Road Cycling - Double or Triple?

What would you buy if you were setting up/buying a new bike? This is of course dependent on where you ride, but including that .... what would you get?

Steel versus aluminium. Campagnolo versus Shimano. Double versus triple. Be prepared for some heated exchange of preferences on this topic.

A triple came with my LeMond and I'm glad it did :)
I know there is a strong debate about this but, I'm not in great shape, but I'm not in bad shape either, and I am glad I have a triple as some of the hills here are pretty steep and just popping down to my 30 (when my legs have begged for it) has helped me alot.
Once I get into riding shape, I may not need it as much but it will always be there if I need it, and if I just need to spin to clean my legs out or give my knees a break, it will also be there :D .

I know some people hate them :confused: not sure why, whatever it takes to get the job done, use it :p

If you are in good shape, all you need is the double. Unless you are talking to a fixed gear guy who will say all you need is ONE gear! It's just all personal preference - no right answer. 35 pounds ago I was looking for a triple. Now, the double is more that enough.

As a flatlander that does hills a couple of times a year I really appreciate a tripple. (Never use it at home though)

My MTB has a triple
My cyclocross/road LeMond has a double
MY fixed gear has a single

I like my fixie the best.

You cant buy bikes with single chainring 1x9spd but they are used by couriers, some commuters and time trialists in flatland.

I wouldn't mind a triple, but having a double has forced me to focus on technique and getting in better shape. I still struggle up hills, but I know it's only making me stronger. With a triple, I'd be tempted not to fight my way up the hill. Even after 40 miles, I still make it and feel proud (and my legs look sooo sexy ;) )

Hills and you need a triple.No hills and get a double.If ya go a triple and got no hills,it wont kill you to keep it.
THE END.

On my road bike I like having a double (53x39). One reason, which admittedly is kind of minute, is that a double has a narrower "tread" or "Q-factor". As Sheldon Brown explains it, with a narrower tread your feet are spaced closer to each other, which is more optimal for the functioning of your hip joints, among other reasons. I find it a bit easier and more natural to spin, as opposed to the triple I have on another bike. The weight savings, which is also kind of minute, is also a factor since it is revolving weight.

On the steepest climbs we have here, (one is 15km with 185 switchbacks), the 39T front/ 28T rear combo does take some work but it's certainly doable and feels great when you get to the top :thumbup: !

Try a triple with a straight block cassette in the rear (11-21).

Try a triple with a straight block cassette in the rear (11-21).

This has crossed my mind several times. I have a tripple that I almost never use, but have an 11-25 rear. I like the close gears, especially in the wind. It's sorta strange, but it seems that most places that don't have hills, have in your face winds that will kill you! In the wind I find that I often would like gears inbetween what I have so I can get my cadence just rite!:)

I have a double with an 11-23 10 speed cassette. I like the feeling of working the legs on a long climb knowing mentally that when I'm down on the 39 and pushing the 23 gog gear it's all about the legs. It forces me to train harder and condition myself for climbs. I can always change the rear cassette if I need lower gearing for more difficult climbs. So far my mountian training in the hills of W. VA I have done with the 11-23. I suppose if I lived in the Rockies I may have a different view.

I'm running a double with a rear derailleur that will take up to a 29t cog in the back. I have yet to ride in the mountains, unfortunately, but I'm confident that a 39-29 will get me up anything I try to ride. It's not even a pride thing with me, really. (If you believe that, I have some property you might be interested in).

It really does depend on your pedalstroke. On the flats, I spin (usually around 100rpm), but I'm a bigger guy (6'1", 185 pounds) and usually mash up climbs. It's always worked alright for me, but it may not for you or anyone else.

And jechet, the Rockies would get rid of that 11-23 for you pretty quick, you're right about that.

Originally posted by Cipher
Try a triple with a straight block cassette in the rear (11-21).

