Compact Crank Comments from Kevin Metcalfe

He's right. The vast majority of people should probably be using a compact.

Been running 50/34 11-26 for years. Gives me the full range I need without swapping out cassettes. Has worked well in Crits, road races, and Triathlon.

Yep, same here, but with an 11-25. The 34/25 still feels like a granny gear even on Connecticut hills. Put me on a flat and I'll destroy you. I completely agree that most people haven't learned about proper cadence and technique, but that should hardly be a surprise. We grow up on BMX bikes, town bikes, with low saddles and for the most part, fixies. We equate going faster with standing up, pushing hard, and getting to a certain speed, then coasting. The more years you do that, the more it becomes ingrained. Take that person and put them on a road bike and they don't understand gearing at ALL. Heck, my sister WORKS for Cannondale and still asks me questions a year later about what gear she should use for what type of grade, and she's only got a rear DR, not even a front one.

I switched all of our bikes to compact 3 years ago.....both of my kids can easily spin 100+ per minute for long periods.  My 15 year old did a 9 mile TT a month ago and averaged 26.8 mph.  I don't think they would be where they are with their cycling if not for the compact crank.  I don't mean this to be a backward brag on my kids....I'd just brag on them straight up if that were the case...it's a testament to what a compact crank has meant to their cycling development.

Excellent !

For the weekend warrior, it is easier to run cassettes with single cog differences with compact cranks than with the standard 130 bcd cranks. With Shimano Junior Gearing: One can run 13-14-15-16-17-18-19-21-23-25 for a 10 speed cassette that provides one cog step differences and the flexibility to pull the 13 and put on a 12 and.....pull the 21-23-25 and put on a 21-24-27 as needed. Thus one can run:

12-14-15-16-17-18-19-21-24-27 via Shimano gearing with crisp one step cog differences for the middle 6 cogs.

I have compact and 11-28 on my road bike.

That setup allows me to get to about 38mph before spinning out and also allows me to climb hills up to 15% staying around 300 watts at a modest cadence.

Proabably about 95% or more of AG triathletes should never see 300 watts. Therefore at least 95% of AG triathletes should be running compact with a 28T rear. If they care about the run anyway.

I live in Kansas. I rarely get to a point where I'm spinning out but when I do, it's for a very short time and I'm usually rolling at 40+ mph anyhow, take a break etc. And there's actually a hill here that peaks out at about 24% grade and I can do that no problem with a 50/34 and 11/25 setup. I don't need to go to the small chain ring either.

I agree that many people overthink things. Just ride more ......

I prefer a compact, and run one on all my bikes other than my Zipp (which, being a 650c is basically a compact) and my Planet X... which should probably be a compact. (although I just bought a new set of rings for It... so I guess not)

I still believe the whole cadence story is not yet fully written.
Ullrich rode low cadence and Armstrong high...

It is also my belief that built has a lot to do with it.

With a 36inch inseam and as a 190+ lbs guy, any cadence above 95rpm is just a horrible chore.
CAN I do 100+rpm? Yes
Nevertheless riding at arun 80-90 just feels the most natural!

The Armstrong/Ullrich thing was pretty exaggerated really. It's not like Armstrong was pushing 120+ rpm and Ullrich was grinding 60rpm. Both of them were pretty much in the "normal" range of cadence. But for the most part unless you are at a VERY extreme, just pick the cadence that feels best.

No.

I switched to a compact on my road bike right before a ride through the Florida Keys two years ago. My girlfriend at the time (strictly a roadie) said I was nuts, that I'd be constantly spun-out, especially going from 5800 ft of elevation down to sea level. I ended up very pleased with the results. Even with the road being as flat as it is through the Keys, I was never spun-out. With that experience and another year of riding on a compact, I got a Quarq in a compact for my tri bike without hesitation.

Normally I ride either relatively flat terrain (where I live now @ 4300 feet) or through mountains with lots of climbing and descending (45 minutes away where I go for group rides @ 5800 feet of elevation). My "everyday" wheels have an 11-28 for the mountains, and my "race" wheels have an 11-26 for the short climbs I encounter at races in southern NM. Both work wonderfully for me across a variety of terrain. I think if I rode mostly on relatively-flat roads, I'd have a 12-25 and be satisfied.

Since power was brought into the conversation: my best 20-minute average was 206, giving me a theoretical FTP (Functional Threshold Pain?) of 196ish (If I calculated that correctly). I'll be very pleased when I get over 200. I have no idea where that puts me in comparison to other folks in my AG; I'm just happy to see incremental increases over time. I think this puts me firmly in the "stick with a compact" zone of ability.

I went from 53/39 and 12/25 to 50/34 and 11/28 for my setup on my tri bike when I did IMCDA. The hills there are steep enough to warrant having that 28. Granted others out there ran standard 53/39 12/25 but for myself I rather spin easier up the hill rather than mash. At the end I was "fresh" to go on for the run.

On flats I'd go back to running a 12-25. I don't see much purpose in running a 12-23 at this time. Maybe there would be but I don't know.

Brag away...that's something to be proud of. If he had a paper route, things would be done in record time!