Road Cycling - Double vs. Tripple front chainring?

What are the pros/cons of a double vs. a tripple? As a brand new road biker coming from XC, should I get a tripple or a double? Is it personal taste?




Thanks.

Oh know it's happened again :)

Let me guess. I should have searched. :( Sorry.

just get a double :)

It usually depends on your level of fitness and if your knees are in good shape. A triple allows you to spin a faster cadence on hills, which is easier on the knees. At least it is on mine.

It usually depends on your level of fitness and if your knees are in good shape. A triple allows you to spin a faster cadence on hills, which is easier on the knees. At least it is on mine.


Well, right in part.

If you are a high cadence rider, even a pretty strong one, and prefer to sit and spin on hills, a triple would be nice especially if you are in an area with long climbs.

What are the pros/cons of a double vs. a tripple? As a brand new road biker coming from XC, should I get a tripple or a double? Is it personal taste?

Thanks.

If you order it with your bike, it is about $30. If you don't and want it later it is about $250 to convert.
The difference in weight is neglible. Think of the third ring as a bail-out gear, there when the hill gets a lot steeper than you thought.

On my old Trek Navigator, it had a triple, but I rarely used the smallest ring. On my new roadie, I have used it almost everytime out, mainly because I am taking on more hills. If I didn't have it, there are quite a few times I'd have been walking!

There's always compact drive double :)

the problem with a triple is that it can be very difficult to tune your shifting for two reasons: (1) the long throw of the front derailleur compromises the chainline, (2) the long cage of the rear derailleur and the extra chain makes for sloppy rear shifting.

triple advocates [usually people who bought triples and want to be validated by your choice] claim that the shifting on a properly tuned triple is "just fine." the problems are that it will never be better than "just fine" -- not "crisp" and "amazing" -- and that it is quite difficult to get a triple properly tuned. a lot of bike shop mechanics don't know how to tune a triple, and those who do frankly can't stand doing it, it's such a bother.

if you need a low gear, you have two better options. the simple one is to just get a cassette with a bigger gear. a standard shimano rear dereilleur can handle a 12-27 cassette, and the 39x27 combination gives you all but two of the lowest gears you'd get with a stock triple with a 12-25 cassette. this will probably cost nothing at the time you buy your bike... maybe $30 as a later modification.

the other option, as racerx points out, is a compact crankset. this is becoming a popular option, since few recreational rider -- even pros -- ever use the 53x12. a 34/50 crankset with a standard 12-27 cassette will give you about all the low gears you need to climb the alps without sacrificing shifting performance.

Double. Just stand up and hammer your way over the alps of CT. You don't need no stinkin' granny gear.

the problem with a triple is that it can be very difficult to tune your shifting for two reasons: (1) the long throw of the front derailleur compromises the chainline, (2) the long cage of the rear derailleur and the extra chain makes for sloppy rear shifting.

Just to add to this. A big factour is chainstay length. Bikes with extremely short chainstays as on many performance roadbikes these days will have a hard time accomodating a triple due to the high angles of deflection of the chainline. There is a higher chance of throwing the chain when going for that bailout gear too. This IMHO negates many advantages of a triple since you have to be very finesse in your shifting at the moment it's really critical to just get it in the right gear.

Well said ! Most road bikes are over geared . thanks to places like FSA, you can now enjoy wide gearing with only two rings (50/34) .


the problem with a triple is that it can be very difficult to tune your shifting for two reasons: (1) the long throw of the front derailleur compromises the chainline, (2) the long cage of the rear derailleur and the extra chain makes for sloppy rear shifting.

triple advocates [usually people who bought triples and want to be validated by your choice] claim that the shifting on a properly tuned triple is "just fine." the problems are that it will never be better than "just fine" -- not "crisp" and "amazing" -- and that it is quite difficult to get a triple properly tuned. a lot of bike shop mechanics don't know how to tune a triple, and those who do frankly can't stand doing it, it's such a bother.

if you need a low gear, you have two better options. the simple one is to just get a cassette with a bigger gear. a standard shimano rear dereilleur can handle a 12-27 cassette, and the 39x27 combination gives you all but two of the lowest gears you'd get with a stock triple with a 12-25 cassette. this will probably cost nothing at the time you buy your bike... maybe $30 as a later modification.

the other option, as racerx points out, is a compact crankset. this is becoming a popular option, since few recreational rider -- even pros -- ever use the 53x12. a 34/50 crankset with a standard 12-27 cassette will give you about all the low gears you need to climb the alps without sacrificing shifting performance.

i dunno man..

