Q ring upgrade - Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh......
- Thread starter Robert Holler
- Start date
ratz
Wielder of the Rubber Mallet
52x34 does work
Jeremy,
Tanya (aka Mrs Ratz) is also running 52/34; it shifts good; it does Shift "late" going to the big ring which means tuning it up is a little more work as you have to have a good "Long" push from the derailleur to the right, but not so much that it over-shifts. Getting that "H" set-screw correctly adjusted is a PITA, but once it's set it's all good. We have a Force22 front derailleur on her bike.
If you have bike stand to tune it up with you should be able to make it work just fine.
Jeremy,
Tanya (aka Mrs Ratz) is also running 52/34; it shifts good; it does Shift "late" going to the big ring which means tuning it up is a little more work as you have to have a good "Long" push from the derailleur to the right, but not so much that it over-shifts. Getting that "H" set-screw correctly adjusted is a PITA, but once it's set it's all good. We have a Force22 front derailleur on her bike.
If you have bike stand to tune it up with you should be able to make it work just fine.
LarryOz
Cruzeum Curator & Sigma Wrangler
I am able to shift pretty
I am able to shift pretty good, although I would have to say that I probably drop the chain going from the small ring to the big ring about 2-3% of the time, which isn't much but not 100% which would be nice. I have not been able to determine if it is just because I try and shift it at the wrong time, but I suspect this is the reason.
I am able to shift pretty good, although I would have to say that I probably drop the chain going from the small ring to the big ring about 2-3% of the time, which isn't much but not 100% which would be nice. I have not been able to determine if it is just because I try and shift it at the wrong time, but I suspect this is the reason.
Rick Youngblood
CarbonCraft Master
The Q-ring timing on my
The Q-ring timing on my Vendetta is also setup exactly like Larry's S and Bob's V.
I'm currently running a 53 x 34 double Q's. Like Bob said shifting is slow, but works good and does take some fine tuning to stop the drops.
When I upgrade to aero Q's - someday - I'm going with 52x34.
The Q-ring timing on my Vendetta is also setup exactly like Larry's S and Bob's V.
I'm currently running a 53 x 34 double Q's. Like Bob said shifting is slow, but works good and does take some fine tuning to stop the drops.
When I upgrade to aero Q's - someday - I'm going with 52x34.
Jeremy S
Dude
I've been bouncing this
I've been bouncing this around in my head. Still not sure if/when I want to pursue this (I'll ride more on my current 50/34 round rings before deciding) but I Googled around and it seems people out there are comfortable going 1 or 2 teeth bigger with Q rings than with round rings (not sure if others here have had that experience). I also read in one review that the 34T Q ring is less oval than the 36T ring because the geometry is constrained by the bolt circle (and therefore I imagine the 34 would provide less benefit):
http://www.slowtwitch.com/Products/Components/Rotor_long_term_test_4118.html
These factors plus possible shifting/tuning issues with something like a 52/34 (even if they're minor, I already don't trust my FD) make me think I would go to 52/36 Q rings from my current 50/34 round rings... if/when I go there...
Reviews also claim that the aero rings are stiffer and therefore shift better (even though those giant logos make me cringe), so that may help you out with the slowness Rick.
I've been bouncing this around in my head. Still not sure if/when I want to pursue this (I'll ride more on my current 50/34 round rings before deciding) but I Googled around and it seems people out there are comfortable going 1 or 2 teeth bigger with Q rings than with round rings (not sure if others here have had that experience). I also read in one review that the 34T Q ring is less oval than the 36T ring because the geometry is constrained by the bolt circle (and therefore I imagine the 34 would provide less benefit):
http://www.slowtwitch.com/Products/Components/Rotor_long_term_test_4118.html
These factors plus possible shifting/tuning issues with something like a 52/34 (even if they're minor, I already don't trust my FD) make me think I would go to 52/36 Q rings from my current 50/34 round rings... if/when I go there...
