fatben

Hi Chaps,

I'm Ben, 25, from the UK originally but have been living in Hong Kong a year or so.

Anyway, my preference for road biking has overtaken mountain biking after purchasing a cheapo Merida road bike last year. As a result i have decided to splash out on a 2008 Cannondale Synapse (Liquigas).

I live on an outlying island which is predominately flats around the cost and steep hills over the central ridge. Subsequently the standard lower 'ring on my double-chainring on my merida (sora) really makes climbing the steep ones really hard.

As i'm custom building the cannondale i selected the ultegra triple chain set to give me a wide spread of gears for climbing and bombing down the other side.

Since announcing it I've been mocked and ridiculed by my cycling buddies in HK and in the UK as they say a compact will offer the gears i really need.

is this correct?

if, so why do cannondale/ shimano make a triple?

Looking at the gears i have a smaller lower and a larger outer with a triple and one in-between!

The frame arrives on Fri so i have time to change but need to know a bit more about it.

All advice/ opinion appreciated...

AEO

compact, regular, triple... whatever gets you to the top of the hill is what you should use.

assuming compact means 34/50 and triple is 30/39/52
T = Teeth on the gear

Triple is best used with a narrow range cassette. (I.E. 12-25, 11-23)
compact needs a wider range cassette to get a similar range of gearing as a triple. (i.e. 11-25, 12-27)
That being said, the lowest and highest gear you want to use is all up to you in the end.

narrow range cassettes are good because you aren't left with "boy, I wish I had a 16T on the cassette"
basically it lessens the gaps between gears. Wide range cassttes may leave you in between gaps at certain speeds.

Compact 34T or 36T chainrings offer a gearing range between the 30T and 39T. Not as low, but also not as high. The main selling point being that you can have a wider range than a regular 39/53, yet with a narrow cassette like a 11-23 or 11-25.

50T chainring and 11T cog has a higher gain ratio than a 53T chainring and 12T cog.
34T chainring and 23T cog has a lower gain ratio than a 39 chainring and 25T cog.
Downside(to some) is that there is less overlap when changing the front gear.

Triple with 30T will give you a lower gear than a compact will allow. Catch is, as mentioned above, the 11T is what gets you going really fast. Triples also set your feet apart wider than doubles will (ever so slightly). Some people find it difficult to tune in the front dérailleur so that it doesn't rub the chain or drop the chain.

It's all a matter of preference, really.

You can calculate the gears you are getting here:
https://sheldonbrown.com/gears/

fogrider

this has been a long debate, you should do a search. but a triple adds weight to a super light bike. with a compact, and a wide cassette you should have all the gearing you need.

sunburst

Just goes to show that some roadies are real arrogant a-holes! I read a funny article in Bicycling about the difference between (friendly) mountain bikers and (snobbish) roadies. Oops, maybe I shouldn't go on about that in this forum.

But getting to the point. I've got two road bikes. One 2006 with a triple, and an old 1987 steel bike that I put a Rival compact crank on last spring. Now, at 53 years, and in the hilly terrain in my area, I need low gears.

Here's my take: the triple with 53/39/30 tooth rings, provides a significantly wider range (both high and low) than the compact double at 50/34. Both bikes have a 12-27 cassette. The double shifts decidedly better, looks better, and in general, is a more elegant solution - I definitely like it better.

However, when cycling in the hills, I seem to use the lowest gear on the triple (also known as "granny" gear, for obvious reasons), more than I thought I would. IMO, it does save the knees. I just got the bike, but I think the high gear (53 front, 12 rear) will see very little use.

the beef

Nei ho ma!

I have run triples, doubles, and compacts. Now, triples can shift very well, but a double will always shift a little nicer just because two is less complicated than three. Compacts shift a little cleaner and give you marginally nicer chainline (although this really isn't something people ought to worry about too much w/ road bikes). It's up to you.

No shame in running lower gearing. I'm a higher cadence guy, and a triple helps.

stapfam

Had a triple and struggled up the steep hills in my area. Struggled but made them- Next bike had a compact and I now struggle up the same hills- but still make them.

Difference was my mentality- Hills and I need lower gears. 30/28 and I'll climb anything even if it is slow. 34/27 and I just climb them faster.

dekindy

I would suggest going to Sheldon Brown's website and seeing for yourself. Use his gear calculator and input compact and triple crank and standard cassette combinations. You will quickly learn that all things being equal you really only lose the lowest gear and a couple of gear inches off the next lowest gear when comparing a 30-inch triple ring to a 34-inch compact.

