Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 104
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,777

    Caution;  Merge;  Workers Ahead! My acquaintance's 39T custom cassette

    Good evening to you

    My acquaintance's 39T custom cassette just rolled tonight on the snow&ice shrouded whereabouts.
    What about yours 39T Actiontec or other cassettes what about clearances for long cages derelaiieurs?
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    Witty McWitterson
    Reputation: ~martini~'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,037
    Why?

    //furst!
    Just a regular guy.

  3. #3
    Administrator Administrator
    Reputation: rockcrusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,030
    dang that is epic. You guys climbing the Tatra mountains straight up over there?
    Try this: HTFU

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    513
    my track stand is faster than that!
    Grand claims demand grand proof.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,672
    Actually, a 39T is pretty useful on a snow bike. I often want something lower than 22x34. I'll probably just get a 20T granny, but still, that's not that big of a change.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,777
    Perhaps Alps more- some of us.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    696
    This is a good thing for riding in Korea where switchbacks are as rare as a good Korean beer (or Korean blond) and the traction is good.

  8. #8
    Administrator Administrator
    Reputation: rockcrusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,030
    how does that SLX derailleur mesh with those large gears?

    Color me intrigued..
    Try this: HTFU

  9. #9
    Expert Crasher
    Reputation: GreenLightGo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,355
    Quote Originally Posted by HardTail29er
    my track stand is faster than that!
    I don't care who you are....that's funny right there
    Happiness depends more on the inward disposition of mind than on outward circumstances. Benjamin Franklin

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: azjonboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,567
    He buys an Actiontec cassette and doesn't spring for a new chain?
    If you're lucky enough to be in the mountains,
    you're lucky enough.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,777
    Quote Originally Posted by rockcrusher
    how does that SLX derailleur mesh with those large gears?

    Color me intrigued..
    As far as I know It clears 38 whereas interferes with 39T. You just need longer screws to adjust the cage range or something like that and then it works fine- how fine? I'll ask the owner and will keep up updated. The teeth are a bit too protuding and steep.
    It will be used on 3x8/9 or 2x9 or even 1x9.
    For a 29er 20x39 on AM 16 kg is needed on over 30% ascends. That's where the difference pop in- either walking or riding.

  12. #12
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,606
    Quote Originally Posted by Davidcopperfield
    Good evening to you

    My acquaintance's 39T custom cassette just rolled tonight on the snow&ice shrouded whereabouts.
    What about yours 39T Actiontec or other cassettes what about clearances for long cages derelaiieurs?
    Coolio. Nice to see one of the Action-Tec large cassette rings. That matches a 203mm brake rotor quite well.

  13. #13
    is buachail foighneach me
    Reputation: sean salach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,602
    if the hill is steep enough to warrant a 39t cog, how do you keep from wheelieing(wheelying? wheeliing?)?? i have trouble imagining not getting really, really bored at that speed.

  14. #14
    Team Awesome
    Reputation: playpunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    974
    39th cassette? I'm not even a *real* racer and I have no problem with a 32 as my biggest cog.

    If you need a 22 x 39 as your lowest gear...... words fail.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    348
    Copperfield you better get a new user name cause these guys are on you like flies on S$!T.

  16. #16
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    21,626
    All comments apply Why The FVCK try going to the supermarket and buying some food and gainning some muscle or something I have enough trouble going at speed my 24-34 my granny/granny combo gives me and balancing and we definitely don't have switchbacks here.

    David, David, david you are contradicting yourself here according to you 29ers are the holy grail, the 2nd coming, they let you do everything better and yet here you are looking for a serious crutch to put on your 29er. (if you have one, still not 100% on that). You know what I found when I got a 29er, I found I could actually, (with the taller effective gearing) still push a taller gear combo than I did before on my 26er - guess you're not as devote as you say you are and 29ers do have draw backs

    it's like a damn wreck, you know you shouldn't and yet you still do
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    54
    Whats the smallest chainring on the bike that wears this cassette?

  18. #18
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,606
    Quote Originally Posted by playpunk
    39th cassette? I'm not even a *real* racer and I have no problem with a 32 as my biggest cog.

    If you need a 22 x 39 as your lowest gear...... words fail.

    Did he say it would for certain be used with a 22 granny?

    Here's what he said...

    It will be used on 3x8/9 or 2x9 or even 1x9.

    I can think of some 1 x 9 and 2 x 9 combinations that make sense to me for one of the Action-Tec larger rear cassette cogs (36, 38 or 39T). I ran a 2x9 with a 29T/42T last year up front and an 11-34 in the rear. There were times I could see having a 36 or 38 cog in the rear with the 29T up front would have saved my legs on the out of saddle steep, steep sustained climbs. And I've ridden stuff in the Alps and in California that a 20T granny and a 34T rear cog could not handle. Plenty of challenges out there and I find it difficult to criticize other riders when we don't know what they face.

    I can also think of some combinations that make sense to run a 12-27 Dura Ace cassette in the rear with some chainrings in the front that you might find odd.

    Lots of choices and options available.

    There are climbs out there that would have you questioning your 32 cog in the rear, big time.

    BB

  19. #19
    San Diego County
    Reputation: Duzitall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,475
    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown
    Plenty of challenges out there and I find it difficult to criticize other riders when we don't know what they face.BB
    I agree BB. Every time someone talks about low gears the boys from Indiana, Iowa and such chime in with "WTF? grow a pair" I'm not sure these guys even know what a mountain looks like.
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    Of course the easiest way to fix this is to go for a hike.
    DT

  20. #20
    Shovel Ready
    Reputation: Cycle64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,780

    Cool-blue Rhythm

    Quote Originally Posted by Schmucker
    Actually, a 39T is pretty useful on a snow bike. I often want something lower than 22x34. I'll probably just get a 20T granny, but still, that's not that big of a change.
    You may be surprised at how well it works. I'm a heavy rider and not that strong. I really like the difference the 20t provides.
    Currently at Mayo Clinic being tested for a kidney transplant. Donors welcome.

  21. #21
    meh....
    Reputation: Monte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,590
    Coolio! Can't wait to get mine built.

