From Newsgroup: rec.bicycles.tech

Andrew, you said that you could use a larger 10 speed cog by using the long arm triple rear derailleur.'
Are you sure about that? I was just looking at a picture of a Racint T and it didn't look to me like it would clear larger cogs.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.bicycles.tech

On 9/27/2025 2:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:

Andrew, you said that you could use a larger 10 speed cog by using the long arm triple rear derailleur.'

Are you sure about that? I was just looking at a picture of a Racint T and it didn't look to me like it would clear larger cogs.

In the Racing-T era (9 & 10 systems) we commonly ran them
with 34t cassettes and a triple:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/ERGOTOUR.JPG

Modern gargantuan cassettes, no.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.bicycles.tech

On Sat Sep 27 15:00:48 2025 AMuzi wrote:

On 9/27/2025 2:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:

Andrew, you said that you could use a larger 10 speed cog by using the long arm triple rear derailleur.'

Are you sure about that? I was just looking at a picture of a Racint T and it didn't look to me like it would clear larger cogs.

In the Racing-T era (9 & 10 systems) we commonly ran them
with 34t cassettes and a triple:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/ERGOTOUR.JPG

Modern gargantuan cassettes, no.

I don't believe that you need anything more than a 10 speed a d a 34 tooth cog is more than enough. Thanks.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.bicycles.tech

cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat Sep 27 15:00:48 2025 AMuzi wrote:

On 9/27/2025 2:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:

Andrew, you said that you could use a larger 10 speed cog by using the
long arm triple rear derailleur.'

Are you sure about that? I was just looking at a picture of a Racint T
and it didn't look to me like it would clear larger cogs.

In the Racing-T era (9 & 10 systems) we commonly ran them
with 34t cassettes and a triple:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/ERGOTOUR.JPG

Modern gargantuan cassettes, no.

I don't believe that you need anything more than a 10 speed a d a 34
tooth cog is more than enough. Thanks.

Remember these are ratios ie the difference between the chainring and
cassette, IrCOd personally say that the top end of gearing is more nice than need to have, as various gravel bikes have had lower gearing and last
change which was a 30/46 chain-set lost a little off the top end, but itrCOs not noticeable bar that one fairly consistent 3% hill I did dropping down
off the pass in the Welsh hills where I hovered around 33/34mph and could
of done with one more gear, but mostly I just freewheel and I noticed the gearing going up, particularly once into double digits and in the 20/30%
range.

Essentially high gears folks think they will need but probably will not,
but probably could do with some lower gears.

Roger Merriman

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.bicycles.tech

On 9/28/2025 12:55 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:

cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat Sep 27 15:00:48 2025 AMuzi wrote:

On 9/27/2025 2:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:

Andrew, you said that you could use a larger 10 speed cog by using the >>>> long arm triple rear derailleur.'

Are you sure about that? I was just looking at a picture of a Racint T >>>> and it didn't look to me like it would clear larger cogs.

In the Racing-T era (9 & 10 systems) we commonly ran them
with 34t cassettes and a triple:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/ERGOTOUR.JPG

Modern gargantuan cassettes, no.

I don't believe that you need anything more than a 10 speed a d a 34
tooth cog is more than enough. Thanks.

Remember these are ratios ie the difference between the chainring and cassette, IrCOd personally say that the top end of gearing is more nice than need to have, as various gravel bikes have had lower gearing and last
change which was a 30/46 chain-set lost a little off the top end, but itrCOs not noticeable bar that one fairly consistent 3% hill I did dropping down
off the pass in the Welsh hills where I hovered around 33/34mph and could
of done with one more gear, but mostly I just freewheel and I noticed the gearing going up, particularly once into double digits and in the 20/30% range.

Essentially high gears folks think they will need but probably will not,
but probably could do with some lower gears.

Roger Merriman

+1 to that.

I sold my 38x52 Stronglight 45 years ago and switched to a
36x48 Zeus. That gives a 100" high gear I nearly never use now.

That was long before 11t cassette gears, so today on a bike
with a 12 or 13 speed system, an even smaller outer would be
adequate.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.bicycles.tech

On 28 Sep 2025 17:55:50 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat Sep 27 15:00:48 2025 AMuzi wrote:

On 9/27/2025 2:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:

Andrew, you said that you could use a larger 10 speed cog by using the >>>> long arm triple rear derailleur.'

Are you sure about that? I was just looking at a picture of a Racint T >>>> and it didn't look to me like it would clear larger cogs.

In the Racing-T era (9 & 10 systems) we commonly ran them
with 34t cassettes and a triple:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/ERGOTOUR.JPG

Modern gargantuan cassettes, no.

I don't believe that you need anything more than a 10 speed a d a 34
tooth cog is more than enough. Thanks.

