I've got a 1996/7 Nivachrome-Oversize/Chorus Bianchi that I have decided to stay with. Gearing (8 speed on the rear) is 12/25 and 53/39. For all of the riding that I have encountered here in southeastern NC that works fine for me (although I am 65 years old, so ....). For riding around here, quite frankly if you gave me a new gear I'd be hard pressed to choose between 11/25 (I would not be willing to drop the 25) and 12/27 (which AFAIK doesn't exist for my setup although I have seen references to a Miche (spelling?) 12 or 13x28).

However, I can imagine the occasional century ride in some serious hills in northern Ga. or western NC where this gearing could present some serious issues on the longer/steeper climbs. I think that I could go to a 36/52 (they exist but I'm not sure about it working with my setup). But maybe a triple is a better answer.

But I really don't want to ride a triple for most of my riding in my area - my current setup works well for me. So the question becomes just how hard is it to swap between a triple and 53-39 in my setup? I don't know crap about bicycle mechanics, but I bought Zinn's book so am willing to learn. But what I can readily tell from what I have read is that "you don't know anything until you have done it once". Or that is my impression. Hence the question. My toolset is what you would find in a typical 'moderately equipped' home workshop, but am willing to invest. I don't think I even have a tool that would remove a pedal easily, for example.

Thanks.

dave

Once you have a triple, staying with that really has very little penalties.
It's a tad heavier, but compared to the total weight of rider + bike, it's really not worth mentioning.
It'll put the pedals a little wider apart, which MAY be an anatomical issue to someone.
And the wider knees will hurt your aerodynamics a tiny, tiny, tiny bit.

Unless the wider stance upsets your knees(Possible, but rare. The opposite is far more likely.), then don't ever try blaming the triple for anything important.

Going TO a triple can be fiddly.
It influences the bottom bracket, the crank and the front derailer. You may need to swap the BB and the front derailer as well as the actual crank.
Not a change I'd do on a ride-to-ride-basis. Although the same front derailer that works for the triple may well work for a double.

Why not consider a compact? (50/34)
You should be able to find one that's a direct replacement for what you have, and you can't miss the last three teeth that much. You'd still get plenty of speed out of that. And easier climbing at a lot less hassle.

The best is probably to go permanently with a triple. This is not a hard job but not something you want to swap out on a regular basis. The BB will be different. The chain length will be different. The rear derailleur has to have the capacity for the new set up. If running brifters, they may not work with a triple, etc. The point is that a lot of changes may have to occur for this to work.

A road bike with a triple is pretty sweet. You can stick to the front two for most of your riding and use the granny as a bail out gear. I'm running a 48-38-26, 12-24 on a seven speed vintage bike.

Modern gearing set up is gravitating towards compacts. The gearing on a compact tends to work a bit better when running 9-10-11 on the rear than when running 6 or 7 as the gaps between the front two chain rings is often pretty big (16 teeth).

Here is a pretty good piece on the pros/cons of triples and doubles: The Rise of the Compact Crank (aka ?The Death of the Triple?) - Bike Hugger

Without knowing what kind of components you are running, it is hard to give you useful advice in terms of gearing.

Also this could be N plus 1 time. I ride a compact double for my local rides but have a road bike with a triple when riding somewhere esp. hilly.

Swapping up and back is just not practical. What ever you choose, plan to stay with it.

Campy does make triple cranks geared 53/42/30 in theory but they are hard to find. Compacts (50/34) are far more common and require fewer changes to fit but will leave some pretty big gaps in your 8-speed gearing.

As noted, other than a very minor weight penalty, there is no downside to a triple. Where you don't need the granny, shifting is just like a double. Where you do need it you REALLY need it.

Back in the 9 speed era Campag Race triple , and the 135bcd 39-53 doubles for square taper BB's made the 2 crankarms on the right end

work on the same 111 (steel standard seat tube)or 115 (oversize seat tubes , usually Aluminum frames ) Cartridge BB ..


Now want compact 50-34? & a 135-74 triple .. N+1.. separate bikes ..

Thanks for the feedback. I'm beginning to get a better understanding of the N+1 principle

dave

Dave, IMHO a triple with a closely spaced cassette is about perfect. I don't use the granny chain ring generally, but when my knee says it's time to do so...

A conversion to a triple can become expensive (BB, crank set, RD, FD & shifters), I've done this and know. The N+1 becomes a good idea. I don't favor the wide ratio of one, but for use in areas where you're climbing or descending with few flats a compact double is a good alternative and a spare bike is available if required.

Brad

I rode 13-14-15-16-17-18-19-21 in the 8 cog era with a triple crank. Straight block for plains, low like 42x28 or 39x26 for mountains, no need to change cogs depending on whether I rode east or west from Boulder, CO.