Road Cycling - double and triples

This is not a which is better thread.... (hopefully)

I just wanted to get a better understanding on how a Double (or triple) would fit me.

First off would one technically be able to climb the same steep hills using a double or triple? Would the effort be very different? I know with the triple you would probably have an easier time but would it be impossible to do cetain steep hills with doubles?

Is acceleration better on a double or triple ? Top speed?

Would it be fair to summarize that triples are fr when you want the security of easier gears but if you want to push yourself you get a double?

On my daily coomute on my mountain bike, I never use the smallest gear (as it is mostly flat). I'm usually cranking it out with the largest and hardest gears and for stop go the middle gear. This ofcourse chnages when I reach really steep hills but so far I haven't done to much of that.

Anyway, input is most welome

In another similar discussion, someone posted a link for converting gear ratios between bikes. Your mountain bike's middle gear is not quite like a road bike middle gear. It's almost definitely smaller and your rear gears are almost definitely larger. Calculate the final drive ratio of your mountain bike is certain gears then do the same for the road bike. Remember you'll be able to push a harder gear in the road b/c it's so much lighter but if the lowest gear you use on the mountain is way lower than you'll have on the road bike then you might have a problem.

Do a search. You'll find a lot on this subject.

Would it be fair to summarize that triples are fr when you want the security of easier gears but if you want to push yourself you get a double?


I've yet to find a good reason for a triple. They're apparently for people who plan on climbing hills with gradients of 25%.

Top speed is probably higher with a triple.
Ride over common hills, and find what speed you can comfortably ride at.
Then calculate gearing ratios to find what sort of gears you would want on a bicycle.
You can push yourself with a triple just like a double, if not better. If you are unable to pedal proper cadence due to too high of a gear, you will do more harm than good... if you have a lower gear and can ride with a proper technique, you will be able to push yourself better.


I've yet to find a good reason for a triple. They're apparently for people who plan on climbing hills with gradients of 25%.

Anything over %7
Unless you have the power output of someone like Armstrong... if you don't, you probably just end up using bad technique on climbs with a double.

I don't know how you are knowledgable on this subject, judging from how you thought it was a joke that a pro might actually use a triple in a bike race.

I've yet to find a good reason for a triple. They're apparently for people who plan on climbing hills with gradients of 25%.

Actually, they serve a good function for climbing mountains at the end of a long ride...but I can see not needing the little ring when I am back in riding form...but living here, it has proven invaluable at first

I've yet to find a good reason for a triple. They're apparently for people who plan on climbing hills with gradients of 25%.
:rolleyes:
troll
troll v.,n. 1. [From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames; or, the post itself. Derives from the phrase "trolling for newbies" which in turn comes from mainstream "trolling", a style of fishing in which one trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite. The well-constructed troll is a post that induces lots of newbies and flamers to make themselves look even more clueless than they already do, while subtly conveying to the more savvy and experienced that it is in fact a deliberate troll. If you don't fall for the joke, you get to be in on it. See also YHBT. 2. An individual who chronically trolls in sense 1; regularly posts specious arguments, flames or personal attacks to a newsgroup, discussion list, or in email for no other purpose than to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion. Trolls are recognizable by the fact that the have no real interest in learning about the topic at hand - they simply want to utter flame bait. Like the ugly creatures they are named after, they exhibit no redeeming characteristics, and as such, they are recognized as a lower form of life on the net, as in, "Oh, ignore him, he's just a troll." 3. [Berkeley] Computer lab monitor. A popular campus job for CS students. Duties include helping newbies and ensuring that lab policies are followed. Probably so-called because it involves lurking in dark cavelike corners.
Some people claim that the troll (sense 1) is properly a narrower category than flame bait, that a troll is categorized by containing some assertion that is wrong but not overtly controversial. See also Troll-O-Meter.

The use of `troll' in either sense is a live metaphor that readily produces elaborations and combining forms. For example, one not infrequently sees the warning "Do not feed the troll" as part of a followup to troll postings.

Top speed is probably higher with a triple.
Ride over common hills, and find what speed you can comfortably ride at.
Then calculate gearing ratios to find what sort of gears you would want on a bicycle.
You can push yourself with a triple just like a double, if not better. If you are unable to pedal proper cadence due to too high of a gear, you will do more harm than good... if you have a lower gear and can ride with a proper technique, you will be able to push yourself better.



Anything over %7
Unless you have the power output of someone like Armstrong... if you don't, you probably just end up using bad technique on climbs with a double.

I don't know how you are knowledgable on this subject, judging from how you thought it was a joke that a pro might actually use a triple in a bike race.

I've been to Europe enough times (Italy and Switzerland) and watched those guys and gals climbing hills. Rarely do I see people with a triple setup. Double can be done with the proper gear ratio. I think it's just a matter of preference. Some people definitely want a triple, and they feel more comfortable with it. Some people calculate a gear ratio for doubles and use those, and they feel comfortable with their doubles.

Hills and mountains in Italy and Switzerland can be waaaaaaay more than 7%, but I've never seen anyone struggling up hills either. But I guess when you live there, and the bike is considered a legitimate mode of transportation that people tend to use in those countries, maybe they get more used to riding in the mountains with doubles than us folks that live out here in the USA where mountains are not as prevelant and/or not as steep.

Koffee

:rolleyes:
troll
troll v.,n. 1. [From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames; or, the post itself. Derives from the phrase "trolling for newbies" which in turn comes from mainstream "trolling", a style of fishing in which one trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite. The well-constructed troll is a post that induces lots of newbies and flamers to make themselves look even more clueless than they already do, while subtly conveying to the more savvy and experienced that it is in fact a deliberate troll. If you don't fall for the joke, you get to be in on it. See also YHBT. 2. An individual who chronically trolls in sense 1; regularly posts specious arguments, flames or personal attacks to a newsgroup, discussion list, or in email for no other purpose than to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion. Trolls are recognizable by the fact that the have no real interest in learning about the topic at hand - they simply want to utter flame bait. Like the ugly creatures they are named after, they exhibit no redeeming characteristics, and as such, they are recognized as a lower form of life on the net, as in, "Oh, ignore him, he's just a troll." 3. [Berkeley] Computer lab monitor. A popular campus job for CS students. Duties include helping newbies and ensuring that lab policies are followed. Probably so-called because it involves lurking in dark cavelike corners.
Some people claim that the troll (sense 1) is properly a narrower category than flame bait, that a troll is categorized by containing some assertion that is wrong but not overtly controversial. See also Troll-O-Meter.

The use of `troll' in either sense is a live metaphor that readily produces elaborations and combining forms. For example, one not infrequently sees the warning "Do not feed the troll" as part of a followup to troll postings.


:roflmao: lol

I'm no troll. Feel free to feed me though.

I honestly see no need for a triple on a road bike. IMO

js, the fact that you don't use your "granny gear" (smallest ring up front) on your MTB is less relevant than you'd think. the gearing of a MTB is "easier" and is made for off-road trail riding. that's why ppl who ride MTBs on the road are often just in the big ring all the time.

this whole thing is way less confusing if you just go test ride one of each and find a steep hill. see about climbing it with a double, and see about spinning up it instead of getting out of the saddle. also notice how quickly you're capable of pedaling in the easiest gear. the third and smallest chainring in a triple setup is all about being able to go slowly (usually up hills) in a way that feels natural and doesn't straing your knees too much. if you're strong enough and your knees are fine then going up a steep grade for an extended period is fine on a double and cassettes can run bigger in the back to compensate.

to add to the confusion you get a lot of old school folks who see no need for a triple in any context and it's more because they personally don't need one combined with the fact that they are seen as being less hardcore.

lastly, you should really really search first before posting such a general question because it's been asked and anwered and debated to death and you can just read up on what's already been said and get a clearer idea than you'll get from folks who are just sick of the question and talking smack.

assuming that your rear cassette is the same on both bikes... the triple (typically) has three rings with 30 teeth (T), 42T, and 50T, whereas the double (typically) has 39T and 50T.

It's pretty straight forward.

Take top speed, they should be identical cuz the big ring is identical.

As for the triple, if you're new to the sport and you're not sure, get it. How can it hurt?

