Do I really need a triple???

[BentMikey]

That's an improvement.

Three pages before someone trotted that old myth out again.

+1

Riding fixed tells you that it's bollocks.

 

[peanut]

possum I have read most of the other suggestions but although there is a wealth of experience and sound opinion it all comes down to what individual people use and are comfortable with themselves.

I would suggest something quite different.

I would suggest you ask the local bike shop if you can borrow a road bike for the day and go ride it round your usual circuit.
You will know immediately whether the gears you have on the bike will be sufficient or not for the type of riding you generally do.

Its a personal thing you see. No one can choose for you.

Ask to try a bike with a compact chainset (probably 50x34) and a suitable cassette like 12-27t
Ask the shop exactly what gearing the bike has got fitted so you can make a direct comparison.

If you are not convinced with the bike you tried then you have the option of going for a triple setup knowing a compact double isn't right for you on a road bike.

If you haven't ridden a road bike before as you say, you are in for the treat of your life. It will fly with so little effort you'll think it has an engine.

 

[wafflycat]

Triple.

All my steeds have triples. I once got very cross at a talk given by a locally well-known cycling 'guru' who told a whole pile of cyclists - including newbies, very old ladies, beginning tourers, experienced cyclists, commuters, that there was absolutely no need for anyone to have a triple as a double will get you up an alpine pass. I pointed out very loudly that he may well be fit enough to get up Alpe d'Huez on a double but I, for one, needed all the help I could get and there was nothing wrong in having a triple chainset.

One of the most horrible feelings I've had when cycling is being on a bike going up a hill, needing a lower gear and then realising there wasn't one, as I was on a double chainset. Never again.

Plus, as others have said, there is a current fashion for 'compact' double chainsets. One of the things I like about having a triple is that close ratio of gears, as it's easy for me to select a gear which is *entirely comfortable* to cycle in.

Doing a cycle tour in France, on a fully loaded tourer, I was very, very glad I had a granny ring.

 

[Fab Foodie]

+1

Riding fixed tells you that it's bollocks.

Agreed.

 

[Fab Foodie]

Disclaimer: It's impossible for anyone else to tell you exactly what your gearing needs are, or what gear you need to personally conquer a given incline.

However, beware of advice from people who say: I have a 39 X 26 and it gets me up anything. That's their experience; not yours.

Also beware those who say a compact double with the same ratios is the same thing as a triple. It's not.

This has been discussed endlessly, but here we go again:

A triple, over the same ratio spread has the advantage of closer spacing. This means that when you bail out of the big ring, on, say, a 50-40-30 triple, the drop is only 10 teeth, rather than the 16T drop from 50 to 34 on a compact double. Smaller difference (and 10 teeth is perfect IMHP) means you don't lose your cadence and end up spinning like hamster on a treadmill.

Mostly, I'm using the middle and big ring on the triple. Granny gets lonely, but is always there on a long ride, when an 18% grade pops up. In fact, when a very steep hill presents anywhere, I'm likely to spin
But, as I said, I have no idea what your needs are.

Agree with this, particularly the bold bit. Here again IMO the Triple wins for me because the compact's large drop between chainrings can lead to a big hole in the gear progression and a lot of double shifting. Whereas the gear progression on a triple is much simpler. In the middle ring you can use the whole cassette with ease and for most riding this is a simple way to go.
I don't see a disadvantage for a triple, wider gear range, closer ratios, easier progression. A small weight gain is neither here nor there.
Other than my fixed, on my road-bikes I've had 52/42 double, 53/39 double and 52/42/30 Triple The Triple is far the most flexible and easy to use, followed by the 52/42. The 53/39 was horrible as the gear I always seemed to want required more double shifting than I would have liked.

 

[MacB]

Fitness/age/physical health must be big factors in this as well as intended riding. I've noticed a lot of comments on here telling people not to worry about saving a couple of pounds on a frame, it would be easier/cheaper to lose the weight yourself. Does a triple weigh that much more than a double? From my starting point I know I wouldn't complete my commute without the granny ring. I also find spinning an easier gear less tiring than grinding, though I accept that may change as my fitness improves.

