Blithedale

Hi All - I would love some insights into switching from a 3 ring crankset to a standard double or compact crankset. I bought my entry-level road bike just over a year ago. I was new to road cycling and bought the best I could afford. Since then, I've really worked hard to improve my skill level and stength. This summer, I've found that I'm more comfortable riding almost exclusively in the big ring, and I find shifting between the big and middle ring cumbersome at best. All this makes me consider a crankset switch - but which one to choose? My preliminary research suggests that a standard double can be potentially too hard for fairly new cyclists, but I wonder if comfort with riding in the big ring means I could handle it. My research also suggests that a compact crankset might be a good compromise, but I wonder if you get the same type of smooth ride and speed. I ride primarily rolling country roads with a few good climbs and do so by staying in the big ring and shifting through the rear cassette. I now I shouldn't cross chain, but I've been really comfortable. I've considered shifting down a ring on bigger climbs to test it out, but shifting back into the big ring turns out to be a huge production on my triple ring crankset. Any insight will be very much appreciated. Thanks so much!

GlennR

What's your rear cassette?

I'd suggest a compact, but you most likely will have to change shifter and FD along with the crank.

redlude97

sounds more like you need to get your triple tuned. There should be no huge production shifting between the middle and big ring, if anything its shifting from the small to middle ring that is sometimes slow. Also your cadence must be super slow if you are always on the big ring. Maybe work on increasing your cadence instead

CafeVelo

+1 spinning 52 x anything is a pretty large gear. What is your cadence? If you cruise at under 70 or so then working on your cadence should be a concern, for the sake of your knees.

Doctor Morbius

I agree with everything in posts 2, 3 & 4. A properly tuned triple shouldn't be a hassle. I have them on all four of my bikes. I also spend the bulk of the time in the middle ring in order to keep my cadence around 85 - 90 rpm. Big chainrings are fine, but they place most riders in too high of a gear.

f4rrest

When I was new, I had a triple. The big ring was 52, and the middle was 42. I made it a point to never use the small ring (30). The climbs were tough, but I got used to it.

Since you're already using the big ring primarily and the middle ring occasionally, a road double would be fine for you if you're unable to get the triple working to your satisfaction.

To make the conversion, you'll need new crankset, new left shifter, new front derailleur. The chain, rear derailleur, and cassette may not need replacement.

12strings

1. I agree sounds like your triple is not functioning properly. I have a VERY cheap bike with a triple chainring, and the front shifts up easily when well tuned. In fact, if you go to a double anything, the size difference between large and small will make that shift even MORE of a jump, It won't make it any easier, unless the new shifter/derrailer are simply dialed in better than your old triple.

2. I also agree that if you are in your big rig up hills, you may be putting undue stress on your knees that may catch up with you. Learning to spin at close to 90rpm will help you advance as a cyclist. HOWEVER, if you are now doing hills with just the big gear, getting even a standard road double that works properly will give you a lower range of gears to work with than you are currently using now.

catgita

Igree, changing the crank and all sounds like a bit much for little benifit. Double would reduce the tread (q-factor) a few mm, which for some helps a higher cadence.

Swapping chainrings can minimize double shifts (f+r). The ideal combo would put you in the middle of the rear cluster on the flats, leaving the larger and smaller cogs available to handle the rollies at a good cadence range. When front shifts are minimized, it makes little difference how fast they are.

For my situation, a compact double 50-34 and 12-26 left me double shifting twice on every roller. I changed to a 46-34 and 13-28, which meant big ring all the time at a high cadence.

Gyrine

Don't know about your "huge production" problem with your triple - never owned one. But even with a double, it does take some finite amount of time for the chain to fully engage when shifting to the big ring, although with modern quality mechs it may not be noticeable. I have a 52/36, what some would call a mid-compact crankset with 11/28 in the back and couldn't be happier; rarely do I have to shift both front and back.

kingfishr

I have bikes with a compact, standard and triple crankset, properly tuned they are equally fast and the triple is a lifesaver in the mountains. If you are always using the large chainring what would be the benefit of the compact? Save your money and get the bicycle serviced and tuned. You might consider a second cassette if your gearing is not optimal, but the only problem you have mentioned so far is that your derailleurs are not properly adjusted...

icyclist 

What do you ride up the steepest hills with? 52x??

RollCNY

The difference between the big rings on a compact versus standard is small, essentially like 1/2 of a dog shift. If your intention is to always remain on the large ring, it makes little difference. I would probably steer to a standard, as I find a 39 far more useful than a 34.