As for triple-haters... get over yourself. At least people are riding.

lastly, you should really really search first before posting such a general question because it's been asked and anwered and debated to death and you can just read up on what's already been said and get a clearer idea than you'll get from folks who are just sick of the question and talking smack.

Point (in theory) taken. I've actually read read quite a few posts on this. I did need a few clarifications though which is why I didn't ask "which is better" per se but was tryign to be clearer on a few points. People will answer as they like though but I have found a lot of invaluable info.

I wanted a triple when I fist bought my roadie as I ride up a few steepish hills but the guy at one shop rubbished me for wanting it and the other shop where I eventually bought the bike wanted an extra $500 on top of the $1500 bike so I made do with the double. I'll admit it's hard going sometimes with just the double but if you don't have the triple then you just have to make do. I've never had to get off and walk so things aren't too bad!

What did everybody do before the advent of triples???

Oh, that's right, they worked hard and got stronger.

I think I have to agree with the senior member troll (Laggard), unless you are way overweight, a senior citizen or have some real rotten knees, they are waste of time and will probably hinder your strength conditioning.

Going up a section of 10% is going to hurt you no matter the gear you are in. Personally I have a double with a 12-25 in back. I can make it up everything in that 25 so far. Most of my climbing up to about 6% or so is done in the 23, over that I will pop into the 25 and still be able to spin fairly well. I feel triples are more for touring when you are loaded down and every gear helps. Unless you are just starting out cycling and happen to live in basque country I recommend a double. Worse comes to worse get a 27 in back, surely that should be able to cover most hills.

The big ring on a double is more typically a 52 or 53T, not 50T. So, in theory, for the same cassette and the same cadence a double has a higher possible top speed than a triple. In addition, the rear derailleur cage is shorter on a typical double, and the chain is shorter, so the shifting is faster and crisper.

I definitely have a triple on my touring bike. With all the gear I'm lugging up and down the hills in Italy, Switzerland, Spain (future trip), etc., I just can't get anywhere unless I got granny gears to struggle with my loads. BUT... on my road bike, it's a double. I cannot stress how little enthusiasm I felt when DeRosa insisted on a double, but for what it's worth, although it's pretty flat out here, whenever I do encounter the Chicago "bumps", I can usually hammer it out pretty good and keep on going, and I've passed people who've dropped into granny gears for some little bump or even into the middle chainring. I definitely think doubles have helped me to ride stronger, and although I know I'll be crying for my next trip when I'll be riding the hills in doubles, I really think that I'll adjust to doubles and really get strong with riding up in the mountains. When I was in Switzerland, I just about died the first time I rode a loaner bike that only had doubles, and I switched back to my Bike Friday with the triple, tried to use the granny gears for one ride, and by the third day, I was staying in my outermost chain ring for most of the climbs I did. The key is always pacing yourself and not overdoing it, and using your clipless to your advantage so you can activate more of your secondary cycling muscles so you can climb stronger.

Koffee

I just bought my first road bike. Doulbe: 53/39 and 12-23t. A double gives you everything you need... providing you don't want to slack off on your climbs (i mean really slack off). I can go up the steepest hills spinning at 90rpm on the 39-23 gear, but there are climbs where I'm going easy and try to downshift beyond the 23 cog... ("crap, I have to work now").

assuming that your rear cassette is the same on both bikes... the triple (typically) has three rings with 30 teeth (T), 42T, and 50T, whereas the double (typically) has 39T and 50T.

It's pretty straight forward.

Take top speed, they should be identical cuz the big ring is identical.

As for the triple, if you're new to the sport and you're not sure, get it. How can it hurt?

As for triple-haters... get over yourself. At least people are riding.

The whole triple debate makes no sense to me. If you are strong enough to climb in higher gears, you will...if not, you'll use what you have...any climbing is better than walking for building endurance and strength. You race with a double because you have no business racing if you can't climb with a double...otherwise, what harm is there in having a bailout to get you home on a bad day?

