Triple on a road bike - yay or nay

[Tollers]

Climbing up hills steeper that 8% at 80 cadence is really ‘out of the question’ on a road bike, even one with a 30 ring and 27 sprocket.

That must be where i'm going wrong Jimbo, i have none of the above combo's on my road bike (30,42,52) (12-25) so that explains why i'm crap going up hills.

Are you a total dimwit?

Your bike has a 30 ring and 21 sprocket which is 38". You should fly up a 10%.

Hold on. I read this as you saying that you can't go up anything steeper than 8% with gearing higher than 30x27 (i'm not sure where that statement came from, or if it's just a poorly phrased joke). Bhoyjim then points out that his gearing is higher, but then you shot him down (rudely) for listening to you and state the opposite to your original statement.

Think you should say sorry Jimbo!

 

[GrasB]

Exactly the same with a triple with an extra low gearbox can t see the problem. Look at the terrain select the ring use the cassette simple.

50t chainring with a 13-26 cassette I have 12 to 36 (42mph for short periods) in theory on the flat in my comfort zone. The 34t chainring covers from 23mph (26mph) down. As I'm comfortably working on the top chainring for most of the time dropping to the bottom gives me the extended range I want.

The complication of a triple comes in that with the 52t chainring I'm dropping out of my comfort zone at 14mph, which is a little to high really. Then with the middle chain ring though I can sustain 26mph for reasonable periods that's at higher ppm so I've got to swap chainrings to put in some real power if I want to accelerate quickly from around 18mph up, now I can drop as low as 9mph in the middle chainring but for me that's a middle-of-nowhere speed. On the bottom chainring I'm tapping out for sustained cadence at 19mph which doesn't give a comfortable overlap with the top chainring.

The result is I'm always finding on a triple I'm having to put more thought into chainring selection & I swap chainrings more often. The triples more annoying ratio set is made to feel even more problematic when I can use a 13-29 cassette on a 34/50 compact without any noticeable ratio holes to my legs which gives me basically the same bottom end as the 30:26 combination & down hill scope for well passed 40mph.

Please take into consideration I'm talking about the way I ride & how the gear ratios work for me. I'm comfortable sustaining 120ppm & can hold 135ppm for short but sustained periods on the flat, when going down hill I can sustain 140-150ppm.

 

[lukesdad]

With ref. to the OP. Although my example may be extreme. The principle remains the same. After upto two hours or + flat out I still want to get home in one piece hence the triple. He wants to use aflat block on sportives etc. and have the insurance to get home. A compact is not the way to go.

How come you can get your head round all this theory,yet the selection of ring on a triple seems to bemuse you.

 

[GrasB]

If I paraphrase my original reply I said "do what you think will work".

How come you can get your head round all this theory,yet the selection of ring on a triple seems to bemuse you.

No, the bemusement is yours because you can't understand there is another solution to the problem that works for me & it's not your solution. I don't say riding on a 34/50 with 13-29 block is the ultimate solution & no one should use anything other than that, I say it works for me. What you're trying to tell me is that a setup I've tried & found doesn't work for me I should be using.

See with a triple I found a 13-29 block has ratio holes in it, this isn't true for a 34/50 setup. Back on the triple while a 13-26 doesn't have these holes it doesn't give me any low-end gearing advantage over the 34/50 compact & pushes the ratio sets about enough that I'm often finding my self between chainrings in my riding. The result is a natural match for my riding is found on the compact so I ride quicker, more smoothly, for longer & enjoy the ride more. With a triple I have to try & remember if that hill ahead was a 5% or 7% gradient to work out which is the right chainring, if I'm doing that I've not got the right setup.

 

[lukesdad]

So what should the OP do in your opinion then ?

 

[wafflycat]

Using a triple can be tricky if you go about it the wrong way. Forget about gear inches and similar ratios. What you need to focus on is the chainwheel. Its simple after that.

I've never had any problems using triples.

 

[wafflycat]

See that's the problem with triples, because they have a fair amount of overlap working out what chainring to be on is a pita. With a compact setup it's high or low simple.

Then you are overcomplicating things. I've never had any problems *ever* using a triple...

 

[GrasB]

By the sounds of it stick to what he's got:

I have a road bike and for the last year have been using a compact, which I find fantastic. Seems to me though that a high quality triple chain ring, with a relatively flat block at the back would offer the greatest flexibility of all - you could spin up all but the hardest of climbs and not lose out on top end gearing either.