  22. #22
    SSolo, on your left!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,577
    Quote Originally Posted by Duzitall
    I agree BB. Every time someone talks about low gears the boys from Indiana, Iowa and such chime in with "WTF? grow a pair" I'm not sure these guys even know what a mountain looks like.
    X2..............here we have some steep, loose terrain and some very long climbs. I also like to see people's inventiveness at work, even if I might not need or want it...good to use your brain and think. However, I have found my 29er to allow me to push a taller gear farther than my 26" which really surprised me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Davidcopperfield
    As far as I know It clears 38 whereas interferes with 39T. You just need longer screws to adjust the cage range or something like that and then it works fine- how fine? I'll ask the owner and will keep up updated. The teeth are a bit too protuding and steep.
    It will be used on 3x8/9 or 2x9 or even 1x9...
    Interesting about the adjuster screws. The teeth do look a bit too tall/deep cut and no ramps on the gear sides to help the chain climb up the larger gears......


    Quote Originally Posted by Duzitall
    For a 29er 20x39 on AM 16 kg is needed on over 30% ascends. That's where the difference pop in- either walking or riding.
    What? Please clarify.
    Last edited by Natedogz; 01-09-2009 at 12:32 AM.
    Get off the couch and ride!

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: simenf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    602
    Where I am riding marathons (in Norway), it is very steep and a larger than 34T would be useful for 29ers.
    Not only for very long and steep climbs in races, but also when base training when you want to stay in a zone. I agree that I generally can use the same, or even taller, gearing on my 29er compared to the 26er, but I would welcome a 12-36T cassette.

  24. #24
    Recovering couch patato
    Reputation: Cloxxki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,019
    This cassette can take away the need for a granny gear, where leaving away the larger front ring is becoming common practice.
    It it works, it works!

    24x39 is more efficient than 20x32, more teeth engaged. If you get 22x39, it's the super short gear many riders secretly want. Not that I see the use for one :-)

    I would just use a 38t front ring and a 12-39t cassette to ride everything.

  25. #25
    meh....
    Reputation: Monte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,590
    Quote Originally Posted by Cloxxki
    24x39 is more efficient than 20x32, more teeth engaged. If you get 22x39, it's the super short gear many riders secretly want. Not that I see the use for one :-)
    Exactly. 24 x 39 for the "everyday" rides. Install a smaller granny for the rides with the big climbs.

  26. #26
    Team Awesome
    Reputation: playpunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    974
    Quote Originally Posted by Duzitall
    I agree BB. Every time someone talks about low gears the boys from Indiana, Iowa and such chime in with "WTF? grow a pair" I'm not sure these guys even know what a mountain looks like.
    Seriously? I live in West Virginia. It isn't Colorado or the Alps, but we have plenty of hills - and lots of steep ones.

    I really can't imagine any application where you would NEED a gear that small - even on a snow bike. You might as well be walking. I ride my bike to go as fast as I can on the bike. If I want to go for hours at 2 miles an hour, I'll walk.

    You can spin a 22 x 32 at 3mph. That is SLOW. 22 x 34 is even easier. If you want to run 1x9 or 2x9, I can kind of understand, but I still think for 99.99% of the time standard gearing is enough. 29 x 34 is 24.7 gear inches - 22 x 39 is 16.4. 1.8 v 1.2 % gain ratio.

    I don't get the fascination with easy gears on this board....

  27. #27
    is buachail foighneach me
    Reputation: sean salach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,602
    Quote Originally Posted by Duzitall
    I agree BB. Every time someone talks about low gears the boys from Indiana, Iowa and such chime in with "WTF? grow a pair" I'm not sure these guys even know what a mountain looks like.

    did you actually look at any of the naysayers' profiles to see where they're from? i just did, and onle one is from a state that could be considered relatively flat or non-hilly.

  28. #28
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,606
    Quote Originally Posted by playpunk
    Seriously? I live in West Virginia. It isn't Colorado or the Alps, but we have plenty of hills - and lots of steep ones.

    I really can't imagine any application where you would NEED a gear that small - even on a snow bike. You might as well be walking. I ride my bike to go as fast as I can on the bike. If I want to go for hours at 2 miles an hour, I'll walk.

    You can spin a 22 x 32 at 3mph. That is SLOW. 22 x 34 is even easier. If you want to run 1x9 or 2x9, I can kind of understand, but I still think for 99.99% of the time standard gearing is enough. 29 x 34 is 24.7 gear inches - 22 x 39 is 16.4. 1.8 v 1.2 % gain ratio.

    I don't get the fascination with easy gears on this board....
    Again - it's all about where you live, what terrain you ride and what one wants to accomplish. Maybe you have no fascination of climbing super steep stuff, but many of us do. That's fine if you would rather walk and spend most of your riding just going as fast as you can. Nothing wrong with that.

    Where I currently live, I have no need for a super granny. However, I do ride a few times a year in areas where it is needed. Briones Regional Park in the East Bay around Moraga and Lafayette, California has some killer climbs. I mean sustained killer climbs. Since I have inlaws in the area and I used to live out there, I ride there a few times a year when we are out visiting. I just ride over on the east end of Lafayette and head up the trails which are steep, killer, dusty, loose, dry, steep and literallly breath taking with the views and sense of accomplishment. A lot of reviews of that park and some of the trails leading up to the upper ridges mention the steep pitch, most just say it can't be ridden. Not me. It's a challenge and I ride them, but for my age and maximum heart rate - even 20T x 34T puts me right at max heart rate. This subject has come up many times over the years, and unless you one has ridden those trails - they have no idea what I'm talking about. A few times, other MTBR.com posters have chimed in and supported my claim about these trails and the need for your A game and correct gearing.

    But if you don't live or ride there, forget about it. We can all simply keep doing this....

