creativepart

My new bike (used) has a standard 39/50 double crank. I live in a hilly area and I need some lower gearing. My hybrid has a triple and I'm used to that. I guess there are three ways I could go. But I'm not sure which is "best".

I could change out my standard double for a triple. Or I could change it out for a compact crank. Lastly I guess I could just change the 12/26 9-speed cassette for 12/30 or even 12/32.

I know many of you diehards HATE triples -- but I don't.

What would be best? Or cheapest? Or most sensible?

Creatre

I had a triple and recently switched to a standard double on my new bike. I lost about half a mph at 80rpm compared to my triple by using a 11-28 cassette. Half a mph is not worth switching to a triple. Get the compact if you are absolutely set on getting something smaller, but you would probably be okay on the standard with a decent sized rear cassette sprocket setup.

icyclist 

IMHO, it doesn't matter what you do, OP. I base this on my own experience over the years.

Having had a serious heart attack a little less than six weeks ago, I rode my bike today with a compact double, up a hill with a short 20% grade. I used to think I needed a triple on that hill, and that's what I rode, until I decided to stop riding my bike with a triple.

You'll get strong if you keep riding, strong enough with any of the set ups you are thinking about to surmount and summit.

Carbon Unit

I changed out a standard for a triple in 2007. At the time I needed better gearing than what I had. The triple was used and I got it for a good price so I don't regret it. Since then, I have become stronger and learned a lot about what I need. I now want to change out the entire group for a new compact and here is my reasoning.

I have played around a lot with gear calculators. I currently have a 13/26 with a 53/42/30 Campy crank. If I were to buy a 12/29 with a 50/34 Campy 11 speed compact, I will get almost exactly the same gear ratios as the triple but the gears are more usable for me. For 98% of my riding, I will only need to use the 50 chain ring. Only on the nastiest climbs will I need the 34. Also, the compact weights probably 2 lbs, or close to it, less than my current triple. The compact weighs less not because the triple is heavy, but because 2011 compacts are just a lot lighter than a 2006 triple. The only down side that I can see is that I already own the triple and I will need to pay for the new compact and that is what is stopping me from changing it out now.

AEO

compact will be cheaper, but triple is definitely more useful.

First things first, check that your shifter can actually actuate a triple.
If it can, then buy a triple FD, long cage RD (if your bike doesn't have one already) and triple crankset.

ColinJ

I like triples because they allow a wide range of gears without the big steps between rings of a compact chainset or the big steps between sprockets on a wide-range cassette.

That is because I live in a very hilly area with climbs up to 25%, and long descents. I need a wide range of gears.

I have a triple on my Basso which is my bike of choice for the steep stuff. The gears on that are 52/39/30 and 14-28. I ride my Cannondale on less hilly routes with gearing of 53/39 and 13-29.

Barrettscv 

We really need more info to make a solid recommendation.

What brifters do you have? Will they shift a triple? If not, add $200-300 for new shifters. You will need a new front derailleur.

Cheapest & most sensible? a 12-32 Sram PG-1070 cassette and a long arm rear derailleur.

Much will depend on where you ride, your current fitness, and your riding goals.

If you are young & fit, new to cycling, and planning on training hard, you will adjust to your current crankset. However, if you are like many cyclist, and just want to ride several days a month for fun and you also have very steep hills in your area, you may need a triple or a compact crankset and a 12-32 cassette.

STP

I have a 53/39 standard double and an 11 x 25 stack. I used to have a 12 x 23 stack but actually needed to drop from 12 to 11 for great top speed on the flats. Speaking of flats, that's what my terrain is like. I don't have any giant hills to speak of, but I ride in the unrelenting wind, which is like a "horizontal hill." The only thing I have a triple on, is my mountain bike. My advise would be to go to a compact if you need a better gearing choice for your terrain, but I PERSONALLY wouldn't go to a triple unless I was pulling/carrying a heavy load in super hilly or mountainous terrain.

miyata man

Find out the largest tooth your RD will handle and what its chainwrap is. Chainwrap is the the total difference in range for your crank and cassette. 39/50 crank = 11, 12/26 cassette = 14, so your current chainwrap is 25. A medium cage RD will normally handle up to a 28t and a long cage may take as big as a 36t cassette but also pay attention to the smallest cog it can accept. The easiest solution here is to use a mountain bike RD and cassette such as an 11/34. This gives you good gearing for downhills as well and this setup is quite common on touring bikes.

