the brakes must be nice
compared to your youth spent on
a penny farthing

Bless you!

I would add that manufacturers can't seem to get it right. Campagnolo recently re-entered the triple game, but making the same fundamental mistake that Shimano has been making... i.e. riders that would want a 52-39-30 triple don't want a triple. The only possible advantage to a triple for a rider pushing as 52t or 53t large chainring is that they can run a tighter cluster in the back.

For touring/commuter riders, a 48t +/- 2 is a much better sized large chain ring, paired with a middle ring that can go smaller than 38t and a granny smaller than 30. There's definitely a demand for this type of gearing, and yet that's generally not what gets made (FSA and Sugino being current exceptions, but each have other faults).

Personally, I think a big part of the disappearance of triples is simply bad combinations on the minimal offerings available. Where are the outboard bracket triple cranks with 110BCD middler/outer chainrings and forged chain rings? Industry abandoned the triple-rider, not the other way around. What did the triples in was the move to a set spindle length for the use in outboard bearing setups... can't even use a "triple-izer" chain ring with those.

I did have a new bike with a cotter pin crankset , but it was already with a 3 speed Hub in a equal sized back wheel.

From the BP site,it looks like he has a short cage derailleur,that would prolly need to be changed for a 30+ cassette.

Pretty sure you'd need to swap the BB as well.

Used to regularly spin out 46/11 on my cross bike. Portland ain't DC.

threegz,I'd just swap the small ring and maybe go with a whatever-28 cassette. Quick,easy,not too expensive.

Good call. Compacts are for people who want lower gears, but don't want to be seen with a triple.

That's my opinion too, but in less complimentary terms. From the manufacturer's point of view, 2 rings = cheaper to produce.

True as that may be (and there's the "fewer SKUs" argument as well), a company like Shimano wouldn't go out of business if they offered more high-quality triples. They just aren't interested, I guess.

You are shopping for each, they listen more to Manufacturers ordering Truck loads, ie thousands.

OEM prices for large lots are less too..

Compact??? I'll gladly give you my 34/23 compact today for your Triple on Tuesday! Hills are tough!

There are zillions of these. They are "trekking" or hybrid cranksets, built on mountain bike cranks. From Shimano they are available up to XT level. I have an Acera level version on my recently-de-commuterized MTB.

Looking at Shimano's site, there are also still XT level V brakes (BR-T780). I had no idea.

Not really. While most mtb cranks do go up to 48t in theory, finding one is a different thing entirely. Most MTB cranks are running 44t max on the triples. Also, going back to something I stated in the same post, I'm looking for a 110 BCD triple; I'd probably stick with a 48t ring but I like the ability to cheaply throw on a 50t as well. I also want an external cup BB that is made for a 68mm shell, not 73mm. I'm being very specific in saying that I want a ROAD not MTB triple that will allow a smaller than 38t middle ring. My point was that a 52/39/30 triple is missing the target. Sure, a MTB crank is another option, but it also misses the mark due to BB width and readily available chainring sizes (not to mention aesthetics, the mtb cranks are ugly). I'd also like to stick to a road front derailleur... I would only seriously consider a mtb crank if I wanted a 44t big ring or got a really good deal on something.

I suppose we disagree, but I think manufacturers are missing a market. Whatever the case, I didn't say that there were no options... but I strongly disagree that there are zillions that meet my criteria (or even 50% of my criteria).

I hear ya. Some people want the 110/58 so they can use that 24T granny and a 48T or 50T big gear. It was used for touring bikes. That size is still around, but can be very challenging to find, especially in higher quality sets.

I think the 110mm triple is the best choice for recreational road riding. MTBs used to come with 110mm until the mid nineties. Normal gearing in the late 80s and early nineties would be 46 36 26 or similar. Modern 110mm doubles are usually 50 34, and I think is just about a perfect ratio for recreational road riding, can only made better by an extra real out gear like a 26 or 24.

I've been debating this same thing for my current build. I really wanted to do road cranks and road RD but there really isn't a good triple option out there with the combo that I want. I'm running Shimano LX (MTB) 48/36/26 with a 11-34 cassette. Most of the time, I never use the 26/34 option but there are times when I'm tired and I just like to spin. Most of the road triples that I've looked at (Ultegra) are in the 52/39/30 range. If I were to go with that setup use an Ultegra FD and long reach RD, I think I could get away with an 11/32 but the chain would have to be crazy long to accommodate that.

