Compact versus triple

[david k]

i use my compact in the small ring 99% of the time, there 9 gears and i find the range great for my needs, even steep climbs

 

[oldfatfool]

Look at it this way, You either carry the extra weight all the time and have a granny gear if you need it, or you never carry the weight and get off and push when you hit a slope greater then you can manage.

 

[SlowerThanASluggishSloth]

I've been using a triple for years. I like it because it is easy to maintain cadence without double changes and, as has also been mentioned, there's an element of reassurance in having the lower ratios. I am not interested in breaking any records so the weight of an extra chainring is irrelevant to me. Some riders may look down on 'MTB components on a road bike' but frankly I couldn't care less about their opinion and none of the people I've ever cycled with have ever disparaged my set-up (to my face! ).

 

[MacB]

but frankly I couldn't care less about their opinion and none of the people I've ever cycled with have ever disparaged my set-up (to my face! ).

well I would, I'd point and laugh and mock mercilessly, as you cycled past me uphill and I'd keep going until I ran out of breath regardless of how fast you moved beyond earshot.

 

[threebikesmcginty]

Hub.

 

[PaulSB]

I rode a triple for years but last June when buying a new bike my LBS, who are usually right about all things, urged me to get a double. I'd been considering the bike purchase for 12 months and agonising over the double / triple thing for that time. Most of my club ride doubles. Like the OP I wanted the reassurance of a granny ring.

Eventually I went with the double. It took about 1000 miles to get used to it but I now find my riding has improved significantly. After starting off on the small ring, I always used the middle on my triple, I now ride almost exclusively on the big ring reserving the smaller one for hills. I find Jill climbing easier than previously.


---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=53.702258,-2.588284

 

[david k]

jill climning? nice

 

[david k]

I've been using a triple for years. I like it because it is easy to maintain cadence without double changes and, as has also been mentioned, there's an element of reassurance in having the lower ratios. I am not interested in breaking any records so the weight of an extra chainring is irrelevant to me. Some riders may look down on 'MTB components on a road bike' but frankly I couldn't care less about their opinion and none of the people I've ever cycled with have ever disparaged my set-up (to my face! ).

i find moving from my middle to small ring is too big a jump and i lose momentum

 

[Riding in Circles]

Now that triple 10 speeds are more generally available with the mechs to handle them you will see a decrease in compacts being offered, they were primarily around to allow low enough gears for climbing when 10 speed cranksets were introduced and only doubles were available.

 

[aberal]

Now that triple 10 speeds are more generally available with the mechs to handle them you will see a decrease in compacts being offered, they were primarily around to allow low enough gears for climbing when 10 speed cranksets were introduced and only doubles were available.

I don't think that that is strictly the case TBH. It has nothing to do with the number of cogs on the cassette. Road bikes used to be only offered (say around 10 years ago) with "racing" gearing such as a double 52-42 front and 12-21 or 24 at the back. This was a marketing assumption that road bikes were designed as "racers" bought by people who wanted to race. Compacts didn't exist and the only alternative to racing gearing to get low enough gearing for big hills for an averagely fit person was a triple. The introduction of compacts came about with the marketing realisation that more and more people were interested in cycling road bikes, but simply not interested in racing and couldn't handle or didn't want the high gearing that came with it. Compacts simply offer easy, low gearing using tried and tested double shifters and mechs.

 

[david k]

Now that triple 10 speeds are more generally available with the mechs to handle them you will see a decrease in compacts being offered, they were primarily around to allow low enough gears for climbing when 10 speed cranksets were introduced and only doubles were available.

i have both and dont ride fast and struggle on hills and have yet not found any issue using either

i find the compact a bit easier because i stay on the small ring and have a good range of gears, makes it simpler
saying that i do pretty much the same on my tripple but stay in the middle ring

 

[Nearly there]

so whats the best cassette range to have on a compact? looking at different bikes they all vary but are still compacts

 

[Garz]

so whats the best cassette range to have on a compact? looking at different bikes they all vary but are still compacts

Depends on the user, needs and lastly fitness levels. Some guys swap cassettes to suit terrain for example.

A 12-23 would be adequate for most terrain to be fair, however for the unfit or hillier terrain you would have a 25 or 27 (not including the MTB cassette/hanger or the recent introduction of the SRAM Apex offerings).

My expensive bike in an 11spd compact offering 27t on the back will get me up anything, however I managed on the other bike which had a 23t on the same sportives - I just had to be fitter or almost burst a blood vessel without the bail-out.

 

[Banjo]

i find moving from my middle to small ring is too big a jump and i lose momentum

This is where a triple scores over a double in that the jump in size between rings isnt so great.

The way to avoid losing momentum is to do a double shift.When you change down to a smaller ring simultaneously change to a smaller cog on the cassette.This will keep you pedalling without spinning like crazy after changing down a ring.

 

[Nearly there]

thats made things clearer for me as i live in a hilly area