Uh oh. I may need some, I guess, aesthetic and functional advice.

Basically, the question is whether it would look ridiculous to put a triple crank on my bike-in-progress.

It is a Vitus 992 frame and the components will be all 9-speed Campagnolo Record.

As I was working out the gearing, I went to Sheldon Brown's online gear calculator and looked at the gearing I'm using now. Particularly for climbing. My current bike goes as low as 2.6 gain ratio.

I can get that using a standard double crank (a Record 53-39 is in the parts bin now) if I use a custom Miche or other non-Campagnolo cassette. I mean, like a 13-32. I'd have pretty big steps between cogs, maybe I'd have to find a long cage Record dérailleur ($$). and I wouldn't have a particularly tall gear (it would be about 8.0 gain ratio, not vastly higher than my 7.4 now.)

If I use a Record triple crank with 53-42-30, I can get a nice low gear (2.4 gain) and a tall gear (9.4) using a commonly available 11-23 cassette. I'll need a different bottom bracket and front dérailleur. If I avoid the big-big and small-small combinations maybe I can use the standard rear dérailleur (?)

A compact crank is not, I think, an option as I don't want a carbon crank or an UltraTorque crank (or to pay for one) and I don't think there was an alloy Record compact crank (?)

I don't think I see anyone here with a triple crank on a bike that's not a tourer (and mine won't be). Will it look terrible or silly? Would you do double or triple?

If I thought I needed a thrid chainwheel, I wouldn't care what other people thought of me for putting a triple on my Series Paramount. I'd intsall one, without hesitation.

J.

so you actually ride your bike too? unless you live in florida, 52/42 is ridiculous when it comes to practicality.

don't hesitate putting on a triple. and yes, if you stay out of the extremes you can keep your current RD. we shouldn't be crosschaining as much anyway.

I like a triple. I've currently got this set up on my Competition with a Huret Jubilee (not the red bike with the Record stuff). It'll do it but you can't cross chain it much at all. I need to try making a long cage for it and see if it will cope with things a little better.

Here's that cage. The spring could be a little stronger but I think I can work that out.

I also like those VO doubles that are like 44/32 or something like that.

You have several options:

In the rear, there are long-cage Campy RD's that are not Record: Racing Triple, Avanti.

In the front, there are triple Campy cranksets, and there are square-taper compact Campy cranksets (110 BCD Centaur).
In my opinion, if you go with a triple crankset, you will likely still need a long-cage RD to take up chain slack.

If you have to stay with Record, your options are, of course, much more limited.
In that case, an expensive long-cage RD may be the cheapest remedy, paired with a wide-range cassette.

Do what you want. I'm putting a triple on my Paramount. I looked at the options and settled on a Grand Cru crankset that has a 24t granny ring on it. The rear has a 13-28 freewheel. If I decide I don't need gearing quite that low, I can put a 26 or 28 ring on the front or a different freewheel on the back. I'm not quite a Clydesdale but I can see it from here and I need a little help on these hills.

Oh..... really?

If I felt I needed it, I'd have a triple. I'm past caring what others think.
That said, I do have one bike that has a triple, and it's a commuter. With a few changes, it could be a tourer. But I certainly don't need a triple for commuting! Especially when it's a very flat commute. I could commute on a single speed, if I wanted!

Florida has some steep bridges. I will admit that I've used my third ring a few times on my Specialized Roubaix going up a bridge toward the end of a long ride.

rBob-Sikes-Bridge-Night-24280 by caseyjaphyjones, on Flickr

RB_RB_GL_Brushed_w_White by caseyjaphyjones, on Flickr

Okay, thank you all for making me a bit more open-minded about this. I never see Record triple cranks on eBay, but I found some new old (2006) ones at an online shop.

If in doubt, go with the triple. If you get a modern Campy one (and they come in a bunch of flavors: Chorus, Centaur, Racing T, Comp Triple, Veloce, and those are just the ones I've held in my hands) and you don't like it, someone will cheerfully buy it from you. Look on eBay - there are usually several up for auction. Be patient, as the prices range from stupid-expensive to reasonable.

As for that old Record RD, it will not handle the spacing between a 13 and 28 or 30 tooth rear cluster. It just won't without a modification that, IMHO, is more trouble than it is worth for less-than-optimal-performance. A triple up fornt also requires a FD made to handle a triple.

As for triples on non-touring frames, bigbossman's four-bike rotation all fit that description, as do three of my four. There are a bunch more pictured in BF, too, not to mention the ones out there in the real world. And they all look a ton better than exploded knees or barfed-up breakfast from trying to climb in too-big a gear.

Simple. Just stop eating breakfast.

On the one hand, a 47/50 with a 9-speed works OK for the half-step concept.

OTOH, you live in Florida. Be a man and rock a single speed.

I know Rob has one and it's not for sale, but I'd love to find one of these!

I bought mine on eBay by mistake, $30 for NOS arms. Neither I nor the seller knew they were 110 BCD.
I kept it, will be using FSA rings 52/38. I'd not be surprised if there were more out there that end up that way.