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/7166535@N05/3182532178/" title="WrongOnTheNet by singingsingletracker, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3486/3182532178_fc91b8e97e_o.jpg" width="300" height="330" alt="WrongOnTheNet" /></a>

    I was in the Black Hills Fat Tire XC Mountain Bike Race last May which was held on some super steep, very technical and very, very narrow singletrack. Due to the muddy conditions leading up to the event, I was unable to pre-ride the entire loop as it needed to dry out for race day. I was on my Dos Niner with a 2 x 9 (29T/42T) Middleburn Duo and an 11-34 out back. After we had been climbing in the first lap for what seemed like about 20 minutes, I was locked behind the wheel of two local riders in front of me to learn the loop from them when I looked ahead and, with what little breath I could muster to speak, I uttered "ya' gotta be kiddin' me!!!". We were headed straight up the fault line of a DH run for a section. The two in front of me dropped into their granny's front and rear and I had nothing to drop into. I made it about 10 feet and had to hop off and attempt to walk/run up the rest of the climb. They almost made it up to the top of the climb, but bailed just before the top. I know I could have made it with proper gearing based on prior successful climbs on such super steep stuff. I've never seen any kind of climbing like that in any other XC race that I have been in, but that's because I'm not riding in the Black Hills or Colorado or the Sierra Nevada, etc... . I'm sure they are out there and I am sure that riders choose appropriate gearing for their needs.

    I used to live in Vienna and ride right out my door up into the Vienna Woods. Straight up the fault line for a sustained 10 - 20 minute climb. I did it on a 26" Trek 8000 using a 20T x 34T combo. Yet, I had to stop and hang on to trees to catch my breath on a couple of the trails before continuing. Again, that's me, my needs and experience on climbing certain specific steep trails. Others may not hit their maximum heart rate and be able to do it with different gearing. Not me.

    So am I wrong? Are others wrong with their desire or need to have a combo that gets them up the super steep challenging climbs? Are they wrong for not wanting to walk?

    Nah. I don't think so. Everybody is right and everybody is and can be happy because there are options out there.

    I am switching from a 29/42 ring combo this season to a 27/40 combo. I will still be running a 11-34 in the rear. But I will bring along another option for the Black Hills and Briones this year.

    BB

    Walk? Screw that. I'll stay on the bike....

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/7166535@N05/2880014201/" title="CycloCrossHill by singingsingletracker, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3152/2880014201_ccdd07f9ab.jpg" width="331" height="500" alt="CycloCrossHill" /></a>

  29. #29
    Administrator Administrator
    Reputation: rockcrusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,030
    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown

    Walk? Screw that. I'll stay on the bike....

    I remember back in the day, way back now, there was a deal called the mountain tamer quad (still available now-see below), but the premise was that you could mount a rear rear cassette cog to the front of your bike giving you a gearing choice of anywhere from 23T-12T up front.

    Same concept different actuation. Some people need epic gears just like some people need tall handlebars or funky seats or big wheels.



    from

    http://www.abundantadventures.com/mt_plus.html
    Try this: HTFU

  30. #30
    jrm
    jrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jrm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,715

    How was the cassette constructed?

    Quote Originally Posted by Davidcopperfield
    Good evening to you

    My acquaintance's 39T custom cassette just rolled tonight on the snow&ice shrouded whereabouts.
    What about yours 39T Actiontec or other cassettes what about clearances for long cages derelaiieurs?

    Can we get a pick of the cassette unmounted and from the back side? peace. A 12-36 cassette would be perfect but im not hot on the idea of floating a 36T single cog off the back of a 12-34 or 32T cassette and tearing up the freewheel.

  31. #31
    Team Awesome
    Reputation: playpunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    974
    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown
    Again - it's all about where you live, what terrain you ride and what one wants to accomplish. Maybe you have no fascination of climbing super steep stuff, but many of us do. That's fine if you would rather walk and spend most of your riding just going as fast as you can. Nothing wrong with that.

    But if you don't live or ride there, forget about it. We can all simply keep doing this....

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/7166535@N05/3182532178/" title="WrongOnTheNet by singingsingletracker, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3486/3182532178_fc91b8e97e_o.jpg" width="300" height="330" alt="WrongOnTheNet" /></a>

    So am I wrong? Are others wrong with their desire or need to have a combo that gets them up the super steep challenging climbs? Are they wrong for not wanting to walk?

    Nah. I don't think so. Everybody is right and everybody is and can be happy because there are options out there.

    I am switching from a 29/42 ring combo this season to a 27/40 combo. I will still be running a 11-34 in the rear. But I will bring along another option for the Black Hills and Briones this year.

    BB

    Walk? Screw that. I'll stay on the bike....

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/7166535@N05/2880014201/" title="CycloCrossHill by singingsingletracker, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3152/2880014201_ccdd07f9ab.jpg" width="331" height="500" alt="CycloCrossHill" /></a>
    I know starting an internet pissing match is stupid, but sometimes I just can't help myself - it's just one of those "my opinion is better than your opinion" moments where I get started and can't stop.

    I do understand why super low gears are nice in some situations - and I really like the simplicity of the 2x9 setup, light what you're running.

    To each his own, and if DC wants to run a 6 inch travel at both ends bike with a Mt Tamer Quad crank and an 11-39 uber cassette, so be it.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fillet-brazed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,696
    like has been said, it's all about local terrain. Short steep climbs of course are easy to do in a tall gear. It's the ones that take a half hour or an hour to climb that the low gears are needed. Add in altitude as a big factor as well.

    The guy who ripped up the 15 second steep climb on his 30-32 2x9 low is gonna be flailing on the hour long, 4 mile climb while the guy with the 20-34 will ride right past him totally comfortable.

  33. #33
    Hike it or Bike it!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    288
    Quote Originally Posted by jrm
    Can we get a pick of the cassette unmounted and from the back side? peace. A 12-36 cassette would be perfect but im not hot on the idea of floating a 36T single cog off the back of a 12-34 or 32T cassette and tearing up the freewheel.
    Then drop the bucks at Action-Tec for a full rear cassette.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    373
    I can definitly see a desire for the low gearing this would provide when bikepacking. We have some 2+ hour long climbs here that during regular rides I spend a lot of time on them in my 22/34. Throw on 20lbs of camping gear and a few days of riding before that and I'd definitly need lower than 22/34. I'm actually looking at puting on an Actiontech 20 tooth for this purpose (The cassettes are too $y for me). And I know a lot of people who prefer to walk when the speed gets down below 3 mph, but I'd also much rather stay in the saddle if I can.

