Allez '09 - dble or triple?

[bonj2]

I take great pleasure when on sportives in cycling past people with double (or compact) chainsets who are walking up the steepest hills. This happens often. With my triple I never walk.

If in any doubt, get a triple. Those who snub triples are either:

1) Very fit
2) Rarely ride steep hills
3) Bike snobs
4) Weight over function victims

no prizes for guessing who on this thread not only fits into, but is the definition of, (3)...

 

[Tynan]

I've used the small end of a triple once ever, Ditchling Beacon when knackered and with tossers walking all over the road

Apart from that I've never got off the big one in London, granted there's hills out there that I've never seen

 

[Steve Austin]

I don't see the point in in triples for on the road, unless its for touring. A compact double (50/34) is fine.

There is nothing wrong with riding a triple, its just very unnecessary on the road

 

[bonj2]

compacts result in a bad chainline most of the time

 

[Smokin Joe]

compacts result in a bad chainline most of the time

Nonsense.

It's only a double with smaller rings and if you choose your ratios sensibly your chainline will not be a problem.

 

[coldash]

Good move getting the triple. I can't get on with the jump in ratios when changing between the 50 and the 34 chain rings on a compact. I have 52 and 42 (as well as a 30) chain rings on my triple and, on a 16 rear cog, the ratio changes from 88 to 71 for the 52/42 rings. On a compact, the ratio change is 84 to 57. I can't be bothered having to change over a couple of rear cogs to compensate for the gap when using a compact.

I can't really see the point of compacts. If you need the low ratios (and I do), you might as well get a triple and enjoy the more useful ratio gaps when changing between chain rings.

 

[water]

I don't see the point in in triples for on the road, unless its for touring. A compact double (50/34) is fine.

There is nothing wrong with riding a triple, its just very unnecessary on the road

This,without wishing to appear rude,has got to be one of the least informed and more absurd statements of so called advice I have heard on the eternal double/triple 'debate'.Knowing next to nothing about the OP's age/fitness/health/intended useage you feel qualified to make the above statement?.
I see he has bought a triple.I have no idea whether he 'needs' a triple or not [and neither does he] but in future why not try at least to have some reasoned and informed discussion when someone like Weswardbound asks for advice



PS.I learned,on another forum,that in the not too distant past triple chainsets were 'employed' by a few riders on some of the mountain stages of the Tour de France.In the Tour de France FFS !!!.By the elite of elite in road cycling !!!!.
But some people on cycling forums would consider them wimps,eh ?!!!

 

[Smokin Joe]

Triples have indeed been used by the pros, but not because they climb faster with a granny gear. On the mountain stages they are sometimes used in the wet because the lower gears keep the back tyre from spinning up on the steeper sections. The Giro is the main event where teams have a supply of triples standing by for this reason, as some of the gradients can be 20% and there is often snow on the higher passes.

 

[water]

Triples have indeed been used by the pros, but not because they climb faster with a granny gear. On the mountain stages they are sometimes used in the wet because the lower gears keep the back tyre from spinning up on the steeper sections. The Giro is the main event where teams have a supply of triples standing by for this reason, as some of the gradients can be 20% and there is often snow on the higher passes.

Your point being ? [in regard to Westwardbounds' doubts re triple/double and Steve Austins 'advice'].
Listen,if ANY pro rider,at ANY time chooses to use a triple its because he thinks it will help him cycle more efficiently.And these are guys that,using only one leg,could leave Steve Austin for dead !.
The wannabee racers on cycling forums,in the BEGINNERS sections of cycling forums,offering advice that triples are " just very unnecessary on the road" without taking anything other than their own prejudices and insecurities into account are helping nobody.Use whatever gears you need, to enjoy your cycling.Why is this so difficult for some people to accept?.

 

[Smokin Joe]

My point being that they use triples to stop the back tyre spinning in the wet on the steeper slopes, exactly what I said in fact.

As for offering advice, people can offer any advice they feel appropriate to the question. There will also be someone with a counter argument and it is up to the person who posted the question to follow that which they think suits them. You triple people do get rather tetchy when people disagree with you.

 

[water]

My point being that they use triples to stop the back tyre spinning in the wet on the steeper slopes, exactly what I said in fact.

As for offering advice, people can offer any advice they feel appropriate to the question. There will also be someone with a counter argument and it is up to the person who posted the question to follow that which they think suits them. You triple people do get rather tetchy when people disagree with you.

Ah well,one can but try to enter into a reasoned debate.But I had a niggling feeling it would end up sidestepping the original intent of Westardbounds dilemma and totally ignore,as usual,the type of non-sense,one-size-fits-all 'advice' offered up.
Lest there be any doubts about what we are talking about I offer again the advice give by Steve Austin :

Originally Posted by Steve Austin View Post
I don't see the point in in triples for on the road, unless its for touring. A compact double (50/34) is fine.

There is nothing wrong with riding a triple, its just very unnecessary on the road

 

[Steve Austin]

I seem to have rattled your cage somewhat. The thing about opinions is everyone is entitled to one.

I think triples are unnecessary on the road. They are unnecessary offroad ime as well. I would even do so far as to suggest triples are unnecessary for touring, but of course i'm not entitled to suggest that. Happy riding

 

[Steve Austin]

Anyway Water, do you think Triples should be the suggested for all roadbikes? I think thats what you are suggesting

 

[dodgy]

An excellent compromise is a compact chainset (50/34) with a 12/27 on the back. Anything's got to be better than destroying the aesthetics of a beautiful road bike

Dave.

 

[water]

I seem to have rattled your cage somewhat. The thing about opinions is everyone is entitled to one.

I think triples are unnecessary on the road. They are unnecessary offroad ime as well. I would even do so far as to suggest triples are unnecessary for touring, but of course i'm not entitled to suggest that. Happy riding

It would take better than you to rattle my cage.And,whether tongue in cheek or not,most reasonable people reading the above will make up their own minds about its value in the context of which we are speaking [ie not your needs,or Steve Austins]