Reviews also claim that the aero rings are stiffer and therefore shift better (even though those giant logos make me cringe), so that may help you out with the slowness Rick.
ReklinedRider
Zen MBB Master
Robert, thanks for taking a
Robert, thanks for taking a look. I will definitely rotate the ring forward. One more ride to pay extra close attention to the feel where it is, then up on the repair stand. I wish my middle son still lived in Newberg so I would have a reason to visit the beautiful Willamette Valley and zip over to see your shop.
That's what I love most about this forum--there are so many real bike experts who are willing to give great advice to those of us willing to learn. Oftentimes I feel a bit like Fredo Corleone in Godfather II where he tells Michael "I'm smaht!! I know how to do things!" Then I find out I ain't so smaht after all-- but there's good help to be had on here.
Thanks again to all.
Kline
Robert, thanks for taking a look. I will definitely rotate the ring forward. One more ride to pay extra close attention to the feel where it is, then up on the repair stand. I wish my middle son still lived in Newberg so I would have a reason to visit the beautiful Willamette Valley and zip over to see your shop.
That's what I love most about this forum--there are so many real bike experts who are willing to give great advice to those of us willing to learn. Oftentimes I feel a bit like Fredo Corleone in Godfather II where he tells Michael "I'm smaht!! I know how to do things!" Then I find out I ain't so smaht after all-- but there's good help to be had on here.
Thanks again to all.
Kline
LarryOz
Cruzeum Curator & Sigma Wrangler
Jeremy, for what it's worth
Jeremy, for what it's worth - I went from a 50/34 round to a 52/34 Q-ring and they seem about the same to me.
The 50R was never really enough size for me for downhill runs though, but I didn't know if my dr could handle moving to a 53Q, plus then there would be an even larger mis-match between that and the 34Q. (Since I am in the mountains, figured I needed that 34 either way) As it is, there are some inclines so severe that my front wheel just spins when I try and climb it (at about 15% grade). Then it is time to walk, since that is faster anyway!
And yes, the 34Q does not seem to have very much difference between the major and minor radius as the 52Q, which is kind of weird, because you would think that in climbing (more than ever) you would want to take advantage of the Q rings even more. The math wizards will have to hash this one out, and I'll just read about though.
Jeremy, for what it's worth - I went from a 50/34 round to a 52/34 Q-ring and they seem about the same to me.
The 50R was never really enough size for me for downhill runs though, but I didn't know if my dr could handle moving to a 53Q, plus then there would be an even larger mis-match between that and the 34Q. (Since I am in the mountains, figured I needed that 34 either way) As it is, there are some inclines so severe that my front wheel just spins when I try and climb it (at about 15% grade). Then it is time to walk, since that is faster anyway!
And yes, the 34Q does not seem to have very much difference between the major and minor radius as the 52Q, which is kind of weird, because you would think that in climbing (more than ever) you would want to take advantage of the Q rings even more. The math wizards will have to hash this one out, and I'll just read about though.
ratz
Wielder of the Rubber Mallet
That's interesting Larry; I
That's interesting Larry; I know you are a lot stronger rider than the Mrs. Ratz. I wonder if you shifted that one hole counter clockwise from #2 to #4 if that would make a difference. My gut says "no" because you are probably just already strong enough to climb where she was failing; but it would be interesting if it did help.
Comparing the 34x110BCD to the 36x110BCD you can definately see the the 36 is more oval. I wonder if the 36x130BCD has the same limitation as the 34x110BCD that might make the case for the 52/36x110BCD and the 53/39x130BCD being the optimal combination.
bah ok back to work;
That's interesting Larry; I know you are a lot stronger rider than the Mrs. Ratz. I wonder if you shifted that one hole counter clockwise from #2 to #4 if that would make a difference. My gut says "no" because you are probably just already strong enough to climb where she was failing; but it would be interesting if it did help.