Remember these are ratios ie the difference between the chainring and >cassette, IAd personally say that the top end of gearing is more nice than >need to have, as various gravel bikes have had lower gearing and last
change which was a 30/46 chain-set lost a little off the top end, but itAs >not noticeable bar that one fairly consistent 3% hill I did dropping down
off the pass in the Welsh hills where I hovered around 33/34mph and could
of done with one more gear, but mostly I just freewheel and I noticed the >gearing going up, particularly once into double digits and in the 20/30% >range.

Essentially high gears folks think they will need but probably will not,
but probably could do with some lower gears.

Roger Merriman

Those of us who crank at 55/65 rpm have a different idea about that.
By my calculation, 50x11 gearing will only get me 22 MPH at 65 RPM.

--
C'est bon
Soloman
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.bicycles.tech

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 28 Sep 2025 17:55:50 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat Sep 27 15:00:48 2025 AMuzi wrote:

On 9/27/2025 2:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:

Andrew, you said that you could use a larger 10 speed cog by using the >>>>> long arm triple rear derailleur.'

Are you sure about that? I was just looking at a picture of a Racint T >>>>> and it didn't look to me like it would clear larger cogs.

In the Racing-T era (9 & 10 systems) we commonly ran them
with 34t cassettes and a triple:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/ERGOTOUR.JPG

Modern gargantuan cassettes, no.

I don't believe that you need anything more than a 10 speed a d a 34
tooth cog is more than enough. Thanks.

Remember these are ratios ie the difference between the chainring and
cassette, I-Ad personally say that the top end of gearing is more nice than >> need to have, as various gravel bikes have had lower gearing and last
change which was a 30/46 chain-set lost a little off the top end, but it-As >> not noticeable bar that one fairly consistent 3% hill I did dropping down
off the pass in the Welsh hills where I hovered around 33/34mph and could
of done with one more gear, but mostly I just freewheel and I noticed the
gearing going up, particularly once into double digits and in the 20/30%
range.

Essentially high gears folks think they will need but probably will not,
but probably could do with some lower gears.

Roger Merriman

Those of us who crank at 55/65 rpm have a different idea about that.
By my calculation, 50x11 gearing will only get me 22 MPH at 65 RPM.

If thatrCOs your maximum Cadence possibly yes, though as yourCOve said your generally traveling slower with only small blips up into the 20rCOs IrCOd suggest that a max cadence of 65 would be quite unusual, while not everyone likes to spin most would be okay with higher cadence, unless your on the
the upper end of your cadence at I assume of 52-11, the difference to 50 is less than the shift down to the 12s sprocket.

I appreciate that the CatTrike is heavy, my commute bikes are 14/20+ KG and
for that reason arenrCOt wildly keen on hills! But unless there is lots of
off and on ramps doesnrCOt seem that yourCOd need much gearing range? Florida is famously flat and so on.

The old commute MTB does with a 40t and a 11-39 cassette which is about
right for that bike, I donrCOt spin out or have to grind on either end, it
has enough to get me into the 20 somethings generally gravity assisted or
down the Embankment where smooth surfaces and wind does wonders for onerCOs ego!

The other commute bike gearing is tedious as itrCOs a 34/50 and IrCOm on the edge of both so I end up cross chaining/shifting back and forth at least on
the commute on the very occasionally cafe sort of ride with it, it works
better at higher speeds and less stops and so on.

--
C'est bon
Soloman

Roger Merriman


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.bicycles.tech

On 28 Sep 2025 21:34:07 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 28 Sep 2025 17:55:50 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat Sep 27 15:00:48 2025 AMuzi wrote:

On 9/27/2025 2:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:

Andrew, you said that you could use a larger 10 speed cog by using the >>>>>> long arm triple rear derailleur.'

Are you sure about that? I was just looking at a picture of a Racint T >>>>>> and it didn't look to me like it would clear larger cogs.

In the Racing-T era (9 & 10 systems) we commonly ran them
with 34t cassettes and a triple:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/ERGOTOUR.JPG

Modern gargantuan cassettes, no.

I don't believe that you need anything more than a 10 speed a d a 34
tooth cog is more than enough. Thanks.

Remember these are ratios ie the difference between the chainring and
cassette, I?d personally say that the top end of gearing is more nice than >>> need to have, as various gravel bikes have had lower gearing and last
change which was a 30/46 chain-set lost a little off the top end, but it?s >>> not noticeable bar that one fairly consistent 3% hill I did dropping down >>> off the pass in the Welsh hills where I hovered around 33/34mph and could >>> of done with one more gear, but mostly I just freewheel and I noticed the >>> gearing going up, particularly once into double digits and in the 20/30% >>> range.

Essentially high gears folks think they will need but probably will not, >>> but probably could do with some lower gears.

Roger Merriman

Those of us who crank at 55/65 rpm have a different idea about that.
By my calculation, 50x11 gearing will only get me 22 MPH at 65 RPM.

If thatAs your maximum Cadence possibly yes, though as youAve said your >generally traveling slower with only small blips up into the 20As IAd
suggest that a max cadence of 65 would be quite unusual, while not everyone >likes to spin most would be okay with higher cadence, unless your on the
the upper end of your cadence at I assume of 52-11, the difference to 50 is >less than the shift down to the 12s sprocket.