Going in the opposite direction, I think you can step "down" in the big ring, but only so far on the small rings.

jyl, The only way to use a close ratio rear and still have low enough gear inches for tough climbs is to run a triple crankset. Compact double cranksets have aesthetic appeal and can have a very large span of gear inches, but at the cost of less than desireable wide ratio differences in the most used gears.

When I hurt my knee I rebuilt one of my bikes with an 8S 52/42/30 coupled with one of three cassettes, 13-23, 13-27 and a 12-21. The 13-27 worked well in the Texas Hill Country while the other two worked well on the coastal flat land when the 30T wasn't touched.

Brad

For me, these days and at my age, it is either a very wide range freewheel with a dual crank, or med range freewheel with a triple. Either are knee friendly. And I do not think, for one second, that the appearance of a triple crank is unappealing. Heavier and heavier looking, yes, but not unappealing.


Of course, this is just an opinion.

I have a Campy Record triple on a Mondonico built with Columbus SL, with tubulars, 13-26 Campy 10 rear end, Nitto bars, and a Selle AnAnatomica saddle. A practical go-fast!

Campy had long-cage rear derailleurs in many levels. I'm using an aluminum Veloce on the Mondo with a steel Chorus front mech. ditto for triple cranks, especially in 9-speed. Check Ebay for the Racing Triple. It's similar in design to the Veloce Compacts of a few years ago. These are a little heavier than Record, but not worse in function. I'm also using Veloce Ergopower on this bike, and Centaur dual-pivot brakes. The wheels are modern build, with Campy Record hubs, and vintage Mavic GP-4 rims, 32 holes front and rear. Overall, it still looks light, and actually is about 22.0# as described. Replacing the Selle AnAtomica with a Toupe reduces it to about 20#. Nice but not weight-weenied.

Look for pictures by BigBossman. He's put triples on a range of very hot steel bikes, and has absorbed all the expected abuse. But his bikes are still stunning.

It sounds like a great bike.

I'd suggest focusing on the engineering first and then see what aesthetic choices you have available. For a 9-speed you don't need to be limited to recent Campy.

Thanks again.

You know, maybe I should ask for a reality check too. At what percent grade do you usually drop into the granny chainring? Or otherwise use a gain ratio below 3.0?

I just want to make sure I'm not planning on wimping out here.

I live in Portland OR (not Florida). There are some hills here, but it's not the Rockies or the Pyrennes. The hill I ride on weekends is 6.5% grade (300 vertical ft) over 0.85 mile, I do laps for 2,000 vertical ft. The steepest sustained climb (that I know of) in the immediate area is 7.5% (870 vertical feet) over 2.0 miles. Assuming that is as steep as this bike will normally see, and that it won't be carrying luggage, does that still sound "triple-worthy"?

Should I save the money and just become a better rider? (Quick estimate: changing my plans to do a triple, all Record, will cost $150 crank + $100 bottom bracket + $??? rear dérailleur + $50 front dérailleur LESS whatever I can save with patience and eBay). Yes, this is an invitation to give me tough love about my legs or lack thereof . . .

Ah, there we go. I kept re-reading the thread and looking at your profile, trying to figure out where you lived. That was my first instinct when I saw your original post...."where's this guy from?" For me it is simple: build the bike for the terrain in which you plan to ride it, and consider what's appropriate to your fitness level. I live in the mtns of western NC, and triples come in pretty handy here, my friend. I have a (not C&V) newer bike with a compact double (36/50), and those things will make a man outta you where I live. On the occasions when I have no triple available (like now when I'm between projects), I sure miss that 26 up front at the end of a day ride!

My 80s Japanese commuter has a 52/42 double. I've been thinking of switching it to a 48/36 or so. You can pick up some nice new cranks at Velo Orange, for example, but I'm just looking into swapping out some rings.

For me, the beauty I look for in bike gearing is functional elegance, which I define as a range that results in the bottom as well as top gears getting used regularly in actual riding, while not constraining maximum speed or ability to climb the prevailing maximum grades; in addition, adequately close spacing of ratios in the cruising range (for me, 70-85") that permits maintaining a comfortable & efficient cadence on the cruising portions of ride.
My gearing of choice is a 2 tooth spacing in the smaller (13-19) cogs, and 3 tooth spacing between the two large chainrings, e.g. 49-52. A 36T "granny" gives ample downward extension of the range. There is no need for significant cross-chaining, and all my triple combos use a standard cage RD.

Easier gears or a wider range do not make you a wimp, IMO. They do make riding more convenient and can let you use your power more effectively.

+1 Plenty of slow climbers can kick my butt.
You want the bike to get out of the way and not be a factor in the ride success. That includes difficulty in propulsion.
Getting to the end 5 minutes later because of a little higher spin on a climb just means "you get to ride 5 more minutes."

I mean, really, when it's over, you have to go back to The Real World. Why hurry?