Using a triple is also a viable answer but will not give you quite as low of gear ratios with your current cassette if you really crawl up hills. Going to a 30/39/52 will always spread your gears out in both directions with more steps in between. Unless you are carrying a touring load or really like to spin up hills you may not want smaller than a 26t in the rear. This is likely more expensive and would require changing the cranks, FD, and bottom bracket.

You may answer the question for yourself by playing around with a gear calculator like the one here. The main factor here is how fast you pedal, cadence, when climbing.

Good luck.

rangerdavid

you can get virtually the same gearing with a compact double and the right cassette. get the double.

ls01

Oh this wonderful debate, again. tripples are heavy. compacts are a compromise in gearing made for vanity. whatever.
Tripples are heavier than a standard double , the weight of the 30 ring, the mounting bosses on the crank arm, the extra material it takes to make the rear derailer cage about an inch longer, and, maybe two links of chain. thats maybe 6 or 8 ounces.
compacts have a larger cassette with bigger steps in between gears and a shorter top end at 50/11 .
some people prefer one and otheres prefer the other. its a personal choice.

IcySmooth52

Id just change the cassette. Having a triple doesn't shift as nice and you'd need a new derailleur and probably left shifter. SRAM Apex is real nice and Shimano 105 will be coming with a competitive option next year.

RoboCheme

I use to have a triple, but I didn't like it because of the redundant gearing and because of the constant FD shifting. I live in a hilly area. My next bike was a compact with a 11-28 cassette. That wasn't enough so I put on a MTB RD so I could use a 11-34 cassette. It's been great since it allows me to spin (relatively speaking) up 20% hills.

We don't know what shape you are in, but since you're asking, I would go with a compact crank instead of a triple. It'll be cheaper since you won't have to change out the shifters or the FD.

Bostic

My fred triple Pedal Force RS. 17.8 lbs with a Power Tap rear hub. It's lighter than my 2011 Tarmac comp with full Rival and a 52/36 Dolomites compact which is just over 18 lbs. Ultegra 6703 shifts fantastic. Whoever says the front shifting suffers has not spent any time on Shimano's latest.

Next Saturday is the Devil Mountain Double century, 206 miles & 20,000' of climbing in the SF Bay Area. I look forward to using 52/39/30 with 11-26 vs 50/34 11-27 the previous two years I've done this ride. I'm 5' 7" 140 and having a 52 outer is the only way I can keep up with bigger riders on descents.

Velo Dog

There's a lot of thinking in this thread, not all of it supported by reality....
Personally, I've never understood the arguments against triples. Maybe it's because I'm a Clydesdale and live in the Sierra Nevada, but the granny gear weighs less than a couple of swallows in your water bottle, and when you don' t need it, you don't have to use it. When you do, it's really nice to have. I think part of the problem is that the standard "granny" has become a 30t, which is silly. When you need a low gear, why not make it a LOW gear, a 24 or 26? Weighs less, works better...but people might see it and think you're a sissy.
Of course you'll hear the argument that it complicates shifting, but how hard is that REALLY? Brifters have created a generation of incompetents.

Beaker

The compact will definitely be cheapest. Perhaps a good place to start would be to compare the gearing you have on your hybrid and see if a compact will get you close- you don't want to invest the time/effort to get a compact and find it's not enough. I'd use the Sheldon Brown gear calculator to compare the gear inches and jumps between gears between you hybrid, your hypothetical setup and your current road bike.

One other point, I like Bostic's setup above as he's running an 11-26 cassette with a triple which will give you many more subtle gearing options on steep/long climbs than a 50/34 with a MTB or Apex cassette.

creativepart

Thanks all. I'll give you more info. I'm 61 and weigh 230 right now (I'm 6' 1'). I'm not that fit yet. I live between San Antonio and Austin - otherwise known as the Texas Hill Country.

My hybrid has the following gears; 11/26 9-speed cassette and 48-36-26 (2011 Trek FX 7.5). My new road bike has 12/26 9-speed cassette and 53/39 double (2005 Trek 2100).

Right now I ride 10 miles a day 6 days a week and I've been doing so for a bit over a month. My home is in a hilly area and 50% of my daily ride is climbing short steeps. On the hybrid I use the granny on at least 3 of those hills. I've tried making it with my 36/26 and am unable. I generally use my 26/18 or so.

