Road Cycling - Triple Vs Double chain rings Questions

I just purchased a new Lemond Tourmalet, not the triple but the double chain ring version 42/52front 13-26 rear. My previous steed is a Puch Model 170 loaded tourer with 30, 45, 50 front and 13-30 rear. Obviously the granny gear on the Puch has made hills easier. My question is when I calced the gear inches and compared the two the is a difference of about 15 inches between the two bikes. I am considering putting a triple on the Lemond, its equipped with RSX and I have located a RSX triple set. Doe anyone have any opinions on this, will there a grweat benefit to the triple set or is it just a question of training more and beter. The Lemond seems like a much more efficent bike so far, I will try some bigger hills this weekend and may answer the question my self.

Dear Don, I don't have any experience with rsx,but most new bikes now are equipped 52-39 and 13-25 (or similar). With 18 gears, the triple doesn't really add anything, and is not always easy to use. There is a lot of doubling up on gears now (i.e. 39x14 is the same as 52xsomething). If rsx is only 7 gears, it may make sense,especially if you keep the 52-42. On a really tough hill 42-26 can still be a hard pull if you are over 40 or not in the best of shape!

Don,

I have a Shimano 105 triple and have been considering a double on the new bike I'm buying. Although I rarely (a few times each year) use the granny gear, many people have told me to go with the triple again. I'm sure you know it can be a life-saver on really long or steep hills, especially at the end of a long ride like a century.
It sounds like you live in a hilly part of the country so think twice before beciding. The benefit of having that third chainring when it's needed definitely outweighs the extra weight it adds for the other 99% of your riding time.

Ron

John and Rhorne,

Thanks for the input, actually I do not live in a hilly part of the country but I have a tour coming up that goes through some pretty hilly terrian, and some other tours after that. Normally I would not worry about the third ring but I am also having trouble with my right knee, so I am trying to concentrate on spinning to take the strain off the knee. As for the third ring I have not yet decided what to do, If I do go with the triple I may have to change derailluers as well as the crankset, If thats the case it gets a little expensive. So I will probably try and change to a 39 tooth chainring in the front for starters.

rsx, is not the best but it is ok 105 would be better, i reccomend a 36/52 front end with a 13/ 28-30 rear it works out really well for hills i used to have a bike with this combo i live in the blue ridge, its about as good as a triple with out the problems. your Lemond probably has fairly short chain stays and would be a real dog with a triple. And the other change would allow you to go back to the other combo if you want much easier. And you would not have to change the front gerailuer , but you would have to go a long cage on the rear.

A triple will let you run a wide range,(very low and very high gears), and still have a close ratio, (where gears are not very far apart so the switch from one gear to the other doesn't affect your spin/pedal rpm very much). If you use a double with a wide range cogset you may lose some very useful gear combos. If I use a 26 tooth low cog, I miss some if my favorite cogs,(18,17,or 16,) vs a 21 or 23 low cog. Of course some people don't notice any problem. Some european pro racers use triples on very mountainous stages. If you ride where it is hilly and your're not some kinda mountain goat, triple cranks are very, very cool. If you have bad knees they're almost required. I'll always have at least one bike set up as a triple.
Some people talk about extra weight etc., but that stuff doesn't amount to much especially when you consider the benefits.
If you do switch to a triple you will need to switch Bottom Bracket spindle lengths as the chain line is different, also a front derailleur with a deeper inner plate on the cage will work much better with the present and much better "full-step"(vs half-step") triple systems, and of course the long cage rear derailleur.

[Edited by pat5319 on Feb 18th at 04:42 AM]

Do you need that highest gear ?
If not, then switch your chainrings to smaller ones, eg 36/48 and lower your front mech on the seat-tube. This is more of a cyclos-cross combination, but I found it works well for me on the road.
Does your left STI lever support a triple mech. Campag do, but I think Shimano are double OR triple.

I had an old Raleigh Protechnium that I upgraded to a triple two years ago (all 105 stuff). I did this because I was just getting back into cycle and the few big hills here would be much easier.

The cost of upgrading a bike is very high (I bought the bike used but in like new condition for $200, so it made sense)by the time you buy a new shifter, chain if required, Crank set and front and rear derailleur.

I now have a Waterford and went back to a double chainring. I just changed out the rear gearing to make it easier on the hills.

I would buy a triple chain ring bike or change the gearing on the back

hi don!i used i dur ace group site with 2 chain rings only
that is 53/42 and 12-23 (9speeds).....that gear go pretty fast ..i love it.
but i can tell you that is really tough to go up mountain
that gears ratio are too larger.
i'm sorry my english is not good!

My bike came with a triple and I did not have a high enough gear (on the downhills). The shop told me to go from a 46 to 50 chainring I would have to drop the granny gear so thats what I did. With some of the hills in PA I really suffer.

On the other hand, my friend just bought a trek 5200 with a triple. the dealer said about 40% are sold with a triple in PA. I guess it depends on where you ride. Another guy in the club went to FL on vacation and hooked up with a club and they looked at the triple and asked him what he needed that for.

Probably the best advice I've been given on the subject is this:

Most people want to do without the triple due to weight issues and the issue of overlapping gears with the triple. With the double, however, people in very hilly areas suffer (especially newer riders). So, the fix is to get a rear cassette that gets the ratio with the smaller double ring closer to a 1:1 ratio.

My ride came with a double FSA (53/39) and a Shimano 105 11/23 rear cassette. The ratio between the 39/23 was 1.7:1. It was adequate but I'm not lying -- some of the steeper hills were difficult at first. The fix was relatively simple. I replaced my 105 11/23 with an Ultegra 12/27, which narrowed the ratio to 1.4:1. It may not seem like much, but it did make a noticeable difference on longer, steeper hills. Also, it was a much easier fix than trying to convert a double crank bike to a triple crank. Since I changed the cassette within a week of purchasing my bike, my local Performance Bike shop was kind enough to give me a "retail swap" on the two cassettes, so the Ultegra ended up costing me only $10.

It was a very economical fix and I've been very pleased since. Hope this helps :)

I was reading through this wondering why nobody was recommending a compact double, then I realized that it was from '01.

Not sure how you find a random thread from '01 to give advice on. I could see if you had a question and searched for it...