http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Graphing your gear inches en Sat, 16 May 2026 23:05:32 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9784#post-105873 Tue, 26 Mar 2013 11:16:32 +0000 Cyclingmollie 105873@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Should it not be a bar chart displaying time spent in each gear? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9784#post-105853 Mon, 25 Mar 2013 23:54:21 +0000 wee folding bike 105853@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yes, in physics where there is a mathematical function behind the results a smooth curve is justified. </p> <p>In biology we would join the dots because we rarely have the same kind of data, it's a bit more subject to random forces. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9784#post-105850 Mon, 25 Mar 2013 23:15:08 +0000 kaputnik 105850@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>Would join the dots be better than smooth curve? </em></p> <p>Is there ever a case when it's not? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9784#post-105846 Mon, 25 Mar 2013 22:34:11 +0000 Dave 105846@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>There's a lot of fuzz because, for instance, if you soft pedal or half turn the cranks to corner going downhill (so the cadence sensor registers a cadence but you didn't engage the cassette) that will create a false reading. I didn't try to manicure it too much - although maybe that's a whole follow-up article?</p> <p>Bar chart would probably be best, possibly with the points forceably fitted to known gearing.</p> <p>For instance, one sample 2x10 drivetrain I just generated figures for gives:</p> <p>28,32,36,39,41,42.5,47,52.6,57,59.5,62.5,69,77,81,87.5,119 </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9784#post-105824 Mon, 25 Mar 2013 18:30:43 +0000 wee folding bike 105824@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Does this mean you have a couple of gears under 20" one of which is almost 0?</p> <p>Would join the dots be better than smooth curve? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9784#post-105792 Mon, 25 Mar 2013 14:45:22 +0000 Dave 105792@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Is that because it has one gear? ;-) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9784#post-105714 Mon, 25 Mar 2013 11:21:32 +0000 Uberuce 105714@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I've followed the guide for wee blue floofy, but it keeps coming out as a single vertical line. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9784#post-105703 Mon, 25 Mar 2013 10:26:07 +0000 cb 105703@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Quite interesting that, although I confess to skim reading most of the Excel stuff. I've sometimes wondered how much I use each gear.</p> <p>Could you regraph it showing distance by gear? That would presumably push the peak towards the right? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9784#post-105689 Mon, 25 Mar 2013 08:55:40 +0000 Dave 105689@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>You need a GPS / phone type device with a cadence sensor for this to work.<br /> I just posted a step-by-step guide to <a href="http://mccraw.co.uk/graph-gear-inches-time-distance/">graphing gear inches by time or distance</a> on my blog. It comes out with stuff like this (for a 200km brevet):</p> <p><a href="http://mccraw.co.uk/graph-gear-inches-time-distance/"><img src="http://cdn.mccraw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/gear-inches-graph2.jpg"></a></p> <p>For instance, it shows I shouldn't worry much about gearing over 90" on a future brevet bike (but want to get the range from 60-85" on a single chainring if possible). :thumbsup: </p>