The whole triple debate makes no sense to me. If you are strong enough to climb in higher gears, you will...if not, you'll use what you have...any climbing is better than walking for building endurance and strength. You race with a double because you have no business racing if you can't climb with a double...otherwise, what harm is there in having a bailout to get you home on a bad day?Hey, even racers can have a bad day! BTW, if you've only got one road bike and it's a triple, you can easily race on it. Just adjust the lower limit screw on the front derrailleur so the inner chainring is locked out.

Anyway, I think in the end it just depends on doing what you are comfortable with. Some folks prefer sitting and spinning to either pushing big gears or standing out of the saddle. I used to use mine inner chainring more than I do now, but I still use it (30x21 or 30x23) for extended climbs over 10%. I rarely use the 30x26. My view is that it's better to be over geared than under geared.

Oh yeah, and if you do go the triple route, go with Campy!

Here’s the thing. There is not a right answer to this. People have differing abilities and goals for their riding. To say “No one needs a triple” is a gross assumption that could cause some beginners problems. First of all, not every male rider is 5’9” and 165 pounds. For a noob wanting to get in shape, or come back to cycling after years away, it may make perfect sense to have that low range for hilly rides, especially for the first year or so of riding. Then, it’s not that big of a deal to upgrade to a double or for that matter it may be time to upgrade the whole bike if they’re going to continue riding. Also, not everyone lives in the flat lands. What works in Ft. Myers Florida may not in Ashville North Carolina or Denver Colorado. Also, if you ride 30 – 50 mile routes you may never have a problem. However, when you get to that last ½ mile climb at mile 88 of a 103 mile century and it’s 92 degrees, you might be willing to sign away your first born for one more gear. I’ve been on that ride and seen some pretty cool double riders off and walking.

Triples don’t have the cool factor that doubles do because they weigh more and they indicate that the rider feels that they might need a super low gear. For a lot of people the appearance is just as important as the function, which is a perfectly valid argument.

I’m sure not going to tell anyone a triple is the only way to go. I won’t tell anyone to only get a double either. What I will say is that there are legitimate reasons for both that only the person getting the bike can decide. If I have any advice to offer it would be that you need to be honest with yourself about your situation. If you get a bike that you continually struggle to ride you won’t enjoy riding near as much, or worse you could be heading for an injury that can really set you back.



One other thing...

"but the guy at one shop rubbished me for wanting it "

Bike shop employees are sometimes guilty of loss of perspective. A lot of them are very enthusiastic riders on their own and log lots of miles racing and or training. As a result they can get a little tilted in their perspective and advice for customers. My brother was a victim of this. He bought a Trek 5200 last year from a shop that caters to a lot of racer types. His goals did not include racing and he is over 50. At 6’ they put him on a 56cm frame because a lot of racers like to go towards the smallest frame that will fit. For fitness and general riding this is not a good choice especially for someone middle aged. You end up with a lot of seat-post showing and the stem naturally wants to be low. Now you are really bent over in a racing position with your head struggling to see ahead of you if you’re in the drops. Great for racing. Sucks for general riding and fitness. To solve the “problem” you put on a goofy looking rising stem and you have your seat-post all the way out at the limit. Bottom line is he is not happy with a sizable investment after the first year and looking to upgrade what should have been a long term ride.

One other thing...

"but the guy at one shop rubbished me for wanting it "

Bike shop employees are sometimes guilty of loss of perspective. A lot of them are very enthusiastic riders on their own and log lots of miles racing and or training. As a result they can get a little tilted in their perspective and advice for customers. My brother was a victim of this. He bought a Trek 5200 last year from a shop that caters to a lot of racer types. His goals did not include racing and he is over 50. At 6’ they put him on a 56cm frame because a lot of racers like to go towards the smallest frame that will fit. For fitness and general riding this is not a good choice especially for someone middle aged. You end up with a lot of seat-post showing and the stem naturally wants to be low. Now you are really bent over in a racing position with your head struggling to see ahead of you if you’re in the drops. Great for racing. Sucks for general riding and fitness. To solve the “problem” you put on a goofy looking rising stem and you have your seat-post all the way out at the limit. Bottom line is he is not happy with a sizable investment after the first year and looking to upgrade what should have been a long term ride.