I appreciate that the CatTrike is heavy, my commute bikes are 14/20+ KG and >for that reason arenAt wildly keen on hills! But unless there is lots of
off and on ramps doesnAt seem that youAd need much gearing range? Florida
is famously flat and so on.

The old commute MTB does with a 40t and a 11-39 cassette which is about
right for that bike, I donAt spin out or have to grind on either end, it
has enough to get me into the 20 somethings generally gravity assisted or >down the Embankment where smooth surfaces and wind does wonders for oneAs >ego!

The other commute bike gearing is tedious as itAs a 34/50 and IAm on the
edge of both so I end up cross chaining/shifting back and forth at least on >the commute on the very occasionally cafe sort of ride with it, it works >better at higher speeds and less stops and so on.

--
C'est bon
Soloman

Roger Merriman

Like I aid, I can crank at 100+RPM, but it tires me out quickly. At 65
RPM, I can crank all day, even back when I was doing 17/18 MPH.

--
C'est bon
Soloman
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.bicycles.tech

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 28 Sep 2025 21:34:07 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 28 Sep 2025 17:55:50 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat Sep 27 15:00:48 2025 AMuzi wrote:

On 9/27/2025 2:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:

Andrew, you said that you could use a larger 10 speed cog by using the >>>>>>> long arm triple rear derailleur.'

Are you sure about that? I was just looking at a picture of a Racint T >>>>>>> and it didn't look to me like it would clear larger cogs.

In the Racing-T era (9 & 10 systems) we commonly ran them
with 34t cassettes and a triple:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/ERGOTOUR.JPG

Modern gargantuan cassettes, no.

I don't believe that you need anything more than a 10 speed a d a 34 >>>>> tooth cog is more than enough. Thanks.

Remember these are ratios ie the difference between the chainring and
cassette, I?d personally say that the top end of gearing is more nice than >>>> need to have, as various gravel bikes have had lower gearing and last
change which was a 30/46 chain-set lost a little off the top end, but it?s >>>> not noticeable bar that one fairly consistent 3% hill I did dropping down >>>> off the pass in the Welsh hills where I hovered around 33/34mph and could >>>> of done with one more gear, but mostly I just freewheel and I noticed the >>>> gearing going up, particularly once into double digits and in the 20/30% >>>> range.

Essentially high gears folks think they will need but probably will not, >>>> but probably could do with some lower gears.

Roger Merriman

Those of us who crank at 55/65 rpm have a different idea about that.
By my calculation, 50x11 gearing will only get me 22 MPH at 65 RPM.

If that-As your maximum Cadence possibly yes, though as you-Ave said your
generally traveling slower with only small blips up into the 20-As I-Ad
suggest that a max cadence of 65 would be quite unusual, while not everyone >> likes to spin most would be okay with higher cadence, unless your on the
the upper end of your cadence at I assume of 52-11, the difference to 50 is >> less than the shift down to the 12s sprocket.

I appreciate that the CatTrike is heavy, my commute bikes are 14/20+ KG and >> for that reason aren-At wildly keen on hills! But unless there is lots of
off and on ramps doesn-At seem that you-Ad need much gearing range? Florida >> is famously flat and so on.

The old commute MTB does with a 40t and a 11-39 cassette which is about
right for that bike, I don-At spin out or have to grind on either end, it
has enough to get me into the 20 somethings generally gravity assisted or
down the Embankment where smooth surfaces and wind does wonders for one-As >> ego!

The other commute bike gearing is tedious as it-As a 34/50 and I-Am on the >> edge of both so I end up cross chaining/shifting back and forth at least on >> the commute on the very occasionally cafe sort of ride with it, it works
better at higher speeds and less stops and so on.

--
C'est bon
Soloman

Roger Merriman

Like I aid, I can crank at 100+RPM, but it tires me out quickly. At 65
RPM, I can crank all day, even back when I was doing 17/18 MPH.

At 100 RPM yourCOd be doing mid to low 30rCOs be that 48/50/52t chainrings at 20mph itrCOs a matter of a few RPM either way, aka a non issue.

--
C'est bon
Soloman

Roger Merriman


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.bicycles.tech

On 29 Sep 2025 06:11:44 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 28 Sep 2025 21:34:07 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 28 Sep 2025 17:55:50 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat Sep 27 15:00:48 2025 AMuzi wrote:

On 9/27/2025 2:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:

Andrew, you said that you could use a larger 10 speed cog by using the
long arm triple rear derailleur.'

Are you sure about that? I was just looking at a picture of a Racint T >>>>>>>> and it didn't look to me like it would clear larger cogs.

In the Racing-T era (9 & 10 systems) we commonly ran them
with 34t cassettes and a triple:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/ERGOTOUR.JPG

Modern gargantuan cassettes, no.

I don't believe that you need anything more than a 10 speed a d a 34 >>>>>> tooth cog is more than enough. Thanks.

