The Weak Link

If an asteroid were going to hit us in a month, wouldn't you be glad you just went ahead and bought the bike?

I caught myself thinking just yesterday how cool it would be to buy a Homer Hilson. Then I took a nap and waited for the feeling to pass.

Tom Bombadil

Hey, just back from WV. I see that you followed up on my suggested and tried out a Giant FCR W bike.

Did you get a chance to also try a Trek 7.5 FX WSD? Or the 7.6 FX WSD if you want to compare another bike with a compact double crank. The 7.6 has a few parts that are a bit better than what the FCR1 has (carbon seatpost, slightly better brakes, arguably better tires, etc.), but that doesn't always translate into it being a better bike for someone.

I would definitely get out and compare at least 3 bikes, then come back to your favorite(s) before you decide to do anything, incuding deciding to not buy one. You should always leave that option open.

Also on your second ride, make it a long one. An hour if they let you have it that long. Especially given your long-standing wrist problem.

Personally, I downrated the FCR1 on my list because it has a double crank. But that's because I know I need a triple.

Here's an example of why one has to check things out carefully: My dealer gave me the low down on the new FCR Alliance a couple of weeks before Giant announced their new top-end FCR. He knew I was looking for a higher end flat bar road bike. But it is an example of a bike going in a different direction than what I was looking for. The price is $650 over what the FCR1 sold for in 2007. This cost in part went for Crank Brothers pedals, a Fizik Aliante Delta seat, Michelin 700x25 tires and a Shimano R600 compact double crank.

Well, I would want to toss all of these off of the bike! So it's a terrible deal for me. So you can't always count on the more expensive bike being better.

You are certainly off on a great first step, by finding a nice bike right away.

stapfam

You may not be but DG is- and we don't like having him Sulk. And torquise and Pink do not go well together.

Yen

I definitely plan to ride other bikes within this class, including the Treks Tom suggested. Since we already have bikes to ride, there is no hurry to find this new one and we'll ride as many as we can, including the OCR. The fit of FCR1 I rode the other day is now the baseline I'll start from.

Now, after a lengthy explanation from my techy engineer husband, I understand that a double crank mostly offers fewer gear options, correct? Why would someone chose a double over a triple -- what are its benefits?

stapfam

Proves that you live in flat country? Proves that you are under 30 without a family and commitments cutting into your riding and taking all your fitness away?

It does depend on where you live and the type of bike you have. Gentle hills can be taken on a double and if you have the lower geared version of a compact double- then even steeper hills can be ridden. Now if you do live in a hilly area- it makes sense to get a triple when you are a more mature rider. Body and leg strength is not the same as a youngster. I am beginning to relearn the hills in my area on a compact double- and hopefully- I will not have to revert to a Triple. just because the bike is nicely set up and I do not want to change things on it. BUT- if I start finding those long hills too much- Then The triple will be fitted.

Glad to see you are trying the different bikes and as you say- That FCR1 is your benchmark.

bobby c

A compact double gives you nearly the same range of gears as a triple, although a triple does off slightly more. There are several reasons why a person might go to a compact double instead of a triple:

1. As mentioned, you are not losing much. But what you lose maybe more than you want.
2. Snob appeal. Some people turn their noses up at a triple, usually these people are not allowed in the 50+ forum.
3. Weight. A compact double weights less than a triple. Important for weight weenies.
4. Efficiency. A chain runs in a straight line, the more rings you have up front, the more likelihood that the chain isn't running as straight as it wants. A double means less reach between the back and the front, which means that a double usually shifts more easily as it has doesn't have to reach as far. Plus in many circumstances, it might be more efficient. For example, let's say on a double you are using the little ring of the two in front and a middle ring on the rear cassette. That's a straight line. You could probably get the same gearing on a triple by using the little ring (of the 3) up front and shifting down to a littler gear in back. But while the effort to pedal might be the same, the chain is running at a greater angle, meaning more wear, more noise, more Fredishness.

For me a compact double is perfect, but if I lived in the mountains, I may want to have a triple on occasion. My wife uses a triple, she could get by with a compact double but the bike she liked came with a triple and frankly I don't think it matters that much.

So for you - a compact double or a triple, but steer away from white, it is too slow.

BluesDawg

Simplicity. A double is easier to set up, easier to use and there is less to go wrong and need adjusting. Indexed front shifting on a triple can be tricky. If things aren't exactly right, you have a good chance of having the chain rub against the front derailleur on the high end or the low end or both. There is more margin for error with a double. It is not a huge difference, but a double is simpler.

That said, I use a triple on my road bike. If you need the gear range, having a triple is worth the added complexity.

maddmaxx 

Doubles are for purists like an MGTC from days of old. Triples are for practicalists like an SUV or Mini-Van.


Otherwise doubles are more simple to design and operate. If you look at the side plates of a front derailleur for a double you will see essentially straight sides ment to push the chain back and forth from inner chain ring to outer. On a triple however you will see various bumps and notches (mostly on the inner plate) that allow the derailleur sides to be more "inside or outside" at the height the chain will be when it is on one of the three rings. These are mechanical compromises of the design that allow it to work well but require more setup time.

For the performance enthusiast, the double is indeed much lighter and slightly more effecient due to an overall improvement of the chain angles. The triple allows the less well endowed (legs..........geesh) to climb large hills such as Stapfams recient exploits.

BlazingPedals

White is the color of virgins, DG. Just what are you trying to tell us?

Digital Gee

I meant that women that ride white bikes are Goddesses, of course!