velocipedio's post is surely accurate, but still.. the idea of having "all but the two lowest gears" of a triple still translates to more knee strain for me. my problem has always been overuse injuries and while i _can stand up and hammer, i try to avoid it because my knees are one of the few joints that hasn't given me any trouble to this point.

also, i think the lack of crispness in a triple is somewhat offset by the ability to ride a smaller cassette. i like having gears that are more like each other - less jump from gear to gear and more fine tuning ability - and while a really strong rider with a double can rock the smaller cassette and have the best of both worlds, i'm definitely more in the position where i'd have to do one or the other: big cassette with a double or corn-cob cassette with a triple.

again, i'm sure velo's comments are all accurate and reflect a lot more experience than i have, but i still tend to think doubles are for ppl who are really strong or live someplace really flat and triples are for regular folks. i also think an ultegra triple would be plenty crisp for me and if the shop boys don't like to tune it then that's their problem.

i am curious about the compact crankset though.

i am curious about the compact crankset though.

For comparison, what gears do you ride now, as in what are the number of teeth on the front and rear sprockets you use on the biggest hills where you typically ride?

-murray

What are the pros/cons of a double vs. a tripple? As a brand new road biker coming from XC, should I get a tripple or a double? Is it personal taste?




Thanks.

I think it's a personal choice. Since Shimano Dura Ace comes in a triple there must be some type of use for it. You can either mash or spin whatever you prefer. Just because someone rides a triple does not make him/her less of a cyclist. Remember, it is not what you ride it's how you ride. It's the engine!

the problem with a triple is that it can be very difficult to tune your shifting for two reasons: (1) the long throw of the front derailleur compromises the chainline, (2) the long cage of the rear derailleur and the extra chain makes for sloppy rear shifting.

Not true. If you know what you are doing and take your time, there is no difference between tuning a double and a triple. :D



triple advocates [usually people who bought triples and want to be validated by your choice] claim that the shifting on a properly tuned triple is "just fine."

Again, not true and a gross insult to those of us who know exactly what we are doing. My triple shifts crisply. I have no complaints about it since I tuned it the second week I owned it. :D :D



a lot of bike shop mechanics don't know how to tune a triple, and those who do frankly can't stand doing it, it's such a bother.

Not true yet again. All the wrenches at my LBS know how to tune a triple. I learned from one of the younger guys how to do it. :eek:

You don't like a triple. That is fine. Some of us do and don't need "validation" from anyone or anything.

What are the pros/cons of a double vs. a tripple? As a brand new road biker coming from XC, should I get a tripple or a double? Is it personal taste?


This will give the anti-triple crowd the vapors, but here it is: I'm on my second bike with Dura-Ace 10 now
and I love that group. However, the Sora triple on my Bianchi shifts just about as well. I've had no trouble with it and I use the granny gear frequently on steep hills. I love being able to spin up steep hills. The Q-factor argument is bogus.

This will give the anti-triple crowd the vapors....


Want to really get people going? How about a Campy Triple versus a Shimano Double? Boy, that ought to bring 'em out of the woodwork!

Road triple? I would if I was making a bike for touring, and going to have max weight.
Other, no. Me, touring, I'd just buy a few chairings and when I hit the mountains, swap out to like 32, 44.

I cut my granny of with bolt cutter cause I'm lazy, 2 snips and unbolt the ring.
No need to pull cranks. ;)

Mtb are different, Road, being shorter, I'd just suck it up and buy ring counts that are good for me and the bike weight. A 52 is sick big to me, useless. A 34, 46 and I'd go up anything road. Maybe a 10t rear cog for some flatland speed.

A....I don't know squat about road gearing.
Just felt like typing..jef.

OK, I've got a question about Shimano front shifters. I ride a triple with Campy Record Ergo shifters. I counted 8 click stops on the front shifter going from the big chainring to the smallest. How many stops do you get with Shimano? Does Campy have a finer granularity in their shifter that makes it easier to trim the front derailleur?

I also wonder if the narrower cage on my old Dura-Ace front derailleur (not designed for a triple! I've probably been using it since the days of 5 & 6 cog freewheels.) actually works better than a derailleur designed for a triple. Sure, I may have to trim it a bit more but I wonder if it shifts more precisely because it was designed for double chainrings.

OK, I've got a question about Shimano front shifters. I ride a triple with Campy Record Ergo shifters. I counted 8 click stops on the front shifter going from the big chainring to the smallest. How many stops do you get with Shimano? Does Campy have a finer granularity in their shifter that makes it easier to trim the front derailleur?