    Crawl on!

  35. #35
    Recovering Weight Weenie
    Reputation: Padre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,792
    I use 20x34 at least once on almost every ride here.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,777
    Quote Originally Posted by Fillet-brazed
    The guy who ripped up the 15 second steep climb on his 30-32 2x9 low is gonna be flailing on the hour long, 4 mile climb while the guy with the 20-34 will ride right past him totally comfortable.
    Agreed totally. That's what I experienced. I ended up walking while kiddy wheels ramping up on 22x34, thus 20x36 is indispensable if surface gets rugged.

  37. #37
    conjoinicorned
    Reputation: ferday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,527
    Quote Originally Posted by Davidcopperfield
    Agreed totally. That's what I experienced. I ended up walking while kiddy wheels ramping up on 22x34, thus 20x36 is indispensable if surface gets rugged.

    sweet setup!! i've often thought of going with a 38t on the back but the uber $$$ led me to a 20t front ring instead. maybe 20x36, we'll see how this season goes.

    this kind of setup is ideal for 10,000ft.+ in an epic day ride with a big pack.
    what would rainbow unicorn do?

  38. #38
    is buachail foighneach me
    Reputation: sean salach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,602
    david, you could get front freewheel cranks for trials and manage an even lower gear.

  39. #39
    jrm
    jrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jrm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,715

    You buying?

    Quote Originally Posted by SingingSingleTracker
    Then drop the bucks at Action-Tec for a full rear cassette.
    thats why ill stick to my 58/94 crankset..thanks

  40. #40
    Hike it or Bike it!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    288
    Quote Originally Posted by jrm
    thats why ill stick to my 58/94 crankset..thanks
    They're in the ballpark price wise with XTR, KCNC, Cycle King and other Ti cassettes. The difference being, the Action-Tecs have the larger cog option. Actually anything in the $150 - $300 range for high end cassettes is the norm...

    http://www.comcycle-usa.com/ProductInfo.aspx?id=4645629
    http://www.comcycle-usa.com/ProductInfo.aspx?id=4645621
    Last edited by SingingSingleTracker; 01-09-2009 at 03:57 PM.

  41. #41
    meh....
    Reputation: Monte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,590
    Quote Originally Posted by SingingSingleTracker
    Then drop the bucks at Action-Tec for a full rear cassette.
    I don't think there's a carrier with the Action-Tek cassettes (single cogs and spacers), so it would be the same as adding a loose cog to the back of a Shimano or SRAM.

  42. #42
    Let's ride
    Reputation: rensho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    7,137
    Quote Originally Posted by Fillet-brazed
    like has been said, it's all about local terrain. Short steep climbs of course are easy to do in a tall gear. It's the ones that take a half hour or an hour to climb that the low gears are needed. Add in altitude as a big factor as well.

    The guy who ripped up the 15 second steep climb on his 30-32 2x9 low is gonna be flailing on the hour long, 4 mile climb while the guy with the 20-34 will ride right past him totally comfortable.
    All the while both are being passed by the SS'er riding by on 34x20.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fillet-brazed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,696
    Quote Originally Posted by rensho
    All the while both are being passed by the SS'er riding by on 34x20.

    yeah, yeah, I've heard that before and it's really funny to the SSers when I ride past them at 4.3mph when they're walking at 1.6 mph.

    Serious.

    And it's also really funny going down the other side when all they can do is bounce rapidly on their seat and I pedal a nice calm 80rpm past them.

  44. #44
    San Diego County
    Reputation: Duzitall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,475
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Fillet-brazed
    like has been said, it's all about local terrain. Short steep climbs of course are easy to do in a tall gear. It's the ones that take a half hour or an hour to climb that the low gears are needed. Add in altitude as a big factor as well.

    The guy who ripped up the 15 second steep climb on his 30-32 2x9 low is gonna be flailing on the hour long, 4 mile climb while the guy with the 20-34 will ride right past him totally comfortable.

    Quote Originally Posted by rensho
    All the while both are being passed by the SS'er riding by on 34x20.
    While it's funny to say the reality is very few humans can really make that happen on 30 minute + climbs like I have here at home. I live almost in the middle of a federal wildlife refuge with state parks all around. Killer singletrack everywhere but connected by very steep and long climbs. Many people shuttle these climbs in motor vehicles. I do not shuttle.

    I am 51 years old, very overworked and a little overweight. Somedays I ride a 36lb all mountain bike with a full hydropack, tools and spares for a full day of riding. That's alot of shilt to haul up a few thousand feet vert.

    I do prefer to climb my 20lb rigid 29er SS with taller gears while standing and beating it out. But not everyday.

    Yes Sean, Iowa, Indiana, Florida and Barbados are FLAT.

    As for the internet argument...I'm right and your are wrong to disagree
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    Of course the easiest way to fix this is to go for a hike.
    DT

  45. #45
    mvi
    mvi is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,236
    I would love a 38x38 gear for my 1x8 XC rig. How can I attach one to the 34 carrier?

  46. #46
    nor
    nor is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    82
    Just run it single.

    ron-k.blogspot.com

  47. #47
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,606
    Quote Originally Posted by mvi
    I would love a 38x38 gear for my 1x8 XC rig. How can I attach one to the 34 carrier?
    You would run the 38 as the granny with a spacer between it and your 34 and drop your little rear cog (whatever it is - an 11T or 12T).

    BB

  48. #48
    Good For You
    Reputation: The_Boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    408
    All above posts.

    More importantly.... WTF is up with your friend's excess der. cable?!

  49. #49
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,606
    Quote Originally Posted by Padre
    I use 20x34 at least once on almost every ride here.
    You better not be shaving your legs admitting that kind of stuff.

    BB

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: veteran_youth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    769
    Quote Originally Posted by nor
    Just run it single.

    THREE SPEED FAIL

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,777
    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown
    You would run the 38 as the granny with a spacer between it and your 34 and drop your little rear cog (whatever it is - an 11T or 12T).

    BB
    Does the granny 36/38/39 chew into freewheel?

