Most say go for a compact over triple
p1tse
Posts: 694
Most say go for a compact over triple
With weight, not required unless doing steep hills, those starting and being unfit etc
But I've found a bike with triple, is it less smooth on gear changes, Is gearing better on a compact?
With weight, not required unless doing steep hills, those starting and being unfit etc
But I've found a bike with triple, is it less smooth on gear changes, Is gearing better on a compact?
Wanted: Cube Streamer/Agree GTC Compact / Pro/ Race : 53cm
0
Posts
But if you're happy, go for it.
Thanks
As a newbie I thought that in my head, better chain line and therefore shifting
Good article in the second issue of Cyclist magazine about gearing author is a big fan of triples although is reluctant to say so because they are seen as not cool, but really who gives a toss I'd rather ride up the hill than get off and push
Difference in weight between and Ultegra triple and Compact is 190g ish so less than half a pound, so for me being at least a stone overweight it is as you can see immaterial
This is absolutely true and an often overlooked major benefit of a triple.
My 12 mile ride to work is hilly (50+ feet per mile) and I ride it between 17-18mph average. The ace card of the triple is that on the middle ring (39 in my case) I can access all 10 sprockets, from 11 to 28, without crosschaining, so for the last few months I have never used either the big or granny ring on my commute. That's hundreds of miles.
It's the same story for generally rolling terrain with an averagely fit rider (me), where the 39 ring makes life very easy indeed as most of the time I want ratios that are 39 front and somewhere around the middle of the rear. It's ironic that having so much choice of gearing actually means you make fewer changes!
I'm a convert from a compact because as a compact user I was forever needing a "big-big" or "small-small" ratio (which is why you see a lot of compact riders riding with a bad chainline ("crosschaining") so to avoid this, on my compact, I was constantly hunting up and down the front rings to find the right cadence, and each such change needed a corresponding rear change too.
On Shimano 105 the difference is 150g.
Most triple skeptics don't understand (or believe) this benefit because you only really do so if you ride both systems extensively. And they are just far too cool to have (gasp!) three chainrings up front.
There are many other benefits but I've banged on about them on previous threads so I'll just stick to the (huge) benefit above for now.
The triple is good for loaded touring or hilly riding when it gets very steep but for for general riding i find it a bit annoying because it is more prone to the chain rubbing on the front derailleur even with the trim option.
I know in theory it has more gears with smaller jumps in the cassette but the actual useable gears is less than on the compact which i can set up and will work for months without any annoying noises before i need to fettle the gears again.
Find me on Strava
Interesting point. Not one I can relate to living in the flatlands of Essex, but it sounds very logical! But my question is, if you don't use the granny ring, why not switch to a standard double (53-39) and then you have the best of both worlds.
IME, triples are good for loaded-up touring on variable gradients, but prefer a double (standard or compact) for general riding.
Good question. Because I live in a hilly area and apart from my commute I generally ride very hilly routes, around 100ft per mile. On the steep road sections, the ratios of climbing gears I have on the granny are closer-spaced than on a compact. And of course I get a better bail-out gear for severely steep climbs like Hardnott pass.
I can see why someone in a non-hilly spot would not want a triple, fair enough.
My 50/34 compact seems better for average riding - althought it is 10 speed and my old triple was only 8 I think.
Precisely my point: I'm not.
How do you know the capabilities of the poster (Sprool)? Your profile says you are 22. Some of us are over twice your age and carrying a fair few extra pounds for good measure, so any extra help on a steep hill is very welcome for us. I would hope in time to not need the small ring, but the extra weight is so tiny that the cost is neglegible.
Just to put the numbers in context, the extra weight of a triple is perhaps a 0.2 % increase. A 30 instead of 34 chainring is worth around 12%. I know which I'd rather have.