That's why I didn't go for a compact double when they came out. I did some math and realized that in the rolling hills I often ride, I'd be shifting the front constantly, whereas with the triple with a 42T (not 39T or smaller) middle ring, I almost never have to shift the front.
What happened to 3 chainring setups
- Thread starter tinywheels
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
That's why I didn't go for a compact double when they came out. I did some math and realized that in the rolling hills I often ride, I'd be shifting the front constantly, whereas with the triple with a 42T (not 39T or smaller) middle ring, I almost never have to shift the front.
I have Dura-Ace 9-sp shifters on the two bikes I ride most, bar-end (on the aerobars) on my go-fast bike, and down-tube on my junker errand bike. They're indexed for the rear derailleur, but not the front. No problem there of course. Our 1999 tandem has RSX brifters, and the front is indexed, with only one position for the middle ring, but the derailleur cage is wide enough that it's not a problem. The 105 brifters on one of the road bikes of our younger son have two positions for the middle ring. Last week he was having trouble with it so he brought it to me. I just turned the barrel adjuster on the down tube and the problem was quickly remedied.
Thank you matticus for the articles you linked to.
There's a myth that triples don't shift as well as doubles. The triple should instead be viewed as a double that shifts better than a double, because of the fewer-teeth difference between the big ring and the next one down, plus a granny ring for the rare times you need it but are glad it's there when you do. With a 30-42-52 crankset, I can stay in the 42T middle ring almost full time and seldom shift the front, from climbing at down to 8mph, up to high 20's. BTW, best front shifting comes from ignoring Shimano's front-derailleur mounting instructions and instead making the rear tip of the cage be out slightly farther than the front, rather than parallel to the chainring like Shimano says. (You might have to make a slight change in the cable routing to get the right amount of travel if your front shifter is indexed.) I had problems with the tandem until someone on the tandem@hobbes forum told me about this trick. Since then, it has been flawless.
I and my family stopped at 9-speed, because it was becoming clear, in the year or two after 10-speed came out, that the 10-sp chains were not lasting nearly as long (in addition to being more expensive). If they go to 12- and 13-speed, the chains have to get even narrower, leaving less internal surface area to handle the wear, and I'm sure durability will again suffer. I have no doubt that it is again a situation where the industry is trying to grow in a flat market by trying to convince us that what we have is inferior and we have to buy their latest (I will not say 'greatest'!). Isn't adding another chainring and a front derailleur lighter than adding several dinner-plate-sized cogs in back?! I was in the bike business in the late 1970's, and I would enjoy going back to it if it were the way it was 10-15 years ago. But after that, updates mostly ceased to be improvements.
ColinJ
Puzzle game procrastinator!
- Location
- Todmorden - Yorks/Lancs border
I bodged a triple chainset onto my CAAD5. The problem I sometimes have is getting the chain to go down from the middle ring to the little ring so I would be better off with the rear tip of the cage slightly farther in than the front of it!
That bike is in hibernation until spring. I will try turning the cage slightly in the spring and see if that helps alleviate the problem without causing other problems .
figbat
Former slippery scientist
- Location
- South Oxfordshire, UK
My ‘best’ MTB has a 32 chainring. And sometimes I curse that for being too big (even on a 50T cog)!
Dogtrousers
Lefty tighty. Get it righty.
Here's a period picture of a cyclist who used an STI shifter for the rear but decided against indexed shifting at the front (even though it is a double). Not sure who it is. Some obscure, long forgotten, nobody from the olden days.
Last edited:
It will need a little more travel, to compensate, which is why I mentioned that the cable might have to be routed slightly differently where it attaches to the front derailleur. (That's if you have front indexing.) After I've been on here a little longer, they'll let me post a picture. If you angle the rear tip of the cage more in, then when you try to shift down to the granny ring, there will be some tendency for the chain to drop off the inside, and you'll have to stop and put it back on.
That looks like the top of Mont Ventoux. He went for a down-tube shifter for the front because that and a regular brake lever is lighter than a brifter, and he wanted his climbing bike absolutely as light as he could get it.
ColinJ
Puzzle game procrastinator!
- Location
- Todmorden - Yorks/Lancs border
I have had that happen on other bikes, but with this setup I can barely get the chain off the middle ring. Another mm or so of movement would probably do the trick without any risk of shoving the chain too far over...