Well, things work better up front with a Campy setup because the front isn't indexed like Shimano. Yes there are detents but you get much more trimming capability with Campy Ergo. If I went with a front triple, it woulod definately be with a Campy setup. With Shimano, the mid-trim on their front double shifter is adequate but throw in a triple (even with mid-shift trim position on the triple front shifter) and things get annoying fast. In short, Shimano double has two positions with a mid-position trim that really only trims fron the big ring although you can sorta finesse a trim from the inner ring if you try. With a Shimano triple there are three positions and two trim positions in between. You can trim from the middle ring to the inner ring which is to say you need to shift into the middle first and then trim downwards. The same is true for the outer to the middle ring. With Campy, you can trim with more granularity and going in both directions for both double and triple setups.



I also wonder if the narrower cage on my old Dura-Ace front derailleur (not designed for a triple! I've probably been using it since the days of 5 & 6 cog freewheels.) actually works better than a derailleur designed for a triple. Sure, I may have to trim it a bit more but I wonder if it shifts more precisely because it was designed for double chainrings.

Probably. A double derailleur with a narrower cage will shift faster and more precisely than a wider triple compatible derailleur since it more closely guides and tracks the chain. Newer derailleurs designed for narrower chains on a double setup will shift even faster and more precisely.

Sure, I may have to trim it a bit more but I wonder if it shifts more precisely because it was designed for double chainrings.

actually i dont think it would work. triple FDs cage has a bigger area to pick the chain up off the granny.

actually i dont think it would work. triple FDs cage has a bigger area to pick the chain up off the granny.Uhh, but it does work! That's what I've been using for the past 4 years. I switched from a double to a triple when I hit the big five-oh, so I wouldn't have any excuse not to ride some of the big hills around here. Instead of buying a new front derailleur I just put the old one on (It dates back to the old friction-shifting days) and never looked back!

you guys are great :)

If you EVER want to be able to spin at less than 15 mph, get a triple.

Want to really get people going? How about a Campy Triple versus a Shimano Double? Boy, that ought to bring 'em out of the woodwork!
I was going to stay out of this but there is to much B.S. flying around.
My last bike was a Serotta that had all Dura Ace on it and it was a double, 53-39 and 12-23 rear the bike was stolen last year. I bought a new Seven and since I am in my mid fifties and wanted to start riding in the Sierra's I had a Campy Chorus group with a triple 53-42-30 and rear 12-25 10speed put on the new bike. Well without going into great detail this thing shifts as well as the the Dura Ace if not better ,I can't see how anything could shift better. I do have some issues with it on the front derailleur as it takes more lever travel to shift from the little chainwheel to the middle ring but other than that it is great and no chain suck.

Well without going into great detail this thing shifts as well as the the Dura Ace if not better ,I can't see how anything could shift better.

As I mentioned before, things are different with the way Campy handles front shifting in general and such is less prone to the same problems seen with Shimano triples.

umm... you can spin at above 85 rpm in 39X23 to 39x27 below 15 mph... no triple necessary.

Let me guess. I should have searched. :( Sorry.

I was just kidding. And obviously still a good question with lots of debate...



If you EVER want to be able to spin at less than 15 mph, get a triple.

What???


I do have some issues with it on the front derailleur as it takes more lever travel to shift from the little chainwheel to the middle ring but other than that it is great and no chain suck.

See. So you do have some issues with it???

To the original post imho get a double. I grew up in Danbury area CT and I know for sure around there a double is all you need. OK thats fine but now I live in mountainous Virginia, I have a triple on my touring bike and that is totally necessary but on my road racer forget about it. Some one earlier I believe asked what kind of riding are you going to do. Thats a great question. Can you tell us? Cause that makes the difference. If your going to be a rec rider that may want to tour or pull a trailer then sure triple is necessary. If you want to start racing road, or just bieng a fast self competitive type then a double is necessary. We can all chime in later depending on what it is you want to do...

As mentioned by many here, I think it is a personal preference. That being said, I just made the change from Triple to Double, and until I get to the point where I am having trouble with the double, I dont think I would ever go back. Why?

1) Shifting crispness is much nicer (though that may also have to do with going from Tiagra to Ultegra shifters and derailers).
2) In my area, I can get up just about anything in a 39/23. In fact, I just climbed probably the toughest hill within 50 miles of here, in my 39/23 (friend was testing me, it was a 1.5 mile climb at about 12%) and while it hurt like hell, I got up it. I would have rather had my wheels with the 12-25, but the jerk didnt tell me where we were going.. ;) There is also a very short, but very steep hill here, a little less than 1/4 mile at about 16-17%, and I can get up it in a 23, but it is much easier in the 25.
3) My legs feel much more comfortable on the bike with the narrower crankset that a double allows me. Bringing my legs in a few mm, seem to have actualy taken quite a bit of stress off my knees, and I find that I have more power in my stroke.
4) Sometimes fewer choices is better. Before I would constantly be changing that front gear.. Now, if I am over 18-20mph, I go to the big ring, if I am below that, I sit on the small ring. Maybe I am just simple minded, but that is easy enough for me, that I find myself concentrating on things like my pedal stroke, and body position, and not on what chain ring I should be in, like on my triple.

