Okay so this might sound like a stupid question to some of you, but I'm goin' for it anyways. So I think my first road bike is going to be a WSD Cannondale Synapse 7. That being said, my LBS has the same price for a Triple and a Compact. Even after some research, I'm still struggling to decide so I still wanted to get everyone's opinion. Keep in mind that I live pretty close to the shore so I have a few big hills to climb if I want to ride anywhere.
Thanks everyone!

Big Hills = Triple

https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...!!!?p=12827210

"First road bike" = triple. I almost guarantee if you get the triple you will not wish you had the compact, at least not in the first year. But if you get the compact, you could well wish you had gotten the triple.

It's much cheaper to switch a triple to a compact than to change a compact into a triple. So if you're not sure, start with the triple.

The weight difference is negligible between the two. I like having another set of gears...
My friends all laughed at me when I installed a triple crank on my Viner back in the 80's.
They stopped laughing when I passed them all going uphill. ;P

Thanks everyone. Triple it is!

For starters a triple is a good choice, but after you have had it for a few years, you will probably want to replace it with a compact. I have had a triple for five years and now want to replace it with a compact. The compact will be more useful for me now and will weigh a few pounds less. I have a Campy Chorus triple and will be upgrading to a Campy Record 11 speed compact.

The weight difference between a 2006 Campy Chorus triple and 2011 Campy Record 11 compact is quite a bit since the 11 speed uses the Ultra Torque bottom bracket.

Still, not much of a difference between a triple and compact double. If you're dying on a steep climb with a compact double, you'll be dying 98% of the same degree on a triple.

Definitely better than a standard, though.

Yep. If your starting out. Triple is the way to go.
I'm in the process of changing all mine but one over to compact because I almost never use the small ring any more.

But when I got back into cycling about 6 months ago after 20 years away, I used it all the time.

As you get stronger, you can switch them over to compact if you want to save a tad of weight.

I have both and I live and ride in a hilly area. There is no shortage of big hills.

The triple rocks. It's kind of like this: A triple gives you the range of gearing that goes above and beyond a compact. You have the granny gear and you have the big top gear. Yet, you also have that middle ring that allows you to have a wider range of gears in the flats.

The Compact Crankset is really a compromise. It sacrifices the big top gear and the granny low gear. However, it saves weight, makes tuning the front DR easier, and if you are a strong rider and don't climb mountains regularly, it does just fine.

Pick your poison. I believe all entry level bikes should have a triple. It should also be an option in most bikes.

It has no effect on the big ring. Average setup is 53/39 on the compact and 53/30 on the triple. You loose the low ring but not much

Shouldn't that be 50/34 on the compact? (I thought 53/39 was a normal double like you'd find on 70's and 80's roadbikes...)

Regardless, +1 on the Triple (I have one on my touring/Rando bike - saves my bacon a) on big gnasty hills and b) at the end of a long long ride and I'm running out of juice). For that matter, you don't necessarily need to replace it once you get stronger...just simply don't shift into granny gear...unless ego gets in the way, which is sort of my affliction, at times

50/34 is compact and 53/39 is standard.

Cannondale's triple I believe is 50/39/30.

Well yes I will give you that. In most cases it's lower. It actually refers to the spacing of the chain ring bolt pattern. You can buy pretty much any ring-T you want. SO OK I consed to your post.

Or, as you get stronger, you can replace your cassette with a more narrow range cassette for more cadencing options, which reduces a tiny bit of weight, but more importantly, has a functional advantage as well.

start with a triple.

Yeah, this bike isn't going to be my primary road bike forever so I think I will start out with a triple and then when I am ready to move on (and save up some moolah) I might try a higher end compact. Thanks to everyone for helping me out The explanations and advice really helps, especially since I have no experience with any road bikes.

I've heard triples are a PITA to keep tuned. True?

Only if you don't know what your doing.

My Campy triple was put on my bike four years ago and it hasn't needed adjustment yet and works the same as the day it was put on.

Unless you live on the side of a mountain I would go compact from the start and put a 28 on the back.

Play with this https://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/ and think it through

I started w/ a triple and wish I'd started w/ a compact.

With a 50/34 crank and an 11/28 cassette, I don't see how the biggest gear isn't big enough and the smallest gear isn't small/granny enough.

Also, between me and various mechanics in MA, CA, TX and CO, no one could seem to get the FD in tune. Maybe it was because it was Shimano?? -- which I disliked for other reasons as well.

Though it'd also help knowing the OP's current abilities and goals (especially regarding climbing).

Compact with cassette that has plenty of low end oomph.

You've already said you'll upgrade anyway, so why spend the money twice?

If your goal is to become a better cyclist, then aim for it and don't let the gear give you an option that'll just hold you back.

sounds like you had incompetent mechanics.

to the OP, i say: i would opt for a compact crankset and then buy a larger (or smaller) cassette, and an extra chain. this way you have gearing for different riding, and you save money by not having to buy a new crankset.