New Sport Tour

[john28july]

quote:Originally posted by stutho

Hi John - sorry for the late reply.  Yes I could sometime do with an extra low gear on the Rohloff BUT I spend FAR MORE time in 14 than I do in first.  On the flat (no wind) and I am normally in 11 or likely 12 gear.  I live in a hilly (and windy) area and my daily commute involves one large hill and a long flat section along an estuary - very exposed to the wind.  Like I said in my earlier post “I use every one of my 14 gears every day” - QED 42*16 is the correct gearing for me.  (I am not claiming it is right for you or anyone else.)

Incidentally I can also set my bike up with a 42*17 - I have only done this twice for touring.  This set up is NOT low enough for me when caring load,  however it is to low for my normal use.

Hello,
The terrain you mention is very similar to the area in which I do most of my riding. I must admit my Raven Tour gearing suits it and me very well. No need for any change when I go off camping early in 2007.I have only ever used 1 to 5 gears to test that they were actually available and functioning!I will no doubt only use them when loaded.With the ratios I have I generally ride in.........gear 11 or 12 too.  However I must say that my Audax 853 is faster and much easier up hills!
John.
www.pbase.com/john28july

[lewisnoble]

Well, I will confound you all and say that I use 39 / 16 on my Raven Tour - and it suits me fine.  Sheffield is pretty hilly, and after a return to cycling after a gap of several decades (the bike was my 60th birthday present) I doubt if I could or should manage a bigger gear  . . . I have only rarely wanted a bigger gear, and probably use the lower gears more than most contributors so far.

Lewis

[john28july]

quote:Originally posted by lewisnoble

Well, I will confound you all and say that I use 39 / 16 on my Raven Tour - and it suits me fine.  Sheffield is pretty hilly, and after a return to cycling after a gap of several decades (the bike was my 60th birthday present) I doubt if I could or should manage a bigger gear  . . . I have only rarely wanted a bigger gear, and probably use the lower gears more than most contributors so far.

Lewis

Amazing! I was born on Mona Avenue, Crookes, Sheffield, 10. in 1950. So I do know your terrain. I was in Sheffield 3 years ago-simply to show my 16 yr old daughter the house I was born in-No 20.
Enjoy your rides,
John.

[Joatamon]

44 x 16 for this fifties RST owner (nineteen-fifties, or just fifties).

I calculated my most-used gear on my old hybrid/mtb as about 71 inches, that dictated 44x16 for direct gear 11.  It's proven to be the right choice for me.  Occasionally I've looked for gear 15, but I've never missed anything lower than 1st.  Generally I keep my cadence above 80.

[wal]

quote:Originally posted by PH

quote:Originally posted by wal


Can someone explain the situation with the front QR skewer with the Son Dynohub. It appears not to be QR or maybe I was mistaken.

It is QR as opposed to a nutted axle.  It isn't a cam type QR, it needs an allen key to undo.  At least this is what my two came with.  It can be replaced with any standard QR.

EDIT - There's a couple of photos on the SON website showing the hubs fitted.
http://www.nabendynamo.de/gallery.htm

Thanks for the info. Do they use these to keep opportunist thieves at bay or for some other reason? I presume that needing an allen key means that they are more difficult to nick than with a simple lever type skewer.

[goosander]

quote:Originally posted by Joatamon

44 x 16 for this fifties RST owner (nineteen-fifties, or just fifties).

I calculated my most-used gear on my old hybrid/mtb as about 71 inches, that dictated 44x16 for direct gear 11.  It's proven to be the right choice for me.  Occasionally I've looked for gear 15, but I've never missed anything lower than 1st.  Generally I keep my cadence above 80.

Same here, my most used gear on my old hybrid was also 71" but I decided to go for 42x16 rather than 44x16 because I felt that the 105" top gear of the 44 tooth setup was too high, however -

If I have done the maths correctly it looks like the figures Thorn give in their table are based on a tyre circumference of 208cm which is somewhat larger than the 200cm diameter of the tyres on my bike, so in reality my gearing is similar to the 40x16 in the Thorn table.  If I change to a 44T chainring I should get the gearing I was expecting from a 42T chainring.

For the benefit of any prospective purchasers reading this, I suspect that Thorn based their gearing table around a bike using 26x1.75 or larger tyres, so it may be worth going up one size of chainring if you intend using smaller tyres especially if the tyres are small for their size (e.g. Conti Sport Contact 1.6's are more like 1.45" in width).