You mean like this guy? (http://www.cyclingnews.com/sf03photos.php?id=photos/2003/sep03/sanfrangp03/brockie/05-fraser-triple)

Triples....sheesh. I can understand the need if you live in an area with lots of hills/mountains, but not every place in the world has that. Although you'd never notice it by shopping for a bike, it seems almost every bike under $1200-1500 has a triple on it, without the double option. You want a double, you gotta pay extra for it.

Andrew

Originally posted by Ajay213
Triples....sheesh. I can understand the need if you live in an area with lots of hills/mountains, but not every place in the world has that. Although you'd never notice it by shopping for a bike, it seems almost every bike under $1200-1500 has a triple on it, without the double option. You want a double, you gotta pay extra for it.

Andrew

And then when the doubles start getting offered you have to pay more for the triple:D I'm using a triple right now but wish I had a double.

I'm in shape, and light, but I'm weak. There are plenty of hills around here, and the triple is helpful. Sure, I could go with a double, but I would rather focus on keeping a high cadence, and taking it easy at times during my ride. I think I'm still going about 7mph at proper cadence in my lowest gear, which isn't exactly that bad on a steep hill. For the more gradual hills, its nice when you want to take it easy and save your energy (say you want to just ride casual over an early climb, and focus on using a lot of energy on a later, flatter part of your route).

I'm leaning toward a double for my area, but what about that ONE time when you go for a road trip and you NEED that third ring .... that's all I'm worried about. =P

I understand the benefit of the Triple, but if you just have a double what does it give you? More speed?

Thanks

I also have a triple with a 11-21 cassette. I use the DA set up so most of my pedaling mirrors a double (53-39 plus 30). My other bike has a double with a 12-27 cassette. When I do big hills (Nacimiento/Ferguson or Figueroa) I put the 12-27 on the triple bike.

Gravity can be your friend.
Trees always have the right of way.

Originally posted by chaztrip
I understand the benefit of the Triple, but if you just have a double what does it give you? More speed?

Thanks

You could save approx. 8 - 9 oz. in weight between the differences in components for each... (With the double weighing less of course).

Originally posted by Cipher
You could save approx. 8 - 9 oz. in weight between the differences in components for each... (With the double weighing less of course).

But don't forget ... that's rotational mass. ;)

wow geez... everytime i've checked back on this poll, it's been dead even, or just about!!

Benefit of Double:

Generally smoother/quicker shifting

Definitely a triple. I rode up Loveland pass (11,995 ft) and seriously doubt I could have made it! I have a 12-27 rear cassette too. But I know if I didn't live and ride in the Rockies a double would be fine.

Ok, if you're riding big hills at 10,000 feet all the time I could see the need for a triple. I live at sea level with some pretty good hills around but a 53/39 has worked. The thing about having a a triple just in case means you've decided to take on a ride that is too hard for your fitness level. I know I'm not going to ride 50 miles over the mountain and back if I haven't been riding enough.

A double with a 27 cog should be all you need. The shifting is better with a short cage rear derailuer and less chain. A triple is often set with 52/42/30 and a striaght block in the back means you are allows dropping in and out of the 30 ring and shifting the rear to find the right gear when the grade changes. On a double I just have to worry about the rear derailuer and work a smooth spin.

I was going to get a triple, but my bike came with a double. It's not terribly hilly around here, but mountains aren't far away. The double has been fine around here and around Charlottesville. I think I may put a 12-25 on the back at some point if I'm going to do some bigger hills, but for now the double with 12-23 works fine.

I'm pretty new at road biking, so I should get better too. Maybe won't even need the 25 in the back.

I saw the voting veering toward doubles so I just had to vote for triples.

I think triples should be reserved for those of us who are over 50 (and have lots of long, steep hills). Everyone else has to suffer!

I am curious as to why a double should shift better than a triple. I don't think there is a difference in the front. I use a standard Dura-Ace derailleur with my Campy Racing-T with no problems. If you look at the rear der., the only part that is usually different is the length of the cage. There doesn't appear to be any difference in the body of the derailleur, the pivot points, or position of the upper jockey wheel, which is where the actual shifting occurs.