AND - I have a dog fang chain catcher installed to stop that happening anyway!
matticus
Guru
He looks quite cool! I expect he died in a crash without a lid on, thus cutting off a promising career ....
De Sisti
Guru
My three bikes, all triples, have 9-speed. I got the range I wanted from Spa Cycles (24-34-46). The rear cassette (and I have over 30, mainly 12-27, but some 11-30 and 11-34). From those cassettes I split to make my desired ratio (13-15-17-19-21-24-27-30-34). On the flat I spend most of my time on the 46 chainring (it is small enough that I don't feel that I am exhausing myself). The smaller chainring and larger sprokets enable me to get up all of the climbs the Cotswolds can throw at me.
Oh, and perfect shifting, even though I am using Campagnolo 10s Ergo levers and Shimano 9s 105 hub and cassette, Campagnolo 10s Champ triple rear derailleur.
Campagnolo triple front derailleurs on all bikes.
Shimano GRX 400 rear derailleur on one bike. Again, perfect shifting.
Oh, and perfect shifting, even though I am using Campagnolo 10s Ergo levers and Shimano 9s 105 hub and cassette, Campagnolo 10s Champ triple rear derailleur.
Campagnolo triple front derailleurs on all bikes.
Shimano GRX 400 rear derailleur on one bike. Again, perfect shifting.
Last edited:
presta
Legendary Member
That's what I was trying to find out, but I couldn't find enough weight data published.
chriswoody
Legendary Member
- Location
- Northern Germany
I few years back on this forum, this question came up and I happened to have a triple set up and a 1x set up lying around so I weighed them. This is my post from back then:
This comes up often and to be honest, whilst I couldn't really give a monkeys about the weight of my drivetrain, it did get me thinking. I have most of a 3 x 9 groupset downstairs off of an old bike and I have some spare 1x drivetrain parts lying around waiting to go on my Kona. So whilst the wife is out and I can put oily parts on the kitchen scales without getting caught, in the name of science and morbid curiosity lets get weighing!
Cassette 9 Speed - 335g as opposed to 11 speed cassette - 398 grams. (This is the base model, steel 10 - 42 SRAM cassette, so not a weight weenie)
Chain 9 speed - 292g, Chain 11 speed 263g.
Crankset - Triple crankset (Hollowtech 2 Deore LX) 1190g. Single Chainring crankset (Race Face Aeffect 652g)
Now for the components that only feature on a 3x :
Front gear cable 35g
Front Shifter 38g (The difference in official weight between a SRAM 1x Rival Brifter versus 2x Rival Brifter)
Front Mech 135g.
OK, some of that may be a little off, but not by much. I've also compared a 3 x 9 using a Hollowtech BB, because my 1 x system also uses a Hollowtech bottom bracket, so this is the same for both drivetrains. A square taper crankset/bottom bracket will be different.
So all up drivetrain weight for a 3 x 9 is 2025g versus 1313g for a 1x system, so 712 grams lighter for the one by. This isn't even an expensive lightweight 1 x system either, I must admit I was really surprised how little difference there was between my cassette weight and the 9 speed cassette.
Now it's by no means definitive, there are lighter and heavier versions of both systems out there, but it was what I had to hand and I found it an interesting comparison when I did it.
matticus
Guru
I've noticed racing CX that my bike (3 rings) gets much less debris in the (rear!) derailleur than most modern riders: from a quick glance this may be explained by their derailleur cages being much longer (and thus closer to the ground/grass/mud) - nearly everyone is on "1x" where i race, certainly if they have a newish bike.
Anyone with more off-road experience able to confirm/corrobarate/tear apart this idea?
*Incidentally, my front cage gathers mud, so that can be a DIS-advantage in cross (although it doesn't collect long grass, which rear cages seem to love!)
Anyone with more off-road experience able to confirm/corrobarate/tear apart this idea?
*Incidentally, my front cage gathers mud, so that can be a DIS-advantage in cross (although it doesn't collect long grass, which rear cages seem to love!)
Dogtrousers
Lefty tighty. Get it righty.
I've possibly already said this - can't be bothered to check up thread - but my theory is similar. I think the manufacturers may have moved away from triples because it means designing, manufacturing, and holding inventory of 2 variants of the left shifter (and RHS of the chainset) If Shimano was still churning out Sora and Tiagra (or whatever they call it now) triples, people would happily buy them.
You don't need a special variant of a friction shifter
