Triple v Double v Compact
- Thread starter Rob500
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
deptfordmarmoset
Full time tea drinker
- Location
- Armonmy Way
Compacts are a bit in between doubles and triples. A compact is essentially a double but the inner ring on a compact is smaller than a straightforward double though not as small as the smallest ring on a triple. The effect is that you get a wider range of gears than a double but not quite as wide as a triple.
YahudaMoon
Über Member
You could also go for a quiche crankset
deptfordmarmoset
Full time tea drinker
- Location
- Armonmy Way
Monsieur Remings
Guru
- Location
- Yatton UK
Hey fella', I'm no expert but here's my take on it. I do a lot of cycling over the Mendips down 'ere I be in zummerzet and my first serious modern road bike I bought when my passion for cycling was resurrected, was a 9-speed triple. I had no fear going up hills of any kind but there's a reason why people have doubles and compacts too, so I looked into it more and realised that when weight became more of a consideration a double was better for obvious reasons - one less chainring.
When I bought my newer roadie I knew I wanted a double but what to go for? Well, as others have mentioned you don't get as big a top gear with a compact, that's why it's called a compact and it's better for climbing given the smaller chainrings. I also, as well as the hills, like pummeling my carbon over the flat gradually moving up to a massive 11 ratio on the cassette, my biggest gear on a SRAM Rival set-up BUT I also compromised with a 28 at the other end giving me that extra low gear on the smaller chainring. On some gradients admittedly it's still hard work (like more than a triple would be on the lowest cassette sprocket and smallest chainring) but eventually I got the hang of it on gradients up to 20%. This might be pushing it for some riders given their own ability in power and not at all for others, whilst I'm puffing away like Puff the Bonked-out Dragon.
What I knew when I opted for a standard double over a compact however, was that I didn't want to compromise a bigger gear downhill or on the flat for something better uphill. The compromise was a larger (28) sprocket on the back which may or may not be enough for you in any given circumstance, hill or mountain depending on your own ability.
I'd say then that that is the real question Rob, compact equals smaller gears than a standard and the trade-off comes in having more scope on the lower gears. Like me you might find that an 11-28 standard is a compromise, whilst others might find that too much of a gap between gears.
Best of luck.
When I bought my newer roadie I knew I wanted a double but what to go for? Well, as others have mentioned you don't get as big a top gear with a compact, that's why it's called a compact and it's better for climbing given the smaller chainrings. I also, as well as the hills, like pummeling my carbon over the flat gradually moving up to a massive 11 ratio on the cassette, my biggest gear on a SRAM Rival set-up BUT I also compromised with a 28 at the other end giving me that extra low gear on the smaller chainring. On some gradients admittedly it's still hard work (like more than a triple would be on the lowest cassette sprocket and smallest chainring) but eventually I got the hang of it on gradients up to 20%. This might be pushing it for some riders given their own ability in power and not at all for others, whilst I'm puffing away like Puff the Bonked-out Dragon.
What I knew when I opted for a standard double over a compact however, was that I didn't want to compromise a bigger gear downhill or on the flat for something better uphill. The compromise was a larger (28) sprocket on the back which may or may not be enough for you in any given circumstance, hill or mountain depending on your own ability.
I'd say then that that is the real question Rob, compact equals smaller gears than a standard and the trade-off comes in having more scope on the lower gears. Like me you might find that an 11-28 standard is a compromise, whilst others might find that too much of a gap between gears.
Best of luck.
Glover Fan
Well-Known Member
- Location
- Almondsbury, Nr Bristol
It all depends on fitness. I completed a very hilly Dartmoor devil with a compact and a 12-27 on the rear and made it up every hill with relative comfort.
Alembicbassman
Confused.com
My Giant Defy Triple has rings of 30 42 52 with a 12-26 Cassette
My Raleigh Avanti has rings 34 50 with a 12-25 Cassette
The Giant has one easier gear than the Raleigh
So not much difference.
My Raleigh Avanti has rings 34 50 with a 12-25 Cassette
The Giant has one easier gear than the Raleigh
So not much difference.
Thanks Guys. I think I'm finally getting all the bike 'techie' talk.
Basically, it makes no difference which of the 3 chainring options you have because ultimatley the most important thing is their Gear Ratios and whether they suit your level of fitness and riding needs.
A 'real' double could be 39+50 or 42+52 whereas a compact could be 34+50 ?
Basically, it makes no difference which of the 3 chainring options you have because ultimatley the most important thing is their Gear Ratios and whether they suit your level of fitness and riding needs.
A 'real' double could be 39+50 or 42+52 whereas a compact could be 34+50 ?
Alembicbassman
Confused.com
Yep that's about it.
Have a play with this widget to get an idea of ratios
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/
I ran a standard double 38/52 with a 13-26 cassette and it had one less easier gear than the Avanti compact 34/50 above
Originally the bike came with a 42/52 with 13-23 cassette, but I swapped the 42 for a 38 to make it easier on the hills.
A 34 up front with 25 at the back is good enough for most hills, some people have tackled all the big climbs in the Alps using a compact set-up
If you live in a very hilly area consider a SRAM Apex compact which can take up to a 32 tooth rear on a 34/50 double or a triple with a 28 small ring usually a 28 38 48. You can swap rings too, they're about £10 each.
Have a play with this widget to get an idea of ratios
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/
I ran a standard double 38/52 with a 13-26 cassette and it had one less easier gear than the Avanti compact 34/50 above
Originally the bike came with a 42/52 with 13-23 cassette, but I swapped the 42 for a 38 to make it easier on the hills.
A 34 up front with 25 at the back is good enough for most hills, some people have tackled all the big climbs in the Alps using a compact set-up
If you live in a very hilly area consider a SRAM Apex compact which can take up to a 32 tooth rear on a 34/50 double or a triple with a 28 small ring usually a 28 38 48. You can swap rings too, they're about £10 each.
Xiorell
Über Member
- Location
- Merthyr, Wales
I'm finding a compact very suited to myself aswell. It's new to me. Gone from Triple MTB type gears on a Hybrid to a Compact road setup on the new bike and somehow I'm destroying hills that used to give me grief.
I never felt happy with the granny gear on the old bike so that never got used, the compact just seems to "fit" with me in some way
So what do you consider my 39-53 as? (11-25). Havent used the top most gear or 2 yet but thats what suits me. No matter how fast I go on a downhill, its good to know I have a gear for an even steeper one.
albion
Guru
I already had given a small clue on this one. Am surprised no one picked up on it.
"110/74 mm bolt circle (Full size MTB/Touring Triple, Compact Road Double)"
"The 110 BCD was in retreat for a while, but it is coming back in a big way since Tyler Hamilton started using a "compact double" crank in the Tour de France."
http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/chainrings/110.html
"110/74 mm bolt circle (Full size MTB/Touring Triple, Compact Road Double)"
"The 110 BCD was in retreat for a while, but it is coming back in a big way since Tyler Hamilton started using a "compact double" crank in the Tour de France."
http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/chainrings/110.html