With a compact double 50/34, I would lose that really low gear and I think that's something I would miss -- especially on those days I'm really tired.

So after some soul searching, I've decided to just stick to the MTB drivetrain and keep the same type of setup since this is what I ride now and I like the gearing. One can get XT level cranks. The difference in weight between LX and XT is ~300 grams for the weight weenies. The XT level cranks weigh about the same as the Ultegra triples ~650 g. The issue is that in the US, LX is about as good as you can get. I can get the XT cranks on ebay but they are shipped from the UK. I agree, it seems like component mfg. have forgotten about the triple setup.

If you're interested in the XT cranks, the p/n is FC-T780 Note the T. If you look for M, you'll get the 44T chainring. And you'll need the appropriate FD and that p/n is FD-T780 Again, note the T. The T is for Trekking and M is for MTB. If you do choose the wrong FD, it will still shift the chain, the shifts just aren't clean. There will be a slight hitch going from the small chainring to the middle ring. I made that mistake on my current bike. I've tuned it the best I can and can live with it.

Thanks for the tip regarding T vs M, I never noticed that one.

I prefer Campy shifters, so I'm either using IRD Alpina or a Campy triple FD with my builds. I'm not a big fan of how Shimano triple FDs work (although I like their chainrings and HT2). I do like Shimano shifters when used with a flatbar setup. ahhhhhh the joy of making components work together that weren't designed to work together.

I have a 50/39/24 and a 48/38/22 on my two bikes. I find very little issues shifting and highly recommend it as you basically have a double with a bail out gear.

+1 to keeping the triple. I'd vote for a 26t chainring replacement for the 30t you currently have. I spend a lot of time in my 39t chainring and 12-27. 53t chainring is for downhills and no-wind flats. The 26t chainring is for longish climbs, say 2 miles of 9-10%, or steep pitches. My Volagi came with a Compact, but at 69 I don't have the strength in rolling terrain to ride exclusively in a 50t chainring so I would be constantly switching up front. The 39t has solved that problem.

I went from a compact to a triple, and am back to a compact. Make no mistake, the triple made the big steep hills more doable. The reason I went back to a compact is thats what came on my new bike, I was worried that the climbs would be too difficult, while they are a little tougher, still doable. For anything but the steep stuff (10 to 19% grade) there is really no issues.
Long story short, a compact wont "help" it will make things more difficult (steep climbs), good luck, and keep riding!

On my mountain bike i have put road crank. 52/42. And i have 7 speeds cassete 13-26. But i want put 9 speeds cassete with spare wheel i have if i can make working. But i want put crank 53/39/30 and 9 speeds cassete 12-23 or 13-23. I not know if i can found 13-23. If i do that start the cassete from 13 i lose too much top speed because no go have the 12? I have hear that 16 and 18 cog is good for cruise and i want have that cogs in the cassete see how is the ride. Some times i ride in hilly trail in steep hill i had one day my mountain bike. I ride uphill and i stayed on the seat i tried the 52 with the 26. I go uphill fast too for heavy steel mountain bike. Because with the cassete i have just the 23 cog for hills is good i have triple crank on my bike and i have the 30 on the crank in case i need low gear in the hills?

Shimano also make, or did make an LX level group T661. A nice looking compact triple but I've only seen them on the UK sites. With the current popularity of "gravel grinding" there might be some demand for the Trekking groups here in the US.

Yes, they do make an LX. I have one on my Giant. I bought it on ebay from a seller on Taiwan. It took a couple of weeks to get here. It's a nice looking crankset.

Here it is on my bike:

I have a '96 Trek 1220 that's has 46/36/26 chainrings and I put a 12/28 cassette on it, can climb anything. Keep the triple, add larger cassette or smaller chainring.

I was running a 105 FD with an MTB 48-38-26 and it was ok. Not really happy but functional. Switched up to a 53-39-30 and its much happier though with wide range cassette I've run out of chain wrap so the bottom 3 gears on the small ring need to be avoided. Not a big issue given I have a huge range of ratios to play with. You can make a road derailler work with an mtb crank. Equally the older (9 speed and lower) Shimano mtb deraillers work great with most any shifter if you avoid the newer groupsets.