Interesting, however, your point. You should have told my ex that, when she went down the aisle a while ago for the fourth time -- dressed in white. Who was she trying to fool?

Hmmm...

Tom Bombadil

Well, if you were one of the first three ...

Yen

Thanks for the explanation of double vs. triple. I guess I'll have to take a long ride to see which one would be best for me. I'm happy with that aspect of my current bike, but as I get more fit perhaps the double would be suitable. I don't know if I should base a purchase on that alone though......

Tom, why do you feel that the tires on the Trek FX are better than the FCR1? How do you learn all this stuff????

Tom Bombadil

It's a minor, debatable point. The Giant has Kenda Kontender tires, which are a pretty average, low-cost tire. I'm sure some people have good experiences with them, but they seem to be more prone to flats and are a basic tire included as standard equipment on a lot of lower cost road bikes. Giant upgrades the tires to a Michelin tire on their $1500 FCR Alliance.

The Trek 7.6 FX WSD has Bontrager Race Lite Hardcase. It is hard to keep track of quality levels within the Bontrager product line as they all sound alike. But this tire has a pretty good reputation and is the same tire that Trek puts on their $2400 7.9 FX. My favorite LBS repairs Treks and they are very straight shooters when discussing parts quality ... freely admitting when some components on their own bikes are not that good ... and they tell me these tires generally hold up very well and they recommend them as a good quality replacement tire.

All of that said, I wouldn't base my final purchase decision on the stock tires, as it is so easy & cheap to replace them.

malkin

DH just got one of those FCRs (but not the W one) and he loves it.

Happy shopping!

stonecrd

Main reason I went from a triple to a double was I had no real use for the triple or a compact. Since 99% of my riding is flat I never used the granny and I use the big ring 98% of the time. As Blues Dawg said maintaining the triples FD alignment can be a pain and since I did not use it much it was even worse. So even with the triple I optimized the FD for the middle and big ring. In the end why should I carry the extra weight and complexity if I don't need it.

BluesDawg

Sounds like a 1X9 (or 8 or 7) would work for you. Get rid of the front derailleur altogether.

Tom Bombadil

Yen,

Here's a new contender for you, the Specialized Vita Sport. Triple crank, carbon fork and seat stay, women's geometry. But spec'ed a bit lower than the Giant FCR 1W and Trek 7.6 FX, as it only has an 8-speed Sora groupset.

https://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?sid=08Vita

Yen

Tom, thanks. I'll add that to the list.

I sat on a Trek 7.6 FX the other day. The WSD model was a size too small but the reach felt good, and the men's model was the right height but the reach was a tad too far. He said he can change the stem to make it feel as good as the WSD model. Is that a proper way to get a bike to fit, or shouldn't I look for a bike that fits without having to change the stem? I still do plan to add trekking bars if I end up choosing a flat-bar bike, but I have not completely ruled out a road bike after all, after having ridden a comfortable one many times around a parking lot last month. I know, I need to take it for a much longer ride to be sure. Maybe I'll try riding Hubby's Schwinn one day and see how long my neck can take it. My new cycling rule: Never say never!

The Giant FCR1 W is still the benchmark in terms of fit, but it has a double crank. We are surrounded by hills and many streets with inclines, so I think I should stay with a triple.

tsl

Within reason, changing a stem is a routine part of fitting a bike. Once you get out of hybrids, the stems aren't adjustable. The only thing you can do is change them.

Extremely long, extremely short or extremely angled stems, are indicative of the frame not being the right size. The idea is to fine-tune the fit, not make it something else entirely.

At the dealer where I bought my Trek, this was all part of the service before I test rode my bike. I spent an hour or so on the bike in the trainer while they watched and made adjustments. One of the things they did was change the stem. They swapped one stem for another at no charge. Stem swapping at a fitting after the sale is generally a chargeable thing.

Tom Bombadil

I would definitely insist on testing out the larger sized WSD model before I would settle for the men's bike. The men's bike could be a better fit, just like the WSD model could be a better fit for some men. But you owe it to yourself to get the best fit possible.

That said, many times changing the stem is the right thing to do to achieve the best fit possible. If the frame is the right height, right length, handles well, but the handlebar is just a bit too low or too close or too far, then swapping in the right stem could make it perfect. Nothing wrong with that. My concern would be if one is trying to compensate for an ill-fit frame by making significant changes to the stem.

You should try to make a conscious effort to feel how the whole bike feels under you, and if it feels good except for the handlebar being a little off, then be prepared to make a stem change. Don't just go with whatever standard bike feels best in its factory configuration. It may well be that Bike A feels a little more comfortable than Bike B right off the floor, but Bike B might be the best bike for you with a little change.

Get the bike that excites you the most in the frame size that fits you best, and then go from there. This could even include going with the FCR1W and swapping out the double crank for a triple.

In my test ride of the 7.6 FX, I was very impressed by it. Smooth ride, comfortable, responsive. But that doesn't mean it is the best for everyone.

Yen

tsl - Thanks for the info. I'd love to find a shop like that around here.... there's got to be one...... but where???

Tom - Thanks for the advice and info. I definitely will test ride a larger WSD model, they just didn't have one available and their warehouse(?) didn't have one either. I'd have to order it with a down payment but with a 30-day money back guarantee. This shop is sort of a Trek "boutique", unlike most bike shops in many ways, and they sell only Treks. There's another bike shop near us that sells lots of brands including Treks and I'll see if they have one there.... if not, they can probably call one up from one of their other shops.