Triple chainset?

simon_e

GIF file of graph from Excel here shows ratios in inches with triple (52/39/30, solid lines) and compact (50/34, dashed lines). Based on Sheldon Brown's online calculator, selecting 12-25t 9 speed cassette and 700x25 tyres.

Bordersroadie

robbo2011 wrote:

But if you compare a 52/39/30 triple with a 50/34 compact, you will only have one lower gear for climbing.

That's a big positive. Having "only" one lower gear may mean the difference between riding or walking up some of the Fred Whitton climbs. You'd also have a bigger top gear in your example, another bonus.

I'm with the guy that said "big/big" "small/small", as these are the ratios that (although unusable due to cross-chaining) I seem to find I'd prefer to have for general cruising at I guess 17mph or thereabouts. On my compact I'm forever changing between the big and small rings up front. The mid ring of the triple would eliminate this problem and probably get a lot of use.

Let's be honest, anti-triple issues are all down to ego/snobbery/vanity/weighweenyism or such like.

citrus_

Bordersroadie wrote:

Let's be honest, anti-triple issues are all down to ego/snobbery/vanity/weighweenyism or such like.

Well you have clearly missed all the posts that have said that they are harder to set up and need tweaking more regularly then...

keef66

My triple has needed virtually no attention in the 4 years I've been running it.

I can use all 30 gears with no chain rub thanks to the trim function, and that's on a fairly small frame.

I'm a lazy bugger and spend most of my time in the middle ring.

I only use the 50t ring for downhills / tailwinds, so I know that with a compact I'd be constantly switching front rings.

Chris James

citrus wrote:

Bordersroadie wrote:

Let's be honest, anti-triple issues are all down to ego/snobbery/vanity/weighweenyism or such like.

Well you have clearly missed all the posts that have said that they are harder to set up and need tweaking more regularly then...

I have been running a triple equiped bike since 2006, with a lowly Tiagra front mech.

The only time I have had to fiddle with it was after changing the cable to allow for stretch, and that's only putting half a turn on the barrel adjuster - once - in six years. I'm not sure what these setup problems are that you describe?

Alibran

Chris James wrote:

The only time I have had to fiddle with it was after changing the cable to allow for stretch, and that's only putting half a turn on the barrel adjuster - once - in six years. I'm not sure what these setup problems are that you describe?

My lbs had trouble setting it up when they replaced the cables last summer (which is a bit of a concern since they mainly deal with MTBs). It took me 10 minutes, starting out with no knowledge of indexing beyond a youtube video I'd just watched, to sort it.

citrus_

Chris James wrote:

I'm not sure what these setup problems are that you describe?

Just a bit of chain rub on the most extreme cross chaining gears.

simon_e

citrus wrote:

Bordersroadie wrote:

Let's be honest, anti-triple issues are all down to ego/snobbery/vanity/weighweenyism or such like.

Well you have clearly missed all the posts that have said that they are harder to set up and need tweaking more regularly then...

Can't say I found that with mine. The only time I get rub is when the cable has stretched (a convenient excuse to upgrade to Di2, perhaps).

It's funny how those who think a third chainrings on a road bike is too many never argue against extra gears on the back

citrus_

Fair enough, its clearly only me who cant set my gears up properly!

Chris James

citrus wrote:

Chris James wrote:

I'm not sure what these setup problems are that you describe?

Just a bit of chain rub on the most extreme cross chaining gears.

Do your shifters have a trim function? That removes any rub for me.

citrus_

They do, but it's nice when it just shifts into exactly the right position without needing to trim.

andrewjoseph

I've got 49/34/24 front and 12/36 cassette. I'm not a racer and don't pretend to be one. I have only failed on a few wet mossy rough west country 'roads' fully loaded.

I hate walking when I'm supposed to be riding.