Again, I think it is very dependant on your riding style, geography, and body, but for me, the double seems much more comfortable (and beleive me, I was not thinking it would, before I made the change).

I bought a new Lemond 2 weeks ago and went with the double. Why? I'm not sure if it was more of an ego thing or not. I mean, I bought a Zurich and it seemed weird to me to have a triple when I have a perfectly usable Trek 400 (the bike I replaced with the Lemond) with a triple sitting at home.

But, I also decided that I could handle any of the local hills in 39x25 and if not I could always switch to 12-27. I find that by dropping 9 or so lbs. of bike I can easily handle climbing now- without the triple. I also figured that I would ride more with the new light bike and be in better shape which allows me to push a double without any problems.

So far the only complaint I have is with the saddle and that's neither here nor there.

Figure out what kind of riding you plan on doing, what you're comfortable riding (spin or mash) and make a decision. The hardest decision when buying my new bike was what bike? Not what setup.

PJ

If you EVER want to be able to spin at less than 15 mph, get a triple.

But I can do under 5 mph on a single????

I have a 30-42-52 triple Shimano 105 crank with a 12-25 9-speed rear. The extra travel of the front lever can make shifting from granny to middle a little tricky (I got chain suck the first few times I tried it when I first got the bike) but other than that it's smooth and I got used to it.

If your shop cannot properly tune a triple, i suggest you find a new shop. It's similar to working on a mountain bike. If your riding buddies make fun of you, find some new buddies.

Many people here will tell you that you'll be fine with a double and 11-21 rear because it works for them. What works for someone else will not necessarily work for you. if you're a beginner roadie, I suggest you get a triple so you will have the freedom to not use it and eventually get rid of it. If not, you may regret it on that final climb home after your first half-century.

Out here in the southern CT valley it's very rolling. It's hard to get a rhythm because there's always a nasty but relatively short climb around the bend. I've had to use it as a bail-out gear a few times, but I use it less and less as the season progresses. I'm considering switching to a double with a wider rear end, but I don't know if I want to have to think twice about my planned route because I don't have enough gears or breath.

Oh well, this thread will probably die after a few more flamers throw in their $0.02. I hope you got the info you were looking for.

What are the pros/cons of a double vs. a tripple? As a brand new road biker coming from XC, should I get a tripple or a double? Is it personal taste?Well, to actually answer your question: In the end, it's really just personal taste. But it also depends on where you ride, how long you ride, if you have more than one bike to ride, how strong your knees are, how strong your legs are, whether you're a pedal masher or not, what your cycling goals are, etc, etc.

There seems to be some agreement that if you go with a triple, you should check out Campy components. If you already have Shimano shifters, though, it might be difficult switching between Shimano and Campy.

I suggest you test ride both types of setups on the steepest, longest hill you can find and see which makes the most sense to you.

I had a tripple on my street bike but never used it until a couple of months ago. I usually found myself walking up hills and considered this a "normal" aspect of cycling. By chance, I used the small ring to see if it made any difference and was able to climb hills that would have left me walking. It was like I had a whole new bike. I never knew what a difference the tripple makes in cycling. My new road bike and cross bike both have tripples and would not consider a bike without one.

I may lose some "crisply" shifting but my vote is for the tripple.

Well, the guys in great shape make fun of us newbies with granny gears. But, I'm 47 (in my second serious year of bicycling) and don't care what I look like. Yes, they drop me pretty easily. But...I'm getting stronger...

If you live where hills are common, then a triple can let you ride longer before you tire out.

If you want to run with the big dogs, then a double is the way to go. If you just want to get out, see a little countryside, lose a few pounds, then a triple is it.

I've never understood why anyone would care whether you ride with a double or a triple.

I find a triple makes my riding more enjoyable. And yes, it's easier on the knees.

After all, riding into the twilight years is the goal, not to blow out young and then reminisce about how fast you were.

a note on the relative shifting performance of road and mtb triples:

1. road bikes have shorter chainstays [typically by 1-1.5 cm] than mountain or touring bikes. the shorter chain distance increases the chainline angle, so the chainline has to pass through a wider range of angles for each chain ring shift.

2. mountain bike chainrings are smaller than road chainrings. a typical mtb triple is 44/32/22, while a typical road triple is 52/42/30. the road difference means that the shifting system has to throw more chain. [one of the reasons why mtbs went to compact gearing back in 1994, or so, was to improve shifting performance.]

comparing mtb and road triples is comparing apples and oranges.

Do it with a 53/39 up front and a 12/27 in back, if the 39/27 combo dosn't get it, it's because, well,,,, n/m I'm not even going (there) because I know what will happen if I do. Remember, No pain = No gain.

[QUOTE=velocipedio]



2. mountain bike chainrings are smaller than road chainrings. a typical mtb triple is 44/32/22, while a typical road triple is 52/42/30. the road difference means that the shifting system has to throw more chain. [one of the reasons why mtbs went to compact gearing back in 1994, or so, was to improve shifting performance.]

Mtb were?..typical 46\36\24.

Mtb were?..typical 46\36\24.

I generally saw three common MTB ring combos between 1990 and now.

My 1990 Nishiki Ariel with full Shimano DeoreDX came with a 24/36/48 and a 11-30 7-speed setup. The component companies started coming out with the Compact/MicroDrive concept around 1994 and switched to using 22/32/42 chainrings along with 11-28 7-speed and 8-speed cassettes. In the late 1990s, everyone started going back to a more sensible setup. My current MTB has a 22/32/44 and a 12-34 9-speed cassette although I have contemplated switching to 22/36/46.

I generally saw three common MTB ring combos between 1990 and now.

My 1990 Nishiki Ariel with full Shimano DeoreDX came with a 24/36/48 and a 11-30 7-speed setup. The component companies started coming out with the Compact/MicroDrive concept around 1994 and switched to using 22/32/42 chainrings along with 11-28 7-speed and 8-speed cassettes. In the late 1990s, everyone started going back to a more sensible setup. My current MTB has a 22/32/44 and a 12-34 9-speed cassette although I have contemplated switching to 22/36/46.

My luck, ALL the chainring sets in the house are the t-count I quoted.. wait, a 44, hmmm.
The only custom ring I needed was 38, so I had to go new :mad: .

My question: micro drive? I keep going back to riding my 7 rear Mavic (ya, I'll stick an 8 cluster in it someday.) The rear cogs on this set are smaller than usual, or other wheels around the house.
Same t, smaller diameter.
Is this what you are referring to? I thought I might have road sprokets or something?
I'm going to measure them.

I'm fond of 36/24/36, but that has nothing to do with bicycles.

If you EVER want to be able to spin at less than 15 mph, get a triple.


Actually, a 39/27 at 90rpm is ~10mph.

Hi all,

Ive been riding Gary Fisher mountain bikes for several years and just got into road riding.

I just bought a Masi Vincere and it came with a double. The LBS I bought it from said they would swap the double for a triple at no charge.

I plan to ride ~50 miles every Sunday. I live in a relatively flat area west of Houston, Texas. I dont plan on any racing, unless the competition is myself. Im 5'7" 200 lbs and a bit on the chunky side for my height, about 25 lbs over-weight by my standards.

Should I go for the triple just in case? Or keep the double?

Thanks for any input you can give,

Dwayne

Hi all,

Ive been riding Gary Fisher mountain bikes for several years and just got into road riding.

I just bought a Masi Vincere and it came with a double. The LBS I bought it from said they would swap the double for a triple at no charge.

I plan to ride ~50 miles every Sunday. I live in a relatively flat area west of Houston, Texas. I dont plan on any racing, unless the competition is myself. Im 5'7" 200 lbs and a bit on the chunky side for my height, about 25 lbs over-weight by my standards.

Should I go for the triple just in case? Or keep the double?

Thanks for any input you can give,

Dwayne

Double. But I repeat myself.

Since Dwayne and double start with a "D" and end with an "E" and both have 6 letters, I think you should stick with a double.

Since Dwayne and double start with a "D" and end with an "E" and both have 6 letters, I think you should stick with a double.
Now that's some serious logic! That's like Kabbalah deep type stuff going on. :)

Hi all,

Ive been riding Gary Fisher mountain bikes for several years and just got into road riding.

I just bought a Masi Vincere and it came with a double. The LBS I bought it from said they would swap the double for a triple at no charge.

I plan to ride ~50 miles every Sunday. I live in a relatively flat area west of Houston, Texas. I dont plan on any racing, unless the competition is myself. Im 5'7" 200 lbs and a bit on the chunky side for my height, about 25 lbs over-weight by my standards.

Should I go for the triple just in case? Or keep the double?

Thanks for any input you can give,

Dwayne

With no hills to speak of...no triple needed...or even a trippppppllleee

Double

And thanks for searching :)