superslomo

I'm looking at building myself a new bike, in addition to my older Cannondale (9 speed STI triple, originally a touring setup, minor changes to make it more all-roundish).

So, everyone on earth is determined to tell me about how great compacts are, and how no one needs a triple, or should require one, and so on and on. That being said, I've always liked it, and despite all protest to the contrary, I still get more range of gearing out of my triple 9 than I can get on the widest cassette 2x11 that exists on this earth (30/30-53/11 is still a bigger range than 32/34-50/11, unless my math fails me). SO, I don't particularly need to hear all those arguments again... I'm determined to go my own dogged way on this one, and I ride by myself so I don't really care about all the popular kids pointing at me and laughing... I just think I'd like to build a triple with the last gasp of the good road triple groups before they go the way of the dodo.

With all that out of the way, can anyone give me a sense of how the functionality and user experience differs between the 6703 ultegra gear and the 5703 105 stuff? Is it really just a matter of a little bit of extra weight, and a different color scheme? Is there a durability difference between the two?

I'm probably putting all this on a soma steel frame, or a player to be named later (based on what I turn up on ebay, or what I find locally), and will probably consider going to a more custom/personalized frame later to move the group over, but for now I want to save a little weight where reasonable, and make a good, nice weather bike that's light enough to climb some, and works the way that I need it to.

Also, if anyone has a good line on sources for complete groups or build kits with either set of triple parts, I'm all ears. Silver or gray preferable, black I'm willing to consider

The way I'm ballparking the numbers puts the whole process in at somewhere between $1600 (full new 105) and $2000ish (full new ultegra) given the soma, and some ebay price-ballparking. For the result, I'm trying to figure out whether that's just a silly errand or makes some sense comparatively, set against options new in the bike shop (all compacts, nobody really makes a triple to speak of in anything but pretty marginal spec.)

Alternately, is the 10 speed tiagra triple decent, or is it a janky prospect?

TrojanHorse

Since you don't care what other people think, get the 105 groupset.

Check out the prices at ribble and probikekit. Ribble has it at $407 but 105 seems to be sold out in 10 speed and there's no sign of ultegra. They do have tiagra for about $330 if you want to consider that.

merlincycles seems to have 105 in silver triple if you can find the correct size crank.

fstshrk

4603. Shift cables route externally out of the shifter. Great shift quality.

vwchad

I would go with 105 or Tiagra. In my experience, I can't tell the difference between 5700 and 6700.

superslomo

The one thing about 105 that's just plumb stupid to my mind is the 30/39/50 chainring selection. I may not be some horse that's going to spin out a 53 tooth chainring, but there's no point making more overlap than needed... why not just throw the 52 or 53 on there, as is done with the ultegra cranks, and get as much variation as possible? I use the tallest gear, but mainly just slow pedaling while descending to keep a bit of motion going and keeping the legs loose, but it's not like I'm pretending I "NEED" the big big ring in that case.

gsa103

The rear-derailuer can't handle the take-up required. A 30/39/50 + 12-30 cassette requires 38T capacity, which maxes out a mid-cage RD (39T). Adding a 52T would require going to a 28T rear (the max Ultegra spec), and you'd lose the low end. Since the whole reason people by triples is for low-end gearing, it doesn't really sell.

chasm54

Last year I had a custom steel frame built for me. It's the bike I use for JRA, long days out in the hills etc., rather than racing, so I too wanted a triple. I absolutely agree with you that they are superior to compacts, in that for a similar range of gearing they allow you to to keep nice tight ratios at the back, so I'm using the 50/39/30 with a 12/25 cassette. I guess most would go with a 12/27, though.

I went through the same process you're going through. The few grams weren't an issue for me, and there was a good deal available on the 105 groupset from one of the online retailers, so I went with that. I've no reason to doubt that the Ultegra is superior (I have Ultegra on my race bike) but the new 105 stuff is excellent and shifts like butter, so I'm happy with my choice. It may be that the Ultegra will have a slightly longer lifespan, but I'd think that was marginal.

superslomo

Ironically, given my curmudgeonly stance above, I am tending towards the Ultegra and the extra money NOT because of the lighter weight as much as I am because of the cranks, and the fact that (I'm ashamed to say it) I just think the gray looks way nicer than the black, and those are my options at present

I can do most of my JRA (nice acronym, much respect) in the 39 on my present bike... 12-25 on a nine-speed cassette gets me up and down a pretty reasonable percentage of where I have to go, though I've swapped on a 12-27 lately to see about a little tiny bit more oomph. The compact just doesn't offer the 1:1 ratio, and while my cannondale will run as big as a 34 or 36t large cog, I haven't needed one, and wouldn't picture needing one other than in the case of heavily loaded touring.

