Do most of you lot own bikes with compact and std doubles ?

desweller

I hate my compact. Bought it to go on a new frame, having always used triples.

With a triple you get the whole back block available with the middle chainring. That 40T is really convenient with a 12-25 or 12-23; you hardly ever need to change out of it! You get everything; a big ring for very high speeds, a small one for those 1-in-4s, and close ratios to avoid those awkward moments when you can't find the right gear.

nickel

Im amazed we're two pages in and we haven't yet had anyone claiming they've ridden hardknott pass in 42x19 and anyone who needs a compact should sell their bike and give up cycling.

DF33

As Rolph and others have said depends where you ride / live. Around Leeds on a 50 miler you have some steep hills. Ride in the lakes at the end of a 100 with a 1 in 4 and a triple /granny can be a lifesaver.

I don't care what anyone thinks. I can ride up Hardnott / Struggle / Coal road after a full day in the saddle with the triple. Unlike some of the 53/39 snobs who end up walking it.

Flexisurfer

I think the bottom line is that, depending on where you live or ride frequently will decide on the best chainset for you. For me, I don't use anywhere near the full range of gears, I have a 53/39 and 12/25, it seems to suit me fine for East Anglia, which isn't without challenging accents. I seem to have gotten out of the habit of using the smaller ring for some reason?? Possibly because the person I ride the most with uses a compact and is always in the bigger ring?

My main sport is kitesurfing and I've become used to doing my own thing and not following the crowds with kit and trends so I guess I need to transfer this to my cycling, just go with what works best for me and what I know if even if it contradicts most of what is written.

MattC59

Nickel wrote:

Im amazed we're two pages in and we haven't yet had anyone claiming they've ridden hardknott pass in 42x19 and anyone who needs a compact should sell their bike and give up cycling.

I suspect that the way RoadMeridaBen likes blowing his own trumpet, he'll be along any minute to tell us he has.

desweller

Flexisurfer wrote:

I think the bottom line is that, depending on where you live or ride frequently will decide on the best chainset for you. For me, I don't use anywhere near the full range of gears, I have a 53/39 and 12/25, it seems to suit me fine for East Anglia, which isn't without challenging accents. I seem to have gotten out of the habit of using the smaller ring for some reason?? Possibly because the person I ride the most with uses a compact and is always in the bigger ring?

My main sport is kitesurfing and I've become used to doing my own thing and not following the crowds with kit and trends so I guess I need to transfer this to my cycling, just go with what works best for me and what I know if even if it contradicts most of what is written.

Sort of depends on your definition of 'challenging' doesn't it?

Nik Cube

I have 2 road bikes (currently ) and a TT bike

I have a standard Double's on one of them and on the TT Bike

and a triple on the other - against most peoples thinking its my racing/summer bike that has the triple and my winter trainer that has a std double.

I like the extra low gears that the triple offers for my longer summer runs and the little bit of extra weight is not an issue for racing

ddraver

For crying out loud guys, how hard is this?! I know we re roadies and we have to use the poshest most fashionable kit there is in case the club guys sneer at us but is this really this difficult? If you live in an area with lots of hills, you re not the lightest/fittest rider then use a compact with a wide range cassette (as I did when I lived in N Wales). If you live in a pancake flat area where the biggest thing you climb over is a bridge then have a full size one with a narrow range cassette (as I do now I live in holland).

Nobody care what you ride, if they do, then they re not worth caring about!

RoadMeridaBen

MattC59 wrote:

Nickel wrote:

Im amazed we're two pages in and we haven't yet had anyone claiming they've ridden hardknott pass in 42x19 and anyone who needs a compact should sell their bike and give up cycling.

I suspect that the way RoadMeridaBen likes blowing his own trumpet, he'll be along any minute to tell us he has.

Where did that come from? thanks for the mention btw :P

(also i live nowhere near the place!)

neeb

A compact gives you more flexibility than a 53/39. It's really only tradition that favours a 53/39, unless you actually need a 53-11 highest gear (i.e. you are an elite-level sprinter). Most people using 53/39 chainsets are using a cassette with a 12T smallest sprocket, and thus are gaining absolutely no advantage from using a standard instead of compact (a 50T chainring paired with an 11T sprocket is a slightly larger gear than a 53-12). The one perceived disadvantage of a compact is in fact a red herring - for some bizarre marketing reason, almost all compact chainsets these days are 50/34, which means that the jump between the big ring and the small ring is greater than in a 53/39, which can prove annoying. However, you can swap the 34 ring for a 36 to get exactly the same jump between the chainrings. A 50/36 would be a superior setup for the vast majority of people currently using a 53/39. It will feel exactly the same, except that you will be able to run an 11-23 on the back instead of a 12-25, or an 11-25 instead of a 12-27. You get the same outcome, with the advantage that if you ever need lower gears for seriously epic climbing you have more room to play with in terms of adding bigger sprockets at the back (or even re-fitting the 34T ring as a last resort). You can also usually get a tighter spread of cogs on the back than with the equivalent 53/39 setup.

