Double or triple chainset?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Flyingfox

Senior Member
Location
SE London
I've come to the conclusion that I would like a road bike as well as my hybrid.

My price range is around £700-800 and have been looking around but not made any decision yet, but need to narrow my search. One question I have is whether to go for a double or triple chainset - is there that much difference on a road bike.

My hybrid is a triple (48,38,28 with 13,25) and I struggle on some hills as it is not the lightest of bikes and I do suffer from asthma.
 

rockyraccoon

Veteran
You have answer your own question there. You hybrid quite low gears.. if you are struggling with that you should look for a road bike that has lower gears as many as possible. So the front lower than 28 and for the back greater than 26.

I don't know what is the lowest chaining you can get on a road bike but the cassette can be easily replaced.
 

aberal

Veteran
Location
Midlothian
A double with a 28 cog at the rear and a 34 small chainring at the front will give you a lower gear than a triple with a 30 small chainring at the front and a 25 cog at the rear. So the short answer is, no you don't need a triple to get a low enough gear. I have a triple with the gearing I've just described and it's a pointless palaver compared to a simple compact double at the front.
 

DCCD

Über Member
Location
South Ayrshire
I'd agree with aberal. A road bike should be lighter than your hybrid too. Sram Apex do a compact with 34/50 front and 11-32 rear cassette.
That may prove tricky to find on something in budget but you'd not be too far off.
 
OP
OP
Flyingfox

Flyingfox

Senior Member
Location
SE London
Thanks guys, I'll check out what is available with a double compact with the ratio you mentioned but won't rule out a triple. I guess ultimately I should try before I buy - now for which type of gears!!!
 

srw

It's a bit more complicated than that...
Before you jump, have another look around the forum. The most common advice is to go for a triple. The weight penalty is negligible, the faff is non-existent, and you get three useful chainrings - one for going quickly, one for going normally and one for going up hills. People with compacts commonly report that they regularly change between chainrings.
 

aberal

Veteran
Location
Midlothian
Before you jump, have another look around the forum. The most common advice is to go for a triple. The weight penalty is negligible, the faff is non-existent, and you get three useful chainrings - one for going quickly, one for going normally and one for going up hills. People with compacts commonly report that they regularly change between chainrings.

I disagree with everything you have just said, other than the negligibility of the weight, which is irrelevant. But each to their own, it boils down to personal choice at the end of the day. IMO triples are unnecessary on the average road bike for the average rider except for full blown touring and perhaps audax.
 

PaulSecteur

No longer a Specialized fanboy
I like tripples, and heres for why...

I have a tripple on my secteur (10 speed) and tricross (9 speed), and in all honesty in normal riding I cant remember having to go down to the granny ring. Before these bikes I used a roadied up mountain bike with an 11-32 cassette and one of the major annoyances was the gaps in ratios of the 3 larger cogs on the cassette. Its hard to describe, but imagine driving a car with 8 gears, but 2nd and 4th are broken, you just cant seem to match your speed to the revs you want.

With a tripple that doesnt happen, and if you do need a lower gear the granny is there for that.

I dont really agree with the "tripples are complicated" arguement, its just moving a lever.
 

aberal

Veteran
Location
Midlothian
I like tripples, and heres for why...

I have a tripple on my secteur (10 speed) and tricross (9 speed), and in all honesty in normal riding I cant remember having to go down to the granny ring.

Then you don't need a triple. You don't even need a compact if you don't use the granny ring. You could live with a 52-42 which used to standard off the shelf for road bikes. The issue with the "missing gears" happens with a triple too - both my bikes have triples and I often have to move up a gear or two when I drop into a lower chainring. Granted it can be slightly greater a shift with a compact but the principle is the same - you just have to adjust your gear changing to compensate. It's no big deal.
 

ColinJ

Puzzle game procrastinator!
A double with a 28 cog at the rear and a 34 small chainring at the front will give you a lower gear than a triple with a 30 small chainring at the front and a 25 cog at the rear. So the short answer is, no you don't need a triple to get a low enough gear. I have a triple with the gearing I've just described and it's a pointless palaver compared to a simple compact double at the front.
A 34/28 gear is 1.214:1 and a 30/25 is only 1.200:1 so the 30/25 is actually a lower gear, but only slightly.

I have a 30/28 bottom gear on my triple and I use every gear I have. Mind you, I'm 3 stone overweight and I do cycle up lots of 15-25% hills ...

I haven't used a compact chainset so I can't comment from experience, but I don't like the idea of a 147% step up to the big ring (50?). On my triple, the steps between the rings are 130% and 133%.

I like the gears on my Cannondale when I am fit enough to use them - a 13-29 cassette and standard 53/39 chainset (136% step).
 

APK

New Member
Like you, I am new to road bikes, and also suffer from some breathing issues, my Allez is a triple, as I bought secondhand, I don't use the granny ring much, but do struggle on hills, and there have been times when I have used the lowest gear, so have been glad I had it.

There seems to be a degree of macho bs around triples, in that real men don't need them! I have yet to hear a convincing argument against, as the extra weight/complexity is minimal, at the moment I am glad I have it, maybe as I get fitter I will use less and less, and maybe my next bike will be a compact, but for now I would take the tripple and leave all options open.
 

rockyraccoon

Veteran
I had a double which was replaced for a compact. Sometimes I wished I had a triple.
sad.gif
 

Tim Bennet.

Entirely Average Member
Location
S of Kendal
There's only really two choices: an ordinary 39/52 double if you are a good club rider (or better) or the same thing with an extra inner ring fitted if you are a more average rider or attracted to the hills / slightly older / more robustly constructed / slight asthma, etc

The compact chainset is a marketing coup that has tapped into both the manufactures' need to restrict inventory levels at each price point and the vanity of some riders.

Although to be fair, they probably work for the average continental rider's need for some extra help before tackling rides like the Etape du Tour or Marmotte etc. In these they ride along the valley in the big ring, arrive at the bottom of some col, drop into the small ring at the front and then sit in that for the next two hours. As they crest the top of the climb, it's back into the big ring for the hour long descent and ride along to the next climb. Even to do a monstrously long day like the Marmotte probably only requires four down shifts and three up shifts at the front in 12 hours! UK riding is not like that - it's up and down all day with viscous kicks and some ridiculously steep longer climbs if that is your fancy. More is better!
 

pepecat

Well-Known Member
My trek 1.2 (entry level - £550 ish) has a triple at the front, and while most of the time i stay on the middle ring, the 'granny ring' does come in useful for a spot of granny spinning up a hill or two. If I"m feeling energetic on the way home, there's a lovely long very gradual descent where you can click onto the big front ring and really get some speed going.
Go for the triple!
 
Top Bottom