Another option is a single ring up front. If the cassette already covers your range, do a single ring, use your FD as a chain keeper, and go to town.

If you don't like your triple, that is your prerogative. Ignore the Doomsayers talking about knee damage, and the requirement to spin faster. Ride the way you want to ride, and recognize blather as blather.

Campag4life

A couple of things based upon what you wrote:

1. Don't change your triple. You don't have to.

2. If you never use the smallest chainring in front, adjust the front derailleur inner stop such that you can't shift to the smallest chainring. This effectively turns your triple into a full size double. Now you have the benefit of a double which is binary shifting between two rings and what makes a double attractive. I really like triples but the biggest issue is they take a bit more tuning to index to the middle ring. Much easier if a triple is set up like a double if you never need the short climbing gear inches of the granny gear. You can even remove the granny gear and keep it in your parts bin.

So no need to change your crank. Heck, you say you rarely deviate from your biggest ring. So having a simple lever full push to get to your middle or 42t ring when you need more climbing is an easier way to ride.

If you can't perform the above changes to your front derailleur which are straight forward for any decent bike mechanic, take your bike to the shop.

Finally if you like the result, you can decide from there if you want to change your crank in the future for another. I am of the school that there are very few amateurs on the planet short of uber strong beefy guys who mash that need a full size crank. If you become particularly evolved you can put a compact on your bike and change out the inner ring for custom gearing. My crank of choice in the relatively flat land I ride is a 50-38 and rear cassette of choice is 28-11 which gives a lot of gear inch overlap making both rings in front highly usable. Many don't know that gear inch overlap is good and not bad as it reduces amount of front shifting based upon speed differential...provided you don't need the relatively short climbing inches. This in fact is the predicate of why many love a triple in the mountains. The 42t middle ring is a great all around ring to ride for a wide variety of speed and elevation changes and why this size ring is popular on single chainring setups.

HTH

dvdslw

I think campag4life nailed it, adjust the front to be a double for easier fine tuning and a more precise shift. The most cost efficient solution is just swapping out the cassette for something bigger if your rear derailleur can handle it, most short cage derailleurs will accept up to 28 teeth and keep you on the big ring longer or exclusively depending on what you have now.

Willbird

This thread title sounds families hehe. I just picked up a bike which has 10 speed 53-39 and 12-28......not drastically different than my 9 speed 50-34 compact with 12-25. BUT 38 is the smallest chain ring I COULD run. If you chose compact depending on crank type you could run mid compact too if you chose, no such luck with conventional. Or pick 5800 or 6800 and run whatever rings you want. The wind is the fly in the ointment where I live, we shall see :-). I can go 12-30 if need be.

Drew Eckhardt 

Doubles are a great idea when you don't need a gear lower than 39x23 or 25/26 which is the best you an do with one-tooth jumps to the 19 cog.

While the 50 big ring is better (it gives you a better chain line on your cruising gears), the 39 ring limits the amount of front shifting you do versus a 34. A 50 big ring is fine.

If those gears aren't enough, you can use a triple like a standard crank plus a much easier bail-out gear than you can get with the 34 which is only one easier than you have with the stock 30 ring.

You have a setup problem, especially if you're running Shimano rings which have excellent pins and ramps.

Most bikes now come with pie-plate sized mountain bike cogs.

Try a 13-23 or 14-25 (9 cogs); 12-23 or 13-25/26 (10); or 12-25 (11) before doing anything to the crank.

Willbird

I think I blew it on the 5800 6800 comment because if you have a triple your probably not 11 speed.

Blithedale

Thank you all so much for such thoughtful and thorough responses!!!! You've given me a lot of good info to consider. First step will be to take my bike to the shop to see if a tune-up helps the shifting trouble between middle and big ring. I also want to revisit all you've said about cadence. I worked all winter on my trainer to increase my cadence but have a very basic cycling computer that only tracks mph and that only when off the trainer. As a result, I'm not really sure what it is beyond unreliable counting per minute. I feel like I'm at a good but comfortable clip, but I'm interested on seeing if refocusing on increasing or at least correctly identifying my cadence can add to my understanding of how best to use my gears. Also very interested in campag4life's suggestion to tailor my triple to a double. I've got a great shop out here, so it won't be a problem if I go that route. Thank you all again for taking the time to help out a newbie!!!