secretsqizz

RoadMeridaBen wrote:

My roadbike came with a 50/34 and changed to 53/39, but to be honest I've yet to find a hill I cant tackle with a 53/39 - 12-25. You just need to make the change if you want to ofcourse, you will get used to the double overtime but if you dont try it you'l be stuck with with that funky 34 forever! :P

Well my hero, I'd pay to see you tackle some cols then, to see your pain ....

(offer is time limited and subject to terms and conditions and you dont qualify)

napoleond

I use a 52-37. Suits me grand. (I have a compact Rotor 3D+ and use Stronglight CT2 chainrings)

daysofspeed

Got a triple. Rode 41 miles last week including two climbs of Box Hill. Was on the granny ring I can tell you. No shame in that. At least I wasn't walking!

greasedscotsman

People worry about this far too much...

Pross

I use a standard 53 / 39 on my best bike with a choice of 12-25 or 12-27 cassette. On my winter bike I have a 53 / 42 with a 12-28 cassette. When I started back I felt embarrassed having to use gears like this as when I started out 42 x 21 was about the lowest standard gear (occassionally you would go for a 23 or 24 on a particularly hilly route) but I'd have done a huge amount of walking if I was still on that set up! Use what you are comfortable with is the best answer.

thiscocks

neeb wrote:

A compact gives you more flexibility than a 53/39. It's really only tradition that favours a 53/39, unless you actually need a 53-11 highest gear (i.e. you are an elite-level sprinter). Most people using 53/39 chainsets are using a cassette with a 12T smallest sprocket, and thus are gaining absolutely no advantage from using a standard instead of compact (a 50T chainring paired with an 11T sprocket is a slightly larger gear than a 53-12). The one perceived disadvantage of a compact is in fact a red herring - for some bizarre marketing reason, almost all compact chainsets these days are 50/34, which means that the jump between the big ring and the small ring is greater than in a 53/39, which can prove annoying. However, you can swap the 34 ring for a 36 to get exactly the same jump between the chainrings. A 50/36 would be a superior setup for the vast majority of people currently using a 53/39. It will feel exactly the same, except that you will be able to run an 11-23 on the back instead of a 12-25, or an 11-25 instead of a 12-27. You get the same outcome, with the advantage that if you ever need lower gears for seriously epic climbing you have more room to play with in terms of adding bigger sprockets at the back (or even re-fitting the 34T ring as a last resort). You can also usually get a tighter spread of cogs on the back than with the equivalent 53/39 setup.

36/23 gives you 0.1 gear inches higher than a 39/23 and 50/11 gives you 3 gear inches higher than 53/12 so basically no difference. There is no point whatsoever in changing from a 53/39 to a 50/36. You should just change the rear cassete to something like a 26-13 or 28-? if you are struggling up the hills.

neeb

thiscocks wrote:

36/23 gives you 0.1 gear inches higher than a 39/23 and 50/11 gives you 3 gear inches higher than 53/12 so basically no difference. There is no point whatsoever in changing from a 53/39 to a 50/36. You should just change the rear cassete to something like a 26-13 or 28-? if you are struggling up the hills.

(You mean 36/23 gives you 0.1 gear inches higher than a 39/25 and 50/11 gives you 3 gear inches higher than 53/12?)

Yes, that was my point - no difference. Sure, there's no point changing if you've already got a 53-39 chainset and you're not running out of gears, but equally if you're buying a chainset anyway you may as well get a compact. And if you DO ever need seriously low gears, you've got a lot more flexibility, because you can use smaller cogs on the back, which generally means smaller gaps between the cogs and the ability to retain the 11 T cog for the downhills.. Also, the whole setup is also quite a bit lighter.

What gets me is people saying that they somehow need a 53-39 chainset for racing when they are using a cassette with a 12 T smallest sprocket. That's just patently illogical. If they are using an 11T sprocket and really needing it, then fair enough.

thiscocks

yes sorry I meant 39/25.

Agree. 12-11 sprocket is quite a ramp in gearing, although this will not apply to those with 9 speed as 12 (i think) is the smallest you can go without finding some rare nos titanium thing for £100+!