Remember these are ratios ie the difference between the chainring and >>>>> cassette, I?d personally say that the top end of gearing is more nice than
need to have, as various gravel bikes have had lower gearing and last >>>>> change which was a 30/46 chain-set lost a little off the top end, but it?s
not noticeable bar that one fairly consistent 3% hill I did dropping down >>>>> off the pass in the Welsh hills where I hovered around 33/34mph and could >>>>> of done with one more gear, but mostly I just freewheel and I noticed the >>>>> gearing going up, particularly once into double digits and in the 20/30% >>>>> range.

Essentially high gears folks think they will need but probably will not, >>>>> but probably could do with some lower gears.

Roger Merriman

Those of us who crank at 55/65 rpm have a different idea about that.
By my calculation, 50x11 gearing will only get me 22 MPH at 65 RPM.

If that?s your maximum Cadence possibly yes, though as you?ve said your
generally traveling slower with only small blips up into the 20?s I?d
suggest that a max cadence of 65 would be quite unusual, while not everyone >>> likes to spin most would be okay with higher cadence, unless your on the >>> the upper end of your cadence at I assume of 52-11, the difference to 50 is >>> less than the shift down to the 12s sprocket.

I appreciate that the CatTrike is heavy, my commute bikes are 14/20+ KG and >>> for that reason aren?t wildly keen on hills! But unless there is lots of >>> off and on ramps doesn?t seem that you?d need much gearing range? Florida >>> is famously flat and so on.

The old commute MTB does with a 40t and a 11-39 cassette which is about
right for that bike, I don?t spin out or have to grind on either end, it >>> has enough to get me into the 20 somethings generally gravity assisted or >>> down the Embankment where smooth surfaces and wind does wonders for one?s >>> ego!

The other commute bike gearing is tedious as it?s a 34/50 and I?m on the >>> edge of both so I end up cross chaining/shifting back and forth at least on >>> the commute on the very occasionally cafe sort of ride with it, it works >>> better at higher speeds and less stops and so on.

--
C'est bon
Soloman

Roger Merriman

Like I aid, I can crank at 100+RPM, but it tires me out quickly. At 65
RPM, I can crank all day, even back when I was doing 17/18 MPH.

At 100 RPM youAd be doing mid to low 30As be that 48/50/52t chainrings at >20mph itAs a matter of a few RPM either way, aka a non issue.

--
C'est bon
Soloman

Roger Merriman

Yes, and on some downhills is when I'm most likely to get to 100 RPM.
There are times when I'm accelerating from a stop where I might get up
to 100 rpm before shifting up and getting to a more comfortable
cadence.

--
C'est bon
Soloman
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.bicycles.tech

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 29 Sep 2025 06:11:44 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 28 Sep 2025 21:34:07 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 28 Sep 2025 17:55:50 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote: >>>>>

cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat Sep 27 15:00:48 2025 AMuzi wrote:

On 9/27/2025 2:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:

Andrew, you said that you could use a larger 10 speed cog by using the
long arm triple rear derailleur.'

Are you sure about that? I was just looking at a picture of a Racint T
and it didn't look to me like it would clear larger cogs.

In the Racing-T era (9 & 10 systems) we commonly ran them
with 34t cassettes and a triple:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/ERGOTOUR.JPG

Modern gargantuan cassettes, no.

I don't believe that you need anything more than a 10 speed a d a 34 >>>>>>> tooth cog is more than enough. Thanks.

Remember these are ratios ie the difference between the chainring and >>>>>> cassette, I?d personally say that the top end of gearing is more nice than
need to have, as various gravel bikes have had lower gearing and last >>>>>> change which was a 30/46 chain-set lost a little off the top end, but it?s
not noticeable bar that one fairly consistent 3% hill I did dropping down
off the pass in the Welsh hills where I hovered around 33/34mph and could
of done with one more gear, but mostly I just freewheel and I noticed the
gearing going up, particularly once into double digits and in the 20/30% >>>>>> range.

Essentially high gears folks think they will need but probably will not, >>>>>> but probably could do with some lower gears.

Roger Merriman

Those of us who crank at 55/65 rpm have a different idea about that. >>>>> By my calculation, 50x11 gearing will only get me 22 MPH at 65 RPM.

If that?s your maximum Cadence possibly yes, though as you?ve said your >>>> generally traveling slower with only small blips up into the 20?s I?d
suggest that a max cadence of 65 would be quite unusual, while not everyone
likes to spin most would be okay with higher cadence, unless your on the >>>> the upper end of your cadence at I assume of 52-11, the difference to 50 is
less than the shift down to the 12s sprocket.

I appreciate that the CatTrike is heavy, my commute bikes are 14/20+ KG and
for that reason aren?t wildly keen on hills! But unless there is lots of >>>> off and on ramps doesn?t seem that you?d need much gearing range? Florida >>>> is famously flat and so on.