Comparing the 34x110BCD to the 36x110BCD you can definately see the the 36 is more oval. I wonder if the 36x130BCD has the same limitation as the 34x110BCD that might make the case for the 52/36x110BCD and the 53/39x130BCD being the optimal combination.
bah ok back to work;
ratz
Wielder of the Rubber Mallet
34 seems to have a benefit.
Jeremy,
Here's a useful point of reference.
Mrs Ratz could not climb B*tch valley (as she calls it) in either direction; (it has two sections that climb out of the basin with 14-16% grade at the crests . With her round 50/34 she always has to walk a short stretch in either direction. After the switch out to the 52/34 Qrings she made it up both sides out and back; and felt she had gearing left. Also as expected She also no longer spins out and was able to pedal up to 34mph on the down hill for her fastest down hill under power. I think part of that success was that she should could carry more speed into the valley, but I also have a heck of a time carrying that hill in the east bound direction. For me the 52 feels both huge and small at the same time; it's fascinating to ride it.
Her immediate reaction to the Qrings was to notice the increased acceleration, she felt a 1 footed start was much easier now. She's running in OCP 4 versus 2. So that she can have more acceleration and less resistance by design; I'll probably move her to OCP 3 as she gets' stronger. If find she makes a great reference point as I don't really tell her why I change her bike; I just do it and then ask her what she notices.
Anyone else think it's interesting that so far in all of the picture we all can use the bolt the leads the crank arm as the "OCP" bolt relative to the factory marks? I am starting to think that as we adjust the boom for our differences in height and leg length that the geometry of the design relative to the crank position keeps that almost constant. When you think about the pedaling action and seat position that does seem like it will hold true for riders in the average sizes. If I recall correctly Larry and Rick are 5'6"-5'7", I'm a short 5'10" and I think Robert's taller than me based on his Silvio Photos. If that's true that really simplifies the setup of the QRings for future riders; or at least have them start by mounting it that way and then taking measurements for adjustment.
Jeremy,
Here's a useful point of reference.
Mrs Ratz could not climb B*tch valley (as she calls it) in either direction; (it has two sections that climb out of the basin with 14-16% grade at the crests . With her round 50/34 she always has to walk a short stretch in either direction. After the switch out to the 52/34 Qrings she made it up both sides out and back; and felt she had gearing left. Also as expected She also no longer spins out and was able to pedal up to 34mph on the down hill for her fastest down hill under power. I think part of that success was that she should could carry more speed into the valley, but I also have a heck of a time carrying that hill in the east bound direction. For me the 52 feels both huge and small at the same time; it's fascinating to ride it.
Her immediate reaction to the Qrings was to notice the increased acceleration, she felt a 1 footed start was much easier now. She's running in OCP 4 versus 2. So that she can have more acceleration and less resistance by design; I'll probably move her to OCP 3 as she gets' stronger. If find she makes a great reference point as I don't really tell her why I change her bike; I just do it and then ask her what she notices.
Anyone else think it's interesting that so far in all of the picture we all can use the bolt the leads the crank arm as the "OCP" bolt relative to the factory marks? I am starting to think that as we adjust the boom for our differences in height and leg length that the geometry of the design relative to the crank position keeps that almost constant. When you think about the pedaling action and seat position that does seem like it will hold true for riders in the average sizes. If I recall correctly Larry and Rick are 5'6"-5'7", I'm a short 5'10" and I think Robert's taller than me based on his Silvio Photos. If that's true that really simplifies the setup of the QRings for future riders; or at least have them start by mounting it that way and then taking measurements for adjustment.
Rick Youngblood
CarbonCraft Master
As it is, there are some
...and that's why I put the monster 42t cog at the end of my cassette. But on those kinds of grades 12%-20%, I can only hold out so long before I bail, which means more training and muscle gain is required.
BTW, not that Bob's trying to sell me SHORT ,
. I'm currently 5'8", but formally 5'9 3/4". So my x-seam and inseam are that of a 5'10" giant
. Lost a little height through my neck and spine over the years.
