Categories: TechniqueThe HardmenThe Rules

Changer de Braquet

The classic gear lever

Some people are supremely good at it, reducing complex situations into matters of simple black and white. This isn’t my particular area of expertise; I enjoy wading through the pools of ambiguity a bit too much to go about bludgeoning this beautiful world into absolutes. In fact, I would venture that delighting in nuance is part of what distinguishes La Vie Velominatus from the simple act of riding a bicycle.

I’ve spent the summer wrapping myself in the Rules handed down by the Apostle Museeuw during Keepers Tour 2012, with particular emphasis on Rule #90. Climbing Sur la Plaque is a cruel business, rising upwards under the crushing weight of physics as you fight to maintain your rhythm and momentum. At first, it’s a struggle to maintain speed on the smaller climbs as you learn how to change your pedaling action to compensate for changes in gradient. You focus on loading the pedals and forcing them around; the moment you lose the rhythm, gravity sinks her claws into your tires and tries to drag you back down the hill. On the other hand, if you maintain your cadence and power through the ramps, what is usually an intimidating slope will disappear under your wheels, making molehills of mountains.

If the Big Ring is a hammer, then not every climb is a nail. (I realize too late that referring to the road as a nail is sure to bring the Puncture Apocalypse on today’s ride.) The guns get more massive from the practice of Rule #90, but it comes at a hefty price: souplesse withers like a delicate flower as one seeks to conquer the art of mashing a huge gear. Indeed, one of the great pleasures in Cycling is to sense a certain fluidity of your stroke which belies the feeling of strength in your muscles as you continue to heap coals on the fire.

This requires an art altogether different from moving Sur la Plaque; it relies on turning the pedals at a higher cadence and shifting gear whenever the gradient changes. Rhythm holds court over everything else and is maintained at all costs. As the gradient steepens, the chain is slipped into the next smaller gear; as the gradient eases, it is droped back down. Not every climb suits this style of riding; the rear cluster must be matched perfectly to accomodate the changes in pitch such that maximum speed is maintained and the legs allowed to continue their relentless churn. When synchronized perfectly, it is the gateway to La Volupté; when not: disaster.

Such is the nuance of shifting gear, such is the nature of Cycling.

frank

The founder of Velominati and curator of The Rules, Frank was born in the Dutch colonies of Minnesota. His boundless physical talents are carefully canceled out by his equally boundless enthusiasm for drinking. Coffee, beer, wine, if it’s in a container, he will enjoy it, a lot of it. He currently lives in Seattle. He loves riding in the rain and scheduling visits with the Man with the Hammer just to be reminded of the privilege it is to feel completely depleted. He holds down a technology job the description of which no-one really understands and his interests outside of Cycling and drinking are Cycling and drinking. As devoted aesthete, the only thing more important to him than riding a bike well is looking good doing it. Frank is co-author along with the other Keepers of the Cog of the popular book, The Rules, The Way of the Cycling Disciple and also writes a monthly column for the magazine, Cyclist. He is also currently working on the first follow-up to The Rules, tentatively entitled The Hardmen. Email him directly at rouleur@velominati.com.

Next Le Graveur: Pain-o-nomics 101 »

Previous « V-Announcements: The Way of the Cycling Disciple

View Comments

the Engine says:

Oct 9 2012 at 12:09 am

@eightzero

@frank

@the Engine

@eightzero

At the risk of (inappropriate) threadjack, this one (and the very appropriate picture) plays directly into a debate I've had with myself whilst focused on the V-Locus: if I could place gear change command inputs anywhere on the bike, where would they be?

Remember that downtube levers were a huge inprovement to derailleur set ups. And then STI levers became derigeur for all modern bikes. In the last few years,we've seen electronic shifting make its appearance, but oddly, electronic shifters have left the "buttons" at the same place as the STI lever. Yes, there are remotes available, and TT bar options as well.

But...if you could put that button anywhere on the bike, where would it be? And remember....it theoreticlly doesn't even need to have a wire leading there. Maybe on a glove? Or is the STI placement the ultimate refinement?

We now return you to our regularly scheduled thread.

I bed that somewhere someone is thinking, "What if we used the output from the power meter to make automatic gear changes to keep a constant cadence (obviously within load parameters) with a manual override - bit like a flappy paddle auto box on a car?"

I mean the computer power is already there and could easily be incorporated in the available space on any bike set up to run electronic shifting.

Wish I had some engineering ability because it would sell like hotcakes to time trialists - no need to move even a finger out of that perfect aero position.

I just died a little bit inside thinking of this. What a tragedy that would be for La Vie Velominatus!

Yeah, this is a bullshit idea for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is the point of your article. The bike responds to my needs, not the other way around.

Correctomundo - I'd still be happy with non-indexed dt shifters - getting it right wasn't so hard. My point about the auto tech was the gains would likely be marginal but a second over 40 kilometres makes all the the difference if there's a few million at stake - and as cycling becomes ever more popular then more money becomes available to the winners.

There comes a point where the needs of racing and the needs of having a fantastic bike diverge and with electronic shifting and disc brakes (carbon ceramic coming soon?) we're getting close.
brett says:

Oct 9 2012 at 2:29 am

@G'rilla

We really need a Keepers Tour of the Antipodes with Brett, Marcus, Mouse, Minion, Oli, and crew.

