So, want to hear something funny. My new Nitto track bars just arrived so I've been installing them on my bike. I decided to do a bit of maintainance (wipe down, chain lube, etc) while I was at it and noticed something interesting...
Remember back when I first returned to the track for this year, and my bottom bracket was loose. Well when putting my wheel back on, it has been flipped. Now, I had my old sprocket still on as it was impossible to remove. So for the last few months, I've been training and racing on...
86 inches. 48 x 15.
I was complaining to Christian at the omnium that I just couldn't get around as I was spinning out and had no jump left at pace. It all makes sense now.
Oh well, good spin training and has probably done me more good then harm.
When you don't know any better...
I would have told you 92 inches (48 x 14) and thought nothing more of it. Looking forward to trying out the "new" gearing. I thought I was spinning out in 92, so I purchased 49T & 50T chainrings with my new bars order, and they aren't cheap either. Guess they will have to wait as I readjust.
Makes me a bit happier with my flying 200 times at the omnium.
Makes me a bit happier with my flying 200 times at the omnium.
Or maybe get more sleep, and be on time when your leading the ride.Interesting, this could mean you're now faster then me. This seems to be happening a lot lately, I think I need to train more.
....I have to try and get as much mileage out of that as possible, even though you have only been late once.
Because the term comes from the size of a penny farthing wheel. On a modern track bike it doesn't really have any meaning at all apart from comparison point in gear selection.
If you wanted the metric term, it would be meters of development, which is how far the bike moves with 1 rotation of the pedals.
If you wanted the metric term, it would be meters of development, which is how far the bike moves with 1 rotation of the pedals.
there was a bit where me and simon were on 90 and every one else on 94 or so at omniums of sorts, we both killed the kieran we had!!
It's more complicated than that. These days we all ride on 700c wheels, but the protocol when quoting gear inches is to assume you are using a wheel with a 27 inch diameter. In Othy's post he said he was riding 86 inches (48 * 15), but thought he was riding 92 inches (48 * 14). If we use the correct wheel size, Othy's 48*15 gear was closer to 84 inches and his 48*14 gear is actually closer to 90 inches.Because the term comes from the size of a penny farthing wheel. On a modern track bike it doesn't really have any meaning at all apart from comparison point in gear selection.
If you wanted the metric term, it would be meters of development, which is how far the bike moves with 1 rotation of the pedals.
One reason we all talk in inches is because the chain pitch is in half-inches, so many calculations are easier in inches. For example, the circumference of any chainring in inches is half the number of teeth.
Last edited by Toff on 16 Jul 2009, 10:02, edited 1 time in total.
-
mikesbytes
- Posts: 6991
- Joined: 13 Nov 2006, 13:48
- Location: Tempe
- Contact:
There's a bit of confusion when it comes to inches, some quote a figure based on some unknown tyre size on a 27" wheel, we can call this "traditional inches" where others quote a gearing based on actual roll out.
Either way just ride the gear and its either too high, too low or just right.
What I find more interesting is gain ratio's
Either way just ride the gear and its either too high, too low or just right.
What I find more interesting is gain ratio's
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests