Here's a link to Sheldon Brown's gear chart that might also be helpful. http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/
Have fun. On Feb 10, 8:28 pm, MichaelH <[email protected]> wrote: > Why 46/34 rather than 48/34? If you lay out the ratios in a chart, > you will quickly se that the 48/34 has more consistent jumps between > gears with a simpler shifting pattern. If you don't know how to lay > this out, I can help you. A difference of 10 between rings > consistently yields a single step on the cogs, and a difference of 14 > yields 2 clicks, but a difference of 12 is neither one nor the other. > > Personally, I find the ramps on chain rings way over rated. These > shifting aids have real value add on cogs, but I haven't experienced > enough benefit on rings to go out of my may to buy them. > > Michael > > On Feb 9, 9:22 pm, Mike <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I'm in the process of changing out cranks on my Hilsen. I'll be > > switching from a Sugino triple to a Sugino compact double. The double > > has 48/34 rings but I think what I want is 46/34. My Rambouillet has a > > 46t chainring on it that I might cannabalize but I'm thinking of just > > using the 46t ring off the triple. The 48t ring is clearly ramped and > > pinned. The 46t ring on the triple does not look ramped at all. Is > > that correct? It seemed to shift fine. I notice that the Sugino > > chainrings that Riv uses have "no ramps or pins", are those the same > > as the chainrings that come on the crank? > > > --mike- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