I don't want to be clipped in and get 2/3 rds up the longest hill and have only 39/26 to get me over the top.

The Trek 2100 was available when new with a double like mine or as a triple with a 52-42-30 so I though of going back to that by going triple. The current crank is a Bontrager item. The brifters and FD are Shimano 105 and the RD is Ultegra.

I'm on a 10-day vacation at the coast and I bought the bike here. So, I've never even ridden it on my usual daily ride yet. I've been riding it here on the flats every day. They're very windy flats but I've done fine. Tuesday will be my first opportunity to try the road bike on my ride. I'll probably put some platform peddles on it and see how I do.

klages

i changed from a triple to compact recently and its been better than I expected. the shifting is actually improved and my gearing is pretty much the same, I haven't hit a climb yet that the compact can't accommodate that my triple could.

Add the weight savings of the compact cranks and that you should be able to use your double fd rather than switch to a triple fd, and that you don't have to make sure your left brifter can throw for a triple and it makes sense (to me) to go to a comact rather than a triple. nothing wrong with a triple but the benefits just aren't there in going from a double to a triple over compact unless maybe your climbing the alps without the legs for it.

Beaker

Here's your benchmark. If you can consider climbing hills in the middle chainring on your hybrid (lowest available gear = 36x26) then you'll be fine with a compact. If that feels like it would be too tough, then I'd recommend the triple.

ericm979

You should have gotten the triple.

Unfortunately it's not cheap to convert a bike from double to triple because you need new shifters in addition to the new crank and derailleurs, and shifters are the most expensive part.

If you are local to the bike store you bought it from, and have not ridden the bike yet, I'd take it back and ask nicely what it would take to get a triple on it. If they can reuse the existing components because they are unused, it might be cheaper.

If it's too expensive then you can settle for a compact crank and a wide-range rear cassette, but I think that for your condition and use a triple would suit you better. A 9sp Shimano mtb derailleur will shift a wide range 10sp cassette with your 10sp shifters.

Aaron_F

Are you hitting those hills in 39/26 while seated? If so, stand up. You don't need better gearing, just more time out of the saddle.

Barrettscv 

I'm also a big guy who likes short but steep hills. I've used a compact double with a 12-27 and an 11-32. The 12-27 lacks the super low gearing and the 11-32 has some bigger jumps between the gears.

I also use a 50,39 & 26t triple with a 12-27. This is the best all-around combination. My crankset is a Shimano 105 with an aftermarket 26t granny gear, you could also use a Tiarga triple, these can be found on eBay for about $110. You will also need a new front & rear derailleur and a longer chain, this will add $150.

A compact double will require an 12-32 cassette to have a low enough range, you will need a MTB rear derailleur too. The cost for the compact crankset, the 12-32 cassette and the new rear derailleur will be about $275.

I've charted the compact with the 12-32 and the 50,39 & 26t triple with your 12-26;

ZippyThePinhead

What did you use to make the chart above?

The first bike I had that I rode seriously had a triple and I just figured I needed it. My lowest gear was 28/32 (22") and I used it for one climb in particular. Then I started riding a road bike where the lowest gear was 42/28 (41") and when I was able to do that particular climb, I realized that maybe I could live without the triple. Now I ride a compact double where the lowest gear is 34/28 (32"), and I no longer care to have a triple. Mabye when I am older...

Beaker

Only just read this - you do realize that a 36/26 combo is almost identical gearing to 26/18?

If the first part of the sentence is correct then yes a triple is the way to go here. Given that this is a 6yr old bike, I'd actually consider whether it would be cheaper to sell it and get another bike with triple gearing, as the cost of new parts is probably a substantial % of the value of the bike anyway.

Drew Eckhardt 

Triple.

At the same range you can keep your current gear spacing or run even tighter cogs for flatland rides than with a double.

50-39 x 12 - 13 - 15 - 17 - 19 - 21 - 24 - 27 - 30
50-34 x 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 17 - 19 - 21 - 23 - 26
50-39-26 x 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - 21

If you really need it due to terrain, load, weight, and/or fitness you can have a 27% easier gear with the compact double (24 small ring vs. 33 which would take a 44 cog to match 24x32).

Triple.

Inexpensive compact crank or mountain bike cassette (might need a longer cage derailleur too).