The old commute MTB does with a 40t and a 11-39 cassette which is about >>>> right for that bike, I don?t spin out or have to grind on either end, it >>>> has enough to get me into the 20 somethings generally gravity assisted or >>>> down the Embankment where smooth surfaces and wind does wonders for one?s >>>> ego!

The other commute bike gearing is tedious as it?s a 34/50 and I?m on the >>>> edge of both so I end up cross chaining/shifting back and forth at least on
the commute on the very occasionally cafe sort of ride with it, it works >>>> better at higher speeds and less stops and so on.

--
C'est bon
Soloman

Roger Merriman

Like I aid, I can crank at 100+RPM, but it tires me out quickly. At 65
RPM, I can crank all day, even back when I was doing 17/18 MPH.

At 100 RPM you-Ad be doing mid to low 30-As be that 48/50/52t chainrings at >> 20mph it-As a matter of a few RPM either way, aka a non issue.

--
C'est bon
Soloman

Roger Merriman

Yes, and on some downhills is when I'm most likely to get to 100 RPM.
There are times when I'm accelerating from a stop where I might get up
to 100 rpm before shifting up and getting to a more comfortable
cadence.

Admittedly I donrCOt have a cadence sensor but the only times I hit 100rpm is on long downhills where I generally spin and then just freewheel and let gravity do its thing.

IrCOd be surprised if I hit 100rpm away from the lights, generally I click
down to a low but not very low gear, aka relying on the fact IrCOm fairly solidly built so can just torque it off the line and change up at the
10/15mph mark.

The old MTB is much better at this as it has lower gearing and has the bars
to allow one to brace better for the initial pull away from the line.

The roadie commuter is faster but doesnrCOt have the snap away from the line
as the old MTB does.

This is clearly evident with other roadie-commuters who tend to have faster setups ie minimal or no backpack and so on, as they leave stuff at the
office.

But they are even slower off the mark, not helped by clipless pedals
clearly, hence folks try to stop with one foot on kerb etc.
Mind you lot of commuters and cyclists are fairly slow off the mark, even
the lime bikes (dockless hire e bikes) are fairly sluggish!

--
C'est bon
Soloman

Roger Merriman
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.bicycles.tech

Am 30.09.2025 um 12:59 schrieb Roger Merriman:

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 29 Sep 2025 06:11:44 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 28 Sep 2025 21:34:07 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 28 Sep 2025 17:55:50 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote: >>>>>>

cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat Sep 27 15:00:48 2025 AMuzi wrote:

On 9/27/2025 2:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:

Andrew, you said that you could use a larger 10 speed cog by using the
long arm triple rear derailleur.'

Are you sure about that? I was just looking at a picture of a Racint T
and it didn't look to me like it would clear larger cogs.

In the Racing-T era (9 & 10 systems) we commonly ran them
with 34t cassettes and a triple:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/ERGOTOUR.JPG

Modern gargantuan cassettes, no.

I don't believe that you need anything more than a 10 speed a d a 34 >>>>>>>> tooth cog is more than enough. Thanks.

Remember these are ratios ie the difference between the chainring and >>>>>>> cassette, I?d personally say that the top end of gearing is more nice than
need to have, as various gravel bikes have had lower gearing and last >>>>>>> change which was a 30/46 chain-set lost a little off the top end, but it?s
not noticeable bar that one fairly consistent 3% hill I did dropping down
off the pass in the Welsh hills where I hovered around 33/34mph and could
of done with one more gear, but mostly I just freewheel and I noticed the
gearing going up, particularly once into double digits and in the 20/30%
range.

Essentially high gears folks think they will need but probably will not,
but probably could do with some lower gears.

Roger Merriman

Those of us who crank at 55/65 rpm have a different idea about that. >>>>>> By my calculation, 50x11 gearing will only get me 22 MPH at 65 RPM. >>>>>>

If that?s your maximum Cadence possibly yes, though as you?ve said your >>>>> generally traveling slower with only small blips up into the 20?s I?d >>>>> suggest that a max cadence of 65 would be quite unusual, while not everyone
likes to spin most would be okay with higher cadence, unless your on the >>>>> the upper end of your cadence at I assume of 52-11, the difference to 50 is
less than the shift down to the 12s sprocket.

I appreciate that the CatTrike is heavy, my commute bikes are 14/20+ KG and
for that reason aren?t wildly keen on hills! But unless there is lots of >>>>> off and on ramps doesn?t seem that you?d need much gearing range? Florida >>>>> is famously flat and so on.

The old commute MTB does with a 40t and a 11-39 cassette which is about >>>>> right for that bike, I don?t spin out or have to grind on either end, it >>>>> has enough to get me into the 20 somethings generally gravity assisted or >>>>> down the Embankment where smooth surfaces and wind does wonders for one?s >>>>> ego!

The other commute bike gearing is tedious as it?s a 34/50 and I?m on the >>>>> edge of both so I end up cross chaining/shifting back and forth at least on
the commute on the very occasionally cafe sort of ride with it, it works >>>>> better at higher speeds and less stops and so on.