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    98
    [QUOTE=BruceBrown]Again - it's all about where you live, what terrain you ride and what one wants to accomplish. Maybe you have no fascination of climbing super steep stuff, but many of us do. That's fine if you would rather walk and spend most of your riding just going as fast as you can. Nothing wrong with that.

    Where I currently live, I have no need for a super granny. However, I do ride a few times a year in areas where it is needed. Briones Regional Park in the East Bay around Moraga and Lafayette, California has some killer climbs. I mean sustained killer climbs. Since I have inlaws in the area and I used to live out there, I ride there a few times a year when we are out visiting. I just ride over on the east end of Lafayette and head up the trails which are steep, killer, dusty, loose, dry, steep and literallly breath taking with the views and sense of accomplishment. A lot of reviews of that park and some of the trails leading up to the upper ridges mention the steep pitch, most just say it can't be ridden. Not me. It's a challenge and I ride them, but for my age and maximum heart rate - even 20T x 34T puts me right at max heart rate. This subject has come up many times over the years, and unless you one has ridden those trails - they have no idea what I'm talking about. A few times, other MTBR.com posters have chimed in and supported my claim about these trails and the need for your A game and correct gearing.

    But if you don't live or ride there, forget about it. We can all simply keep doing this....

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/7166535@N05/3182532178/" title="WrongOnTheNet by singingsingletracker, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3486/3182532178_fc91b8e97e_o.jpg" width="300" height="330" alt="WrongOnTheNet" /></a>

    I was in the Black Hills Fat Tire XC Mountain Bike Race last May which was held on some super steep, very technical and very, very narrow singletrack. Due to the muddy conditions leading up to the event, I was unable to pre-ride the entire loop as it needed to dry out for race day. I was on my Dos Niner with a 2 x 9 (29T/42T) Middleburn Duo and an 11-34 out back. After we had been climbing in the first lap for what seemed like about 20 minutes, I was locked behind the wheel of two local riders in front of me to learn the loop from them when I looked ahead and, with what little breath I could muster to speak, I uttered "ya' gotta be kiddin' me!!!". We were headed straight up the fault line of a DH run for a section. The two in front of me dropped into their granny's front and rear and I had nothing to drop into. I made it about 10 feet and had to hop off and attempt to walk/run up the rest of the climb. They almost made it up to the top of the climb, but bailed just before the top. I know I could have made it with proper gearing based on prior successful climbs on such super steep stuff. I've never seen any kind of climbing like that in any other XC race that I have been in, but that's because I'm not riding in the Black Hills or Colorado or the Sierra Nevada, etc... . I'm sure they are out there and I am sure that riders choose appropriate gearing for their needs.

    I used to live in Vienna and ride right out my door up into the Vienna Woods. Straight up the fault line for a sustained 10 - 20 minute climb. I did it on a 26" Trek 8000 using a 20T x 34T combo. Yet, I had to stop and hang on to trees to catch my breath on a couple of the trails before continuing. Again, that's me, my needs and experience on climbing certain specific steep trails. Others may not hit their maximum heart rate and be able to do it with different gearing. Not me.

    So am I wrong? Are others wrong with their desire or need to have a combo that gets them up the super steep challenging climbs? Are they wrong for not wanting to walk?

    Nah. I don't think so. Everybody is right and everybody is and can be happy because there are options out there.

    I am switching from a 29/42 ring combo this season to a 27/40 combo. I will still be running a 11-34 in the rear. But I will bring along another option for the Black Hills and Briones this year.

    BB

    Walk? Screw that. I'll stay on the bike....
    Well said. My challenges in central TX are not mountains. Lance Armstrong won a MTB race near Bastrop a month ago, there was a picture of him pushing his Superfly up a hill, Gearing? We all know he can climb with or without a "pair."

  53. #53
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,606
    Quote Originally Posted by Maheoway
    Well said. My challenges in central TX are not mountains. Lance Armstrong won a MTB race near Bastrop a month ago, there was a picture of him pushing his Superfly up a hill, Gearing? We all know he can climb with or without a "pair."
    I remember reading somebody's blog about that climb. If memory serves me right, it wasn't the short steep climb itself that had Lance hopping off his bike. It was the loose soil conditions making the safest and quickest route to the top to push (which the guy in his blog said everybody did).

    Another blog - maybe another race - mentioned a bottleneck created in front of him and we all know what happens if the guy in front of us dismounts. It's a chain reaction that causes everyone to dismount. The blog had a picture of that, but I can't find it now.

    Here's Lance swerving to avoid the guy in front of him who appears to be checking the standover height of his frame...

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/7166535@N05/3185235471/" title="413655406_e3CCg-M by singingsingletracker, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3419/3185235471_8f9f185388_o.jpg" width="600" height="400" alt="413655406_e3CCg-M" /></a>

    And of course, it all really doesn't matter when you've got this kind of a gift....

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/7166535@N05/3185235579/" title="LanceArmstrong1hr-thumb-600x409 by singingsingletracker, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3436/3185235579_e6ddab8259_o.jpg" width="600" height="409" alt="LanceArmstrong1hr-thumb-600x409" /></a>


  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,104
    I feel like copperfield suffers from "more is better syndrome.." 34 teeth -- f that, 39! 5" of travel -- f that, 9! Pretty soon Copper field will have a 400 horsepower ferrari with 8.99 gearing that makes 900 ft/lbs of torque because it goes 45 and gets 3 mpg... Sweet!

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,104
    Or better yet a 7" travel 29er with a 39 tooth climing gear that can't climb because it's too soft, geared too low so the slightest crank causes it to break out and it weighs 38lbs: And cost $5500, I forgot

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    478
    Hello everyone, I'm the guy who has the cassette in question

    SLX handles it fine, to my surprise. Is slightly sluggish in the low range of gears, but that is due to mismatched ramps on the other sprockets. The change itsself is a bit noisy, but that is due to the lack of shifting ramps and rather tall teeth.

    The sprocket itsself is my experiment with large cogs, meant to be filed/modified to get something that works almost as well as stock Shimano stuff. Ie - profile the teeth a little better, add shifting ramps etc.

    As for riding this thing.

