly less nice shifting.

.
 
#23 ·
Yeah, I want to such with a Campagnolo cassette. The season is early and I just stated riding after taking the winter completely off to finish my basement. I think I'll give it 4-6 weeks of good hard training and see how I feel.

I'm looking at ~$500 when it's all said and done, so I want to make sure I'm making a good move.
 
#25 ·
Why not get a 50/34 crankset, and if that doesn't feel better, swap out the rings on it. I think you'd be best served going that way. I quickly adapted to a compact from a standard. Timing the shifts at the crest of the hills was easier with a compact for me too.
 
#97 ·
Compact isn't for everyone. I had a compact crank on a bike before and found the gear spacing to be very awkward. I could never find the right gear. I don't have that problem with a standard double. It wasn't a matter of simply getting used to it either since I gave it an honest try (rode the compact for about 5,000 miles). Personally I would take 53/39 with a larger cassette any day. You couldn't pay me to ride a compact again.
 
#33 ·
If you're asking for advice from those that have actually ridden the 52/36, and/or made the change that you're contemplating, then I suggest you listen most closely to that input and much less to the numeric calculations from those that haven't ridden the 52/36. As implied in several responses, your actual experience and perceived benefit isn't just in the numbers. Just saying....try it and see how it works for you.
 
#35 ·
I hear you. I just don't want to spend the ~$500 and not experience any benefit from it...that's all. Maybe I'll go with a 50/34 and a custom made 11/29.

I decided I'm not going to do anything for a month...I need to put in more miles for the season and get my climbing legs back. I usually ride all year, and this year I hung it up completely in September to take on a big project at home. So...I need to get my fitness back before I go doing anything.
 
#41 ·
I'm not afraid of a compact, I just don't want a 50 big ring, with the smallest cog a 12.

Every ride I do has climbing...I live in the mountains. There isn't a flat ride here, and as I mentioned, I'm a big guy. There is no way an 11/23 would work for me, even with a compact. The common configuration here is a compact with 11-28. As already mentioned up-thread...Campy doesn't make an 11-28...anything with a 25 tooth cog or bigger stats with a 12.
 
#46 ·
What's the correlation between the two? I'm a big guy and can haul ass on the flats, sprint really well and climb better than most my size too. When I say climb, I mean climb. I don't know where you ride, but I roll out my front door and in the first four miles I've climbed 1,528 feet.

(Queue the stats about full tuck, cadence, etc...)
 
#43 ·
I switched from 53/39 to 50/34 a few years back, but couldn't really get used to the 16t difference in front. Have settled on 36/48 and 11-28. With a little more fitness/a little less weight I'd probably go 36/50 and 11-25, which would bring back the 16 tooth cog. Shimano 10spd.
 
#56 ·
re: where this thread is headed

 
  • Like
Reactions: jpdigital
#58 ·
...but you want to avoid compacts, right?

Never said I was God's gift to climbing, other than the statement that if you need lower gears than a 34x25 that you're probably not in the bunch sprint and probably don't need a 50x11.

Sure, it would be nice if Campy had a 28-11 cassette. They might even make one in 3-4 years if enough people complain.

Need and want are two different things. If you really want to learn a lot about gearing, a power meter might blow your mind.
 
#61 ·
I ride with a PowerTap and upload app my rides to WKO+ for analytics.

The reason I don't want a compact is because I don't want my fastest gear to be a 50/12. After those climbs come descents, and some have long gradual downhills (-1%) and I can run a high cadence in my 53/12 carrying a lot of speed for a long time.
 
#68 ·
You mentioned you would spin out on a 50-11 combo, which had a gear inch length of 121.36.
No, what he said was that he didn't want 50x12 to be his top gear, presumably he would spin that out, so if he went compact he would need an 11t cog.

BUT, Campy doesn't make a wide-range 11-X cassette (i.e. no 11-28 or similar), so it's kinda a problem unless he goes with a Campy 'frankencassette' or goes with IRD, which he doesn't seem to wanna.
 
#70 ·
Established that point several posts ago...maybe even several days ago.
Then why did you erroneously say that he said he'd spin out a 50x11? Presumably he wouldn't want a compact at all in that case.

Incidentally, his current top gear (which he seems fine with) is 53x12, and 50x11 is higher than that.
 
#72 ·
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top