# Why is it called the granny Gear?



## JerB (Jul 10, 2012)

Hi Guys

I have wondered why do they call the smallest cog the granny gear? is it a gear that only olde ladies use 

Jeremy


----------



## Sandrenseren (Dec 29, 2011)

Question asked and answered.. :thumbsup:


----------



## JerB (Jul 10, 2012)

From what I gather its a use of the gears that allow you to pedal faster without exerting much power?


----------



## Kiwiplague (Jul 22, 2011)

Because it makes riding up hills so easy a granny could do it


----------



## Gasp4Air (Jun 5, 2009)

It's the gear with the fewest teeth. Like Granny.


----------



## thomllama (Oct 3, 2007)

Gasp4Air said:


> It's the gear with the fewest teeth. Like Granny.


:yikes:


----------



## perttime (Aug 26, 2005)

Because it makes riding up hills so slow a granny can walk faster



edit:
I hope any grandmothers who frequent the forums do not get offended. I know there are some.


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

When I go with my small chain ring and my large 34 tooth gear in the cassette I call it "Super Granny". Why? Because it will climb up almost anything, but only goes 3.5 mph. I can walk that fast.


----------



## Mtn-Rider (May 21, 2010)

Because grannies creep up to things very slowly.


----------



## JerB (Jul 10, 2012)

Thanks guys . I had a laugh at a few of those. All in good fun though.


----------



## Fantom-29 (Aug 15, 2012)

Granny has less than 11 teeth lol!


----------



## GarlicDude (Aug 15, 2012)

Gasp4Air said:


> It's the gear with the fewest teeth. Like Granny.


lol::lol::lol::lol:


----------



## jetboy23 (Jun 14, 2011)

Gasp4Air said:


> It's the gear with the fewest teeth. Like Granny.


Funny, but, not true. Extreme granny gear might be 22x32 (54t). If fewer teeth was correct then 22x11 (33t) would be easier. Even 32x11 (43t) has less teeth and much harder to pedal.

Still, made me chuckle regardless :thumbsup:.


----------



## Mtn-Rider (May 21, 2010)

It's really just the small chainring that's a granny, the rear cogs don't count. Maybe the big rear cog is the grampa gear.


----------



## brent878 (Apr 17, 2007)

jetboy23 said:


> Funny, but, not true. Extreme granny gear might be 22x32 (54t). If fewer teeth was correct then 22x11 (33t) would be easier. Even 32x11 (43t) has less teeth and much harder to pedal.
> 
> Still, made me chuckle regardless :thumbsup:.


I always throught granny gear refered to the front sprocket.


----------



## thomllama (Oct 3, 2007)

brent878 said:


> I always throught granny gear refered to the front sprocket.


tiny front and bigger in the back are both grannie's.. just the big one in the back is her dentures!!!


----------



## adrianbk (Jul 14, 2012)

They force grandmothers to carve them out by hand.


----------



## StuntmanMike (Jul 2, 2012)

This is an originaly an automotive term..... manual transmission trucks used to come with a super low first gear (and some still do). They were for getting heavy loads moving, as the older trucks were seriously underpowered....no 400hp V8's like today, we're talking 100hp straight sixes.

So, you'd use granny to get the truck moving, then almost immediatly shift into second, as you couldn't get any speed in granny low (driving as fast as your granny walked, probably IS pretty much where the term came from).

The big GMC Topkick box truck we have at work has a six speed stick with granny low. When the truck is empty, we always start it out in second. In first, almost as soon as you've let the clutch out it's already time to shift into second...that diesel redlines at 2.5krpm!

Jeep guys LOVE these transmissions...leave it in first gear, low range, you can literally get out and walk faster than the Jeep is moving. And all the torque from that gearing lets them creep over damn near anything.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

With a 94/58 crankset and the new 11-36 cassettes, you can have a 20/36 low.

I think that's the GMILF gear.


----------



## Gasp4Air (Jun 5, 2009)

I ride 20/30 in front with 12/36 in back. I call the 20/36 combo Great Granny. I don't use it often, but it keeps me going on long technical climbs when my legs go limp.


----------



## RTM (Sep 17, 2005)

Gasp4Air said:


> I ride 20/30 in front with 12/36 in back. I call the 20/36 combo Great Granny. I don't use it often, but it keeps me going on long technical climbs when my legs go limp.


LOL, 20 x 36! I've never seen anyone do a track stand while pedaling. You win the award for 'most determined to clean this mother-f-ing climb!"


----------



## Gasp4Air (Jun 5, 2009)

I've always sucked at endurance - hence my name. But I do consider walking to be a personal fail. So for me, even though I'm almost always at the back of the pack when I ride with others, I try like hell to clean those climbs. And when I do, I give myself a pat on the back. Also, I tend to sit and spin a good cadence, so I'm not _quite _standing still.