Like I aid, I can crank at 100+RPM, but it tires me out quickly. At 65 >>>> RPM, I can crank all day, even back when I was doing 17/18 MPH.

At 100 RPM you-Ad be doing mid to low 30-As be that 48/50/52t chainrings at >>> 20mph it-As a matter of a few RPM either way, aka a non issue.

Yes, and on some downhills is when I'm most likely to get to 100 RPM.
There are times when I'm accelerating from a stop where I might get up
to 100 rpm before shifting up and getting to a more comfortable
cadence.

Admittedly I donrCOt have a cadence sensor but the only times I hit 100rpm is on long downhills where I generally spin and then just freewheel and let gravity do its thing.

Gravity assistance is pretty much a cadence killer ;-)

On the recumbent, the legs more more freely. As a student, I once
pulled out of a road, saw a bus behing me and legged it like nothing,
with the cadence display showing something above 150 by the time I dared
to shift gears again, and doing 110-115 just felt natural.

While trouble with my tailbone prevented me from using the recumbent, I
put the cadence sensor on the gravel bike, rarely seeing cadences above
90. Only by keeping the upper body rigid I was able to increase cadene
to 110.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.bicycles.tech

On Tue, 30 Sep 2025 14:51:31 +0200, Rolf Mantel
<news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:

Am 30.09.2025 um 12:59 schrieb Roger Merriman:

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 29 Sep 2025 06:11:44 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 28 Sep 2025 21:34:07 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote: >>>>>

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 28 Sep 2025 17:55:50 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote: >>>>>>>

cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat Sep 27 15:00:48 2025 AMuzi wrote:

On 9/27/2025 2:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:

Andrew, you said that you could use a larger 10 speed cog by using the
long arm triple rear derailleur.'

Are you sure about that? I was just looking at a picture of a Racint T
and it didn't look to me like it would clear larger cogs. >>>>>>>>>>

In the Racing-T era (9 & 10 systems) we commonly ran them
with 34t cassettes and a triple:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/ERGOTOUR.JPG

Modern gargantuan cassettes, no.

I don't believe that you need anything more than a 10 speed a d a 34 >>>>>>>>> tooth cog is more than enough. Thanks.

Remember these are ratios ie the difference between the chainring and >>>>>>>> cassette, I?d personally say that the top end of gearing is more nice than
need to have, as various gravel bikes have had lower gearing and last >>>>>>>> change which was a 30/46 chain-set lost a little off the top end, but it?s
not noticeable bar that one fairly consistent 3% hill I did dropping down
off the pass in the Welsh hills where I hovered around 33/34mph and could
of done with one more gear, but mostly I just freewheel and I noticed the
gearing going up, particularly once into double digits and in the 20/30%
range.

Essentially high gears folks think they will need but probably will not,
but probably could do with some lower gears.

Roger Merriman

Those of us who crank at 55/65 rpm have a different idea about that. >>>>>>> By my calculation, 50x11 gearing will only get me 22 MPH at 65 RPM. >>>>>>>

If that?s your maximum Cadence possibly yes, though as you?ve said your >>>>>> generally traveling slower with only small blips up into the 20?s I?d >>>>>> suggest that a max cadence of 65 would be quite unusual, while not everyone
likes to spin most would be okay with higher cadence, unless your on the >>>>>> the upper end of your cadence at I assume of 52-11, the difference to 50 is
less than the shift down to the 12s sprocket.

I appreciate that the CatTrike is heavy, my commute bikes are 14/20+ KG and
for that reason aren?t wildly keen on hills! But unless there is lots of >>>>>> off and on ramps doesn?t seem that you?d need much gearing range? Florida
is famously flat and so on.

The old commute MTB does with a 40t and a 11-39 cassette which is about >>>>>> right for that bike, I don?t spin out or have to grind on either end, it >>>>>> has enough to get me into the 20 somethings generally gravity assisted or
down the Embankment where smooth surfaces and wind does wonders for one?s
ego!

The other commute bike gearing is tedious as it?s a 34/50 and I?m on the >>>>>> edge of both so I end up cross chaining/shifting back and forth at least on
the commute on the very occasionally cafe sort of ride with it, it works >>>>>> better at higher speeds and less stops and so on.

Like I aid, I can crank at 100+RPM, but it tires me out quickly. At 65 >>>>> RPM, I can crank all day, even back when I was doing 17/18 MPH.

At 100 RPM you?d be doing mid to low 30?s be that 48/50/52t chainrings at >>>> 20mph it?s a matter of a few RPM either way, aka a non issue.

Yes, and on some downhills is when I'm most likely to get to 100 RPM.
There are times when I'm accelerating from a stop where I might get up
to 100 rpm before shifting up and getting to a more comfortable
cadence.

Admittedly I donAt have a cadence sensor but the only times I hit 100rpm is >> on long downhills where I generally spin and then just freewheel and let
gravity do its thing.

