Standard or Compact

Eskimo427

Could someone please tell me what the difference\benefits of each are?

Not knowing anything about road bikes but thinking of buying one I think this is something I need to know.

Thanks

jibberjim

If you're thinking of buying one, just buy a compact, you can change the gearing of a compact chainset to that of a double cheaply, you can't do the reverse.

mrushton

Go to a gear chart,enter the parameters for the chainrings and sprockets for each set and compare the readings. There will be overlap but it depends if you are happy pushing bigger gears or spinning smaller gears

Monty Dog

If you haven't done much road cycling or live in a hillier area, then the compact is the better option as it gives you a broader range of gears i.e. low ones for getting up hills.

Eskimo427

Thanks for the replys

so to sum up.

Compact gives me more gears than standard and can be converted to standard cheaper than the other way round.

So why would anyone want standard, what's the benefit?

Rule74Please

34 teeth is too small be of any use. If they came with a 36 I'd agree (originally they did).

A compact will see you on the big ring from 17 mph upwards a standard 39 from 22 upwards.

39 with a 25 on the back is as low as you ever need (and yes I have 2 17% I rideon a regular basis

northpole

my opinion only - if you are starting out cycling and if you are intending to cycle in hilly areas eg Surrey Hills or take part in sportives, I would strongly recommend that you specify a compact chainset together with a cassette having a range of 11 or 12 on small ring to 27 or 29 on the large ring (if 11 speed you could get away with 11; if 10 speed, 12 is more realistic for the small cassette fing).

The compact chainset does not provide you with any more gears than a standard chainset, what it provides are smaller chain rings with less teeth which require less strength/ effort to turn the pedals when the hills become steep and/or you become tired.

Another option, depending on terrain and your level of fitness would be to get a triple chainset - these provide an 'emergency' get out of jail small chain ring which some people depend on and others frown upon.

Peter

prawny

I'd go compact for starting out at least. I read an interview earlier this year with a pro saying that most of them train on compacts but race on standards, (think it might have been Michael Barry it was in cyclesport anyway) I assume because the benefits of a standard double aren't that important in the real world, where as lower gears are very useful for staying in HR zones or just getting home. I'm sure I could cope with a standard double I just can't see why I would other than for bragging rights

Eskimo427

Thanks again for the relies guys.

Although this will be my first road bike I do a lot of mountain biking including 24hr races as a solo, fitness is not an issue.

I must admit, from what has been written I'm inclined to go with the standard now.

daviesee

I like my compact. So much so that I just bought another set.
However, double shifting or the big jump between 34 & 50 is starting to niggle me.
Something closer would be better. Or possibly just go for a standard with bigger cogs at the back.

northpole

I thought the same as you until I was introduced to a 65 mile tour of the Surrey Hills. Cost me £300+ for a compact DA chainset the following weekend!!

Let us know how you get on.

Peter

Eskimo427

daviesee wrote:

Or possibly just go for a standard with bigger cogs at the back.

That is exactly what I was thinking. It'll be far cheaper to change a cassette than the front cranks.

northpole

'You' referred to the OP

thegreatdivide

Monty Dog wrote:

If you haven't done much road cycling or live in a hillier area, then the compact is the better option as it gives you a broader range of gears i.e. low ones for getting up hills.

This.

I've been riding a compact ever since I got back into cycling and round these parts there are a lot of hills, so it's been a great help while I've been building up my fitness level.

Went out for the first time on a double yesterday (Campagnolo Athena 53/39 with an 11/25 cassette) and I could instantly tell the difference. It was a bit of a shock on the hills at first but it wasn't too bad, and today I was bombing it along the flats and spinning fine up the slopes.

Evil Laugh

I'd say it's better to go for a compact with a closer range cassette than a standard with a wide range on the back. Nothing more annoying than not being able to get the right cadence because the gaps are too big between gears. The change between the front rings on a compact is easily rectified by a couple of rear shifts but if you've not got the slelection of cogs on the cassette that's it.

Also it's all well and good coming on here and proclaiming to a road beginner that a 39-25 is all you ever need but everyone is different, likes to spin different cadences and has different riding styles. Hey I can get up 25% on my standard but id still rather a compact. On long hilly rides I'd much rather be able to spin up hills and have a long day out than kill myself grinding up everything. Personally i needed my compact in the mountains, for sure, nonshame in saying that. Nobody's gonna point and laugh at you riding up a hill on a compact but you might feel a fool walking a standard along. Better to be equipped IMO.

jibberjim

Eskimo427 wrote:

daviesee wrote:

Or possibly just go for a standard with bigger cogs at the back.

That is exactly what I was thinking. It'll be far cheaper to change a cassette than the front cranks.

But that's exactly the point, if you get a compact, you can put 52x38 or 55x45 even on the front at the cost of a couple of chainrings - considerably cheaper than the cassette. Yes, you may get slightly ropey shifting from chainring flex (although you can get very stiff aero chainrings to overcome this) but it's still extremely cheap to go from compact to double.

Going from double to compact requires you to buy a new crankset if you find you need lower gears.

fred22

Evil Laugh wrote:

..
Also it's all well and good coming on here and proclaiming to a road beginner that a 39-25 is all you ever need but everyone is different, likes to spin different cadences and has different riding styles. Hey I can get up 25% on my standard but id still rather a compact. On long hilly rides I'd much rather be able to spin up hills and have a long day out than kill myself grinding up everything.

What they said

mrushton

it really depends on your fitness and the terrain you cycle. I've realised that my ideal is prob. a 48/36 with 11-25/12-27 depending where i am.If I lived in the Dolomites I'd be on 48/34. For me it's better to have more mid-low gears, gravity takes care of the downhill. If I lived somewhere flat then 53/39 with 12-23/25 would do v.nicely

Eskimo427

I like the idea of changing the chain rings (should have thought of that), however would the front deraillier have to be moved too?