Nah, it wasn't like that. I just immediately jumped at the triple, and he was like "why?". I couldn't give a reason why except to say that I needed it for the hills. So he was like "we can work with the gear ratios, you'll be ok with doubles", so I agreed to go for it. I trust his judgement, and I don't think he was all that wrong about talking me through my fears of going double. I mean, that first time I ever rode a double, I could do the hills, but I couldn't really keep up well, so I moved back to my regular bike with the triple, but it did make me think a bike with a double would not be bad in the mountains, provided that I did regular rides into the mountains, paced myself, and stayed persistent. After all, when I went back to triple, I still sayed in the higher gears eventually while we were climbing. I did learn that I shouldn't put the blinders on when it came time to choose my setup. There are always ways to accomodate for just about anything on a bike these days.

Koffee

I've yet to find a good reason for a triple. They're apparently for people who plan on climbing hills with gradients of 25%.

Not everyone is 22 years old weighing 147 pounds with 7% body fat.

I use a triple because at 64yo, much higher body fat and weight, etc., I need it at times.

Is there some shame in that?

Why NOT?

I have a double and at times I wish it was a triple. I've riden up a 3 mile long 8% grade on my double. I wasn't the fastest but I also wasn't the slowest. I've also climbed 15% grades with my double, the longest being 1.5 miles. I wished I had a triple then so I could have kept the rpm's higher, but I managed. When I hit the 27.6% grade, I would have given anything for a triple. One of the stongest riders in my club weas having a hard time getting up that hill so I didn't feel so bad.

If I rode flat or even hilly terrain, I wouldn't even think of wanting a triple. When it gets very hilly (10,000 climbing in 100 miles) then I wish for a triple.

Originally, when choosing a road bike setup, I was set on a double thinking it would force me to conquer the climb or walk. The guy at the LBS told me to consider the triple for hills and things around Arkansas.

We have quite a few good climbs on any ride around here. Since I wasn't spending enough on the OCR1 to play with gear ratios and the bike was mainly to help train for xc, I agreed. I'm happy I did. BUT, I'm using the inner chainring as little as possible to help build strength. My next roadie will probably be a double (I should be stronger by then).

Nah, it wasn't like that.
There are always ways to accomodate for just about anything on a bike these days.
Koffee

;) Glad to hear they were more professional. I certainly don't mean to say that the majority of bike shops have the perspective I noted. If a bike shop can explain other options in a way that makes sense then I tend to trust their judgement too. The majority of bike shop folks are really good.

I get ticked off when they let a part-time employee / racer loose on customers. I remember a thread not long ago where a forum member said he overheard employees talking down his components because they weren't DuraAce. I've seen similar things at one local shop as well. :rolleyes:

And, there are deffinately a lot of cool new things out there. I think "compact" doubles are going to really be the hot set-up for a lot more of us within the next two years.

I would like to chime in.

I have a 30-42-52 crankset and a 12-25 rear. I got this bike (my first road bike ever) a year ago and preferred to have the extra gearing a triple offered, given that I was coming from mountain biking and had no road experience. I used it quite a few times that season but didn't rely on it too much.

So far this season, I have maybe used the granny gear maybe 3 times, the last time being in May towards the end of a very fast group ride going up a very steep hill that I was not familiar with. I have not used it since then and I feel strong, but I've picked up a pretty bad habit. My favorite routes consist of some relatively short (less than a mile) but very steep (7-8%) hills. I always stay in the 42x25 gear and end up mashing out of the saddle at a cadence of around 60, often less. I attack every hill I see in front of me, and I'm sure my knees will eventually quit if I keep this up. I simply can't spin up these hills in the saddle, so it's either stand up and hammer or drop to the granny and risk ridicule from elitists like Laggard.

A couple weeks ago I was hammering up one of my favorite hills and got caught by a 40something guy methodically spinning up the hill in a 39x27 at about twice my cadence. I had a moment of clarity, like alcoholics sometimes have. Instead of forking over $300 that I don't have to convert to a 39-53 front and 12-27 rear, I have decided to give the snobs the finger and start using my granny again to re-teach myself how to spin. I'll try to use gears that will give me the same ratio as a 39x27 so people won't think I'm cheating (which I've been accused of before because of that extra ring).

