gearing and mechanical advantage

[roadmaster]

so this is sort of a random question that i have been pondering to post and get your ideas about. i have two cruiserswith about the same gearing, one having a compact 36tooth chainring and a 16tooth rear cog and the other having a 44tooth sprocket and a 20tooth rear cog. as i mentioned, both bikes have gear ratios very similar, but one uses smaller cogs and chainrings to acheive this.

is there any "mechanical advantage", say for like pulling hills or acheiving ideal cadence on flats, that a compact drivetrain (36/16) would have over a conventional 44/20 combo? i thought of this when calculating gear inches and discovered the same ratio or "gear" could be duplicated in what id say would be a big ring vs normal vs compact drive.

thanks for any imput.

 

[bicycleguy]

A little more than half way down the page there is a section about the pros and cons of larger and more compact gearing.
http://sheldonbrown.com/singlespeed.html#gearing

 

[deorman]

Larger sprockets spread chain pull over a larger area, and reduce chain rotation requirement. Smaller sprockets weigh less (chain included), produce marginally less drag, require less clearance and precision in alignment, and wear out more quickly. I don't know if the difference is appreciable, but I have always felt that biggies run more smoothly. Some engineering students may at this very moment be proving me to be wrong. :?

 

[roadmaster]

thanks for the quick answers guys.

 

[socal_jack]

A pretty good rant from Surly bikes on the general topic

http://www.surlybikes.com/spew3.html

 

[roadmaster]

geez, thats a good way to look at it. makes sense once you think about it. good lookin out.