change a triple to compact

[yello]

I have these idle thoughts sometimes... changing my campag veloce triple to a compact.

Obviously not as simple as just changing chainset... new front mech, maybe bb, probably rear mech and cassette, possibly even levers... just about a whole new groupset really

Probably more pfaff and expense, no? What'chya reckon? Buying a 2nd hand compact is doubtless simpler.

 

[BigTone0777]

Yes Yes Yes most definately change it and sell me your triple group really cheap

 

[raindog]

Unless you're unhappy with your set-up yello, what would be the point?

 

[yello]

No real point, just because... as I said, idle thought.

Though, having never ridden a compact, I'd like to know practically what it's like.

At the moment, I pretty much stay on the middle ring. Granny is for climbing, big ring for descents... pretty lazy really. I suspect the practicality for me would be that the front mech would see more service!

 

[Garz]

Sounds to me like you should stick with what you have and use the granny ring for what it's meant for (bailing you out on tough terrain or long days). For all the faff and money thrown at it I would wait till the rings wear out or dérailleur packs in.

Why not try a friends compact or test ride a steed equipped with one from your LBS?

The compact just offers a similar gearing ratio albeit with more jumps and slightly less weight. The attractive aspect to compacts now is from the newer groupsets giving you a 32t option or around that for flexibility.

 

[rich p]

I can't see much point. It may be cheaper to buy a new bike with a compact fitted!

Someone on here told me that they found that they were forever changing betwwen rings with a compact although, like you, I have no direct experience myself.

 

[yello]

For all the faff and money thrown at it I would wait till the rings wear out or dérailleur packs in

So doable then?

 

[Garz]

Oh certainly do-able yello, just would be easier to justify say if you could transfer to another bike or sell them on.

 

[alecstilleyedye]

pointless. the only advantage to compact i can see is that it allows those who are snobbish about triples the chance to ride double and feel cool.

a top cyclist will ride standard double (52/42 or similar) with no bigger than 25 at the back. they don't need low gears because they are extremely good riders (there are a few of these in my club).

a triple gives you the option of the same setup with the addition of lower ratios to aid hill climbing (e.g. 52/42/30) which means that no compromise has to be made in terms of top end speed. true, the triple setup is slightly heavier, but if you are good enough to be concerned about that, you should be able to ride standard double.

a compact is a messy compromise that, admittedly, is more suitable for the novice road cyclist than standard double, and makes a nice easy choice for the manufacturers/retailers as it's a cheaper setup, keeping bike prices down. it's easy enough to convert a compact to standard double, should need be. the problem with them is that they do not offer good spread of gears. a triple can glide in small increments from a gear for climbing a mountain to one for descending it. to avoid the huge gap in gearing between big and little rings, the compact chainset compromises at both extremes; a 34/50 for instance gives higher climbing gears and lower top gears.

when i bought the bike that got me back into cycling it came with a standard double which was fine unless i wanted to go hill climbing. as i realised i needed a set of lower gears, i looked carefully into the pros and cons of triple vs compact. the only reason to go compact would have been price and 'cool' factor, other than that the triple won hands down.

if you're used to a triple, you'll probably find one ring too high, and the other too low for everyday riding.

 

[yello]

Totally accepted alecs, but I'm more interested in the how than they why!

The chances of me actually doing it are next to nil but I'm interested to know what needs to be considered.

 

[alecstilleyedye]

in which case, simples. limit the front mech travel so it only goes far enough for the second ring, take links out of the chain as required and job's a good'un…

probably

 

[Aperitif]

Bottom bracket, front derailleur and left-hand lever perhaps, Andrew? I have two bikes with Campagnolo triples and often wondered the same! My Planet X is a compact however, and I find it ok (it's just my body that runs out of options - not the gearing ) - the range is enough (so far) to get me up stuff and I'm not in need of any fast gears anyway.
As for moving between rings, generally, I have learnt to drop down the block one or two cogs when using the '34', and then just 'go to the '50' as necessary. I suppose the chain is going to be about mid-cassette either way, prior to change, for best chainline.
IT sounds like you need a new bike!

 

[alecstilleyedye]

n+1 is the best solution, of course

 

[RecordAceFromNew]

Obviously not as simple as just changing chainset... new front mech, maybe bb, probably rear mech and cassette, possibly even levers... just about a whole new groupset really

Assuming all your components are currently ship-shaped, imho chance is there is very little "collateral damage" to your wallet required.

The main problem is to know what you have, since Veloce has been through numerous generations over the years with different specs.

However assuming your groupset is current, then officially the triple uses a 115mm bb while doubles have 111mm bb (unless bike has oversized tubes then it would also be 115mm). Anyhow since the 115mm is roughly 4mm longer on the drive side, putting a compact on will mean it sticking out same over designed. However because the compact is narrower by nearly the same and because all mechs have leeway to go over, mech reach "should not" be a problem despite committing the sin of reusing the old bb.

Since the existing rear mech obviously can wrap far more chain than the compact yields you can even be lazy (you can call it retaining flexibility for potential future changes) and not even shortening the chain if you don't want to.

The only remaining issue then is whether a triple mech will shift a compact up as well as a double mech. The physics is not very different - a double mech can be seen to have a slight advantage, but all front shifts are agricultural at best (for cure see 1xN below) and it should work if properly adjusted.

Benefit? You will lose around 100g for around £100 unless you beg, borrow, steal or fleabay - I only said limited "collateral damage". £100 for 100g + busy left hand suck, imho.

Actually one move that seemingly and surprisingly hasn't been mentioned much here but is all the rage (even) offroad is going 1xN where N is the number of speeds at the back. Since these days 11-34T and even 11-36T cassettes* are available and many have modern long cage rear mechs already, getting a light single (say around 38T e.g.) chainset, ditching the front mech, associated cabling as well as the front shifter (particularly for flat bars) should probably be considered by more roadies (and softcore offroaders), and they shouldn't even need a chain keeper.

It could be a very liberating experience.

* alas, the fly in the ointment, is Compaq freehub owners need not apply - Compaq cassettes are only available up to 29T

 

[Aperitif]

Actually one move that seemingly and surprisingly hasn't been mentioned much here but is all the rage (even) offroad is going 1xN where N is the number of speeds at the back. Since these days 11-34T and even 11-36T cassettes*

Good point! 'zigzag' / Rimas of this parish rides a diddy 'front end'. He rides 600k for a pootle, 1200kms for a little 'run out' for the weekend, that sort of thing. <Insert expletives here > Works well for him, but he is exceptionally fit. (And crazy.)