mblk6062

OK Guys, I'd like everyone's feedback who has experience with the following scenario:

I've been riding a standard double (53/39) for years, until I recently bought a new bike with a triple. So far, I just can't justify the "granny ring" as I live on the Gulf Coast of Texas and don't do that much climbing. I do however, ride the Houston-Austin MS150 every year, which has a fair degree of hillwork, and the older I get (46 now), the more I think that granny gear might be nice to have - for that ride. Since I've been riding the triple though, it seems that the gear changes are just not as crisp as the double was - and I'm only talking about between the big and middle rings - I've only used the GG once or twice. My bike (Spec Roubaix) was built out and set up by a top notch Spec Concept store, so I don't think it is a setup issue.

I've read that a compact set up gives you 95% of the gear range of a triple, without the added weight and chain angle/shifting issues. Who can give me some insight into whether their experience with this is true? Would I be better off with a compact or a triple? With a Compact, do you lose much (or any) range/speed in the big ring versus what you might pick up in climbing ability in the little ring?

BTW, I am not a racer, I strictly ride because I love it, but am also semi-competitive within my riding group (Alright - I'm a beer racer! - I can't afford to buy beer for the group every time I come in last!). Right now, I'm leaning towards replacing the triple with a compact setup.
Advice?

Jarery

A compact is nice, you can go to sheldons site and use the gear inch calculator to comapare your triple vs whatever compact your interested in. You can swap out your rear cassette to make up what your losing, to an extent.

But its a lot of extra expense to end up with less gearing than you have now. It will shift crisper, but i also find a double shifts nice than a compact.

johnny99

Not true. A compact crank usually has 50/34 rings (16 tooth range) and a triple usually has 52/39/30 rings (22 tooth range). 16/22 = 0.727, i.e., the compact has 72.7% of the range of a triple (much less than 95%). The triple will have 1 more gear at the fast end and 2 more gears at the low (mountain climbing) end of the range. If you're climbing long steep grades and you're not in great shape, those 2 extra gears may mean the difference between finishing the climb and walking. Real cyclists never walk.

Regarding shifting, a compact crank has a bigger gap between rings than the triple does. I have seen people drop chains with both setups. I don't think the compact has any advantages in this area.

Personally, if I only needed low gearing once a year, I would just mount a mountain bike cassette (and dérailleur) that day. Use a regular double with a normal cassette the rest of the year. That setup will work with Shimano shifters.

FlashBazbo

In recent years, I've done a couple of triples and I've done two different compacts -- 50/36 and 50/34. I ride in big hills every time I ride, but there are mountains in the area (and the mountains are tempting me back toward a triple). Here are my experiences:

Doubles and compacts do shift better and their chain angles are easier to manage (trim adjustments). For me, this is the biggest advantage of having two rings on the front. Probably the only advantage that you would really notice. The weight difference just isn't significant. (Oh, but you can avoid that triple stigma that might come if you encounter immature double riders.)

The advantages of the triple? Obviously, one is the wider range of ratios. Another huge advantage, though, is the ability to have close ratios like you have on a conventional double ring. With the overlap of ratios and ratios that are closely spaced, it is far easier to find that optimum ratio to keep your best cadence.

In my area, with pretty big hills, a triple is not necessary if I stay off the mountains BUT -- I climb the steepest parts of the really big hills faster on my 29er triple than on my road bike compact. I used to live in Houston and I can't imagine a triple being necessary there or in the Austin area. (I'm older than you are.)

A 50/36 compact setup provides decent overlap and ratios close enough to keep my cadence in an optimum range at any speed. A 50/34 compact has a serious gap between front rings and finding that optimum gear for a given speed can be a lot more of a hassle. (To stay close in ratio after a ring change requires four cog changes in the rear.)

For 99% of Texas, I would give the edge to a compact crank. If you make that trip to hillier areas, you can switch rear cassettes in less than five minutes. If I didn't want to race on the big mountains of Tennessee, the compact crank would be the clear choice here, too.

badkarma

You're from Texas, so I'm going to assume it's fairly flat where you live. If so, then a comp. double will do you just fine. I went from a triple to a comp. double (50/36), and I had no problems even navigating the hills of central PA. Yeah, there's a weight savings from a triple to a double, but the reason I like the doubles so much more is that there's less shifting involved to go from top end to bottom end as you're only navigating through two chainrings, as opposed to three.

If you were to get a comp. double, and you decide you need slightly higher gearing, then replace your rear cassette with a 11-23, that should give you all the gearing you need.

DMF 

Same group?

The difference in shifting (between top two rings) is a myth. There is no reason that a triple and a double can't shift equally well - or poorly - provided the difference between rings (in T) is equivalent. (Because of the larger difference, I suspect that compacts don't shift as well as either.)

With a compact, you'd be giving away gears that you do use.

I'd tweak the shifting and keep the triple. Would you remove the top two gears of a 6-speed transmission because you rarely go fast enough to use them?

DMF 

You should give up ten gears so you don't have to shift into them.

Wow! That makes a lot of sense.

Markedoc

I would have stayed with the 53/39 that you were happy with vs. getting a triple that is only somewhat useful for one 150 mile event. But that's just me.

badkarma

If you can do with 20 what you did with 30, why carry the extra chainring....??

stapfam

I know it depends on the severity of your hills- how fit you are- and that age thing comes in again. I ride on hills that are generaly around 12% with the odd 15% thrown in. Not long ones but 1 mile at 15% as your third hill of the morning can get through to you.

