Compact v Triple
- Thread starter Maz
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
HLaB
Marie Attoinette Fan
I would disagree there. I had a triple on my last roadbike (just a fixie roadbike at the mo) and I found the outer and middle rings fine for regular riding - but the inner ring was just too small - spinning like a lunatic when using it but the middle ring was just a little too big for some of the hills round here.
I like the sound of 50/36 though - sounds a good compromise.
Yellow Fang
Legendary Member
- Location
- Reading
I used to have a 52/39 chainset on my Ridgeback Genesis flat-barred fast commuter. The main thing I didn't like about it, at first, was that the LH gear indicator showed three gears, but I only had two. Later on I changed the flat bars for drops, and put Tiagra gear/brake levers on it. I found that I very rarely used the top gears, but often found myself struggling up hills in the bottom gear. I took the bike in to have a triple chainset, but by the time they quoted me for the new chainset, bottom bracket, front derailleur and back derailleur, I thought better of it. Later on I changed to a 50/36 compact. This seems pretty good. The 36 chainring seems small enough to get up most hills. A lot of triples look a bit naff, although there are some about where the inner ring is only a bit smaller than the middle ring and they look alright. If I was to put on a triple chainset, I would probably choose a very tight cassette, because the combination of a granny ring and dinner plate sprockets would make the bottom gears ridiculously small.
Chris James
Über Member
- Location
- Huddersfield
I suppose if nothing else this shows that we are all different. If the original poster finds that they rarely if ever use the granny ring of their triple then perhaps they would simply be best off going to a standard double?
After all a 39 /27 combination is approximately the same as a 30/21 so you only get two extra gears on a triple with a 12-25 cassette (as on my bike). The comments about never using the granny ring due to it being ridiculously low and just spinning like an idiot seem strange to me. I can cycle in 8 of my 10 sprockets on my granny ring and overlap with gears on a standard double -except that I get nice close ratios!
A lot of it depends where you live. Anyone can mash their way up a few steep hills but this becomes very tiring if you are doing lots of steep hills . I used to do all my cycling in my youth on a 5 gear Raleigh Winner - but then I lived at the edge of the Cheshire plain and only occasionally ventured into the Welsh hills. Now I live in the Pennines and it is a very different story.
Round my way most of my cycling involves going up and down steep hills - it is actually difficult to find any flat stretches of road. Consequently I spend a lot of my time in low gears and in my granny ring.
As far as a triple looking ugly, presumably to those riding fixed a double looks a terrible cluttered mess and they view those with geared bikes as pansies?
After all a 39 /27 combination is approximately the same as a 30/21 so you only get two extra gears on a triple with a 12-25 cassette (as on my bike). The comments about never using the granny ring due to it being ridiculously low and just spinning like an idiot seem strange to me. I can cycle in 8 of my 10 sprockets on my granny ring and overlap with gears on a standard double -except that I get nice close ratios!
A lot of it depends where you live. Anyone can mash their way up a few steep hills but this becomes very tiring if you are doing lots of steep hills . I used to do all my cycling in my youth on a 5 gear Raleigh Winner - but then I lived at the edge of the Cheshire plain and only occasionally ventured into the Welsh hills. Now I live in the Pennines and it is a very different story.
Round my way most of my cycling involves going up and down steep hills - it is actually difficult to find any flat stretches of road. Consequently I spend a lot of my time in low gears and in my granny ring.
As far as a triple looking ugly, presumably to those riding fixed a double looks a terrible cluttered mess and they view those with geared bikes as pansies?
- Location
- the post-brexit wasteland
on a practical point, it will be cheaper to go compact and get some lower gears at the back with the aid of a long arm rear mech, than it will be to go triple, which will require a new l/h shifter.
if you do go triple, you might find it worthwhile upgrading the whole groupset as it might actually work out cheaper than buying just the parts you need (it was in my experience).
if you do go triple, you might find it worthwhile upgrading the whole groupset as it might actually work out cheaper than buying just the parts you need (it was in my experience).
I ride a triple and am very glad I do. I don't race so I've no need for a race set up (ie 53-39). My triple is 50-39-30 (although I might change the 50 for a 52 soon). I'm pretty fit and can get over pretty much anything in the 39 but the 30 provides a nice bit of security and has come in useful on occassion.
A mate recently bought a compact - beautiful bike but the amount of chain crossover going on didn't seem very good at all too me. On a stanadard compact (50-34, 12-25) the ratios seem to necessitate lots of crossover as the standard gears (ie 66ish inches) are located at a point on both chainwheels which mean any rear change leads to crossover or having to change the front plate as well.
A mate recently bought a compact - beautiful bike but the amount of chain crossover going on didn't seem very good at all too me. On a stanadard compact (50-34, 12-25) the ratios seem to necessitate lots of crossover as the standard gears (ie 66ish inches) are located at a point on both chainwheels which mean any rear change leads to crossover or having to change the front plate as well.