The longer cage means a longer chain...if you're shifting both the front and rear, to find the right gear, it all means more chance of shifting problems. This might not be a problem if you're curzing up a hill by yourself, but if the boys are rearing to go you can hit the one shifter for one more gear and get going or you can shift around and wait for the front to drop into the granny gear then find the right rear cog...

Originally posted by fogrider
...if you're shifting both the front and rear, to find the right gear...
Well, that's a big hypothetical right there and something I wouldn't ordinarily do. Anywho, having a good gear to get into makes more difference in the long run than quickly getting into a gear that isn't optimal, IMHO.

Back to my original question: Why should the longer chain length make a difference with shifting speed or smoothness? I might buy the smoothness part, I'm not sure about speed, tho'. The part of the derailleur that actually does the shifting doesn't change between a short cage, a medium cage, or a long cage, as far as I can tell. So there isn't any difference in the setup where the derailleur moves the chain from one cog to the next.


This might not be a problem if you're curzing up a hill by yourself ...

Did you mean "cruising" or "cursing"? :D

My MTB has a triple and my R600 has a triple. The road was my first real bike so it was I guess somewhat of an ignorant decision kind of thing getting the triple. Although I ride 3-4000 miles annually, I'm still a recreational cyclist. I think most of us here are. That I think is the BEST option for this group of riders. The bike has the gearing to take you from novice to semi or pro. The machine adapts to me not the other way around and I know my knees like it!! anyhoo, couldn't resist jumping in. One other thing is I don't see a correlation xtween mashing big gears and being phisically fit.

I'm not saying the smashing big gears is the meassure of being fit, if you run the numbers, a 39x27 will get you 40 gear inches, and you could get a 38 in front and get it down to 39 gear inches. With a triple setup with 52/42/30 chainrings and 13x23 in the rear, you get 36 gear inches in the last cog and 40 in the 30x21. So with a 39x27 you come pretty close to having the same gearing as a triple. The extra chain does make a difference in how well the system shifts. And don't forget the chainline, with mountain bikes and touring bikes the rear triangle were designed with longer chainstays, but road bikes like shorter chainstays, this means the chain gets flexed alot which ads to sloppy shifting.

On my K2, I have a triple, and happy I do. I ride mountains, not all of the time but quite often, in Georgia, so it comes in handy on those rides. On day to day riding I don't use it, but when I need it , it's there.

Do you live in a hilly area? Do you like to spin? Do you like healthy knees? Triple.

Do you live in a flat area? Do you have a huge ego? Double.

:D

This thread couldn't have come up at a better time. I'm trying to figure out if I want a double or a triple on my next bike (which should be coming soon!). I tend to agree with SteveE because of the area we live in (hilly to downright mountainous) that an over 50 guy like me should have a triple. On the other hand, I want to get a Campy gruppo on the new bike and Chorus would fit my budget, but Chorus only comes in a double. I can't afford Record. So my choice is between Centaur and Chorus.

Right now I have a triple, but I hardly ever use it. When I do use it, I really appreciate it. So with the goal of being scientific about this, I decided to do the math.

My lowest gear is my 30x25 with 32.4 gear inches, but I almost never use it. So effectively, my lowest is 30x23 or 35.2 gear inches. On a double, a 39x25 is 42 gear inches, or roughly equivalent to my30x19. Now, I feel that I could use the innermost cog on a double effectively because the chain line is not as extreme as on a triple. Is that correct?

So is there very much difference in the lowest gears? SteveE, I know that you are a strong believer in the triple and you are a stronger cyclist than I am, what do you think?

I will try an experiment later today by using my 30x19 on a tough climb and see how I feel about it.

Results later.

Rich

Originally posted by Stinger9oh
This thread couldn't have come up at a better time. I want to get a Campy gruppo on the new bike and Chorus would fit my budget, but Chorus only comes in a double. Rich

Check again. Campy Chorus in a triple. (http://www.campagnolo.com/groupsets.php?gid=2&cid=7&pid=182)

I voted double, but want to qualify my vote by stating that I start each year with a triple for the hills and work back into a double.