On my hills and my legs- I have no objection in taking my granny out for a ride. 30/27 is a lot lower than a compact 34/27. But I'll let you know when the new bike comes that has a compact double being fitted to it.

Dubbayoo

+1. If you are 'just about' getting by with a standard double I would think a compact would provide plenty of gearing. Get what you need, not what people say you should need. I have a compact and I could definitely use a triple around here with my size/fitness level.

DocRay

if this is just an occasional need, just put on a larger cassette, 13-29.

Stray Cat

Medium RD needed for that as well, no?

urbanknight

I bought a bike with a double, but I'm no pro so I switched to a compact and a wide cassette. Now I have too big a jump between gears for my taste, so I should have gotten a triple. That's the difference

urbanknight

My 9 speed Campy Veloce short cage works with the 13-29, but the pulleys get pretty close to the 29. After all I've read, the medium or long cages are mostly for the taking up the wider range of chain slack on a triple. If that meant it also keeps the pulleys further from the cogs, it might be a good idea for a compact with a wide cassette, but not required.

Mhendricks

I found a Veloce 9-speed medium cage derailleur and used that with my 50-34 set-up. Not a problem.

DMF 

You completely miss the point, which is strange since it was your post that made the point.

You said, essentially, that the extra weight isn't a big deal; the reason you preferred the double is because "there's less shifting involved to go from top end to bottom end". I said, essentially, "that's a stupid argument". So now you're back to the weight. (Weightweenies, btw, shows that the extra weight is a mere 100g.)

Since neither of those reasons is your real reason, why not admit that you're afraid someone will laugh at your triple?

Dubbayoo

The question is - will people laugh at you harder for having a triple than they would laugh at you for walking up a hill because your double wasn't low enough?

bbattle

Gain ratios for a 50-34 with a 12-25 range from 8.2 to 2.7

Gain ratios for a 53-39-30 with a 12-25 range from 8.7 to 2.4 That's roughly a gear/gear and half lower and a gear higher.

A 53-39 with 12-25 will give you one higher gear but lose two lower gears over a compact.

Like somebody else posted, check out www.sheldonbrown.com/gears and calculate all the various gear combinations(it's really not that hard) and then consider your terrain and riding ability. Then pick the best crank for you.

bsyptak

My 2003 105 triple drivetrain shifts perfectly. I've never once dropped the chain. Your new stuff should shift perfectlier . Don't leave the shop until they get it right.

Remember, mountain bikes have had triples since the dawn of time. Nobody hears MTBers complaining about wanting to swap to a double (single speed riders excluded!) because of shifting problems. And MTB drivetrains get absolutely trashed. They work under way more stress than a road bike will ever see.

CardiacKid

I don't understand why bike shops in Houston even stock triples. The biggest hill within 100 miles is an overpass. But since you got it, I wouldn't waste the money changing. You are going to lose the high gears that you may need with your back to a 30 mph wind. You have to be able to outrun the mosquitoes.
If your shifts are actually slowing you down, there is something wrong. Have you had it tuned since you bought it. Most stores tell you to bring it in after the first 200 miles or so to get it adjusted.

Avalanche325

There are some good points made here. First of all, you need the right gearing for your terrain, fitness, and riding style.

Here are my points:

1. A triple has all the range AND you can run a tight cassette. A BIG plus.
The only thing not perfect with shifting is going on and off of the small ring. It is a big jump. But, you won't do it that often. There is no differance in shiftng on the rear. The middle to big, where you will do most of your front shifting, is a small jump.

2. Anyone that says that there is more shifting with a triple does not know how to use their gears. You actually don't have a 30 speed (triple) or 20 speed (double), you have 10 gears and 3 (triple) or 2 (double) speed ranges.

3. The middle ring on a triple gives you a really nice range of gears. Warm up spin to 23 or so MPH. If you are adjusted right, you can use the entire cassette.

4. The chainline on a triple is actually better. Your small/big and big/small have a better line. (Not that chainline means much of anything on a multi-speed bike)

5. When you are on a hill in the middle, and the next guy is on the small ring of a double, you're pushing the bigger ring. Who's the hairy man now!!!

I will admit a rarely hit my sissy ring any more on regular rides. But, on a century with 7000+ ft of climbing, it sure comes in handy. I have passed easily 100 people with doubles that couldn't make some of the climbs on centuries.

urbanknight

It must have been a while since you've ridden with a total newbie. I know people who would use the granny gear on a bridge.

superslomo

That might be going in my sig line

FWIW, you may someday travel to a place that actually does have hills y'know. I've been on vacation in places with mountains and even the granny gear left me feeling like throwing up from the exertion from time to time.

the engine

I have always used a triple (30 years now). Laugh if you want, but in my high school years I had surgery on both knees (football injuries), and I have always used the bicycle to keep my knees strong ... the triple has allowed me to "never walk" up a hill. I lived in the Appalachian for many of those years. I live in the flatlands now, but on some 8%-10% grades (though short) I do encounter, the triple is the ticket.

If I see you riding a triple, I'll understand. If I see you walking up a hill, I'll call you a "wussy" as I blow by you.