To Get a Triple or Not?
 

When I returned to cycling awhile back and bought a new bike I was asked if I wanted a triple. I said sure, why not? Since, I've used the granny ring only cause I felt bad for neglecting it. I've never experienced or felt the necessity of it. But still, when I built up my next bike, I put a triple on it.

I'm thinking about getting a new crankset. I cannot help but to feel I need a triple on the basis of, ya never know, one day I'll be in dire need of it.

Can anyone support my psychological dependence on a triple? Can anyone disabuse me of it?

I've ridden a triple on two occassions. I can't figure out how anyone can stand how the shifter sometimes skips over the middle ring. Doubles are more fool proof in this respect.

If you want to split the difference get a compact. I'd suggest a compact specific front derailleur as well.

There is no psychological dependence for me...its physical. I have ridden all of them and prefer a triple for overall riding. If you never ride on hills, you won't likely ever need a triple. A compact is a good compromise but I believe it is just that...a compromise. I think many don't like a triple because of ego...complexity...not set up properly....don't know how to shift them etc. They are wonderful when set up properly and you learn to shift them. Small ring is great for climbing...mid ring great for flats and rollers...and big ring great for standing and sprinting with lower cadence and for maximum speed on flats and descending.
George

See, that's the issue, I don't know where I will one day find myself where there will be a need. I regularly ride hilly terrain featuring some pretty steep inclines, but the middle ring without serious cross chaining has more than sufficed ... but no doubt, not the most challenging terrain.

My wife has a 50/34 CT with a 12-25 cassette, and she climbs some of the biggest hills around here right along with me. I personally think the CT is not a compromise, but an improvement for those who want better climbing capabilities, but not the shifting hassle and weight of a triple.

Your wife must be in shape and light. A 34-25 just isn't going to provide the gearing a triple with 30-26 will which is necessary for some on the really steep and long stuff after 30 miles of riding into a cold stiff wind. A compact is a compromise in terms of gearing. Some believe a compact is just a marketing gimmick i.e. if limited to two chainrings up front, better to find a gearing sweet spot for a given rider by changing the rear cassette and sticking with a std. double. I wouldn't go that far but I have ridden them and while I can ride anything prefer a triple. Its good to have choices. Any cyclist doesn't know what is best for he or she until they try a given configuration and decide what they like best.
George

Weight? I guess I could care less about a couple ounces.

I've got three bikes with triples, the oldest being a 1982 (bought new in '82). All three shift fine. I'm not sure what shifting hassles you are talking about. Certainly one more gear can't make it significantly more complicated or people would be hating the 9sp and 10sp rear cogs.

I like my triples. Although I rarely use them, they are there for those massive hills that sometimes find thier way into my rides. In fact our cabin, which is just a couple hundred yards off one of the roads in North Georgia where they race the Tour de Georgia, features a 21% grade. It's so steep my car can barely make it up. Without the triple, I'd be walking.

Az

Ok, so get a 12-27 cassette. That's pretty darn close. So close, I doubt the average person would ever notice.
And yes, my wife is in good shape, but she's not a Pro either.

The OP admittedly said he used the small ring only because he felt he was neglecting it, and didn't really need it. With that being the case, my initial suggestion of a 50/34 CT and 12-25 cassette, still stands as the best option for what he's looking for.

IMHO, compact double w/ 11-21 or 11-23 cassette should work fine. I'm thinking about this combo myself, but right now, I've been able to stick w/the bike club on climbs (running 39/53T x 11-25), so I'll hold on to that idea until I get older and/or fatter.

To me the issue is not weight but ease of use. If you are really good at shifting a triple then by all means go for it.

For me shifting a double is a no brainer. You don't have to worry about pushing the shifter lever too much.

As far as CT front derailleur goes.....I just think its a better design. I'm not sure it shifts noticeably better . More likely setting it up is easier though.

You are correct in your assessment of the feel in the shifting of a CT der vs standard ders. However, the main thing the CT helps provide, is a much quicker downshift with less concern for dropping the chain. My wifes bike used a standard Centaur der for about a year, and no matter how much I fiddled and adjusted, she would still have more than normal ocassion of dropping the chain on the downshift. The CT der has a bit of extra metal on the inside of the der cage to catch the chain, thus prventing it from dropping and scratching the BB shell. It really does work much better.

Some folks prefer compacts, others triples. I've never come across objective proof that one is "better" than the other. I have 105 and Chorus triples, with nary a problem shifting with either system, and I'm too old to have an ego problem with granny gears. Besides, I'm entitled to grannies, as my second grandchild is on the way.

So the small ring is there but you don't use it much. If you're not a weight weenie, so what? You can certainly stay with what you know, with the small ring being there if and when you might need it, as you say. Doesn't seem like a big deal to me. Either way, you can get pretty much the same gearing options, if you want to tinker with the various cassette/crank choices people have suggested. If you have the gears you need, it doesn't really matter how you get there.

So throw on a 12-27 cassette with the compact. It is only 2.8 gear inches bigger than the 30x26.

I live in a pretty hilly area (no real mountains, but neverending rollers and steep climbs), and am still about 20 pounds heavier than I would like to be.....and am currently running a compact w/ 12-25 cassette, and haven't had any issues.....well, other than I could use an 11T small cog in the back, because I spin out at about 40 mph on the downhill sections.