Hoopdriver

That's quite a set up. A big drop for your front mech, and with 36 on the back I am wondering how you manage the chain length...

andrewjoseph

Hoopdriver wrote:

That's quite a set up. A big drop for your front mech, and with 36 on the back I am wondering how you manage the chain length...

I have an mtb rear mech and never use extreme crossing. When not touring I hardly use the granny but use all the cassette. When touring I hardly use big ring, but as we're camping and carrying big loads, the granny gets a good workout.

migrantwing

Personal preference > fitness level > terrain

jameses

migrantwing wrote:

Personal preference > fitness level > terrain

Succint and reasonably accurate summary!

rob21

i would be lost without my triple
all down to personal preference TBH.
see below going to be getting this bike in a few weeks

http://www.jejamescycles.co.uk/cube-agr ... 66170.html

dombo6

I have a triple, 52/39/30 with 12-25 10 speed cassette. I rarely use the 30x25 but when i do i'm glad it's there. I ride mostly sportives and club rides - occasionally at the end of a ride there'll be a steep hill where the triple comes into its own, spinning up the hill saving my knees. Aesthetically a compact would look nicer, but i'm not that fussed.

houndlegs

rob21 wrote:

i would be lost without my triple
all down to personal preference TBH.
see below going to be getting this bike in a few weeks

http://www.jejamescycles.co.uk/cube-agr ... 66170.html

thats a mighty big reduction in price theyre giving you on that bike rob

rob21

houndlegs wrote:

rob21 wrote:

i would be lost without my triple
all down to personal preference TBH.
see below going to be getting this bike in a few weeks

http://www.jejamescycles.co.uk/cube-agr ... 66170.html

thats a mighty big reduction in price theyre giving you on that bike rob

yeh that made me a whole penny :roll:

teebs_123

I've gone from a triple to a compact with a 11-28 and it's been an easy transition so far. Going from Shimano 2300 to Ultegra also helped.

I had a nightmare keeping the triple indexed correctly.

migrantwing

JamesEs wrote:

migrantwing wrote:

Personal preference > fitness level > terrain

Succint and reasonably accurate summary!

Thank you, kind sir

Squillinossett

I tried a tripple for a bit and hated it! Also did a bit of time with a double - then just went back to compact as its what suits me. I find with a tripple I never used the full range, it was heavy, chain rub, pig to clean etc.

But, its very much a personal thing. My Mrs 9who has only been cycling two years) is more than happy on a double, with a 11-25 out back, and still kicks my rear on climbs :evil: :evil:

Bordersroadie

I'm a convert. I've used a compact for ages and now a triple for a few hundred miles.

One main advantage, hardly ever mentioned, is the versatility of that middle ring, and how it makes life so much easier.

On a compact I very often seem to need a gear which is "small small" or "big big" (ie small front ring with smallest rear, etc), neither of which are usable, due to chaincrossing, so I'm forever changing up and down the front on a compact every tme the terrain changes. I'm talking about the rolling sections, neither proper uphills nor downhills.

On a 40 middle chainring, with an 11-28 cassette, you're covered for 90% of terrain, so (somewhat ironically) you actually, in practice, need fewer changes when you use a triple, because much of the time you can just be going up and down the cassette, where you can use every one of the 10 sprockets without rubbing or chainbending. That 40-11 really is a nice long gear.

The granny ring is also superb in a hilly area like here, not just for the "extra lowest gear" aspect of it, but the fact that you have a closer set of low ratios - I don't feel that the gaps are a bit too big anymore on steep climbs. Again I hadn't really thought about it, it's only in practice that you find these things. So put your ego aside, change down to the small ring and enjoy a whole set of gear spacings that are better suited to climbing than the average compact set up.

Another nice difference noted includes much quicker and smoother front ring changes (stands to reason really).

Well worth "suffering" the alleged "drawbacks" of a triple, most of which seem to me to be spurious, tenuous, irrelevant or untrue.

rob21

Bordersroadie wrote:

I'm a convert. I've used a compact for ages and now a triple for a few hundred miles.