I just find it to be a bit of a bummer, and given my middle-ring tendencies I feel like any use of a compact would involve loads of shifting the front back and forth, while mine stays unmoved for most of the ride, other than "oh-god that's a long way up" in the little ring, or "wow, that's a long way down" in the big ring.

Also, as to the capacity, I don't really find myself using the Big/big, small/small combos anyway, so if you can avoid using the most senseless gear options at even one or two cogs at that absurd end, you can fudge it and be find with a 52/39/30 on the 12/30 cassette... at least that's my plan. Not that it would fly officially, but it's good enough for me (I wouldn't ever use the 30-ring with the 12 or 13 cog, most notably, can't really see how that would ever come up if you are thinking relatively clearly )

dtrain

Isn't that funny, a part of the reason I waited on 5800 vs 6800 is because I prefer black to the gray (at least on my frame)...

chasm54

On the triple, I never ever use the big/big small/small combos, can't see why anyone would. I find I am in the 39 well over half the time, using pretty much the full range of the cassette; though usually, if I'm going to need the 25, I'll have shifted to the small ring by then. And 50-12 is plenty big enough, imo. By the time I'm spinning out on that I'm going close to 40 mph. Outside a road race, who the hell pedals at 40 mph?

Hope you like the Ultegra. Like dtrain, the black 105 actually goes rather better with my current colourscheme.

Bandera

I'm converting my Rando-ish build from 50/34 to a mongrelized mix of triple FSA crank, 6703 GS derails & 5703 brifters this winter.
Haven't finalized 52/39/30 13-25 or 50/39/30 12-25 yet.

This will be a test mule set-up, if I really like it I'll convert the CF Merckx as well.

Looks like a last gasp for triples, the 11 cog set-up offers nothing for me w/ an 11T top on wider range cassettes.
I don't plan on doing any down-mountain time trials so the "advantage" does not exist for me.

chasm54

Yes, I'm afraid triples are on the way out. I may stockpile a couple just so I can stubbornly keep riding them until I die. I don't really understand why they're phasing them out, the advantages seem obvious to me.

Bandera

Fewer lines of product mean major cost saving in design, manufacturing and inventory control for the entire supply chain, and higher profit margins.
How recreational and amateur racing cyclists are coming to accept 11T top cogs as "normal" & necessary is beyond me but that Kool-aid has been swallowed by the consumer.

The entire industry will attempt to move totally to electronic shifting above the mass market offerings w/ similar cost savings and profit margin enhancements in the near future.

-Bandera

superslomo

I guess I just don't understand why we are stuck on the idea that there is a very specifically defined range of mechanical advantage that all human beings need. It's not as if some deity on high determined that a ratio of 1.0625 was somehow the One True Set of Cogs, and none would ever require more "leverage" than that going up a steep hill, or carrying more stuff than whatever small load was indicated in the case above...

I wouldn't mind 11-32, if I could decide what combination of chain rings I wanted... if I wanted 28-40 on the front, shouldn't that be possible? (I'm not saying that that IS what I want, but it seems kind of absurd that we're all getting pigeonholed into some pretty confined spaces.)

djb

Another common sense advantage of a triple is that along with the main one of the mid ring being used most of the time with a tightish cassette (1 tooth steps at common flat speeds) is how easy it is to change the granny to a smaller like a 26 and get reasonable touring gear inches with a 11-32 cassette (if your rd can handle it)

My tripled Tricross can be a reasonably quick unloaded bike with a 12-27 nine speed and with the lx deore rd, a simple cassette and chain change turns it into a tourer that works perfectly fine with 40ish lbs of gear, and the just under 22 gear inches works for most hills.