    It is meant for a 1x9 AM setupwith 32 front. But for now I am using it with 32/22 11-39 8 speed cassette. The 22-39 gear provides anough torque to get through anything that is trackable. On loose surface the wheel just spins through.
    Last edited by uzurpator; 01-10-2009 at 06:21 PM.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,777

    Good job!

    Thanx for appearing
    Quote Originally Posted by uzurpator
    The 22-39 gear provides anough torque to get through anything that is trackable. On loose surface the wheel just spins through.
    Propably yeah, yet take into account that 29er has 622mm rim which is 11% larger than 559mm thus gears must be setup accordingly.

    22x39 gives 0,564.... of wheel revolution whereas
    20x36 gives 0,555...and
    20x39 gives 0,512....

    This reveals how ineffctive the enlargement of cogs alone is. Swapping the chainring returns more effect than another cog.
    I would rather have 20x36, which is lighter and perhaps easier to be catered for, than 22x39.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    478
    The only problem is, that without expensive modifications it is impossible to make round 20T chainring for 64mm BCD.

    21T might be doable.

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,777
    Perfectly round 20T 64 BCD may put the bolts too close to the teeth and provide too little material to bear drivetain forces and crack up.

    I reckon that a squarish 20T is more efficient than 21T round.

    Let's wait for 20T 64 bcd owners to chime in.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    478
    Quote Originally Posted by Davidcopperfield
    Perfectly round 20T 64 BCD may put the bolts too close to the teeth and provide too little material to bear drivetain forces and crack up.

    I reckon that a squarish 20T is more efficient than 21T round.

    Let's wait for 20T 64 bcd owners to chime in.
    Assuming there are any. 21T is a very tight fit (just CADed it) which might work for some cranksets, but not for others.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,777
    Post some pictures of that custom cassette for closer inspection. Exact derailluer clearance with 39T. What spacers are installed etc.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    478
    Earliest I can do is monday. Currently the bike with it is in a different city

  63. #63
    meh....
    Reputation: Monte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,590
    Quote Originally Posted by uzurpator
    The only problem is, that without expensive modifications it is impossible to make round 20T chainring for 64mm BCD.

    21T might be doable.
    94mm/58mm BCD cranks are the way to go. 20t chainrings are easy to get and fit.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    512
    i would love to have one more steep gear. 20t in front or 39 in rear.

    these guys who say they dont need anything lower than 28x34...i would love for them to try some of the climbs around here. i ride 22x34 and i cant get up that massive rock climb right off of corral canyon (socal). i get half way up and then it gets steeper and i just plain run out of gear or steam. i want to conquer than dam hill one day.

  65. #65
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,606
    Quote Originally Posted by uzurpator
    The only problem is, that without expensive modifications it is impossible to make round 20T chainring for 64mm BCD.

    21T might be doable.
    Could have fooled me. The 64mm BCD Ti 20T I run on my Shimano XT 752 Hollowtech with Octalink BB seems round to me. But maybe I better get my reading glasses on and take a closer look to see if it has s "squarish" look to it. Either way, it works.

    How about I take it off the crank, lay it down next to my Rotor Q-Ring 2x9 rings? That ought to make the 20T look round...

    BB

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    478
    BruceBrown: pic and brand please. Does the chain hit chainring posts on the crank?

  67. #67
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,606
    Quote Originally Posted by uzurpator
    BruceBrown: pic and brand please. Does the chain hit chainring posts on the crank?
    Pic?

    That's right, with a photo things don't exist, right? But I'm in my jammies and there was no way I was going to clean up for you. ;-]

    Here she be mounted up on my XT crankset (sorry for the dirt, mud, grease and grime ):

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/7166535@N05/3188091346/" title="20TonXT by singingsingletracker, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3328/3188091346_db7b9272dc_b.jpg" width="1024" height="768" alt="20TonXT" /></a>

    Brand?

    Hmmmm.... I'll have to defer to others for that. These were made available on this forum a few years ago where part of the proceeds went to the Mountain Biking Hall of Fame with every purchase. So I bought one to have the 20T option and to support the Hall of Fame. I don't know if Boone, Action-Tec or some other company made the rings and were part of that fund raiser for the Hall of Fame. Sorry - that's all I know and those threads are quite a few years ago (maybe search in the year 2004) as it listed all the particulars. I can't even remember what I paid for it.

    A.....HA! Here's one thread from back in 2005. Claims I paid $67 for it and it is from Don Cook and Chad Oleson. Chad responds in the thread. The ring, Don Cook had them, came with the bolts which were designed for no clearance issues.

    Changing Cassette/Chain Ring for 10% lower gearing

    Probably best to contact Chad/Don through the Hall of Fame website to see if and how any of these chainrings and special bolts could be found.

    Does the chain hit chainring posts on the crank?

    As you can see from the picture, it is a very clever design where the 4 chainring bolts are, the ring dips down so that the chainring bolt blends into the "waves" like the other teeth. Obviously, the curvature of the chainring bolt is not identical to the other "waves", but it is pretty darn close. I've never noticed anything regarding the chain "hitting" the crank bolts to the point of altering performance, chain life, etc... .

    Anyway, the thing looks round to me in terms of the actual 20 teeth. Maybe my eyes are deceiving me, but she looks round to me.

    And this is one of my 2 "go to" cranksets for scaling real mountains. The other being a Race Face with Boone Ti 20/29T granny/middle and a Race Face 42T big ring. Most other times, I'm running 2 x 9 these days in the middle of the cornfields.

    BB
    Last edited by BruceBrown; 01-11-2009 at 08:55 AM.

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    478
    I am actually curious if the chain hits the chainwheel mounting posts, so the crank does not need to be modified like this:

    http://forums.mtbr.com/drivetrain-shifters-derailleurs-cranks/20-tooth-chain-ring-xt-crankset-231019.html#post2297254

  69. #69
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,606
    Quote Originally Posted by uzurpator
    I am actually curious if the chain hits the chainwheel mounting posts, so the crank does not need to be modified like this:

    http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?p=2297254
    In short, the Hall of Fame 20T came with special chainring bolts so no chain is hitting the bolts (coupled with the design of the ring).

    Edit: My bad. I apologize. Of all the terminology I know (which isn't a great deal) I had never heard the term "chainring post". All this time I thought you were talking about the chainring bolts.

