Originally Posted by
Mr IGH
I see all these new bikes and component groups are exclusively compact doubles, the triple is relegated to the junk pile alongside rim brakes, freewheels and friction shifting.
Help me understand the advantage of a compact double 50/34 with an 11~36 cassette and a long cage mountain bike derailleur. All I see is double the step size between gears (11%~14% vs ~5%~7%), there's no weight advantage with that boat anchor cassette and long cage mtb derailleur. Add in the sloppy shifting a long cage derailleur provides compared to short/medium cages.
I'm running stone-age triple, 50/39/24 with a 9-speed 14~28 cassettes, single tooth steps from ~28" to 93" gearing, medium cage rear derailleur.
Hmmm, what am I missing?
Oh, you mean that bicycle options have varying degrees of effectiveness and there are things called "trade offs" when you switch from, oh I don't know, one type of brake to another? You know... for example...
Wow, never would have thought.
None of my road bikes have wide range cassettes or long cage derailleurs on them. A switch from a triple to a double is one of lower weight and simplicity. Bike companies are simply trying to use the parts they have to emulate the "range" of old triples by using large cassettes with accompanying MTN derailleurs.
The funny thing is, the only road bike of mine that DOES have a long cage derailleur on it is a sora equipped triple crankset bike.
We are simply at the mercy of whatever bike fads the major companies want to push on us.