...and that's why I put the monster 42t cog at the end of my cassette. But on those kinds of grades 12%-20%, I can only hold out so long before I bail, which means more training and muscle gain is required.
BTW, not that Bob's trying to sell me SHORT ,
LarryOz
Cruzeum Curator & Sigma Wrangler
Bob,
I will try your
Bob,
I will try your suggestion ((switching from #2 to #4) and get back the forum with my results.
I think I will just go to my killer hill,, try to ride it and pay attention to when and where I fail, then drive back down, rotate the rings and try again. It would really be cool if I had a power meter to, to those differences too.
First things first!
Larry
I will try your
Bob,
I will try your suggestion ((switching from #2 to #4) and get back the forum with my results.
I think I will just go to my killer hill,, try to ride it and pay attention to when and where I fail, then drive back down, rotate the rings and try again. It would really be cool if I had a power meter to, to those differences too.
First things first!
Larry
LarryOz
Cruzeum Curator & Sigma Wrangler
Rick,
How do you get traction
Rick,
How do you get traction on anything over 15%?
From where I am sitting (pun intended), I am in my 34x36 gears, and I can push the gear, but the front wheel just starts spinning under me.
Do you somehow pull on the handlebars and go to a more forward position, or what?
Maybe hangs some 10 lb weights off of the front axle or something?
What is the secret?
Thanks for sharing - cause I really hate to walk up a hill - especially one I could ride up on my DF!
Larry
p.s I really like the newest pic of you in your sunglasses. Very mysterious and debonair (and of course you have the yellowness of the V behind you too!). I also like Ivan's where he is cruzing around a slight corner when he had someone take his photo. I definitely need to upgrade mine!
How do you get traction
Rick,
How do you get traction on anything over 15%?
From where I am sitting (pun intended), I am in my 34x36 gears, and I can push the gear, but the front wheel just starts spinning under me.
Do you somehow pull on the handlebars and go to a more forward position, or what?
Maybe hangs some 10 lb weights off of the front axle or something?
What is the secret?
Thanks for sharing - cause I really hate to walk up a hill - especially one I could ride up on my DF!
Larry
p.s I really like the newest pic of you in your sunglasses. Very mysterious and debonair (and of course you have the yellowness of the V behind you too!). I also like Ivan's where he is cruzing around a slight corner when he had someone take his photo. I definitely need to upgrade mine!
Rick Youngblood
CarbonCraft Master
Larry, Ivan's photo is
Larry, Ivan's photo is classic-awesome. The best on the board in my opinion.
On the ultra grades, having momentum makes a big difference. Raising up and leaning forward, and spinning (this is where my 42t cog helps I suppose). But again, this is just for short runs, like getting close to the top of a hill. I don't think I could do long climbs at those grades like a mile. At least not yet!
I've had only a couple times where I lost traction towards the top, and that was on a bumpy rough road where the front end started to bounce or I hit loose gravel. I think out of 4000 miles I lost traction bad enough only once that I had to stop and walk. Other times I had to walk was due to bonking out, or mis-shifting, which is less that a hand full. Keep in mind, I don't ride in the rain or on gravel roads - god forbid.
Now I noticed the Vendetta seems to loose traction a lot less or not at all for me (actually it never has yet), and I'm thinking it might be because the wheelbase is just a little longer by moving my weight more forward - wondering if anyone else has noticed this.
Larry, Ivan's photo is classic-awesome. The best on the board in my opinion.
On the ultra grades, having momentum makes a big difference. Raising up and leaning forward, and spinning (this is where my 42t cog helps I suppose). But again, this is just for short runs, like getting close to the top of a hill. I don't think I could do long climbs at those grades like a mile. At least not yet!