Thanks again.

rokkala

You would just need to adjust the height of the derailleur to allow for bigger/smaller rings

Mad_Malx

Any time now someone will say that no-one should ever use anything other than a fixed 53x11 for 35% hills. The rest of us think that gears were a pretty good invention.

I suspect few of us agree with Rule74please. Unless you know you don't need it, go with the compact. No-one gets off to push because they are undergeared, the opposite isn't true.

I moved from being an above average (compared with the rest of the riders on my commute) climber on an old-school heavy steel rigid fork MTB to a road triple (30x25 bottom) a few years back, and I thought I was going to die the first time I hit a 13% average 1km road hill on my daily trip. Yes I have got 4 teeth stronger, but I wouldn't want a bottom gear above 34x25 for when a big hill comes after a long ride or I'm not feeling so good.

dbb

i have been riding for more than 25 years - so some old habits and beliefs die hard.

i moved to a compact a couple of years ago and it took me a good 18 months to get used to it. i now ride 50/34 with a 12-25 block and i wouldn't change back.
i spend a lot of time in the big ring - and - shock, horror - i will even use the forbidden 50/12!

advantage for me of the compact is that i get lower gears. the cost is a marginally smaller top gear - but the reality is that i don't ever run out of gears even when sprinting (or at least, my version of sprinting!) :roll:

Pseudonym

dbb wrote:

i will even use the forbidden 50/12!

why is 50/12 'forbidden'..?

on-yer-bike

I have both. With the 39-53 I have a 12-29 cassette, with the 34-50 I have an 11-25. I live in a hilly area where typically a 30 mile ride will climb 2600 ft. I prefer the closer ratio at the front and I have to use both chainrings equally with the 39-53. I have a tendency to use the 34 as a last resort with the compact just because it feels too disruptive to the rhythm. If I did a very hilly sportive or the Marmotte again I would use a compact. The good thing about 11 speed is that you can have a 29 dinner plate on the back without affecting the gaps between the ratios too much. 39-29 is a very slightly easier gear than 34-25.

ben16v

Pseudonym wrote:

dbb wrote:

i will even use the forbidden 50/12!

why is 50/12 'forbidden'..?

was thinking he meant 50/25

dbb

yep - meant to say 50/25 :oops:

RoadyForever

Or there's another option, which has wide gearing range and small steps - It's called a triple (nothing wrong with it on your first bike, in fact I would recommend it).

Saying that I like the large jumps and prefer a compact, the gearing doesn't go quite as low but these days I'm going to fall off the back of the bike before my legs can't turn the cranks.

Eyon

look at your terrain and decide. My average 50 mile ride will total 2000ft climbing, but most of it is rolling with not a lot of steep climbs. I ride a 53/39 with a 11/23 and very rarely do I get out of the big ring (though I do cross chain on occasion out of bad habit). But I live in essex... if you lived in the highlands of scotland, id want the smallest gears possible!

Also, how do you like to climb? are you a stand and mash, or a sit and spin? Pick your gearing from there.

There is a great advantage I guess with the big rear cassette, I blew out 5 miles from the end of my ride the other day, and even 39-23 was agony, i wished I had lower, and if I was compact or a 28T on the back, i'd have found it easy, but I love that 1 tooth gear change, which i'd struggle to give up.

Personally, if I lived outwith east anglia, i'd be on compact, but for over here, I'll stick with my standard, but the gearing has to suit you, not the other way round IMO

Eskimo427

Thanks for all the replies, some interesting views.

I currently ride a 27 geared mountain bike so I have a wide range of gears to choose from, however when commuting to and from work (48 miles) I never change out of largest ring. In fact until now I've never given my gearing much thought. So I would think using a road bike would be much the same, although I appreciate the larger ring on a road bike is larger than a mountain bike.

I'm planning on using the bike for a LEJOG ride will be doing it as quickly as I can so this is part of my reason for asking this question.

Thanks again.

Pigtail

Another North-Easter here!

I bought a road bike almost a year ago with a compact. Prior to that I was only a very occasional leisure cyclist on an mtb. On the mtb I rarely used anything but the biggest ring. In fact generally only the biggest gear. On moving to the road bike I was generally the same. In fact I was convnced I would have been better with a standard. Gradually over the year I've increased my cadence and made better use of my gears. Then I failed quite spectacularly and unexpectedly on a hill - swallowed my pride and moved from a 12-25 to an 11-28.

Since then I've been deliberately working hills and am just about ready to go back to the 12-25. The North-East is funny mix, with some flat fast runs and some of the steepest hills around. I enjoy a steady rhythm on the flat, but on the principle of training your weakness I've been targeting hills, having done the Lecht, The Cairn O' Mount and the Suie in recent weeks.

So I would recommend looking at your cadence and practicing spinning - with a compact being plenty.

James

DrewDubya

Eskimo427 wrote:

Thanks for all the replies, some interesting views.

I currently ride a 27 geared mountain bike so I have a wide range of gears to choose from, however when commuting to and from work (48 miles) I never change out of largest ring. In fact until now I've never given my gearing much thought. So I would think using a road bike would be much the same, although I appreciate the larger ring on a road bike is larger than a mountain bike.

I'm planning on using the bike for a LEJOG ride will be doing it as quickly as I can so this is part of my reason for asking this question.

Thanks again.

My experience says this isn't true. On my mountain bike (now really a commuter hack / child carrier) I'm never out of the top 5 or 6 gears and the ride is incredibly easy at all times. I have a standard double on my road bike and its a completely different world on the same routes.

Of course - the easiest solution would be to try and find some kindly friends who could let you try out a double or a compact - even if not on your commute - so you can experience what everyone here is talking about.