Not the road bike angle here, but I certainly agree with the mid ring being so versatile and not needing to shift back and forth with a compact and or cross chain up the ying yang.

Bandera

Actually we're stuck with the limitations imposed by the design and production of the indexed "brifter" shifting systems.
Only particular sets of ramped & pinned chainrings are compatible and limited size ranges are produced, getting what you need/want is preempted by production.
I scrounged up a 50T 130BCD ring marked "39T" to make sure that I'll have a choice when I build up my triple conversion.

The days of building up a custom cassette from a "cog board", or just replacing a worn 15T are long over. To get the 13-27 10 speed cassette that might be paired w/ a 52T I have both a 13-25 and a 12-27 to cannibalize. Not cheap or convenient, but I'd have a useful spare 12-25.

That's just how it is.

-Bandera

Dunbar

I have 4600 on my utility bike (triple) and 5700 on my carbon bike (compact double). 4600 shifts great but beware that 1) the hoods are smaller than 5700/6700 and 2) it's a hard click through the trim position to shift. Meaning you actually click twice to drop down a chain ring. 5700/6700 it's just one push of the button (trim is a soft click.) I would invest in the new polymer coated cables if you go with 5700/6700. They make a big difference.

Bike Gremlin

Why not get a Claris triple? 3 x 8. Cheaper chains, cassettes, cogs are further apart so less problems when derailleurs develop play and/or cables/housing gets dirty. Claris chainrings are steel, so won't wear as much as 105+ aluminium ones.

9 + cogs at the rear is just for racers... and to take your money. 3x8 is as good as it gets.

chkuo

The inner BCD is 74mm for 5703 and 92mm for 6703. So if you ever need to replace the inner ring, it might be easier to find one for 5703.

superslomo

This would be a new bike to get myself something nicer than what I currently have, not just to get another bike for comparatively practical purposes. The only practical element is that I'd have my current bike to put/keep fenders on, throw a rack onto it, and keep cross or studded tires on as needed, as it'll fit them. The new bike would be on the lighter side, if possible. I'm not taking a step backwards through history to go 3x8, maybe it's vanity or whatever, but it just seems like the direction I don't want to go in... I want to get the last best triple I can lay my hands on if I'm going to do this, otherwise I can just get a compact like everyone seems to tell me is so much more sensible.

bikemig 

The area around the Hudson river (which is where the OP lives) has some of the finest hills on the east coast. Lots of beautiful areas to ride (Harriman, the gunks, the catskills, and places in between) but the hills there are some tough. I'd go with a triple if I lived there.

If I wanted the best triple available, I'd probably get the sugino XD600. I prefer 110/74 bcd crank arms over the shimano design (130/74) but YMMV.

superslomo

I do like the STI/brifter setup. Hence I'd be looking at the Shimano gear... the bar-end options will be decent for a while to come, I think, as long as there are cycle tourists we'll have to have triples somehow... this would be for something light-ish and quick.

Yep, indeed... we're in the Hudson Valley, I'm within a reasonable ride both of the Gunks (60 mile roundtrip puts you on top of the ridge outside of New Paltz off 44/55) and Bear Mountain/Harriman (probably 20 miles downriver from me to there), and I'm not a great climber, so I like the idea of all the options I can lay my hands on, despite what every bike shop employee might tell me

I had a wrench look at me disparagingly while looking at my current triple and ask me whether I "was doing the Mount Washington hill climb or something." Thanks, bub.

Bike Gremlin

8 at the rear is not going backwards. It is better in most ways. Except for racing. 9, 10, 11 - just marketing. You pay more for worse, more fiddly equipment. Been there (10 speed) and never again.

djb

That's just your opinion, 9 speed or 10 gives you closer ratio shifts which is nice in the real world, especially with a load on a bike. I have only 8 and 9 sp bikes, but 9 speed parts are much cheaper than 10 or 11, and with proper maintenance, my 9 sp stuff lasts a perfectly long time, ie regularly 5000km for chains.

superslomo

I've never had any trouble with durability with my 9-speed triple now. I wasn't asking whether to go 10 speed or not, I was mainly curious about differences and experiences with the two triple groups I had mentioned above... I'm not buying a new bike to get something with less capacity and more weight than I currently have, even though I'm not going crazy full-weenie on things, I'm only human