Originally Posted by
europa
Nope, for me and my riding, compact cranksets are just a recipe for inefficient gearing, but you do need to remember that I have a rather wide range on the back and genuinely need that granny gear.
Teasing aside, Steve Hogg talks a lot about back issues and, unless you're carrying an injury (like my dicky shoulder), back problems are usually associated with a poorly fitted bike - using KOPS and similar, old school fitting methods cause me no end of trouble and pain. Steve's methods remove pain.
The bent, on the other hand, has a seat that doesn't support my back properly because it's hard and the wrong shape for me, the pad is slightly too wide for my shoulder blades and causes trouble, the head rest fouls my helmet (compulsory here) which leads to neck pain and I slide forward everytime I hit a bump ... hence I find a shorter than optimal leg reach is needed to keep me on the thing. It's not major but it's bloody annoying. It's probably sortable too but I've yet to find a solution that doesn't involve making new bits for the bike.
The bent? If I had someone here who knew what to look for and what he was talking about, AND I had spare money to spend on the thing, I could probably get it right or at least a lot better. But I don't have either the support or the money. It doesn't help that my sportster is sooo darned comfortable and well set up nor that my commuter is much better suited to the commuting I do than the bent. The thing's has been relegated to 'toy' status ... which is not what I envisaged when I bought it.
Richard
There is no "inneficiency" there. On a normal double you often have one quarter to one third of the gears that is duplicated. Most people, when they hit a hill, they have to shift both front and back, with a double, they actually ahve less shifting. No need to argue, we get the message that you are happy with your triple and will stick with it.
If you're not stubbornly closed-minded however, you get my point, and understood that the reason I was making it was because someone here said that a double on a bent is plain wrong. And I disagreed. Then you jumped in and I felt obligated to defend my opinion, because of where it all originated.