> Gearing on most bikes sold to new cyclists is not that different to the gearing that professional cyclists use.
Huh, growing up, my (kid) bike had exactly three gears. No wonder I always hated cycling.
As a person who’s bike commuted on and off in a very hilly city, but never biked athletically, it’s hard for me to think of gearing linearly. Yes, for equal level of effort, 4x easier is probably a good introduction. But climbing that slowly is frustrating. And it’s dangerous in traffic.
I’ve definitely “learned to climb”, and I definitely don’t have that strength and endurance now, but next time I’m riding I will still definitely prefer a little extra effort over the slow crawl.
One of the recent (awesome) trends on the mountain biking side of things is 1x12 drivetrains. My Rocky Mountain has a 10-51 on the rear and I have a 30-34 Oval ring up front (One-Up Components). I can climb anything!
But there's an awesome side effect of drive trains like this, they're really noob friendly. I used to sit in the top three gears when going uphill, but now the 51 tooth is reserved for climbing walls as my fitness has improved.
Long live the 1x12!
And unless you’re sub 10% body fat it’s even worse. You can feel every gram going up a steep climb.
Jeez his calculations didn't even seem to account for watts/kilogram. In addition to the massive power gap, a typical pro cyclist is probably lighter than a typical (fat) American, and lighter than fitter places like europeans.
The weight differential become even more apparent on hills than the power gap.
I think electric assist bikes will close this gap between gearing sold and gearing actually usable by riders.
I was an ironman triathlete that happily rode a triple front crank.