I've had only a couple times where I lost traction towards the top, and that was on a bumpy rough road where the front end started to bounce or I hit loose gravel. I think out of 4000 miles I lost traction bad enough only once that I had to stop and walk. Other times I had to walk was due to bonking out, or mis-shifting, which is less that a hand full. Keep in mind, I don't ride in the rain or on gravel roads - god forbid.
Now I noticed the Vendetta seems to loose traction a lot less or not at all for me (actually it never has yet), and I'm thinking it might be because the wheelbase is just a little longer by moving my weight more forward - wondering if anyone else has noticed this.
ratz
Wielder of the Rubber Mallet
Hills smills
I do believe the Vendetta holds the road better on a hill because there is no suspension in the fork. Also helps to not run max pressure on the tires; I'm running about 95psi on tires rated for 125psi; but also running tubeless so not much risk. I do admittedly go out twice a month and do hill intervals on a road that ranges 10-15% and that's helped alot because it's taught me how to meter out the force not to slip the wheel.
I do believe the Vendetta holds the road better on a hill because there is no suspension in the fork. Also helps to not run max pressure on the tires; I'm running about 95psi on tires rated for 125psi; but also running tubeless so not much risk. I do admittedly go out twice a month and do hill intervals on a road that ranges 10-15% and that's helped alot because it's taught me how to meter out the force not to slip the wheel.
Lief
Guru Schmuru
I have to admit - the
I have to admit - the QRings were scary magic to me.
I didn't understand them so I didn't touch them (I left them how I got them on the bike).
But...I finally sat down and read and re-read JT's instructions, Ratz' description, the pictures you guys put in here (which helped a lot for me) and took the plunge.
I took a picture of my original setup (as it came) which turns out it was in OCP #2.
I did my dead-bottom measurement.
Fiddled around a bunch, got it all set up and 90min later it came back to OCP #2.
SO...I read about what happens in what direction (Going #1 or Going #3) and figured if anything my boom is a bit shorter than it ought to be - so I went with OCP#3.
I *think* it's better.
It feels smooth. OCP#2 was okay too - maybe a bit lumpier? hard to say.
The bottom point of my right patella is healing faster tho than ever.
I still get some pain when I hit the higher wattages - but if I just keep the max under ~600W I don't really feel it.
I think that's better - and it still feels fast.
One other question for you experienced mechanics tho...how in the HAYLL do you get to the chainring bolt underneath the crank arm? SRAM Force Crank.
The crank itself is bolted down with 3 torx bolts - in order to do it right do I have to remove that drive-side crank arm?
I didn't do that and I monkeyed with that chainring for probably an hour - I eventually wormed one side of the chainring bolt into place and married both rings AND the inside bolt into place and got it together but that CAN'T be right.
What am I missing? (other than experience
)
I have to admit - the QRings were scary magic to me.
I didn't understand them so I didn't touch them (I left them how I got them on the bike).
But...I finally sat down and read and re-read JT's instructions, Ratz' description, the pictures you guys put in here (which helped a lot for me) and took the plunge.
I took a picture of my original setup (as it came) which turns out it was in OCP #2.
I did my dead-bottom measurement.
Fiddled around a bunch, got it all set up and 90min later it came back to OCP #2.
SO...I read about what happens in what direction (Going #1 or Going #3) and figured if anything my boom is a bit shorter than it ought to be - so I went with OCP#3.
I *think* it's better.
It feels smooth. OCP#2 was okay too - maybe a bit lumpier? hard to say.
The bottom point of my right patella is healing faster tho than ever.
I still get some pain when I hit the higher wattages - but if I just keep the max under ~600W I don't really feel it.
I think that's better - and it still feels fast.
One other question for you experienced mechanics tho...how in the HAYLL do you get to the chainring bolt underneath the crank arm? SRAM Force Crank.
The crank itself is bolted down with 3 torx bolts - in order to do it right do I have to remove that drive-side crank arm?