Though I think the underlined bit is incorrect assuming a 34t compact v's 30t triple bottom chainring. As the difference between 30:27 & 34:27 @ 80ppm in still air is a 0.5% gradient.

 

[GrasB]

Then you are overcomplicating things. I've never had any problems *ever* using a triple...

Not really, I've just found consistently a triple leaves me between 1 set of 2 chainrings, on my old 8 sp setup I had a similar issue & was always swapping between the middle & top chainrings & the same on the 10sp setup. This changing has been eliminated by using a compact.

 

[Fab Foodie]

The result is I'm always finding on a triple I'm having to put more thought into chainring selection & I swap chainrings more often. The triples more annoying ratio set is made to feel even more problematic when I can use a 13-29 cassette on a 34/50 compact without any noticeable ratio holes to my legs which gives me basically the same bottom end as the 30:26 combination & down hill scope for well passed 40mph.

Please take into consideration I'm talking about the way I ride & how the gear ratios work for me.

And here I agree to a certain extent.
We don't all cycle the same way. Whether GrasB is typical or aytipical of most road-bike cyclists would take some research. I always hated 53/39 set-ups as I always found a big hole where I there should have been the gears I needed, hence a lot of double shifting for good progress.

My own experience shows I like short gaps between chainrings, so 50/40/30 is good and I've found 52/42/30 actually better (42x15 is my fixed wheel fave), the 30T is a granny anyway so I don't mind the bigger drop there. Unlike GrasB I find that simply dropping from 52 to 42 provides ME with a useable transition, but I can imagine it not suiting everybodies style (I don't spin much).

Having said all that.... I've rarely heard anyone complain about a triple set-up, but know plenty who find Compacts hard to live with. In addition it's easy to convert from a Triple to a compact, but expensive to do it the other way around. For those 2 reasons I would always proffer the advice to somebody relatively inexperienced to opt for a triple over a compact as the safest bet.

 

[alecstilleyedye]

Exactly the same with a triple with an extra low gearbox can t see the problem. Look at the terrain select the ring use the cassette simple.

i think of my 30/42/52 triple as a normal double with an extra granny ring for climbing. on the flat i use exactly the same ratios as when riding my other bike with a standard 42/52 double.

 

[jimboalee]

i think of my 30/42/52 triple as a normal double with an extra granny ring for climbing. on the flat i use exactly the same ratios as when riding my other bike with a standard 42/52 double.

I think of my 30/42/52 ( with a 9 cassette ) as a 42 ring with 7 gears ( the middle 7 ). There are some higher gears with the big ring and some lower gears with the little ring.

 

[alecstilleyedye]

I think of my 30/42/52 ( with a 9 cassette ) as a 42 ring with 7 gears ( the middle 7 ). There are some higher gears with the big ring and some lower gears with the little ring.

the trick is avoiding big-big and small-small, especially the latter as i've known the chain jam between the sprocket and chainstay…

but essentially that's a good way to think of it on varied terrain.

 

[Fab Foodie]

i think of my 30/42/52 triple as a normal double with an extra granny ring for climbing. on the flat i use exactly the same ratios as when riding my other bike with a standard 42/52 double.

Exactamundo.
Always preferred 52/42 over 53/39 which to me has too big a gap between rings, the 10T difference between 52 and 42 is a useful interval for my style and cadence of riding.
The 30T is just like a crawler gear.

 

[Halfmanhalfbike]

Wow. Thumbs up all 'round then.

I must admit I love the idea of having that flexibility to maintain your speed but double your cadence, it seems pointless to just default to 1st gear at the foot of every climb and slog all the way up.

I have heard that they can be more problematic or not change gear as sweetly - and of course racers will scorn and spit in disgust, but then every mountain bike I've ever seen has a triple, and all the entry level bikes have them, so they can't be that bad.

What kind of blocks do you guys run at the back in conjunction then?
I think I might be sold! . Yay indeed.

On my big bulky Tourer I have 48/38/28 with a 30-11 on the back. On my Cannodale Synapse I have 50/39/30 with 26 - 12 on the back. I also have a Spesh Allez compact with runs a 50/34 with a 25 - 12.

All of them get me up any hill (at least so far )