In conclusion, I think that a triple chainring definitely has its place and can be used properly to improve fitness for beginners and people with knee problems (or sledge hammer kamikaze riders like me). My advice to beginner roadies: if in doubt, get a triple. To hell with the elitist roadie snobs!

A tripple will always offer greater capabilities than a double for any given rider. If you can push a double up a 10% grade you can push the same bike with a tripple up a steeper grade. A double is my choice when I'm cycling familiar territory and I know that there aren't any climbs that exceed my ability. If I'm going to do a ride in unfamiliar territory, that I don't have any reports on, I almost always take the tripple.

I'll add that for someone with wide hips, (me) a tripple offers a slightly wider stance on the pedals. This is easier on the knees. I will off another plus for a tripple is that you can use a tightly spaced cassette in the rear, say a 11 or 12-21 and can always find a comfortable gear. This combo gives the same range as a 12-27 tripple, with out the large change between gears.

I'll also add here that I am just over 40 and ride with a fella who uses a double 12-27 and he is bad about pushing too big a gear because he doesn't want to drop onto the 39 ring! This slows him down on the hills. I on the other hand do 85% of my riding in the middle ring. ;)

I honestly see no need for a triple on a road bike. IMO I guess not, in Minneapolis. If I lived there, I would have a double too. I live at the base of some mountains - triple for me.

I always find this debate amazing. There are always people on here saying how whimpy it is to ride a triple. Meanwhile, the same person will spend his rent money on the new 10 speed rear. If your such a brutal powerhouse hairey man, shouldn't you be riding a single speed?????

Guess what? People have been trying to get more gears on bikes since they were invented. Why would you want a 10 speed rear, 9 is enough. Oh wait 8 is enough. Wait a minute, wasn't 5 enough? No. Everybody wants more. But, for some reason, just on the back. It amazes me how the road crowd resists change on some things and then tramples each other to be the first to buy other things.

BTW. Climbing on the middle ring with a triple is pushing a bigger gear than the small ring on a double. OOOORAAAAAHHHHHH. And I wear a Camelbak too......................

I've yet to find a good reason for a triple. They're apparently for people who plan on climbing hills with gradients of 25%.


They used to have solid wheels on wooden rims with no brakes. Why aren't you riding one of those? I bet you have pneumatic tires (tires with air) - for shame! Ride like a REAL man.

I rarely, rarely use my small chain ring - but when I am climbing Vail Pass, or Ryan's Gulch Road I sure do. One of those new-fangled more modern inventions. I hang my head!

I guess not, in Minneapolis. If I lived there, I would have a double too. I live at the base of some mountains - triple for me.

I always find this debate amazing. There are always people on here saying how whimpy it is to ride a triple. Meanwhile, the same person will spend his rent money on the new 10 speed rear. If your such a brutal powerhouse hairey man, shouldn't you be riding a single speed?????

Guess what? People have been trying to get more gears on bikes since they were invented. Why would you want a 10 speed rear, 9 is enough. Oh wait 8 is enough. Wait a minute, wasn't 5 enough? No. Everybody wants more. But, for some reason, just on the back. It amazes me how the road crowd resists change on some things and then tramples each other to be the first to buy other things.

BTW. Climbing on the middle ring with a triple is pushing a bigger gear than the small ring on a double. OOOORAAAAAHHHHHH. And I wear a Camelbak too......................


Thank you, thank you, thank you...I made that discovery myself today when I was climbing...and posted a useless post to that effect...bigger climbing gear...getting stronger...

BTW. Climbing on the middle ring with a triple is pushing a bigger gear than the small ring on a double. OOOORAAAAAHHHHHH. And I wear a Camelbak too......................
ROFLMAO!!! :roflmao: :roflmao: :beer: :beer:

I have a triple. I dont think Ive been in the little ring more than twice all spring and summer. My preference was a double, but I couldnt pass up a good deal, on a nice bike. Im doing fine with the triple. Next time Ill buy a double, and keep this one. Then Ill have the best of both worlds. If you buy a Shimano triple, dont forget the half click feature. Otherwise, youll be adjusting it every time you ride. :D