Gravity assistance is pretty much a cadence killer ;-)

On the recumbent, the legs more more freely. As a student, I once
pulled out of a road, saw a bus behing me and legged it like nothing,
with the cadence display showing something above 150 by the time I dared
to shift gears again, and doing 110-115 just felt natural.

While trouble with my tailbone prevented me from using the recumbent, I
put the cadence sensor on the gravel bike, rarely seeing cadences above
90. Only by keeping the upper body rigid I was able to increase cadene
to 110.

I think that's true. I never measured my cadence on two wheelers, but
on the Catrike, I routinely hit 120 rpm, and occasionally 130/140.
It's never for more than about 30 seconds, and often it's followed by
30 seconds of coasting.

--
C'est bon
Soloman
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.bicycles.tech

On 9/30/2025 8:51 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote:

Am 30.09.2025 um 12:59 schrieb Roger Merriman:

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 29 Sep 2025 06:11:44 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 28 Sep 2025 21:34:07 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote: >>>>>

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 28 Sep 2025 17:55:50 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:

cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat Sep 27 15:00:48 2025 AMuzi-a wrote:

On 9/27/2025 2:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:

Andrew, you said-a that you could use a larger 10 speed cog by >>>>>>>>>>> using the
long arm triple rear derailleur.'

Are you sure about that? I was just looking at a picture of a >>>>>>>>>>> Racint T
and it didn't look to me like it would clear larger cogs. >>>>>>>>>>

In the Racing-T era (9 & 10 systems) we commonly ran them
with 34t cassettes and a triple:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/ERGOTOUR.JPG

Modern gargantuan cassettes, no.

I don't believe that you need anything more than a 10 speed a d >>>>>>>>> a 34
tooth cog is more than enough. Thanks.

Remember these are ratios ie the difference between the
chainring and
cassette, I?d personally say that the top end of gearing is more >>>>>>>> nice than
need to have, as various gravel bikes have had lower gearing and >>>>>>>> last
change which was a 30/46 chain-set lost a little off the top
end, but it?s
not noticeable bar that one fairly consistent 3% hill I did
dropping down
off the pass in the Welsh hills where I hovered around 33/34mph >>>>>>>> and could
of done with one more gear, but mostly I just freewheel and I >>>>>>>> noticed the
gearing going up, particularly once into double digits and in >>>>>>>> the 20/30%
range.

Essentially high gears folks think they will need but probably >>>>>>>> will not,
but probably could do with some lower gears.

Roger Merriman

Those of us who crank at 55/65 rpm have a different idea about that. >>>>>>> By my calculation, 50x11 gearing will only get me 22 MPH at 65 RPM. >>>>>>>

If that?s your maximum Cadence possibly yes, though as you?ve said >>>>>> your
generally traveling slower with only small blips up into the 20?s I?d >>>>>> suggest that a max cadence of 65 would be quite unusual, while not >>>>>> everyone
likes to spin most would be okay with higher cadence, unless your >>>>>> on the
the upper end of your cadence at I assume of 52-11, the difference >>>>>> to 50 is
less than the shift down to the 12s sprocket.

I appreciate that the CatTrike is heavy, my commute bikes are
14/20+ KG and
for that reason aren?t wildly keen on hills! But unless there is
lots of
off and on ramps doesn?t seem that you?d need much gearing range? >>>>>> Florida
is famously flat and so on.

The old commute MTB does with a 40t and a 11-39 cassette which is >>>>>> about
right for that bike, I don?t spin out or have to grind on either
end, it
has enough to get me into the 20 somethings generally gravity
assisted or
down the Embankment where smooth surfaces and wind does wonders
for one?s
ego!

The other commute bike gearing is tedious as it?s a 34/50 and I?m >>>>>> on the
edge of both so I end up cross chaining/shifting back and forth at >>>>>> least on
the commute on the very occasionally cafe sort of ride with it, it >>>>>> works
better at higher speeds and less stops and so on.

Like I aid, I can crank at 100+RPM, but it tires me out quickly. At 65 >>>>> RPM, I can crank all day, even back when I was doing 17/18 MPH.

At 100 RPM you-Ad be doing mid to low 30-As be that 48/50/52t
chainrings at
20mph it-As a matter of a few RPM either way, aka a non issue.

Yes, and on some downhills is when I'm most likely to get to 100 RPM.
There are times when I'm accelerating from a stop where I might get up
to 100 rpm before shifting up and getting to a more comfortable
cadence.

Admittedly I donrCOt have a cadence sensor but the only times I hit
100rpm is
on long downhills where I generally spin and then just freewheel and let
gravity do its thing.

Gravity assistance is pretty much a cadence killer ;-)

unless you're riding a fixed-gear.

On the recumbent, the legs more more freely.-a As a student, I once
pulled out of a road, saw a bus behing me and legged it like nothing,
with the cadence display showing something above 150 by the time I dared
to shift gears again, and doing 110-115 just felt natural.