    So I did go and read the thread to see exactly what you were talking about. I have not machined my "chainring posts" on the two XT 752 cranksets that I own. In spite of that, I have been riding the cranks and the rings for 5 years. I guess at this point, all of that riding has allowed the chain to do any machining needed for me. ;-) I can't remember back 5 years when I installed if there was any problem that I felt or noted. Regardless, things work great at this point. I suppose the solution to the answer would be what Crashtestdummy did by slightly machining down his "chainring posts". Although I'm riding different cranksets - the XT 752's - with the black spider. Probably the same problem, but as I said it looks like 5 years of riding has taken care of any clearance issues "naturally".

    BB
    Last edited by BruceBrown; 01-11-2009 at 09:16 AM.

  70. #70
    jrm
    jrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jrm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,715

    I never had too

    Quote Originally Posted by uzurpator
    I am actually curious if the chain hits the chainwheel mounting posts, so the crank does not need to be modified like this:

    http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?p=2297254
    manipulate anything to get my action tec 20T to work on the XT 760 crank. Also notice the thread your linking was posted in 06'. Im pretty sure i bought my action tec 20T in 07'.

    Couldnt hurt to call action tec..just saying.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    478
    Really. Read the link I provided. Then think what I have asked about.

  72. #72
    jrm
    jrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jrm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,715

    the answer is no

    Quote Originally Posted by uzurpator
    Really. Read the link I provided. Then think what I have asked about.
    the holes on the backside of the 20T i have in my hand are recessed.

  73. #73
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,606
    Quote Originally Posted by uzurpator
    Really. Read the link I provided. Then think what I have asked about.
    Corrected and apologized above. Sorry about that.

    BB

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    478
    So, basically, the sprocket is moved inward by something like 1/10" to the middle in comparsion to normal 22T? If yes, and it shifts well, then that's the information I needed

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    478
    Concerning the topic of this thread. Some more images for the curious
    Attached Images Attached Images

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bobbotron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,305
    Neato man. I like it!

    I'm sure other people have mentioned it, but I think that larger cassettes with also larger chain rings make for a good setup, by increasing the chain rap and gearing efficiency...

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,777
    Is it 38T or 39T, which you used? Is there enough clearance lest the jockey pulley should drag on the sprocket?

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bobbotron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Davidcopperfield
    Is it 38T or 39T, which you used? Is there enough clearance lest the jockey pulley should drag on the sprocket?
    If you're asking me, I have no idea. I just like the theory of a larger rear cassette. The closest I've gotten to it is a 32 tooth cog on my touring bike, sorry man.

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    478
    Its:

    11 - 13 - 15 - 18 - 23 - 28 - 33 - 39

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,777
    Making it 9 speed for a 29er it would be advisable to do:
    12-14-17-20-25-29-33-36-39 and add crankset 20/30/42
    If SLX can clear it, so can XTR shadow.

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    478
    I think it would be better to have tighter bottom. Like:

    12-13-15-17-20-24-29-34-39

  82. #82
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,606
    Quote Originally Posted by uzurpator
    Concerning the topic of this thread. Some more images for the curious
    Nice cassette.

    However, that brake cable excess has got to be the most dangerous excess I've ever seen. I hope you plan on trimming it a bit before you suddenly stop and fly over the bars.

    BB

  83. #83
    Administrator Administrator
    Reputation: rockcrusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,030
    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown
    Nice cassette.

    However, that brake cable excess has got to be the most dangerous excess I've ever seen. I hope you plan on trimming it a bit before you suddenly stop and fly over the bars.

    BB

    methinks the owner has no means of cutting cable. Have a look at the zipped tied derailleur cable running back up the cable housing out of view. At first I though it was some jury rigged lubrication system. Then I though it was some sort of electric device. Then i realized it was just excess cable from what I can only imagine was a tandem cable length.

    Side cutters, any will work. Even if they won't cut through just grab tight and work the cable back and forth until all the strands break. Seriously.
    Try this: HTFU

  84. #84
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,606
    Quote Originally Posted by rockcrusher
    methinks the owner has no means of cutting cable. Have a look at the zipped tied derailleur cable running back up the cable housing out of view. At first I though it was some jury rigged lubrication system. Then I though it was some sort of electric device. Then i realized it was just excess cable from what I can only imagine was a tandem cable length.

    Side cutters, any will work. Even if they won't cut through just grab tight and work the cable back and forth until all the strands break. Seriously.
    Maybe we ought to all chip in for a pair of Park Tool cable cutters. Odd that the pictures posted in his Profile are different shots of a new frame not yet built up, yet when you click on those pictures in his profile photos you get these odd photos of the old bike with the uncut cables. What's up with that?

    BB

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    478
    That is not going to be trimmed. Mostly because the bike in question was hit with a severe PDS (Progressing Dissasembly Syndrome ) in order to sell most of the stuff.

    Anyways - the bike was put togather just for a few test rides, which should be obvious with 140mm disc on a DH wheel

    And TBH - I don't trim the cables, because sooner or later they will split on the ends, making a quick in field repairs difficult/impossible. I merely zip-tie them to the housing, which mitigates the problem.

    And before you say that I can carry a spare cable - replacing a shifter cable in a blistering cold in the night = not fun.

    Dunno what's the deal with the profile pics as well

  86. #86
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,606
    Quote Originally Posted by uzurpator
    And TBH - I don't trim the cables, because sooner or later they will split on the ends, making a quick in field repairs difficult/impossible. I merely zip-tie them to the housing, which mitigates the problem.

    And before you say that I can carry a spare cable - replacing a shifter cable in a blistering cold in the night = not fun.
    Trim 'em and solder the ends. Wear goggles, shake off or melt off the excess solder with the gun/iron. This allows the cable to still be pulled through the housing and it will not fray or develop "split ends". It's even weight weenie approved!

    I had a set of stainless steel cables on a bike I did this to back in 2003 that worked perfectly for several years (sold the bike with the cables still working great). I had removed all the cables from the brakes, derailleurs and housing several times during regular seasonal maintenance. You can't do this with Teflon coated cables, but with the SS cables it is the ticket.

