Whats really wrong with a triple?
bahzob
Posts: 2,195
A recurring question here and else where seems to be "should I go triple or compact?"
As a confirmed triple user I seem to be in the minority. Puzzled because while I can see advantages to having a triple I can only see 3 minor disadvantages:
- Front adjustment takes a bit more time/trouble
- If the going is hard on a hill its tempting to shift down to lowest and take it easy (this is only an issue if going as fast as possible is the objective).
- It weighs a bit more.
There is, of course, the embarrassment factor of being seen to need 3 rings instead of 2 that the pros can use but since I've no illusions of being a pro that doesnt bother me.
Is this it? Any other real disadvantages of a triple that I have not encountered yet?
As a confirmed triple user I seem to be in the minority. Puzzled because while I can see advantages to having a triple I can only see 3 minor disadvantages:
- Front adjustment takes a bit more time/trouble
- If the going is hard on a hill its tempting to shift down to lowest and take it easy (this is only an issue if going as fast as possible is the objective).
- It weighs a bit more.
There is, of course, the embarrassment factor of being seen to need 3 rings instead of 2 that the pros can use but since I've no illusions of being a pro that doesnt bother me.
Is this it? Any other real disadvantages of a triple that I have not encountered yet?
Martin S. Newbury RC
0
Comments
-
nope tripples are good if you struggle with big hills etc. I say people with triples have more sense then those who struggle up hills. My folks have them on their dolans and they mince up the climbs while others are busting a gut0
-
Absolutely nothing wrong with using a triple. I think there's a bit of snobbery about them - i've had a few comments about mine. Personally i've never had a problem with mine and it's nice when you get into the real hills to have gears you can spin rather than grind.0
-
Nothing at all.Rich0
-
as others have said very little minus after all have been on mtb's for years. This said 30 compared to 34 is not a massive jump about a gear down0
-
-
It's a tiny bit quicker to clean a compact!0
-
Nowt wrong with a triple , its all about having a choice isn't it, more gears = more choice. There is minimal grief in setting up a triple properly from my experience.
Most sports I've done which involves any equipment - people often blindly assume the top end competition gear setup is best, and then they can end up with kit that doesn't match their overall ambition or ability. In reality for most of us who aren't up for competing at any serious level, a more friendly setup ( like using a triple on a bike ) works better.0 -
The only thing I don't like about my triple is that it is just a tiny bit wider between the pedals than a normal double or compact. I only notice it when I swap between bikes - the triple always feels a bit "John Wayne" for the first few miles.
Other than that, what's not to like?0 -
All my Dutch clients laugh at my bikes with triples... some of them have never even seen a triple road bike before. Then they come back to me after a week of riding Tenerife & say "Yeah, you need the triple".0
-
ive got a Scott CR1 Pro with a triple and in nearly 4000 miles have only used the granny ring twice, both times at the end of a long 70-80 mile ride when i was knackered and faced with a 20% hill which i just wouldnt have been able to do on 39/25, at least i can still say that i havnt been beaten by a hill yet thanks to my granny ring, why struggle up steep hills on a double when a triple can make life easier0
-
Triples, doubles, single speed and fixed.....Who cares as long as you're riding and you're enjoying it?'How can an opinion be bullsh1t?' High Fidelity0
-
I have a bike fitted with a triple , but with no front shifter so the mech is fixed in place.
Still waiting for someone to laugh at my 'triple' only to find out it's a single........
TBH I'm supprised that the dutch think you even need a double. I sure don't here in the fens.0 -
i have to admit - I have been stricken with the triple-snobbery disease.
I have had a few road bikes with triples - took one to the alps last year where it was excellent - but came to built a new bike this year and went for a compact.
It does look neater and the front mech is SO much easier to setup - but mainly becuase I wanted a campag centaur bike and I didn't want the (non-UT) compag triple chainsets.
the triple gives you the best of all worlds really - a 52/11 for the top gear and a 30/27 as the lowest (that is a real crawler!) - but to be honest my 34/26 isn't that far off the lowest and the 50/12 is still a very high gear (ive never - not even on an alpine decent - felt I didn't have a high enough gear!)0 -
nothing wrong with havin a triple. it lets me remind anyone else that im not going to rip my legs out of my hips to get up hill lol.0
-
Richie G wrote:I think there's a bit of snobbery about them - i've had a few comments about mine.