I recently started cycling seriously again and purchased a new bike with a triple. I was out of shape and weighed more than when I previously biked seriously. Now that I understand the minimal difference between a triple and compact and taking into consideration that a compact is lighter and easier to keep in adjustment, I would have went with a compact.

But I also mainly cycle in flat central Indiana and only rarely venture down south. If I ride the Hilly Hundred this year I may be changing my tune and recommending a triple.

If possible, test a compact and determine if a compact is adequate before you take the plunge.

rollin

Ben I am also from the UK living on a flat island. I had a triple, now compact with 12-27 in the back. I only loose one gear at the granny end (compared to my triple set up). Works fine for me and I've got 17 years on you!

A compact should get you up Lan Kwai Fong to Al's Diner

superslomo

I have a triple, and I just don't get what the big deal is about the obsession with compacts, personally. The weight difference is minimal, I haven't had any tuning problems with the FD, and while I had a crankset that had uneven spacing from the bottom bracket (right foot further from bike than left foot), the Ultegra 9 speed triple that I replaced it with is perfect.

If you feel you want the biggest range you can get... get the triple. If you are worried about snobs judging you, get the compact double.

Somebody on here once said: "Will you get laughed at harder for having a triple, or for having to walk up the hills?"

FWIW, I have been in places where the triple was even overtaxed to get up certain very steep sections.

recursive

Ignore the haters. I have a triple and look how awesome I am!

threeflys

Ben,
I had the same questions last month when I was trading my Randonee for an Element. For starters, I'm a really noob cyclist in that my longest ride to date is around 10 miles. I was worried about losing the triple on the Randonee when going to the compact on the Element. After a couple of rides on the Element, I have no issues with the compact double. It all depends on what you are comfortable with. My line of thinking is that I'm still fairly young (34) and having a compact double will only make me a stronger cyclist on the hills which will translate to stronger on the flats. BTW- I went to Sheldon Brown's site and it just make my head hurt
Good Luck and ignore the bike snobs!
Chris

LanceFanBoy

I race with a Triple on my Trek 1500, i don't care. When we're doing a quick steep climb, and everyone is bearing down on their lowest rings, i slip it to the granny and stay seated and spin along, then sprint at the top with those that have energy left. Whatever, I'm that guy!

^oZ

I like my compact. Where I live it's really flat so I ride a 39/50-12/23 most of the time. For the hills and mountains I have two cassettes, 12/25 and 12/27 and two chainrings, 34 and 37. All the pro's of a double and light gearing whenever I need it.

Avalanche325

Here are the benifits of a triple over a compact:
1. You can run a tight cassette.
2. You don't give up a low gear OR a high gear.
3. You will find that you can do a huge amount of riding on the middle ring.

Benifits of a compact.
1. You can fool yourself into thinking you are riding a double.
2. Lighter.

There is no differance on the shifting on the rear. The long cage just takes up chain slack. The shifting part is the same. The front shifts very clean if it is adjusted correctly. It is a little harder to adjust than a double. But, honestly, it is not hard at all.

Keep in mind that if you use your gears correctly, you rarely shift up front. Do a search on "speed ranges", it has been explained several times.

Bostic

I noticed the shifting was a lot smoother going from 42 to 53 on a Campy Bianchi I test rode compared to the 34 to 50 jump on my bike.

BikeWNC

Ok, here is my take on this issue. My original bike had a triple (53/39/30) with a 12/27 rear. I live in the mountains and needed the 30/27 often. A couple years later I bought a second road bike with a standard double (53/39) with a 12/27 rear. Being the new bike I chose to ride it more. I made the decision to try to use the double on all my rides. When I rode the bike with the triple I did not use the 30 chainring. The only time I needed the granny gear was on mountainous century rides where I used it to save my legs.

I have yet another new bike, this one with a compact double (50/34) and 12/27 rear. I found I never used the 30/27 gear on the triple anymore. Sure it might come in handy for the few rides that had 20% grades but I also found I could ride those in my compact. So I guess I've gotten a bit stronger. I recently replaced the triple with the same compact gearing of my other bike.

In some ways I feel the triple was a bit of a crutch. I always used the easiest gear when the road got tough and therefore got stuck needing it. Going to the standard double forced me to ride harder gears and I got stronger. The compact is a compromise. It gives me the narrower stance on the bike I need, I never liked the wider Q factor of the triple, and better shifting. With the SRAM 11/28 cassette it would be possible to get very close to the wide range of the triple gearing at the cost of wider gaps between gears.