While trouble with my tailbone prevented me from using the recumbent, I
put the cadence sensor on the gravel bike, rarely seeing cadences above 90.-a Only by keeping the upper body rigid I was able to increase cadene
to 110.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.bicycles.tech

zen cycle <funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:

On 9/30/2025 8:51 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote:

Am 30.09.2025 um 12:59 schrieb Roger Merriman:

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 29 Sep 2025 06:11:44 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 28 Sep 2025 21:34:07 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote: >>>>>>

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 28 Sep 2025 17:55:50 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:

cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat Sep 27 15:00:48 2025 AMuzi-a wrote:

On 9/27/2025 2:47 PM, cyclintom wrote:

Andrew, you said-a that you could use a larger 10 speed cog by >>>>>>>>>>>> using the
long arm triple rear derailleur.'

Are you sure about that? I was just looking at a picture of a >>>>>>>>>>>> Racint T
and it didn't look to me like it would clear larger cogs. >>>>>>>>>>>

In the Racing-T era (9 & 10 systems) we commonly ran them >>>>>>>>>>> with 34t cassettes and a triple:

http://www.yellowjersey.org/ERGOTOUR.JPG

Modern gargantuan cassettes, no.

I don't believe that you need anything more than a 10 speed a d >>>>>>>>>> a 34
tooth cog is more than enough. Thanks.

Remember these are ratios ie the difference between the
chainring and
cassette, I?d personally say that the top end of gearing is more >>>>>>>>> nice than
need to have, as various gravel bikes have had lower gearing and >>>>>>>>> last
change which was a 30/46 chain-set lost a little off the top >>>>>>>>> end, but it?s
not noticeable bar that one fairly consistent 3% hill I did >>>>>>>>> dropping down
off the pass in the Welsh hills where I hovered around 33/34mph >>>>>>>>> and could
of done with one more gear, but mostly I just freewheel and I >>>>>>>>> noticed the
gearing going up, particularly once into double digits and in >>>>>>>>> the 20/30%
range.

Essentially high gears folks think they will need but probably >>>>>>>>> will not,
but probably could do with some lower gears.

Roger Merriman

Those of us who crank at 55/65 rpm have a different idea about that. >>>>>>>> By my calculation, 50x11 gearing will only get me 22 MPH at 65 RPM. >>>>>>>>

If that?s your maximum Cadence possibly yes, though as you?ve said >>>>>>> your
generally traveling slower with only small blips up into the 20?s I?d >>>>>>> suggest that a max cadence of 65 would be quite unusual, while not >>>>>>> everyone
likes to spin most would be okay with higher cadence, unless your >>>>>>> on the
the upper end of your cadence at I assume of 52-11, the difference >>>>>>> to 50 is
less than the shift down to the 12s sprocket.

I appreciate that the CatTrike is heavy, my commute bikes are
14/20+ KG and
for that reason aren?t wildly keen on hills! But unless there is >>>>>>> lots of
off and on ramps doesn?t seem that you?d need much gearing range? >>>>>>> Florida
is famously flat and so on.

The old commute MTB does with a 40t and a 11-39 cassette which is >>>>>>> about
right for that bike, I don?t spin out or have to grind on either >>>>>>> end, it
has enough to get me into the 20 somethings generally gravity
assisted or
down the Embankment where smooth surfaces and wind does wonders >>>>>>> for one?s
ego!

The other commute bike gearing is tedious as it?s a 34/50 and I?m >>>>>>> on the
edge of both so I end up cross chaining/shifting back and forth at >>>>>>> least on
the commute on the very occasionally cafe sort of ride with it, it >>>>>>> works
better at higher speeds and less stops and so on.

Like I aid, I can crank at 100+RPM, but it tires me out quickly. At 65 >>>>>> RPM, I can crank all day, even back when I was doing 17/18 MPH.

At 100 RPM you-Ad be doing mid to low 30-As be that 48/50/52t
chainrings at
20mph it-As a matter of a few RPM either way, aka a non issue.

Yes, and on some downhills is when I'm most likely to get to 100 RPM.
There are times when I'm accelerating from a stop where I might get up >>>> to 100 rpm before shifting up and getting to a more comfortable
cadence.

Admittedly I donrCOt have a cadence sensor but the only times I hit
100rpm is
on long downhills where I generally spin and then just freewheel and let >>> gravity do its thing.

Gravity assistance is pretty much a cadence killer ;-)

unless you're riding a fixed-gear.

Indeed the folks who use them in the hill climbs joke that itrCOs almost the same time down as up!

On the recumbent, the legs more more freely.-a As a student, I once
pulled out of a road, saw a bus behing me and legged it like nothing,
with the cadence display showing something above 150 by the time I dared
to shift gears again, and doing 110-115 just felt natural.

While trouble with my tailbone prevented me from using the recumbent, I
put the cadence sensor on the gravel bike, rarely seeing cadences above
90.-a Only by keeping the upper body rigid I was able to increase cadene
to 110.

And cheers for the clarity re us Laws!

Roger Merriman


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2