I,m looking at bikes again to replace my Focus Cayo 105 that was stolen last week and I am back to this question over compact v triple. I don't want this to turn into a debate over which is better because I can see advantages to both systems so it will be up to me to make up my mind. I am after some answers to help me make that decision. There is more choice of bike if i change to a compact.
Until last week i was riding a Cayo triple of 50/39/30 with a 12-27 cassette. Now my riding style on hills meant that I rarely used the 30 chainring as I would try to keep on the 39 chainring and let my legs do the work. However there are some hills where I have no choice but to drop down to the 30 chainring so it is always there as a fallback.
Now I have been trying to compare the triple to a compact running 50/34 with a 11-28 cassette to see if I get a similar low gear and come across a gear ratio calculator on the web and it gives me this:-
Triple Chainring 30 Cassette 27 ratio 1.1
Compact Chainring 34 Cassette 28 ratio 1.2
For high gears I get this:-
Triple Chainring 50 Cassette 12 ratio 4.2
Compact Chainring 50 cassette 11 ratio 4.6
Does this mean that the ratios of 1.1 and 1.2 for the low gears are so close togethe that, even though the compact ratio is higher by 0.1, I would not really notice it being harder to climb.
At the other end of the scale with the higher gears the ratios are 4.2 and 4.6 so there is a marked difference between these giving you a possible higher top speed.
I appreciate that with a triple there is a lot of repetition of gears between the high and low gears and that if I do change to a compact I will have to alter my riding style and relearn the gears. More double shifting and most probably my average cadence improving because of my stubborness not to use the granny ring.
Another factor I have to consider is my age (62) hence the question of the lower gearing being similar on the compact and triple in my example above.
Can anyone help? Am I on the right track with my comparison or am I comparing the gears from the wrong angle?
Sorry it's so long winded but I don't want to change to a compact only to find the lower gears that very much harder.
Until last week i was riding a Cayo triple of 50/39/30 with a 12-27 cassette. Now my riding style on hills meant that I rarely used the 30 chainring as I would try to keep on the 39 chainring and let my legs do the work. However there are some hills where I have no choice but to drop down to the 30 chainring so it is always there as a fallback.
Now I have been trying to compare the triple to a compact running 50/34 with a 11-28 cassette to see if I get a similar low gear and come across a gear ratio calculator on the web and it gives me this:-
Triple Chainring 30 Cassette 27 ratio 1.1
Compact Chainring 34 Cassette 28 ratio 1.2
For high gears I get this:-
Triple Chainring 50 Cassette 12 ratio 4.2
Compact Chainring 50 cassette 11 ratio 4.6
Does this mean that the ratios of 1.1 and 1.2 for the low gears are so close togethe that, even though the compact ratio is higher by 0.1, I would not really notice it being harder to climb.
At the other end of the scale with the higher gears the ratios are 4.2 and 4.6 so there is a marked difference between these giving you a possible higher top speed.
I appreciate that with a triple there is a lot of repetition of gears between the high and low gears and that if I do change to a compact I will have to alter my riding style and relearn the gears. More double shifting and most probably my average cadence improving because of my stubborness not to use the granny ring.
Another factor I have to consider is my age (62) hence the question of the lower gearing being similar on the compact and triple in my example above.
Can anyone help? Am I on the right track with my comparison or am I comparing the gears from the wrong angle?
Sorry it's so long winded but I don't want to change to a compact only to find the lower gears that very much harder.