----------



## Sickmak90 (May 27, 2012)

32/34 is the lowest I have. If I can't make it in that gear I might as well be walking it.


----------



## skidjam (Aug 17, 2012)

:d:d


----------



## cwininger (Jul 4, 2012)

on a somewhat related note, can i just ditch the granny gear to save weight/simplify my drivetrain? i've got a 22/32/44 crankset with 11-32 9 speed cassette. i've found i almost never use it, though i haven't had many serious climbs since i started riding.

reason im asking is i've learned how everyone is going to the compact crankset/bigger cassette combo because you get similar gearing with less weight. in my limited experience i'm finding i can climb just about anything i've come across with the right combo of middle chainring and appropriate cassette cog. i think i'm on the middle chainring about 80% and about 15% on the big for descents/speed. that leaves the granny gear almost unused.

am i being dumb with this and i've just not riden enough to know i need the granny gear? or can i just dump it? cant really afford to switch to the other format right now, so i'm wondering if i should fudge it with what i have or just leave it alone.

don't mean to hijack the thread, but i dont have enough posts to start a new one...:madman:


----------



## Sickmak90 (May 27, 2012)

Yes, you can remove the granny and/or the big gear. Check the drivetrain forum.


----------



## bclagge (Aug 31, 2009)

jetboy23 said:


> Funny, but, not true. Extreme granny gear might be 22x32 (54t). If fewer teeth was correct then 22x11 (33t) would be easier. Even 32x11 (43t) has less teeth and much harder to pedal.
> 
> Still, made me chuckle regardless :thumbsup:.


As long as we're being cerebral about it, "granny gear" refers strictly to what gear you've selected in the front. Therefore, you wouldn't be adding all teeth currently in use in the drivetrain. You would only use the 22 teeth up front, which really is more than two thirds of your teeth remaining. Pretty good for an old gal if you ask me.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

cwininger said:


> on a somewhat related note, can i just ditch the granny gear to save weight/simplify my drivetrain? i've got a 22/32/44 crankset with 11-32 9 speed cassette. i've found i almost never use it, though i haven't had many serious climbs since i started riding.
> 
> reason im asking is i've learned how everyone is going to the compact crankset/bigger cassette combo because you get similar gearing with less weight. in my limited experience i'm finding i can climb just about anything i've come across with the right combo of middle chainring and appropriate cassette cog. i think i'm on the middle chainring about 80% and about 15% on the big for descents/speed. that leaves the granny gear almost unused.
> 
> ...


This is a popular modification. I think it's kind of silly.

Suppose you ditch your granny ring. The only weight savings you get is the weight of the 22t chainring itself. Which isn't all that heavy. You still have a front derailleur and left shifter, and you still have a crank spider that's got support for a granny ring. If you don't swap out your front derailleur, you also still have the bottom-most step in the derailleur cage, which is there to facilitate shifting into the granny ring. Which it will, whether there's a chainring there or not.

So you don't use the granny ring. Good for you. Count your cadence. Learn to pedal 90 rpm, at least as a tool if not as a way to ride full-time, and re-evaluate whether or not you want those bottom few gear ratios. If you decide you don't want your granny and you're trying to save weight, get a double-specific crank, with only one set of bolt-holes. Give a little thought to 1x9 as well. Do you really need higher gears than 32/11? What about higher than 34/11? Etc.

I feel like people often rush into throwing parts at their bikes. It's not like someone's holding a gun to your head and making you change things. And I really don't think that granny ring is harming you by being there. So you have time to try some things.

Actually, here's an experiment. Use your limit screws to lock out your granny ring. If you don't miss it, including when you're practicing high-cadence on those long, boring fire road climbs, awesome. Get rid of the old girl.


----------



## cwininger (Jul 4, 2012)

AndrwSwitch said:


> This is a popular modification. I think it's kind of silly.
> 
> Suppose you ditch your granny ring. The only weight savings you get is the weight of the 22t chainring itself. Which isn't all that heavy. You still have a front derailleur and left shifter, and you still have a crank spider that's got support for a granny ring. If you don't swap out your front derailleur, you also still have the bottom-most step in the derailleur cage, which is there to facilitate shifting into the granny ring. Which it will, whether there's a chainring there or not.
> 
> ...


great answer. thanks. i'll give it some time and gain a little more experience before i make any mods to the chainring. your right though, it does seem kind of silly to worry about the minor weight savings of removing that tiny chainring at this point.


----------



## Sickmak90 (May 27, 2012)

Originally I was going to do a 2x9, but like you mentioned I would still have the derailluer. I ended up ditching the 44 and 22 tooth to make a 1x9. The only time I "spin" out is on big downhills. At that point I'm going plenty fast enough anyways.


----------

