3rd Ring vs Weight

mike4.3

I'm on the brink of spending some cash and I've narrowed it down to 2 bikes.
One is a tourer and one is a road bike albeit with 26mm tyres and clearance for mud guards.
Just to keep this on topic, I won't mentioned the makes and models... lets pretend it's hypothetical.

The major difference is the tourer has 3 front rings and the road only 2 BUT the road is about 8lbs lighter.

When it comes to going to big hills, what's the better option (I live in a pretty hilly area) ?

Pross

Depends on your own fitness levels and what you are doing. The tourer has the extra ring as it is more likely you are going to be carrying loads. If you are going to be using panniers and lugging loads around I would go for the extra chainring. If you are just doing leisure riding then the double may suffice (I assume it is a compact chainset i.e. 50 / 34 as most new bikes of that type would be).

mike4.3

Why does everything always start with "depends"

Seriously, yes it's 50/34.
I'd say mostly leisure riding although using the bike to ride into town, carry a bag of shopping etc is more than possible. Lets say leisure, some commuting and day rides although a small amount of light touring could certainly be possible.

Are the questions therefore...

Would I never use those extra gears unless I'm fully loaded?
Would I notice a massive difference in weight using the tourer unloaded anyway?

Cheers.

sungod

depends, heh heh, on the cassette as well...

a triple with a 30t small ring and a cassette with x-25 will give you about the same smallest gear as a compact with 34t and an x-28 cassette

there's a gear calculator here that you can use to see the impact of different combinations...

http://sheldonbrown.com/gears/

the impact of the extra weight depends on the total weight of bike+you

so if the extra weight is, say, 3% of the total of you plus the lightest bike, then you'll expend 3% more energy going up hillls

mike4.3

sungod wrote:

a triple with a 30t small ring and a cassette with x-25 will give you about the same smallest gear as a compact with 34t and an x-28 cassette

Holey Moley. Maybe I'll get a singlespeed.

Well Tourer...
28/38/48 with 11-32 cassette
Road...
34/50 with 12-25 cassette

So whilst I geddit I'm no wiser really as I just dunno what it REALLY means when I'm out there.

Pross

From the sound of what you want to do I would say the road bike would suffice and you can always get the cassette changed. If you are likely to do a lot of touring with panniers then go for the tourer. Unfortunately so much in life "depends" or one bike would suit all. You could compromise as there are road bikes out there available with triple chainsets that weigh little more than their compact chainset siblings.

Han2130

I just did the Hampshire Hilly Hundred on my heavy tourer, bit slow but not last. If you want to carry stuff go for the tourer. Having a heavy bike makes you fitter. My tourer is 15kg but still good fun to ride.

mike4.3

Thanks for all the replies... the answer really is "depends"

Ok here's questions to try and give me some personal context...

I usually ride a XC fulll suss / short travel mountain bike, triple ring, xc tyres and weighs just under 30lbs. How would the triple tourer (30lb) and road (22lb) compare agains giong up tarmac hills in terms of effort and speed?

Pross

The tyres will make a huge difference in all situations, having rigid forks will ensure you don't waste as much power and the position will improve your aerodynamics although the advantage of this will be more noticeable on the flat or descents rather than going uphill. All in all you should find yourself going quite a lot faster for the same effort (or less effort for the same speed).

mike4.3

Yes I thought that would be the case.

So if I go for the tourer it will still be far better/faster/easier climbing the hills than my MTB even though it weighs the same or if I go for the 2 ring roadie, likewise it'll be way better than the MTB?

And if I can climb them on the MTB... then I should have no trouble on either of them.
So it sounds like the best thing to do is go and have a proper look at each bike and get the one that feels right.

Pross

"Better" is so subjective and may lead to me being called a snob Horses for courses, an MTB is more suited to off road riding whilst a tourer or road bike are more suited to the road but yes you should find riding either of those "easier" than an MTB (particularly a full suspension model) on the road. Yes, take your own advice and take both out on a trial ride if possible.

Mossrider

What about an "audax" style bike. It'll have capacity for light paniers, mudguards etc, be considerably lighter than a full on tourer (but fine for credit card touring), yet easily capable of being a club / sportive bike if your interests develop in that direction. Mine has been used as winter bike, commuter, club bike, weekend tourer and has done the etape du dales twice (I also have a tourer and a "best" bike).

CiB

Depends where you ride I suppose, but for tarmac hills unless they're v steep the double clanger would be more than adequate. My old sit up & beg bike has 3 rings but the smallest is too small to be of any use round where I live. Horses for hills really. Depends on so many things in the end.

mike4.3

The road bike I'm looking at could be described as an Audax bike to be honest (it can take frame/mudguards and comes with 26mm tyres) and I've been looking at a few others... but they all seem to be doubles... I've not found a triple Audax on budget. The closest is the Ribble 7005 as I can change the build from a double to a triple for a tenner. But REALLY I wanted a compact frame as my legs are quite short.

If anyone can show me a compact frame Audax with a triple cassette for around £500 please do

Lillywhite

mike4.3 wrote:

Road...
34/50 with 12-25 cassette

That's the set up I've got on my new Trek carbon steed and I'm the wrong side of 60 weighing about 70 kgs and the gearing suits me fine.

Unless you're doing serious touring then the road frame with the compact set up will do you OK.