For me the compact is great. I just don't miss the higher gears above a 50/12. Our descents are technical enough that I won't be hammering a 53/11 down them. I get the low gearing I need on long rides too.

Avalanche325

34 to 50 is a bigger jump. So the chain has more climbing to do. I have seen several posts here about compacts not shifting smoothly. I have never used one though.

You do realize that you just opened up the Campy / Shimano thing

AEO

shimano's cheapest compact, the tiagra 4550 34/50 crankset, actually shifts better than my 39/53 105 5500 crankset.

so there

higgit

I have two bikes, a 9-speed (2006 Specialized Sequoia Elite) and a 10-speed (2007 Specialized Roubaix Elite), and both have triples with 12-27 cassettes. I really like the 39T cog and do most of my riding in it. The available ratios provide sufficiently close gearing to allow me to keep up with the pack on club rides, up to about 21 mph at 90 rpm.

On my first bike, the 9-speed, I kept getting dropped on flat rides. So, I replaced the 30 cog with a 24 and put on a 12-23 cassette. The tighter gearing offered a significant improvement. That bike (the Sequoia) now has a normal triple with a 9-speed 12-27 cassette. I installed a rack and '28' Armadillo tires on 36 spoke (Mavic) tandem XT hub wheels (almost indestructable) and it it is now my touring bike. The 10-speed Roubaix is now my "fast" bike.

The 30T "granny gear" provides me with the mental reassurance that I will get to the top of most climbs without dismounting and walking, although I have done that on many occasions. Would you rather get hazed about "not making it" or because you have a triple? Some choice.

I find that on long (several mile climbs), I need to get into a "zone" and the 30T cog gives me a wide range of possibilities.

Good luck. Either way I know you will really enjoy your new bike. A number of our club members ride the Synapse.

robbyracer

I ride a Synapse with a triple crank and I haven't even touched the granny gear yet. I'm thinking of changing to a compact double but I'm sure if I do I'll encounter a hill I would need the granny gear for....

ericm979

Ignore your friends hazing. What counts is who gets to the top of the hills first (or who is not last), not what gears you use to get there.

Which setup you use depends on a lot of things- what sort of condition you are in, your pedalling style on climbs (spin vs mash), how hard you want to go, how much climbing you do, and how steep the climbs are. Having a triple and a decent set of cogs on the back means you'll have a lower gear than you would with a 50/34 compact, and a better selection of ratios. Depending on the factors above you may or may not need that lower gear. Also depending on how willing you are to walk- I have friends who would rather walk a steep climb than suffer the indignity of being seen with low gears, while I would rather have low gears than walk. I never walk a climb.

Another thing to consider is that when you are getting a new bike the incremental cost of getting it with a triple is often quite low, like $50US. But if you get a double and later decide you need a triple, the cost will be significant- you'll need two derailleurs, shifters, crank and BB. Depending on the group that's many hundreds of dollars. But if you got a triple and decided to go compact, you'll only need a BB, front derailleur and crank. The triple shifters, which are expensive, can be used on a double.

The reasons above are why I recommend triples to newish riders buying new bikes.

Brian6751

I run a 50/39/30 triple with a 11/23 cassette. I never feel like I'm spinning too hard in the 50/11 and the 39/23 gets me up any hill near me.

No I dont use the granny gear much, but I plan on doing some rides where I may need it. Good to know its there if I need to crawl home.

Who looks dumb, the guy spinning up a hill called "The Wall" in his 30 ring or the guy walking his double up the same hill.

Retro Grouch 

The real question is: "What do YOU think is best for you?" Do that. Your new bike has to make only one person, out of the whole world's population, happy.

As for the detractors, if they can't mock you for your choice of crankset they'll just find something else to laugh at. Do Brits still use the term "Bugger off"? If so, tell them that (or words to that effect).

Brian6751

There will be no laughing when their souls are crushed.

bbattle

I second the idea of using Sheldon Brown's gear calculator (sheldonbrown.com/gears) and deciding for yourself what gearing setup you need. You'll find that the triple adds a gear or two on the low end over a compact which goes a gear or so lower than the regular. Most of us don't have to worry about running out of the high gears unless we're going 50+mph downhill.

The compact cranks will support 52T, 50T, 48T, or 46T big ring and 34T, 36T, 38T and 39T in the small ring. Lots of possible combinations to suit most needs.

A regular 130mm BCD will support 48T, 50T, 52T, 53T, 54T, 55T big ring and 38, 39, 42, 44 for the small ring. Lots of possible combinations to suit most needs.

Dang, triples come in so many combinations that if you can't find something to suit you then just get a fixed gear and some capri pants.