Standard Double vs Compact Double

shockedsoshocked

Just about to order a new bike (Planet-X Pro Carbon) and can't decide which cranks to get.

I've tried working on gear ratios (inches) and found I can get a similar range with a compact as with what I have currently (a triple with 52/42/30), but for some reason i'm tempted just to get the standard and force myself to get fitter.

Anyone else have trouble deciding these things?

powenb

Yes Shocked, I'm also having that trouble.
I currently run a compact with a 12-25 cassette.
But I am upgrading my groupset and can't decide whether to stick with the compact or go for the standard.
Around where I live, I virtually always stay in the big ring, and run out of gears in the small chainring very quickly, so I'm thinking of going for a standrad with a 12-27 cassette.

The thing about compacts is, I understand that a compact with a 25 bottom gear will be easier than a standard with a 25 bottom. But why do people with compacts then fit 11-23 cassette?
TOO MANY OPTIONS!!!!!

stevechambers34

it really is a personal choice and one you have to go through to find out your answer, but that doesn't help you....To be honest I find the jump from the large ring 50 or 52 down to 34 or 36 a bit big at times you reall yhave to think ahead, the triple set up does give a better feel with far less of a difference but then it is wider and a little heavier, just depends how seriously you cycle/race? and how close you want/need your gear ratio's?

simbil1

I find the cross over fine on a compact once you get used to it. Coming from an MTB, it seemed like a big jump between chainrings but you adapt. When I just start to lose momentum on a hill, I drop the front chainring whilst changing up twice on the rear and the effect is a manageable overall change down (50/34 12/27).
I need the 34-27 to get up 20% climbs. Any lower gearing would be MTB twiddling so not necessary for where I ride.
Note that with a triple, you will probably only have 1 lower gear than with a compact. So to me the choice is more about the gear spread than the gears you end up with.

wildmoustache

stay away from triples is my advice. they are harder to maintain, clean and index, and are heavier and look worse.

Compact with 50-36 and 11-26 for me, but if you are a bit less strong then 50-34 and perhaps 12-27 if you're on shimano will get you up anything.

sloboy

I've been thinking about this too.

Currently I ride a 53-39/12-27 and that's been fine for sportives and my usual riding here in the no-more-than-undulating South. I can yomp that up short sections at 14-16% in the midst of a 100 mile ride. But when I rode in the Pyrenees a while back, I hired a triple and crawled up some of the mega-cols in something like 30-25 :oops:

So I was thinking that maybe a 50-34/11-23 for home use, swapping over to a 12-27 for "specials" might make quite a nice setup.

dennisn

I live in the flattest part of the world and use a compact 50-36 and an 11-21. Have no problems whatever. Each summer I go to Colorado for The Bicycle Tour of Colorado.
A six day nightmare of long, long climbs each day. I switch out to a 50-33 with a 12-27
on the back. I run Shimano Dura-Ace and don't have to change deraillers at all. Works
just fine for me , although going from the 50 to the 33 needs a bit of care, I have no
problems to speak of. Note that I am no longer a racer. For what it's worth, if I still was
racing I would probably still use the compact. Also note that a 50-11 gear is bigger
than a 53-12. Sounds strange but it's true. Oh yeah, I don't even change the chain length
when I switch over. Can't fault "Compacts".

Dennis Noward

redddraggon

dennisn wrote:

Also note that a 50-11 gear is bigger
than a 53-12. Sounds strange but it's true.

Aye, that's the reason why I've gone for a compact on my build.

50-34 and 11-25 gives me a higher gear and a lower gear than the 50-36 and 12-23 I have currently.

wildmoustache

redddraggon wrote:

dennisn wrote:

Also note that a 50-11 gear is bigger
than a 53-12. Sounds strange but it's true.

Aye, that's the reason why I've gone for a compact on my build.

50-34 and 11-25 gives me a higher gear and a lower gear than the 50-36 and 12-23 I have currently.

but it comes at a cost of inferior front-shifting and more shifting at the back required due to the 16tooth jump up front.

why not keep the 50-36 and use 11-26?

Anonymous

powenb wrote:

Yes Shocked, I'm also having that trouble.
I currently run a compact with a 12-25 cassette.
But I am upgrading my groupset and can't decide whether to stick with the compact or go for the standard.
Around where I live, I virtually always stay in the big ring, and run out of gears in the small chainring very quickly, so I'm thinking of going for a standrad with a 12-27 cassette.

The thing about compacts is, I understand that a compact with a 25 bottom gear will be easier than a standard with a 25 bottom. But why do people with compacts then fit 11-23 cassette?
TOO MANY OPTIONS!!!!!

To save weight.
The compact C/S weighs less than a standard and so does the cassette(marginally) but the lowest gear remains the same.

redddraggon

wildmoustache wrote:

why not keep the 50-36 and use 11-26?

I get up all the hills with a 36-23 so I've got no plans to change it. And I'm not putting my crappy halfords chainset on a nice carbon bike if that's what you mean.

I'm building another bike and I don't fancy getting a standard double and the only choice is 53-39 and 50-34. I may eventually change the inner ring to 36.

aracer

powenb wrote:

But why do people with compacts then fit 11-23 cassette?

That's what I've got. The reasoning being that it still gives me more single tooth jumps than the equivalent range with a standard chainset would. I can also swap to a 12-25 for hillier events, which is easier (and cheaper) than swapping the chainset.

wildmoustache

redddraggon wrote:

wildmoustache wrote:

why not keep the 50-36 and use 11-26?

I get up all the hills with a 36-23 so I've got no plans to change it. And I'm not putting my crappy halfords chainset on a nice carbon bike if that's what you mean.

I'm building another bike and I don't fancy getting a standard double and the only choice is 53-39 and 50-34. I may eventually change the inner ring to 36.

don't let the halfords kit anywhere near your carbon bike please.

Is it campag you're using? you can get 36 rings as standard on their compacts ... often they're not listed though.

redddraggon

wildmoustache wrote:

Is it campag you're using? you can get 36 rings as standard on their compacts ... often they're not listed though.

Aye it's Carbon Centaur I'm getting. Merlin cycles has the carbon groupset for less than £400, but there was no choice in the actual components sent, luckily the only thing wrong is the front mech is braze on rather than band on - but I can get an adaptor for that.

sloboy

Do Campag do an 11-26 cassette ?

I hadn't spotted that - and that carbon Centaur does look verrrry nice

wildmoustache

sloboy wrote:

Do Campag do an 11-26 cassette ?

I hadn't spotted that - and that carbon Centaur does look verrrry nice

no, you have to either make it up yourself or else use a shiftmate or conversion cassette (SRAM do one).

Neither are that complicated. I've made one up.

powenb

I just wish they did a Dura-Ace compact.

wildmoustache

powenb wrote:

I just wish they did a Dura-Ace compact.

because it would be fractionally lighter and have the DA name? I agree completely

daft of shimano not to have done this. in italy i see lots of riders on DA but with a chorus or record compact chainset.