IMO whether double, compact or triple, it's just a matter of choice, regardless of the gradients you ride or the strength of your legs. Everyone can choose and be happy. I can only guess this kind of snobbery is due to some childhood trauma that results in an acute lack of self-confidence.Aspire not to have more, but to be more.0 -
I have just collected my new bike Paul hewitt make up for me.Being new to road biking he recommended a triple as you may not need to use it.But it's always there.0
-
Absolutely nothing wrong with triples. I've done sub 58 minutes for 25 mile TTs and happily use a triple on my road bike. In practice I ride 53/42 most of the time and then on 20%+ hills I might stick it in the granny ring and spin to save the knees, makes perfect sense to me. And all this nonsense about set-up, I've not adjusted my front mech in about 3 years so how big a problem is this?!0
-
Naz wrote:Absolutely nothing wrong with triples. I've done sub 58 minutes for 25 mile TTs and happily use a triple on my road bike. In practice I ride 53/42 most of the time and then on 20%+ hills I might stick it in the granny ring and spin to save the knees, makes perfect sense to me. And all this nonsense about set-up, I've not adjusted my front mech in about 3 years so how big a problem is this?![/quote]
I always wonder the same thing when the old 'triples are hard to adjust' chestnut comes up - I haven't touched mine since I got my bike a year ago and it still works perfectly!0 -
'Real' men don't need triples,thats whats wrong with them.You should get up anything using a 39-25.Doesn't matter what type of cycling,where you cycle,how old or your level of fitness.'Real' men don't need triples.End of story.
woof woof0 -
Simon E wrote:Richie G wrote:I think there's a bit of snobbery about them - i've had a few comments about mine.
IMO whether double, compact or triple, it's just a matter of choice, regardless of the gradients you ride or the strength of your legs. Everyone can choose and be happy. I can only guess this kind of snobbery is due to some childhood trauma that results in an acute lack of self-confidence.
Great answer to which i totally agree with. If you want a triple then why not have one? It's nothing to do with anyone else, if it gets you up hills then job done. Then you can laugh at the idiots struggling up the same hills.0 -
I love my triple.
I like having the options to keep pedling
It's about the cycling, not the bikeRichard
Giving it Large0 -
After 100 miles triples are ridden up hills doubles are pushed0
-
John C. wrote:After 100 miles triples are ridden up hills doubles are pushed
depends whats on the back of your double
34:29 is plenty!0 -
how does having a triple make it easier to get up a hill exactly? You still have the small gear and large gear - except you have one in between too..... surely all this means is that you lose slightly less power when you shift down a gear (i.e. if you switch from top to bottom - 2 gear you lose alot of power unless you pedal very very fast, where a triple is a more gradual decrease in speed cause you click into middle, then click into bottom?)..... I dont know, but I dont get the logic of a triple being "easier" to get up a hill. Like reddragon said, if you cant get up the hill in the bottom of a double you cant get up the hill anyway even if you have a triple..0
-
well with road triple you gain a little lower and a little higher compared to a compact, but one could fit (i would guess?) mtb type's which really would make short work of all but the silliest of hills, this said unless you think your likely to find your self grinding up 30% or so. it's likely to be massive over kill.0
-
giant mancp wrote:pictit wrote:'Real' men don't need triples,thats whats wrong with them.You should get up anything using a 39-25.Doesn't matter what type of cycling,where you cycle,how old or your level of fitness.'Real' men don't need triples.End of story.
woof woof
Idiot!0 -
giant mancp wrote:pictit wrote:'Real' men don't need triples,thats whats wrong with them.You should get up anything using a 39-25.Doesn't matter what type of cycling,where you cycle,how old or your level of fitness.'Real' men don't need triples.End of story.
woof woof
Idiot!
I take it you have a triple?0 -
redddraggon wrote:With a Compact I can be going at ~4mph, any slower and I'd be struggling to balance and it'd be easier to get off and walk.
Also, if you've got a triple and want lower gears, you can swap the 30 for a 24. With a compact if you want lower gears you have to pay up for switching to triple.0 -
Campy King wrote:giant mancp wrote:pictit wrote:'Real' men don't need triples,thats whats wrong with them.You should get up anything using a 39-25.Doesn't matter what type of cycling,where you cycle,how old or your level of fitness.'Real' men don't need triples.End of story.
woof woof
Idiot!
I take it you have a triple?0