One main advantage, hardly ever mentioned, is the versatility of that middle ring, and how it makes life so much easier.

On a compact I very often seem to need a gear which is "small small" or "big big" (ie small front ring with smallest rear, etc), neither of which are usable, due to chaincrossing, so I'm forever changing up and down the front on a compact every tme the terrain changes. I'm talking about the rolling sections, neither proper uphills nor downhills.

On a 40 middle chainring, with an 11-28 cassette, you're covered for 90% of terrain, so (somewhat ironically) you actually, in practice, need fewer changes when you use a triple, because much of the time you can just be going up and down the cassette, where you can use every one of the 10 sprockets without rubbing or chainbending. That 40-11 really is a nice long gear.

The granny ring is also superb in a hilly area like here, not just for the "extra lowest gear" aspect of it, but the fact that you have a closer set of low ratios - I don't feel that the gaps are a bit too big anymore on steep climbs. Again I hadn't really thought about it, it's only in practice that you find these things. So put your ego aside, change down to the small ring and enjoy a whole set of gear spacings that are better suited to climbing than the average compact set up.

Another nice difference noted includes much quicker and smoother front ring changes (stands to reason really).

Well worth "suffering" the alleged "drawbacks" of a triple, most of which seem to me to be spurious, tenuous, irrelevant or untrue.

+1 to your post 8) below is a recent ride and i was so glad i rode my tripple....
http://connect.garmin.com/activity/168405593

secretsam

"Simon wrote:

I like my triple. The 39t is great for general riding, and I don't have the big gap between the 50 and 34 on a a compact, and where too often most people have to cross-chain it, riding big:big or small:small. Other people's aesthetics don't get me up hills, which is what gears are for, and I really don't care how many chainrings or gears anyone else wishes to use, that's up to them.

+1, end of debate

FWIW: Cannondale CAAD8 with a triple (50/39/30 to 12-16), which is ace - use the middle ring loads, granny strictly for mahoosive hills, could get the same with a big plate on the back but as others have noted, the 34/50 jump is quite big

johnbirkby46213

Bordersroadie wrote:

I'm a convert. I've used a compact for ages and now a triple for a few hundred miles.

One main advantage, hardly ever mentioned, is the versatility of that middle ring, and how it makes life so much easier.

On a compact I very often seem to need a gear which is "small small" or "big big" (ie small front ring with smallest rear, etc), neither of which are usable, due to chaincrossing, so I'm forever changing up and down the front on a compact every tme the terrain changes. I'm talking about the rolling sections, neither proper uphills nor downhills.

On a 40 middle chainring, with an 11-28 cassette, you're covered for 90% of terrain, so (somewhat ironically) you actually, in practice, need fewer changes when you use a triple, because much of the time you can just be going up and down the cassette, where you can use every one of the 10 sprockets without rubbing or chainbending. That 40-11 really is a nice long gear.

The granny ring is also superb in a hilly area like here, not just for the "extra lowest gear" aspect of it, but the fact that you have a closer set of low ratios - I don't feel that the gaps are a bit too big anymore on steep climbs. Again I hadn't really thought about it, it's only in practice that you find these things. So put your ego aside, change down to the small ring and enjoy a whole set of gear spacings that are better suited to climbing than the average compact set up.

Another nice difference noted includes much quicker and smoother front ring changes (stands to reason really).

Well worth "suffering" the alleged "drawbacks" of a triple, most of which seem to me to be spurious, tenuous, irrelevant or untrue.

+1 to that. I also am firmly in the camp that when out on my bike, I'd much rather ride a hill than walk it. I also have a car. Its got 6 forward gears. I use them all.

CakeLovinBeast

I have 105 triple on my bike (50-39-30), but I'm also one of those who doesn't really want the triple, and the aesthetics bother me. Anybody wanna swap?