Chris James
Über Member
- Location
- Huddersfield
jay clock said:
My triple is 52/42/30. So your double chainset would be 2% higher geared. I can never spin out my top gear anyway! Above about 35 mph I find it faster to just get in an aero tuck.
Double or triple?
- Thread starter ShinSplint
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
My triple is 52/42/30. So your double chainset would be 2% higher geared. I can never spin out my top gear anyway! Above about 35 mph I find it faster to just get in an aero tuck.
Try a TA Cyclotourist crankset with 26T and 40T rings.
With a 12 - 25 9 sprocket cassette, you'll have 27, 29, 32, 36, 40, 45, 50, 55, 61, 69, 74, 80 and 87 inch gears.
OK, so fit a 11 - 34 cassette.
ps, With TA Cyclotourist, you buy the crank arms as a pair, then buy the rings you want to use. See Spa Cycles.
With a 12 - 25 9 sprocket cassette, you'll have 27, 29, 32, 36, 40, 45, 50, 55, 61, 69, 74, 80 and 87 inch gears.
OK, so fit a 11 - 34 cassette.
ps, With TA Cyclotourist, you buy the crank arms as a pair, then buy the rings you want to use. See Spa Cycles.
My advice - fit a triple and forget about gearing! I'm fed up of people moaning that their double or compact won't do what they want. They are constantly swapping chainsets and cassettes (or even bikes!) trying to get the perfect setup. To be honest some of it is just an excuse for poor performance (of the rider) but it's boring and gets right on my wick after a while.
Why not just fit a triple that will cope with every situation? Usually macho vanity.
Why not just fit a triple that will cope with every situation? Usually macho vanity.
Before40
New Member
- Location
- Chandlers Ford
I had a twin for over two years and "got by" - Now just changed to a Specialized with a Triple & very glad that I did.
ShinSplint
Well-Known Member
well, i'd been using my mates Bianchi (with double) for a fortnight or so, with no particularly challening hills to contend with. Had my first ride out on my new (well, 10 yr old) Giant yesterday (triple), and for relatively flat roads with slight inclines... there's not much in it. I probably slightly prefer the the Double... has one extra tooth on the big cog (52 as opposed to 51 on the Giant).
Was havign this discussion with the bike salesman last week in my lbs. He reckons the one to go for these days is the double compact, best of both worlds apparently. I can see the appeal - less angle for the chain to cope with, less to go wrong, less potential chain/gearing problems in general.
Gonna stick with the Giant anyway for the foreseable.
Was havign this discussion with the bike salesman last week in my lbs. He reckons the one to go for these days is the double compact, best of both worlds apparently. I can see the appeal - less angle for the chain to cope with, less to go wrong, less potential chain/gearing problems in general.
Gonna stick with the Giant anyway for the foreseable.
ShinSplint said:
The "problem" some have with a Compact Double is that riders that aren't particularly strong can find themselves having to flit between the small and large chainrings in undulating terrain.
With a triple you've got a good range of gears using the middle ring for undulating terrain, the small chainring for proper hills/headwinds, and the big chainring for downhills, tailwinds or when you want to push hard.
With a compact double you may find that your comfortable range of gears for undulating terrain requires the use of both chainrings and the constant changing (and subsequent rear gear changes) can get annoying.
Stronger riders will tend to sit on the big chainring at the front and only drop down to the smaller chainring when it gets properly hilly.
For what it's worth: My Audax bike has a triple. The Colnago has a standard double. The new carbon bike will have a compact double. I do the vast majority of my riding on a fixed.
Halfmanhalfbike
Über Member
- Location
- Edinburgh
Landslide said:
I know EXACTLY what you mean.
I think Bike Snob NYC put it best when he wrote:
"Compact is the new triple, so if you’re still using a triple crank on your road bike discard it immediately. Triples are dorky, whereas compacts are “stealth dork” because people have to look pretty closely to tell you’re using one."
"Compact is the new triple, so if you’re still using a triple crank on your road bike discard it immediately. Triples are dorky, whereas compacts are “stealth dork” because people have to look pretty closely to tell you’re using one."
John the Monkey
Frivolous Cyclist
- Location
- Crewe
Triple for me - there's some hills in Normandy I plan to go back to, and I ain't proud 
Yellow Fang
Legendary Member
- Location
- Reading
When I had a standard double on my road bike, I found I was often in gear 1 going up hill, but rarely ever used the top gears. I think standard doubles are basically for club riders to race on. They're over-geared for me. A compact double seems to do the job though. I can get up just about anything with that. A triple chainset on a road bike is considered a bit outré by a lot of cyclists, but get one if you want to.
chirk2000ad
New Member
- Location
- lancaster
triple for me but it all depends where you like to ride.
If you like the B and unumbered roads as I do and find yourself on 1 in 5 or 1 in 6 then you may be glad of a triple.
thats got me thinking? where are the steepest tarmac roads in britain. I seem to remember a 1 in 4 when on holiday in Devon and Cornwall near a place called Crackington Haven. And there s the Hardknott pass in Cumbria 1 in 3 - anyone know of any more steeper?
If you like the B and unumbered roads as I do and find yourself on 1 in 5 or 1 in 6 then you may be glad of a triple.
thats got me thinking? where are the steepest tarmac roads in britain. I seem to remember a 1 in 4 when on holiday in Devon and Cornwall near a place called Crackington Haven. And there s the Hardknott pass in Cumbria 1 in 3 - anyone know of any more steeper?
MacB
Lover of things that come in 3's
- Location
- Farnborough, Hampshire
I've got a triple and, barring testing it worked, haven't yet used the big ring. I spend most of my time in the middle ring and only the first 7 gears of that. When I actually analysed my gears, with lots of help on here and Sheldons site, I was very surprised by what I found.
I have nothing like 27 gears, remove the duplicates, the unuseable extremes of chainline(big to big and small to small) and the gears that are so close to each other as to give no appreciable difference. This leaves me with 15 gears, 9 of which are on the middle ring. The other 6 are the top and bottom 3 gears of my range. I could quite easily imagine using a double whereby the outer ring is for main use and I only drop to the inner for really steep bits, ie the bottom 2-3 gears. I'm sure a rear cassette can be selected that will give me whatever I needed in that area.
One of the two bikes I'm currently building up I'm looking at having a single ring and a custom rear cassette. Something with 8-9 gears that gave me a steady progression through 6-7 and one high/low for extremes. Set it up with one trigger shifter at the front and hopefully you get easier riding and less maintenance.
I have nothing like 27 gears, remove the duplicates, the unuseable extremes of chainline(big to big and small to small) and the gears that are so close to each other as to give no appreciable difference. This leaves me with 15 gears, 9 of which are on the middle ring. The other 6 are the top and bottom 3 gears of my range. I could quite easily imagine using a double whereby the outer ring is for main use and I only drop to the inner for really steep bits, ie the bottom 2-3 gears. I'm sure a rear cassette can be selected that will give me whatever I needed in that area.
One of the two bikes I'm currently building up I'm looking at having a single ring and a custom rear cassette. Something with 8-9 gears that gave me a steady progression through 6-7 and one high/low for extremes. Set it up with one trigger shifter at the front and hopefully you get easier riding and less maintenance.