We could probably sell it to a TV network as a reality drama.

Come on down... we also have Bianchi Denti, rigid, G'Phant/Cap'n FuckAround, and a whole host of awesome lurkers right here in Welly and beyond...

And I really want to see the Marcus and minion Show live!
G'phant says:

Oct 9 2012 at 2:51 am

@brett

@G'rilla

We really need a Keepers Tour of the Antipodes with Brett, Marcus, Mouse, Minion, Oli, and crew.

We could probably sell it to a TV network as a reality drama.

Come on down... we also have Bianchi Denti, rigid, G'Phant/Cap'n FuckAround, and a whole host of awesome lurkers right here in Welly and beyond...

And I really want to see the Marcus and minion Show live!

Now THAT would be worth not fucking around (too much) for.
G'phant says:

Oct 9 2012 at 2:53 am

@G'phant And, yes, a day of self pity is enough - I am back to being G'phant. (Though you can call me Captain ...)
MartinD says:

Oct 9 2012 at 3:10 am

@frank

On the other hand, I'm 100% sure you have a better mechanical advantage in the 53Ã—26 than in the 39Ã—19 or whatever the equivalent-sized gear ratio is in the 39.

Without wanting to seem more of a grumpy old bastard than absolutely necessary ...

10 and 11 speed cassettes and compact cranks certainly mean that the idea of putting it in the big ring isn't what it used to be. My 1977 Peugeot PX-10 came with a 45-52 and 5 speed 13-21. This cluster was of course just used for training. Everyone raced on a 13-17 (a beautiful Regina Oro version for me - probably the classiest thing on the bike). Some friends had 42 tooth inner rings, but I don't think anyone had a 39.

It was relatively flat where I grew up, but windy enough that a large part of many races was in the small ring.
rauce says:

Oct 9 2012 at 3:31 am

@Marcus

@rauce weeeell, I think your bottom bracket height is going to have a helluva lot more influence on clearance than a relatively miniscule decrease to the diameter of your big cog...

BB drop doesn't vary that much, nearly all 700c bikes fall somewhere between 55 to 80mm. I didn't necessarily mean strictly height from the ground either, a big ass chainring is more likely to get in the way in all directions and get bent or otherwise damaged over something smaller.
frank says:

Oct 9 2012 at 7:13 am

@snoov

Interesting, I wonder if the large rings (less friction) balances out with the straighter chain, which I'm assuming also has less friction.

That's always got my noodle going. With how close the chain rings are on modern cranksets, I'm not sure its a significant difference between being in the 39x25 vs 53x23. But being in a bigger cog in the back is for sure more efficient by a considerable margin; consider turning the wheel by the axle vs turning it by the tire; the farther out the chain is, the better. Similarly, in the big ring, you're creating better leverage by sitting in the 53.

But the matter is muddied considerably by friction of the chain entering the chainring, less friction by distributing the load over a larger surface and bending the links less, and the bend in the chain as it moves from chain ring to cog.

All delightfully nuanced and messy, per the subject of the article.
frank says:

Oct 9 2012 at 7:18 am

@graham d.m.

@all: does it make me a hypocritical retrogrouch to be using Shimano STI, but refusing electronic shifting? I mean when STI were introduced, people probably truned their noses up at them as they preferred their downtube shifters. I mean to hear some people, everything will be electric in five years and this kills me....

I don't remember turning my nose up at STI; STI was a real solution to a real problem and while I'm sure there were some who resisted, I remember it being largely applauded.

The problem I have with disc brakes, electric brakes (fuck you, @eightzero) etc etc is that by and large, my problem with hitting the brakes on my road bike is not locking up a wheel. I don't need better brakes. Disc brakes in the rain seems rather nice, though, but fuck, with a little practice and good brake pads, I've never not been able to stop in time.

(Queue accident on next ride.)
frank says:

Oct 9 2012 at 7:27 am

@G'rilla

@frank If the big ring always gives the greatest leverage, why don't track and single speed cyclocross bikes always use a 53 ring?

A common CX gear is 38Ã—18, which is the same as 53Ã—25. But people regularly go for the smaller chainring to get the same ratio.

Or maybe I should try it! It would be intimidating to line up next to someone with a 53 if you only have a 38!

Because I'm the only person on the planet who holds the belief that its better. Being Dutch, it doesn't bother me in the slightest if no one else agrees; I still know I'm right!

Seriously, though, there might be something about flex in a bigger ring that offsets other gains, I hadn't thought of that. I was riding a 53 on my CX bike and was having only a little bit of trouble on the steepest climbs in my 53x27. I honestly think that a lot of time people are just picking ratios they're used to and not giving it a lot of thought. A good Cyclist is the perfect amount of dumb, mind you.
frank says:

Oct 9 2012 at 7:29 am

@mcsqueak

@DerHoggz

Here is his superlight race bike, 10.8lbs of mostly steel:

Love the colors, but I have to say I'm sort of getting over sloping TT geometry... on my next bike it'll be straight unless there is a very compelling reason for it otherwise.

That is too compact for my tastes, but the smaller triangles of a compact are stiffer than the larger ones on standard geo; the longer seatpost then also gives a nice dampening effect. Its a very good design.