But one thing you can guarantee, if you get the triple you'll wonder why you bothered, if you don't you'll suddenly find a need for further gears.........it's call sods law........personally I'd rather have something I didn't need than need something I lacked.

 

[punkypossum]

Right, thanks for all the feedback! I think I'll better stick with the original triple plan...just seems to limit the choice of bikes considerable....

 

[wafflycat]

Don't forget that you can change a double to a triple - but then there is a cost in that.

 

[punkypossum]

Which is apparently quite substantial...

Lets say I went for something like the Allez, with sora shifter but tiagra mechs, would it be possible to just change the shifters to tiagra if I don't get on with them or is that going to be ridiculously expensive as well?

I just don't want to rule out potential bikes if changes are feasible and don't end up doubling the price of the bike...

 

[Gary D]

Right, thanks for all the feedback! I think I'll better stick with the original triple plan...just seems to limit the choice of bikes considerable....

punky,
I have posted about this before, but here goes. Don't let your decision of going for a triple limit your choice too much!

The main cost when changing from a double to a triple is in the shifters. However, 9 speed Tiagra and 10 speed 105 shifters are double and triple compatible.

So........

If you find a compact or double bike that you like equipped with either of these shifters, and find yourself a good LBS, they should be able and willing to convert the bike at a fairly sensible cost.

I know, because I had the same dilemma. My bike is 105 equipped but I couldn't get a triple at the time. So, the LBS had to change the chainset & BB obviously, the front derailleur and the rear mech to a medium length. The whole lot only cost me an additional £40 as they just took the difference in cost between the parts - and I assume, banked on being able to sell the parts they removed in the shop. They were not unique either, as another shop I was seriously talking to, also offered to do it at a similar price.

Depends on how much they want your business I guess

Hope this helps,

Gary.

 

[Paul_Smith SRCC]

Which is apparently quite substantial...

Lets say I went for something like the Allez, with sora shifter but tiagra mechs, would it be possible to just change the shifters to tiagra if I don't get on with them or is that going to be ridiculously expensive as well?

I just don't want to rule out potential bikes if changes are feasible and don't end up doubling the price of the bike...

I assume you are looking at the 2009 Allez 27, as this has a Tiagra rear mech but note not front as that is Sora, along with the STI levers.

Can confirm what GardD mentioned above, most shops will simply charge for the price difference for the upgrade.

Paul_Smith
www.corridori.co.uk

 

[postman]

Beacon Fell i know it well.My in laws live in Goosnargh.I intend to ride up and around the area.Good cafe aswell.

 

[Crackle]

Punky, have you actually worked out what gears you use now for cruising and climbing? A bit of time invested on it might start to clarify your needs as will intended use.

I.e. Living in the flat plains of Cheshire now, a compact would do me. I'd mostly use the large ring but there are climbs which would require me to use the inner occasionally. I have toured with a compact but I wouldn't now.

Living in hilly Scotland I bought a triple and set it up to use the middle on the up and down singlerack and the inner on the climbs and the outer for long flats. I hardly ever used the outer there but I would here.

You do get more gear overlap with a triple but it means you can arrange it to have a tight spread in a gear area you use most, which I like as it means I can maintain my cadence easier but I'm repeating what's already been said.

The thing is, once you start thinking about and playing with gears, you will inevitably spend money on new chainrings and blocks as you find the gears which suit. You may as well start the process of understanding gear set-up now even if it takes a little while to translate into actual use. I have a little spreadsheet you can use to put your current set-up into and your future set-up, which will then allow you to compare directly what gears you now use with what gears your new bike will have. Bear in mind that the same gear on a mountain and racing bike will not feel equivalent because the two bikes are very different and you will almost certainly find it easier to shift a racing bike along on the same gear you use on your mountain bike.

 

[BentMikey]

More toe overlap with a triple?

More toe overlap with a compact frame?

What's that all about then, all else being the same?

 

[Crackle]

toe overlap? I know I was talking gear overlap or are you not referring to my post?