Again, it comes down to where you ride and your fitness level. I ride a triple 52-42-30 x 12-26 and there are times I'm in 30x26 wishing there was more available to me. There are some riders around here who ride doubles and I am quite impressed. I, however, love my knees and ain't getting any younger!! As for the easy of use, I have to agree that shifting is more complicated but I am not racing and a couple extra seconds to get the right gear is worth the effort. It is better than walking up the hills!!

I have a triple on my Felt and am fine with it. It has a 105 drivetrain and there are no shifting issues. I like having the extra gears when I need them or I have over-extended myself long before my ride is over! I dont really understand why you wouldnt want them for fitness or recreational riding.

I think triples are great. I've been using an Ultegra 52-42-30 with 12-25 cogset for five years. I love to spin and transitioning from the middle to the granny (I forget the combo) is as seamless as it gets. There's a bit more weight, but if you ride lots of hills, worth it. I've been on monstrous hills spinning happily (still hurting) at 6 mph while others in standard doubles are doing all they can not to fall over. Never mind that they're slower! I'm currently using a compact double. It doesn't go as low (34x25), and I haven't found the sweetspot yet for switching rings. Still dunno if I made the right move...YMMV

I have a triple on my rain bike 50/40/30 with a 12-25 in the back... It gives me super low gearing for the once in a while when I just want to spin up a hill, and at the top end I still get a couple more gear inches than on my other bike with 53/39 - 13-26. While I rarely need to drop to the 30t, there are times when it comes in handy.

I just went from the FSA triple to the 53x39 double. I actually used the granny ring so little, I had moved to an 12x23 9s cassette just to make the granny useful. Now I'll be on the ultegra groupset 53x39 with a 12x25 10s. So, by doing the switch, I basically lost the 30x21 and 30x23 gears. Everything else was comparable.

If you want to know if you need the lower gearing, try what I did and spend some money on the cassette change first. When I did it, I went out and attacked some of our 14-15% grades just to confirm what I suspected. I was only using the granny as a "bail out" for pain tolerance. When I didn't have the extra gearing, I didn't use it and still got over the hills. A little more tired maybe? But, its forcing me to train harder now.

On a side note, I never have been happy with the way my 105 FD/FSA triple shifted. It's always been slightly finicky. I pick up my bike tomorrow with the new ultegra double/10s drivetrain tomorrow and I'm stoked.

VW

Reading the posts, I'm on my way to a reliance on the conviction that I'll stick with the triple for the possiblity that I might find it useful one day. I'm not so concerned about the additional weight and my (new(ish) but 9sp) DA shifters, DA rd, Chorus fd, properly tuned, move the chain nearly flawlessly.

Probably a bigger issue is what is the best ring for everyday use. I think the 39T to 42T range is where you want to be. A 34T in a compact is pretty low, so you'd better be fit to turn that 50T or 52T big ring all the time.

Extra weight of a triple? only 86 grams or about 1 mouthfull of water. Shifting issues between the compact and a triple? My triple shifts like silk, the change in the number of teeth between my 52T-39T-30T is less in each shift than between the 50T-34T so I think the triple shifts as well if not better than the compact. Other issues? The triple has a chainline that is 2.5 mm different and the long cage RD weights 10 grams more. It does't bother me.

You can have your cake and eat it too. Get a triple, when you're tired of it, take the 30T ring off and set your limit screw so you can't shift on it. Now you have a double and have recovered half of the 86 grams. Plus you can always go back.

Bottom line, if you need to climb big hills and keep your cadence up in the 80+ range most of us need that granny.

I couldn't have said it better myself. I went through the exact same thing, and you know what? I am so much happier with my 53x39 than I was with my triple.

I was schmoozing around on-line (read: not working and dreaming of the outdoors) and found an Ultegra on sale at nashbar.com. I could care less about weight/more gears/AllThatCrapEveryoneArguesAboutBetweenTripleandDouble and had never ridden a double, but comm'on... 65% off?!? I couldn't pass it up.

I dropped that bad boy on and BAM! I was off. My legs were burning for a bit, but since I didn't have that crutch...hhmmpphh... I mean third ring... to bad for me. I cranked it out and eventually got to the top.

Now, about a month or so later, I don't even think about the granny.

No burn.

Bigger legs.

Faster avg. with the 53

= me a better rider.

ya only need one gear. truly. 44x16 fixed (or whatever ya like for your terrain). but don't coast. you can sleep when you're dead!:) :D :)

It's flat here so I got rid of my triple. Now I've got a 53/39 double with a 12-25 cog on my race bike and my commuter is a fixie (41-15 = 71 gear inches). But as I said, it's flat here.

Only your legs can tell you whether you need a 30t chainring. I don't, so I got rid of it.

I personally don't want to go to a triple. I've been riding on a double since I was 12 years old, so I'm sure I can handle it now. Right now I can make it up all the hills I did before, just often as slow as 6 mph and 50 rpm, which I'm sure will improve. But I do live in the hills and the 12-23 just isn't cutting it. Since I think my RD is a short cage, does anyone know how big of a rear cog I can get away with?

And I might have completely missed the boat, but I thought the compact was introduced first to MTBs for better rock clearance and had smaller cogs to match, then roadies started using it for the lightweight. Isn't that what it's still marketed for and some people just use it to get the lower gearing they desire? Or are the manufacturers actually marketing it as a climbing option?