And Chorus is now available in a triple. Check out www.branfordbike.com or www.campyonly.com for all the scoop on current and new ('04) Campy gear.

Rich,

All I can say is that I can keep up much more comfortably on a climb such as Jamison Creek Road (1470' in 3.1 mi, 9% avg. grade with 14% just before the top) with a triple than with a double. The triple lets me switch between sitting & standing and allows me to climb faster overall. I'm not sure if I could stand for the full 3 miles. Also, as I'm not the greatest climber out there(and I ain't getting any younger!), I like to have the triple. For a pure climber it probably isn't necessary. On the other hand, I have measured my times up Old La Honda using the inner (30-teeth) chainring vs. both a 40-tooth and a 42-tooth chainwheel and have not noticed any significant difference.

The triple gives me a nice sense of security. Without it, I doubt that I would have attempted some of the rides the club does (e.g. San Jose to Santa Cruz and back). Besides, I still want to do Alba Rd., Bohlman/On-Orbit, Gist, Black, China Grade, Bonny Doon, etc. and not have a coronary!

Just my $0.02

Steve "whose knees aren't getting any younger" E

Well i suggest double becouse of the many opportunity we have today with the 10 cog, it should be all you needof. Anyway
double or triple it dipend on how fit you are, but if you are not really a road biker i suggest you to wait a while for high % mountain road and get fit on small hills, than try with something a litle bit stronger. Becouse double or triple you won't go on in any hard % road if your legs (and body) are not ready for it! I hate find people goin 4-5kmh up the hill with a really high heart attack risk, probably at the first season ride. take it easy and you will enjoy this fantastic sport and not trow your bike in the garage for a week until you are able to walk again!

This is only for those cyclists don't classify themselves as too big and too powerful to ever consider the degrading act of using a front chainring with only 35 teeth versus 39 teeth. Of the two roadbikes belonging to me, ones a tripple chainring Shimano 105 and the other is a double chainring Dura Ace. I ride them both a whole bunch. But the last MS150 I did (the other day) I took the tripple. It provides greater capability over a wider range of terrain, no matter how big and strong you are. And when you know there are some leg blowing sections on a ride, it's nice to have that added flexibilty. So, if you only have one bike to ride, I'd suggest a tripple. If you can't make the crankset swap economically, keep a spare cassette in the garage that is one tooth per cog larger across the scale. Pushing a front 39 and a rear 25 (1.56 ratio) will provide you with just about the same advantage as pushing a 35 by 23 on a tripple (1.52 ratio). The speed at 80 crankshaft rpm is 9.7mph for the 39x25 and 9.5mph for the 35x23.

Except for "The Look" most people would benefit from a triple. Even though I have never had to use my granny, if I ever need it, its there.

I got a double. I rode Identicle bikes back to back, and the double just shifted way faster then the triple. I switched to a 12-27 cassette, and I had a pretty good range right there.

I think you have to go with the double, granted I don't live in the mountains, but I do have decent climbs around me. When I am doing the steepest climb by me (2k @ 20% avg) my 39x21 works for me, now I know some of you like to spin, so do I, but that just means you need ride faster :D . Seriously though go for the double.

-Matt-

I switched my Shimano 105 double Peugeot to triple but kept the original derailleurs. They work fine with the triple.

Originally posted by stridercc
. When I am doing the steepest climb by me (2k @ 20% avg) my 39x21 works for me,
-Matt-

By walk? or going down? :confused: :eek::D

Triple, because VA is to hilly for a double :)

Originally posted by spazegun2213
Triple, because VA is to hilly for a double :)

Your kidding right?:confused: :D

Originally posted by stridercc
I think you have to go with the double, granted I don't live in the mountains, but I do have decent climbs around me. When I am doing the steepest climb by me (2k @ 20% avg) my 39x21 works for me, now I know some of you like to spin, so do I, but that just means you need ride faster :D . Seriously though go for the double.

-Matt-

:eek: :eek: :eek:

For all you who are passing on a triple because it's 'just not cool' or it's only for those that are a little Passé, think again. The owner of this bike? Greg LeMond...