    The other trick is to use electronic shrink wrap around the end of your cables (and is the method for teflon coated fancy, high priced cables). Both methods work great and you avoid any fraying. Plenty of posts in the search threads about doing that here at MTBR.com.

    Why are you out in the middle of the night in the cold changing cables? Iditarod Bike Race or something? I just came in from shoveling snow in -22 temps and even with my ski gloves on, fingers were numb after 15 minutes. No way I could change a cable in those temps.

    BB

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,777

    Idea!

    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown
    The other trick is to use electronic shrink wrap around the end of your cables (and is the method for teflon coated fancy, high priced cables). Both methods work great and you avoid any fraying. Plenty of posts in the search threads about doing that here at MTBR.com.
    BB
    This trick looks better with 29 inch wheels in the background. Uzurpator is a tall guy 205cms I think and he doesn't get it, that resistance to 29ers is futile
    It is a tall man problem to properly fit a 26er, they never seem to work fine, no matter how much money one spends. The trouble lies in the wheels not apparel.

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,777
    So, guys does anyone use an Action Tec additional sprocket added behind 34 one? Does it chew into aluminium hub freewheels? (of course 11 one will be removed)

    Edit: I am planning to add either 36 or 38. 39 is an overkil

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    244
    Quote Originally Posted by playpunk
    Seriously? I live in West Virginia. It isn't Colorado or the Alps, but we have plenty of hills - and lots of steep ones.

    I really can't imagine any application where you would NEED a gear that small - even on a snow bike. You might as well be walking. I ride my bike to go as fast as I can on the bike. If I want to go for hours at 2 miles an hour, I'll walk.

    You can spin a 22 x 32 at 3mph. That is SLOW. 22 x 34 is even easier. If you want to run 1x9 or 2x9, I can kind of understand, but I still think for 99.99% of the time standard gearing is enough. 29 x 34 is 24.7 gear inches - 22 x 39 is 16.4. 1.8 v 1.2 % gain ratio.

    I don't get the fascination with easy gears on this board....
    I don't understand all the p!ssing and moaning going on. It's not your bike! Let the dude do what he wants with it.

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    446
    I know this is an old thread, but I thought I'd put in my 2c. I pulled the trigger on a 38T cog and will be setting up a a 2x9 with a 12-38 cassette and 26-39 cranks (aka Poor Mans XX - we'll call it II or VV).
    I have an 11-34 cassette, removing the 11 and adding the 38T.
    I'm using a set of road cranks in order to get a 39T chainring that is ramped and pinned and got a 130mm bashguard from www.bbgbashguard.com/ . I'm going to use an SLX derailleur as well (cheapest shadow RD available) and will be targeting a chainline of 50mm. Any thoughts on chainline? I've seen anywhere from 47 to 50, XX is 49.5

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Soupboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by alexkraemer
    I know this is an old thread, but I thought I'd put in my 2c. I pulled the trigger on a 38T cog and will be setting up a a 2x9 with a 12-38 cassette and 26-39 cranks (aka Poor Mans XX - we'll call it II or VV).
    I have an 11-34 cassette, removing the 11 and adding the 38T.
    I'm using a set of road cranks in order to get a 39T chainring that is ramped and pinned and got a 130mm bashguard from www.bbgbashguard.com/ . I'm going to use an SLX derailleur as well (cheapest shadow RD available) and will be targeting a chainline of 50mm. Any thoughts on chainline? I've seen anywhere from 47 to 50, XX is 49.5
    Just be sure you've got a steel cassette carrier on the hub as the added torque of the single 38T will devour an Al carrier unless it has a fairly thick base.
    Professional Amateur

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    446
    Quote Originally Posted by Soupboy
    Just be sure you've got a steel cassette carrier on the hub as the added torque of the single 38T will devour an Al carrier unless it has a fairly thick base.
    It's an el-cheapo wheel build (I got the hub for $10) - so I'm guessing there's very little aluminum (390g hub weight)., but I'll certainly have my LBS check to make sure - thanks for the heads-up.

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,777
    Here we go! An aluminium rear cog not devouring the aluminium free wheels. Unheard of
    I'm ditching the 11T and go right up from 13 upto 38, which will reside behind the 34T. Thus I'm rocking 20x38 combo in the near future. Steep knolls beware!



    Ride what you want, even 1x10, but remember you have only one pair of knees.

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    396
    LOL topic

    do you have fast legs for 39t?

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    478
    Hello everyone.

    This is a bit of a necro, but there is a followup for this story, so I feel it is justified.

    I have worked on the concept for some time now, and after a few prototypes I arrived at this ( sorry for the poor quality of the pictures... I am really bad photographer ):





    It is made out of 7075 T6 aluminum, 38 tooth, 9 speed compatible ( altho 8 speed will also work fine with a shim ) cog which is also compatible with alloy freehubs. Weighing at 80 grams currently gets tested

    It should be compatible with most freehubs and cassettes

  96. #96
    Ancient Astronaut
    Reputation: Patagrande's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    162
    How far does the derailleur cable go back up? I see at least two zip-ties holding it along the housing.
    What is the plan DC?
    Just curious, I generally cut the cable at over one inch or so.

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,777
    These are aluminium cogs so they do not chew into aluminium free wheels and they are much cheaper than Action Tec ones.

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    3
    Hi,
    Do you know where could I buy a 38T alu cog?
    Thanks in advance.

  99. #99
    Ride da mOOn Moderator
    Reputation: NEPMTBA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    8,258
    Quote Originally Posted by dieselcruiserhead View Post
    I feel like copperfield suffers from "more is better syndrome.." 34 teeth -- f that, 39! 5" of travel -- f that, 9! Pretty soon Copper field will have a 400 horsepower ferrari with 8.99 gearing that makes 900 ft/lbs of torque because it goes 45 and gets 3 mpg... Sweet!
    Now that's foooooookin funny... LOL

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by NEPMTBA View Post
    Now that's foooooookin funny... LOL
    :-P

    Now I use 1x9 on my XC racing bike, 34T with 11-34. So, I want to try this 38T cog and I could put on a 36T chainring.

    Any tip where to buy it?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •