Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4
Results 76 to 88 of 88
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    6,560
    Quote Originally Posted by jono View Post
    I would be suprised if the same degree of ovalization is optimum for both low rpm and high, so mountain vs. road seems like it would prefer different shapes FWIW.
    More ovalization being better for lower RPMs?

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Dantheman View Post
    More ovalization being better for lower RPMs?
    That would be my guess, just because at low rpm an "unbalanced" feeling matters less so you could go past whatever is optimum for spinning fast. Maximizing rpm range might mean something in between?

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    6,560
    Went AB. CRC had them cheap and they look to have meatier squarer tooth profiles than the OneUp rings. I really like it. I'll agree with others that it's not a huge difference, but the smoother power delivery and easier turnover past TDC is definitely noticeable while grinding uphill. While spinning fast riding flat road between the house and the trailhead I could feel the oval, almost like a very tiny amount of pedal bob, but only if the pavement was really smooth and I really paid attention. Felt great in all other circumstances. Altachic likes hers a lot too.

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    5-1-Oak Reprezentin!
    Posts
    6,442
    Quote Originally Posted by YourMomJustCalled View Post
    If you're still looking for one, I have an Absolute Black 30T Cinch that you can have. It wasn't for me.

    What didn't you like about it? If no local Utards wanna take that off your hands, I might be willing to buy it off you, if you can drop into an envelope and ship to California.
    _______________________________________________
    "Strapping myself to a sitski built with 30lb of metal and fibreglass then trying to water ski in it sounds like a stupid idea to me.

    I'll be there."
    ... Andy Campbell

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    In Exile
    Posts
    4,665
    I just bought a 32t round narrow wide to replace the oval that's currently on my yeti SB66, when I put on a new crankset. I don't think the oval works particularly well with the chain growth/rearwardish path of the yeti's suspension, it seems to produce too much pedal feedback (hangs up) riding technical terrain at lower speeds and cadences, and doesn't seem to do much to help with suspension bob or technical climbing. But I'm going to try them both back to back if possible and will also try the oval on a hardtail.

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    5-1-Oak Reprezentin!
    Posts
    6,442
    ^ Interesting - this seems opposite of what I would expect.

    It seems to me that, overall, oval rings would actually improve (reduce) kickback in descending pedal position (pedals level) by increasing the apparent chainring size, thereby decreasing the angle of attack and chain torque on the rear, thereby reducing antisquat and kickback. On the flipside, it would stand to increase antisquat in TDC pedal position, which will depend on the linkage to see if that's good or bad. I can see how this would feel like increased hangup when in TDC, but the increased gear leverage would offset this, no?

    Look at the linkage design antisquat curve on the SB-66:
    http://linkagedesign.blogspot.com/20...b-66-2012.html (use Google Translate)

    Really though, you are talking about 3t of apparent chainring size difference - which should impact antisquat by like less than 5%? - on a linkage that has a pretty neutral antisquat property at 32T avg chainring size.

    Also, I think your climbing style matters here. I'm personally a cadence climber - I really like a bit more antisquat and I'm light enough that for me, hangups don't translate into getting stuck, so much as they translate into leverage I can use to maintain sag position (not get too bogged down into the rear tire) on steeper tech climbs. I actually really miss the climbing properties of my SB-66 compared to my current VPP2 Bronson.
    _______________________________________________
    "Strapping myself to a sitski built with 30lb of metal and fibreglass then trying to water ski in it sounds like a stupid idea to me.

    I'll be there."
    ... Andy Campbell

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Granite, UT
    Posts
    559
    Quote Originally Posted by SchralphMacchio View Post
    What didn't you like about it? If no local Utards wanna take that off your hands, I might be willing to buy it off you, if you can drop into an envelope and ship to California.
    I ride a single speed a bunch and tend to stand and pedal when the going gets tough, even on the geared bike. These rings are effective if you're sitting, not so much if you're standing.

    I'll let it sit here for a few more weeks as winter in the Wasatch wraps up. If someone doesn't want it, I'll let you know.

