Jem
Viscount
?
Posts: 3,392 
|
Post by Jem on Apr 16, 2022 17:14:12 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by brianbutler on Apr 16, 2022 18:58:58 GMT
That is a rather odd setup with not many usable gears.
Brian
|
|
|
|
Post by wheelson on Apr 16, 2022 20:24:49 GMT
It’s possible that it will shift ok, all depends on front derailleur and if the rear derailleur can take up the chain slack. I have a 50-28 with a 13-32 freewheel, Campagnolo NR with long cage and Record front derailleur, downtube shifters on my Austro Daimler. It shifts surprisingly well. It took some very careful setup. As Brian says,,not always the most usable gear range. Best, John “wheelson” |
|
|
|
Post by oldroadietehachapi on Apr 16, 2022 23:14:23 GMT
I agree with John, it depends on the capacity of the derailleurs. I have a similar setup on my PX10 and it shifts like a champ.
Cheers
Jim
|
|
rodh
Viscount
Posts: 122
|
Post by rodh on May 2, 2022 16:58:02 GMT
I see "modern" set-ups with 53/39 at the front and a close ratio set at the rear, say 12/23.
Total difference 25.
My AP has 52/42 and 14/28, so total difference of 24; ie, similar derailleur needs (modern vs. vintage)
so is this just a preference of "sequential" versus "interleaved" use of the front chainrings?
I think the Shimano Crane capacity is 28, so in theory there's room to expand before fitting the GS.
PS, is this frame really 60cm? Looks more like a 22.5" (57cm) from the head tube length ...
|
|
|
|
Post by brianbutler on May 2, 2022 19:51:13 GMT
SRAM says triples are obsolete and even doubles are almost obsolete. They have an 11-42 (11 speed) cassette for use on single 40, 42, and 44 tooth chainring systems. That's still too many gears and a flimsy chain, but the range is about right.
Brian
|
|
|
|
Post by oldroadietehachapi on May 2, 2022 21:51:40 GMT
I like obsolete  |
|
|
|
Post by brianbutler on May 3, 2022 10:54:07 GMT
I like obsolete  I AM obsolete. |
|
|
|
Post by wheelson on May 5, 2022 0:59:40 GMT
I like obsolete I AM obsolete. Since almost all my bikes have triples, I must be obsolete as well. Most triples do take a bit more messing with to get right and as the cog count goes to eleven and beyond it gets even harder due to chain lines and chain length take up. Since in my obsolescence I haven’t progressed beyond 8 x 3, and I am both a rider and mechanic, I confess that these are my personal limits. At the shop, I see pretty much all, even the extremes of poorly designed and implemented drivetrains. Some challenge my sanity and religion. The manufacturers are probably right in going 2x or 1x not only in terms decreased component count and cost, but also decreased ire of the shops and the customer. This is not to say that 2x or 1x are not without problems. A 1x usually requires an “odd even” chainring and outrageously large cogs present their own problems. And don’t get me started on the indiscriminate use of hydraulic brakes. So I guess that simplicity and obsolescence go hand-in -hand. Which is okay with me since the accompanying cost to need ratio is much more agreeable! Best, John “wheelson” |
|