I didn't do that and I monkeyed with that chainring for probably an hour - I eventually wormed one side of the chainring bolt into place and married both rings AND the inside bolt into place and got it together but that CAN'T be right.
What am I missing? (other than experience
) 
John Tolhurst
Zen MBB Master
We need to make this set up
We need to make this set up easier.
1) push the crank straight out with your foot, now back if off about 1/3rd of the stroke, so about 60 degrees. Hold it there.
2) spin the elliptical chainring so the high side is just where the chain is engaging. Bolt them together.
What you've done is give your leg maximum gearing where it can best deliver. If you were to get wheelspin the tire, this is about the spot on the pedal stroke that would most easily initiate it.
How's that?
We need to make this set up easier.
1) push the crank straight out with your foot, now back if off about 1/3rd of the stroke, so about 60 degrees. Hold it there.
2) spin the elliptical chainring so the high side is just where the chain is engaging. Bolt them together.
What you've done is give your leg maximum gearing where it can best deliver. If you were to get wheelspin the tire, this is about the spot on the pedal stroke that would most easily initiate it.
How's that?
ratz
Wielder of the Rubber Mallet
Lief;
Well it's not a lot of
Lief;
Well it's not a lot of fun to get to those FORCE and RED bolt. The correct way is to use a "slotted" chain ring bolt. The ones that look like they have screwdriver indents. Then you can use a slim 90 degree tool to slide in and hold the bolt on the cranks side so it doesn't turn; and then use an allen wrench on the inside to loosen it. I'm guessing yours isn't put together that way and probably has standard bolts.
So if that is the case; get a SHORT hex bit from a screw driver set. You should be able to slide that through from the inside; (the top bolt has the same or smaller sized opening). Push the bit through until just short of touching the crank arm. Then use needle nose pliars to reach in and hold the bit. There should now be enough clearance now to put a normal allen wrench into the bolt on the inside. Use the allen wrench to crack the bolt and remove it with just hand torque.
If you don't have those parts there's always the scrary way: Remove all the other bolts; then gentle torque the ring (don't bend it) 1-3mm of torque should be enough and then you should be able to loosen it with just the inside bolt. If that doesn't do it then you have to remove the crank arm or bend the ring which is fine if you are discard old worn out rings; not so great for adjusting high end qrings
When you reassemble Grease the Screw and use proper torque on the bolt. 90% of the time if the bolt is grease and torqued correctly you should be able to crack the bolt open using just the inside access. Just make sure it is the first bolt you loosen. Most chain ring bolts I encounter on friends bikes are way way over torqued.
Well it's not a lot of
Lief;
Well it's not a lot of fun to get to those FORCE and RED bolt. The correct way is to use a "slotted" chain ring bolt. The ones that look like they have screwdriver indents. Then you can use a slim 90 degree tool to slide in and hold the bolt on the cranks side so it doesn't turn; and then use an allen wrench on the inside to loosen it. I'm guessing yours isn't put together that way and probably has standard bolts.
So if that is the case; get a SHORT hex bit from a screw driver set. You should be able to slide that through from the inside; (the top bolt has the same or smaller sized opening). Push the bit through until just short of touching the crank arm. Then use needle nose pliars to reach in and hold the bit. There should now be enough clearance now to put a normal allen wrench into the bolt on the inside. Use the allen wrench to crack the bolt and remove it with just hand torque.
If you don't have those parts there's always the scrary way: Remove all the other bolts; then gentle torque the ring (don't bend it) 1-3mm of torque should be enough and then you should be able to loosen it with just the inside bolt. If that doesn't do it then you have to remove the crank arm or bend the ring which is fine if you are discard old worn out rings; not so great for adjusting high end qrings
When you reassemble Grease the Screw and use proper torque on the bolt. 90% of the time if the bolt is grease and torqued correctly you should be able to crack the bolt open using just the inside access. Just make sure it is the first bolt you loosen. Most chain ring bolts I encounter on friends bikes are way way over torqued.