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,489
    Quote Originally Posted by SchralphMacchio View Post
    Also, I think your climbing style matters here. I'm personally a cadence climber - I really like a bit more antisquat and I'm light enough that for me, hangups don't translate into getting stuck, so much as they translate into leverage I can use to maintain sag position (not get too bogged down into the rear tire) on steeper tech climbs. I actually really miss the climbing properties of my SB-66 compared to my current VPP2 Bronson.
    I think this is the biggest difference between how people perceive certain bikes like the Yetis: the new SB's are closer to 100% anti-squat, but the more noticeable characteristic is the tendency to stiffen up on square bumps when climbing, more as a result of the wheel path. Personally, I like it, as the bike gets really efficient and just crawls over, but I can see where the same thing could be seen as locking the rear end or making it less active. (I say that having been probably almost 200 with kit when I was first admiring that "feature." Mostly a style and expectation issue IOW.)

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    In Exile
    Posts
    4,665
    Quote Originally Posted by SchralphMacchio View Post
    ^ Interesting - this seems opposite of what I would expect.

    It seems to me that, overall, oval rings would actually improve (reduce) kickback in descending pedal position (pedals level) by increasing the apparent chainring size, thereby decreasing the angle of attack and chain torque on the rear, thereby reducing antisquat and kickback. On the flipside, it would stand to increase antisquat in TDC pedal position, which will depend on the linkage to see if that's good or bad. I can see how this would feel like increased hangup when in TDC, but the increased gear leverage would offset this, no?

    Look at the linkage design antisquat curve on the SB-66:
    http://linkagedesign.blogspot.com/20...b-66-2012.html (use Google Translate)

    Really though, you are talking about 3t of apparent chainring size difference - which should impact antisquat by like less than 5%? - on a linkage that has a pretty neutral antisquat property at 32T avg chainring size.

    Also, I think your climbing style matters here. I'm personally a cadence climber - I really like a bit more antisquat and I'm light enough that for me, hangups don't translate into getting stuck, so much as they translate into leverage I can use to maintain sag position (not get too bogged down into the rear tire) on steeper tech climbs. I actually really miss the climbing properties of my SB-66 compared to my current VPP2 Bronson.
    5% can be noticeable on a bike, and I've got a pretty smooth cadence. Before the yeti, I rode FSR bikes for about 15 years, and think that they technical climb much better. I'm still on the fence about the yeti, might eventually switch to a specialized stumpjumper evo or enduro if I can find a good frame for under $1000.

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Whistler
    Posts
    806
    I use one, hidden on inner ring of my road bike. I love it for climbing.
    I'm to vain to use one on my MTB where it's visible to the naked eye.

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SF & the Ho
    Posts
    2,370
    Quote Originally Posted by Dee Hubbs View Post
    I use one, hidden on inner ring of my road bike. I love it for climbing.
    I'm to vain to use one on my MTB where it's visible to the naked eye.
    What size ring do you use on the roadie? What would you compare to a standard ring ?

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Whistler
    Posts
    806
    Quote Originally Posted by mcski View Post
    What size ring do you use on the roadie? What would you compare to a standard ring ?
    I have a Dura Ace 50-34 matched up to a 11-28 cassette. I live in Colorado and all my rides include climbs and I spend a lot of time in the small ring.
    I replaced the 34 with an Absolute Black 34 and I love the smooth cadence and power delivery I get with oval.
    On my Di2 bike its really easy to switch between big ring and small ring gears that have the same ratio.
    Climbing in 50-19 is ratio 5.2, from here I can easily shift to 34-13 with the same ratio of 5.2. I can usually climb longer on a pitch in the Oval ring in the 34-13 combination then in the big round ring with the same ratio.
    Its hard to describe but I can keep my cadence higher and still push the same power. I sound like the marketing lingo, but it feels like a 32T in the climbing aspect and putting the power of a 36down.
    I just ordered the parts to upgrade my Di2 system for Synchro Shift, I am going to program 2 models (one identifying the small ring as 34 (actual) and one as a 36. When the bike shifts based on the next ratio request, this will truly show me if the oval is felt or supporting what I feel.
    Hope this answered you question.

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SF & the Ho
    Posts
    2,370
    Awesome detail. Thx!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •