Triple vs. Double vs. compact triple

[mikki]

As I've mentioned in previous posts, I am in the research stage of purchasing my dream bike. I am female, 5'5 1/2" . In this process, my wonderful local bike shop has loaned me a Serotta St and now a Seven ID8. Both have compact double chainrings. I am coming off a triple chainring in my old bike and am finding myself getting stronger but have trepidation thinking about doing some of the centuries I've done with just a double...I have a distinct gut feeling that the bike shop owner is subtly trying to steer me into a double; not sure why but it is so much easier to shift and seems to feel lighter. My worry is conquering the hills I've managed with my triple, even shifting imperfectly.

What is a compact triple? Why would someone get one? Any comments on the double vs. triple vs. compact triple? :rolleyes:

[dave thompson]

As I've mentioned in previous posts, I am in the research stage of purchasing my dream bike. I am female, 5'5 1/2" . In this process, my wonderful local bike shop has loaned me a Serotta St and now a Seven ID8. Both have compact double chainrings. I am coming off a triple chainring in my old bike and am finding myself getting stronger but have trepidation thinking about doing some of the centuries I've done with just a double...I have a distinct gut feeling that the bike shop owner is subtly trying to steer me into a double; not sure why but it is so much easier to shift and seems to feel lighter. My worry is conquering the hills I've managed with my triple, even shifting imperfectly.

What is a compact triple? Why would someone get one? Any comments on the double vs. triple vs. compact triple? :rolleyes:
I've had all three, on different bikes. First, a modern properly set-up triple shifts very well. My wife's Calfee has a triple and she's not complained about hard or erratic shifting. (providing I've done my shop tuning it! :D )

A compact triple generally is used for severe conditions such as loaded touring where you have to live on the bike for days on end, in all kinds of weather and terrain. Or if the bike is going to be used for 'exploring'; wandering on the bike and taking roads that look interesting, which may be unpaved or quite rough.

Generally a 'regular' triple, with an appropriately sized cassette, will get you most anywhere you want to go on the road. You may wind up spinning up long climbs at a few MPH but you'll make it to the top without hurting yourself in the process.

A compact double can get you almost the same (not quite) low gearing as a triple but the gearing choices of what gear to use are not as good as a triple. The compact is lighter (not a huge amount) and does shift slightly better, but as I said the triple doesn't shift badly, just different.

The choice of equipment boils down to what will get the job done. I think either a triple or a compact double would be the two I would look at. I would ask your LBS to let you ride bikes with each type of equipment. Concentrate on the shifting and gearing, not on the bike itself. Your question may be answered then.

[barry1021]

I've had all three, on different bikes. First, a modern properly set-up triple shifts very well. My wife's Calfee has a triple and she's not complained about hard or erratic shifting. (providing I've done my shop tuning it! :D )

A compact triple generally is used for severe conditions such as loaded touring where you have to live on the bike for days on end, in all kinds of weather and terrain. Or if the bike is going to be used for 'exploring'; wandering on the bike and taking roads that look interesting, which may be unpaved or quite rough.

Generally a 'regular' triple, with an appropriately sized cassette, will get you most anywhere you want to go on the road. You may wind up spinning up long climbs at a few MPH but you'll make it to the top without hurting yourself in the process.

A compact double can get you almost the same (not quite) low gearing as a triple but the gearing choices of what gear to use are not as good as a triple. The compact is lighter (not a huge amount) and does shift slightly better, but as I said the triple doesn't shift badly, just different.

The choice of equipment boils down to what will get the job done. I think either a triple or a compact double would be the two I would look at. I would ask your LBS to let you ride bikes with each type of equipment. Concentrate on the shifting and gearing, not on the bike itself. Your question may be answered then.
I have two Fiertes, identical except one is a triple and one a regular double. The triple resides where I do hillier riding-I can switch back and forth from one bike to the other no problem, the shifting on the triple (ultegra) is a non-issue. a double is lighter but i doubt that you will notice the difference

b21

[flydhest]

I think I agree with what Dave wrote, but here's some of my take. The gearing that you need should drive the choice. If the goal is to have low enough gears, then I don't think that a triple is necessarily the answer. (My default is a double, but there's no reason for that to be yours). A triple will (almost) always allow you to have a bigger gear range and more choices in between. There are, however, a great deal of duplicate gears, so the latter distinction is less important, in my view. When setting up my wife's bike, this question came up. She has a 50/34 and a 13-29 cassette. The 50-13 top end does not restrict her riding in anyway. The 34-29 is a fairly low gear and we live in a relatively flat area anyway. Now, if she wanted/needed as big or a bigger top gear AND a lower bottom gear, then a triple would have been necessary.

I think triple devotees will tell you that you don't give anything meaningful up by having the triple. I think double devotees will tell you that a triple isn't necessary for most riding. These two arguments miss each other, in my view. As long as you don't need a triple due to gearing range (top to low, not just the low end), then, in my view, the choice becomes one of preference.

[dauwhe]

I've thought a lot about this, and have had good luck with VERY wide range doubles, like 46/33 with a 12-32 cassette. This gets you down to almost a 1:1 gear, which is nice on very, very steep hills.

I have another bike with a similar triple: 46/34/24 with 12-32. This will get me up anything I've ever seen, including 25% on dirt (Archambo road on D2R2)!

I've thought of using something like 46/30 with a 12-30, but am currently thinking about what you might call a compact triple: 44/32/22 with 12-27 or 12-30.

I like having very low gears, and I never use high gears (I've probably never been in my 46x12! But I like having a good range of climbing gears on a single ring--that's the appeal of the 33 or 32 ring. I can get from nearly flat cruising to a very steep hill without a front shift. I may go for the same idea with a compact triple--a really low (close to 1:1) gear on the middle ring, with the granny for super-horrible stuff (Mt. Ascutney, Lincoln Gap, a steep hill on the 2nd day of a 600k).

Good luck!

Dave

[SoCalSteve]

I think I agree with what Dave wrote, but here's some of my take. The gearing that you need should drive the choice. If the goal is to have low enough gears, then I don't think that a triple is necessarily the answer. (My default is a double, but there's no reason for that to be yours). A triple will (almost) always allow you to have a bigger gear range and more choices in between. There are, however, a great deal of duplicate gears, so the latter distinction is less important, in my view. When setting up my wife's bike, this question came up. She has a 50/34 and a 13-29 cassette. The 50-13 top end does not restrict her riding in anyway. The 34-29 is a fairly low gear and we live in a relatively flat area anyway. Now, if she wanted/needed as big or a bigger top gear AND a lower bottom gear, then a triple would have been necessary.

I think triple devotees will tell you that you don't give anything meaningful up by having the triple. I think double devotees will tell you that a triple isn't necessary for most riding. These two arguments miss each other, in my view. As long as you don't need a triple due to gearing range (top to low, not just the low end), then, in my view, the choice becomes one of preference.

If you look at the "modern day" triple as a double with a "bail out " gear...Then there is no reason to NOT have a triple. The double portion of a triple shifts 98% as well as a double.

A double uses a 53/39 (standard) and a triple uses a 53/39/30 (in most cases) For the most part, you will NOT use the 30. BUT, and this is a big but (no pun intended) when you need the 30, it sure is nice. I would never consider doing a Century (unless I knew it was very flat) on a double. If you encounter a big hill towards the last bit of your ride, wouldnt it be nice to shift into that 30 (bail out) and spin up?

I found that compacts(for the most part) are a huge compromise in gearing. Why would you bother? To save a few grams? Not worth it, imho.

Good luck,

Steve

[Climb01742]

I've thought of using something like 46/30 with a 12-30,

dave, what kind of crank could run a 46/30? is it a mtb crank? thanks.

[flydhest]

Steve,
Thanks for making my point. The option value you describe seems like the ticket for a lot of people in a lot of situations. In SoCal, you often have a mix of flat and fast and then some real climbing, so your position makes a lot of sense.

Other people may obsess about the 2% of performance you talk about. Hey, this is a sport where people seriously think that 250 grams matters on a bike with a rider on it. Sorry, if I phrase it as a half pound, more people will think it matters, but . . . for a 200 pound package, that's less than .25% Think how they would react to a 2% difference, or 4 pounds. Under those circumstances, they will swear up and down that they can feel the differenece those 2% make. (Note, for smaller riders, adjust down the weight--if you weigh 100 pounds with the bike, that would be 2 pounds.)

On the other other hand, I can honestly say that none of my rides that are under 75 miles has a climb that I need my 39-25, let alone something smaller. I have a wheelset with a 13-29 for longer rides in the Shenandoah Mountains.

[dauwhe]

dave, what kind of crank could run a 46/30? is it a mtb crank? thanks.

TA Carmina has a 94bcd, which allows as low as 29 teeth. Available from Peter White...

Dave

[thwart]

I have a compact double and a triple, on different bikes.

If I had to live with only one bike in my area of many short steep hills, I would go with the triple. Especially if that is what I was used to...

I would also go with Campy since their triple set-up is clearly superior to Shimano, atmo.

[flydhest]

I have a compact double and a triple, on different bikes.

If I had to live with only one bike in my area of many short steep hills, I would go with the triple. Especially if that is what I was used to...

I would also go with Campy since their triple set-up is clearly superior to Shimano, atmo.

Please elaborate on why.

[thwart]

A double uses a 53/39 (standard) and a triple uses a 53/39/30 (in most cases) For the most part, you will NOT use the 30. BUT, and this is a big but (no pun intended) when you need the 30, it sure is nice. I would never consider doing a Century (unless I knew it was very flat) on a double. If you encounter a big hill towards the last bit of your ride, wouldnt it be nice to shift into that 30 (bail out) and spin up.

I found that compacts(for the most part) are a huge compromise in gearing. Why would you bother? To save a few grams? Not worth it, imho.

I agree completely, with the only change being I would remove the "huge" in describing the compromise.

[dirtdigger88]

Ill offer an opinion in a few weeks- Im in the process of making my Kirk a true all- arounder

XTR RD
XTR 11-34
Sugio 50-34

:cool:

Jason

[flydhest]

Ill offer an opinion in a few weeks- Im in the process of making my Kirk a true all- arounder

XTR RD
XTR 11-34
Sugio 50-34

:cool:

Jason

Jason,
Looks like you have the range of gears covered. Is that 9 speeds in back? Do you know what the cogs are?

[dirtdigger88]

9 speed out back-

34-30-26-23-20-17-15-13-11

and yes- downtube shifters

Jason

[goonster]

A compact double can get you almost the same (not quite) low gearing as a triple but the gearing choices of what gear to use are not as good as a triple.

+1 :beer:

It really boils down to exactly that.

I went from a 50/40/30 triple to a 46/34 double because I thought I could eliminate a chainring with no real tradeoffs. Lower top gear, higher low gear, I can deal with that.

Wrong. With the 40 I could do 90% of my riding without a front shift. With the double I'm shifting three times as much in the front, the chainline for the 46 is crap on the bigger cogs, and it's too tall for a lot of hills I could previously do in the 40. Plus, it turns out 34/27 is not quite a low enough bailout gear for the second day of a hilly 600 km.

I'm going back to a triple because I have no ego. :beer:

dave, what kind of crank could run a 46/30? is it a mtb crank? thanks.

Also: TA Pro 5 Vis

http://www.specialites-ta.com/produits/trans/pro5.jpg

Expensive, hard to find, not compatible with wide fder cages, tight pedal threads, big outer rings are no good . . . and still the coolest crank evar.

[Karin Kirk]

Mikki - how fun for you to be enjoying the search for the dream bike! Sounds like you are onto some excellent choices.

I do some coaching with our local women riders, and I've gathered a few observations that may be more applicable to women than men.

Nowadays many entry level bikes come with triples as standard equipment, so that's what our current generation of new riders (esp. new women) 'grow up with.'

The 'bailout' notion of a triple is a very appealing thing, emotionally. This is the biggest reason why many women are hesitant to go to a double. It's nice to know that you won't get stuck in a position where it will be extremely difficult for you to get up a climb.

The other side of this coin is that the bailout gear is always just a finger-flick away. I see a lot of women immediately shift to the little ring as soon as the road goes uphill and the breathing rate rises. I see two drawbacks to this. First is that there is a lot of extra shifting going on (and many people haven't gotten proper instruction on how to really use the triple, in terms of which gears to use and which to avoid). Second, and more important to me, is that many of the women I've seen resort to the very easy gears rather than staying in a harder gear and pushing themselves a bit more. For some women, the idea of turning yourself inside out to get up a climb does not come natually. For lots of guys, it's pretty natural to be able to do that.

On the other hand, maybe just having the triple on your bike will allow you to go out on hillier rides. In that regard, you may end up able to ride harder because you've got the triple there. My take home message is to get the gearing that will help you acheive your goals. My only caveat is to encourage you to not use the easier gears just because they're there. Truly save the bailout gear for the times you need bailing out!

[SoCalSteve]

I have a compact double and a triple, on different bikes.

If I had to live with only one bike in my area of many short steep hills, I would go with the triple. Especially if that is what I was used to...

I would also go with Campy since their triple set-up is clearly superior to Shimano, atmo.

-2

Try the Dura Ace 10 speed triple set up. You'll NEVER go back.

[jthurow]

I ride two compact doubles; one 48/36 on my commuter and a 50/36 on my new to me CSi. I really like both of them. I don't have any problems with having to shift between the rings to find my favorite gears. The reason being is, and here is my recommendation to Mikki, I looked at what the gear inches were going to be on each bike before I set them up.

Since I knew what the gear inches of the chainring/sprocket combos I used most often were on my other bikes, I only had to figure out where those same gear inches would be found using compact chainrings and a given cassette. The 50/36 I have on the CSi, closely matches the gearing I have on my Lemond with the 52/39 (which I ride similarly), but I loose one of the high gears (which I only spin out when going down a hill) and gained a low gear, which I'm really happy is there when I need it. The 48/36 lowers the upper gearing a bit more since I'm carrying too much crap when commuting to get going too fast :rolleyes: So Mikki, I suggest figuring out the chainring/sprocket combos you are in most of the time, go to Sheldon Brown's Gear Calculator (http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/), input your current set-up and see where the gear inches fall and then play around to see where a compact double or triple would place those gear inches, given a particular cassette.

Good luck with your search for your dream bike, Mikki. I'm jealous...

jimi

[CalfeeFly]

Ill offer an opinion in a few weeks- Im in the process of making my Kirk a true all- arounder

XTR RD
XTR 11-34
Sugio 50-34

:cool:

Jason

I hope it works for you. I had the same set-up on one bike but the problem was getting enough B tension to keep the jockey wheels apart. I rigged it for a while in a wild fashion with a wing nut attached to the B tension screw. The wing nut then gave me the right distance when it hit the notch on the dropout. It worked fine but bugged the anal roadie in me. I replaced it with a 32 worked without modifications. My guess is yours will work. In my case it is an older frame and the B tension screw would slip off of the dropout eventually. If for some chance the screw isn't long enough my hardware store (a great one) has had metric screws to fit my Shimano uses.

Take care and happy riding on your Kirk.

[93legendti]

Ill offer an opinion in a few weeks- Im in the process of making my Kirk a true all- arounder

XTR RD
XTR 11-34
Sugio 50-34

:cool:

Jason
I agree. When my wife and I went to Tuscany and Napa and she was a novice biker, I set up the bike with a double and a huge XTR cogset and she was fine.

No one has mentioned q factor, but if I recall my use of a modified triple (52, 42, 26 and a 12-23 cogset) in the Alps and Dolomites back in the '90's, the slightly wider stance of the triple crank combined with 8 days of climbing huge cols tweaked my right leg a bit. Just sayin'.

[CalfeeFly]

There was a similar thread on the Calfee forum. The person ended up with a triple. Here is his reply.

I ended up buying a slightly used Campy Chorus Triple and have been riding it for a few days. So far I do not see any down side to riding with a triple; unless you consider the few extra grams a downside.

The shifting on the front derailleur is about the same as it was with my double, and the spacing between the 30-42-53 chain rings seems about right for me. I can jump between the chain rings without changing the cassette cog.

Well, I might be a social outcast now at coffee houses.

Bruce

I ride both a triple and compact. I like them both. I do prefer my middle ring to be a 39 and the way Shimano sets up their Dura-Ace triple. You literally can easily ride it as a double. It is a favorite of Dave as well. Mine is the 9 speed version. My one compact is Record and another is a mix.

Enjoy your decision. I would get wider gearing because it is there when you need it. The advice not to immediately go to the lowest gear is good advice. I did when I first started to ride again a long time ago. It is an easy habit to get into doing.

[dirtdigger88]

I hope it works for you. I had the same set-up on one bike but the problem was getting enough B tension to keep the jockey wheels apart.
.

I thought I would have this problem but I dont- I was pleasantly suprised

jason

[thwart]

Try the Dura Ace 10 speed triple set up. You'll NEVER go back. Duly noted... However my experience with an Ultegra 9 spd triple almost made me swear off triples... My Centaur 9 spd is vastly better, without the constant need for minor adjustment, and I avoid the "Shimano knows best" approach to their front derailleurs.

I also have a Record triple, 10 spd---almost as good as the 9 spd. Awaiting an ultra narrow chain to (hopefully) achieve shifting nirvana.

Here we go with the S***** vs. C**** wars :banana:

[mikki]

"The other side of this coin is that the bailout gear is always just a finger-flick away. I see a lot of women immediately shift to the little ring as soon as the road goes uphill and the breathing rate rises. . "


WOW. How good to hear from a woman who knows how we women ride! I aspire to be like these great male riders and my current experience of riding these doubles is exactly as you mentioned. I too, am guilty of going into that bail out gear too soon. Now, riding both the Ottrott and now Seven's IB8, the bike's are like having wings beneath me anyway. My husband says that I am much more aggressive on these doubles than he ever saw me on my triple (one big difference...these bikes are close to fitting me and my Trek carbon isn't...). I am getting stronger and stronger but mentally am afraid when I look ahead and see that big hill comin' up. I am in Laguna Niguel...lots of hills around. I have been riding this sweet ride for two days now and have gotten into it's top gear just a few times. I feel myself challenging myself so much more with the double; no escape route available..

What gears on a triple should one avoid like you said?

:cool:

[Dave]

-2

Try the Dura Ace 10 speed triple set up. You'll NEVER go back.

Campy users don't want big, heavy, ugly, expensive, nonrepairable shifters with exposed cables and very limited ability to trim. They've already got the best.

Also, try to find a little ring with a 92mm BCD other than a 30T for a DA triple. Good luck. The 74mm used by nearly all others is easy to find.

[Ahneida Ride]

I bail out to the easier gear I can every time and I am Proud of it !!!
easier gear and spin. and Yes I do want to ride like a girl.
and yes I want a triple .... with grandma gears,

and if you think I am a wuss, I challenge you to a squatting contest.

[Grant McLean]

It says something about our modern society that people feel they "need"
30 gears, and that flipping a lever to shift between chainrings is deemed
too much hassle. I hope there's a single speed waiting for me in heaven...

g

[Elefantino]

[M]aybe just having the triple on your bike will allow you to go out on hillier rides. In that regard, you may end up able to ride harder because you've got the triple there. My take home message is to get the gearing that will help you acheive your goals.

Sage.

[Bud]

FWIW, here's my (admittedly limited) experience. I have a triple on the Fierte (52-42-30, 12-27) and a compact double on the commutocross (50-34, 11-32). My riding terrain could be characterized as some kind of continuum from rolling -> mountainous.

While comparing the two setups is somewhat like comparing apples and oranges since they are on different bikes (which often serve different purposes, but do cover much of the same terrain), I will say this: I don't think I would ever switch the Fierte out to a compact double (even though my double setup covers a little bit larger range- see below) simply due to the fact that the spacing between the rear cogs is not sufficient for long days/miles. There are some big jumps in that cogset, which works fine for my commute and for riding on the trails around here, but which I'd never take on a jaunt up the canyons or over the passes. It's simply not as comfortable to me as the triple arrangement for that type of riding.

Go with what makes you smile, not with what others think will make you smile.

And by the way, I don't want to get in on this campy/shimano pissing match (which amuses me to no end in some sick, train wreck kind of way), but my Ultegra triple setup shifts no worries and is quite a joy to ride.

[Karin Kirk]

Yes I do want to ride like a girl.
and if you think I am a wuss, I challenge you to a squatting contest.

So what.. first you want to ride like a girl and then you want to pee like one?

[Karin Kirk]

WOW. How good to hear from a woman who knows how we women ride! I aspire to be like these great male riders and my current experience of riding these doubles is exactly as you mentioned. I too, am guilty of going into that bail out gear too soon. Now, riding both the Ottrott and now Seven's IB8, the bike's are like having wings beneath me anyway. My husband says that I am much more aggressive on these doubles than he ever saw me on my triple (one big difference...these bikes are close to fitting me and my Trek carbon isn't...). I am getting stronger and stronger but mentally am afraid when I look ahead and see that big hill comin' up. I am in Laguna Niguel...lots of hills around. I have been riding this sweet ride for two days now and have gotten into it's top gear just a few times. I feel myself challenging myself so much more with the double; no escape route available..

What gears on a triple should one avoid like you said?

:cool:

Sounds to me Mikki, that you are up for the challenge of the double. I really like how you are open to pushing yourself and setting your sights high - way to go! If you are enjoying the challenge of the tougher gearing then go for it. You are quite right that it will make you a lot stronger, and no doubt it will help you keep up with the guys.

When it comes to your century rides with the tough climbs, my guess is that you'll be used to the gearing and you will surprise yourself. If you run out of gear, you'll still be able to grunt your way up one way or another.

Next topic, gears to avoid. I call them the 'contradictory gears,' which means chosing the hardest gear in front and then the easiest in the back (i.e. 52 x 25), or vice versa (26 x 12), or anything even close to these combinations. You'll notice when riding in these gear combinations that there is no possible way to get the chain to be quiet because of the odd angle it's taking.

With a triple, when you're in the small chainring, you want to only be in the easiest few gears in back. If you shift into a harder gear in back, say somewhere in the middle of the cogs, then things get whacky, so you'll want to shift to the middle ring in front instead. Make sense?

Another way to explain it is that you generally want the chain to run in a straight line, and combinations that cause the chain to run from the far left in the front to the far right in the back (or the other way around) will result in unhappiness.

You can generally tell when your drivetrain is happy with you because it's nice and quiet. :)

[kat_w]

As a female who has thought a lot about this question if you are fit you should go with the compact double. Guys in bike shops usually underestimate a women's ability rather than overestimate a woman's ability. Sad but in my experience true. So if they think you can handle a compact double then you probably can. A few things to consider about triples and the gears you would be losing with a double.

1. q-factor -- my biggest gripe with triples. the triple puts your right leg out a little bit farther than a double and I believe this is the root my knee and hip (IT band) issues. Also my calf muscle ends up rubbing my front derailleur when I am in my big ring.

2. bottom end of a 50/34 compared to a 52/42/36? you are loosing some gears but you say you are stronger so it might not be such a big deal. You probably can make up for this by putting on a 12-27 cassette instead of the more standard 12-25 cassette. Not sure what comes stock on a compact bike.

3. top end -- this is what worried me about a compact double you are losing a few gears on the high end of the spectrum too a 50 x 12 vs a 52 x 12. My friends with compact doubles can keep up fine with them on the flats and downhills.


Go for the compact double!

[Ginger]

I have recently returned to a triple setup for brevets this summer. I don't doubt that my compact campy double with a 13-29 on the rear would do any century I want to do, but for things above 200k, I'm concerned about my three surgery knees. So I'm on the triple for this year. But the compact double with a medium cage der and a 13-29 on the rear really let me climb anything I needed to...

The one thing I noticed is 14 years ago, I didn't shift correctly, nor spin fast enough to do anything with the granny. I'm really amused by it now. After 12 years on standard doubles and the last 2 years on a compact double, now that I can spin, I can use the granny gear. (gosh...I feel old...).

Something mentioned here is of interest. When I went from a triple, to a double, my knees bothered me for a while, I think it was the lower q factor...one of those "any change" issues...but I have sensitive knees.

[Grant McLean]

Something mentioned here is of interest. When I went from a triple, to a double, my knees bothered me for a while, I think it was the lower q factor...one of those "any change" issues...but I have sensitive knees.

good pont ginger. Narrower Q isn't better for everyone. I have washers
between the crank and pedals on my bikes with double alloy cranks,
the wider Q works better for me.

g

[Ahneida Ride]

So what.. first you want to ride like a girl and then you want to pee like one?

It's what a man does standing up, a woman does sitting down and a dog
does with one leg raised ..... Shake hands of course.

Real men (and women) pump iron .....

http://www.exrx.net/AnimatedEx/Quadriceps/BBFullSquat.gif

[Lifelover]

This whole issue has very little to do with Sex. The only thing that matters when climbing is body weight to strength ratio. There is some magic but I don't know for sure what it is.

I would guess that for men it is around 180 lbs.

For women it may vary some but I would guess it around 155 lbs.


If you weigh more get a triple and if you weigh less get compact double.

[Karin Kirk]

This whole issue has very little to do with Sex. The only thing that matters when climbing is body weight to strength ratio.

Oh gosh, if it were all so simple as strength/weight we'd have a lot less to talk about! :)
I think that there is lots more than that at play, such as mental toughness, pacing, tactics, etc. This is true for all sports, and all aspects of cycling, but I have found it to be especially important while climbing because that's often where we push ourselves the most. IMHO, for the riding I've done, the ability to push myself is considerably more important than my fitness level. Of course, the two are intertwined. Confidence increases with fitness.

Hence, gender is indeed relevant because men and women often have different types of self-motivation in sports.

[Ginger]

If you weigh more get a triple and if you weigh less get compact double.

Whoa. Really? You need to check your numbers. Outside of that, I'm with Karin on this one. It isn't that simple.

[Bud]

This whole issue has very little to do with Sex. The only thing that matters when climbing is body weight to strength ratio. There is some magic but I don't know for sure what it is.

I would guess that for men it is around 180 lbs.

For women it may vary some but I would guess it around 155 lbs.


If you weigh more get a triple and if you weigh less get compact double.

I weigh 160-165 and I prefer a triple (see my previous post). Sorry to violate your postulate...

Oh- and I like to climb. A lot :D

[David Kirk]

100-130lbs - single fixed gear.
131-150lbs - single freewheel.
151-180lbs - double
181-220lbs - triple
221-250lbs - quad
251-275lbs - five rings


no exceptions.

Dave

[Dave]

I've already posted a picture of the generally accepted "useable" gear combinations (but what happened to it?). The lines in red indicate chainlines that are too extreme. I'll disagree about the middle ring and smallest cog on a triple because the middle ring on a triple is in nearly the same position as the big ring on a double. It's quite useable.

http://forums.thepaceline.net/showthread.php?t=27085&page=2&pp=15

The idea that you can only use the lowest few cogs with the little ring is not correct. Each ring is spaced less than twice the distance between cogs, so when you add a ring, at most you lose access to two cogs.

One poster complained about "duplicate gears". Duplicate gears are a good thing. If you had no duplicate gears, you would have to shift 7 cogs every time you switched between the chainrings. For example, a no duplicate gear setup would be a 53/27. Let's say you have a 12-25 cassette. If you're in the big ring and shift down to the 53/23, but soon need a lower gear, you would shift to the 27T chainring, then through 7 cogs to the 13 for the next lowest ratio. If you were riding an area with a slight back and forth change in the grade, you might have to make this shift over and over. Wouldn't that be a miserable setup! Duplicate gears create a small range of 3-4 combinations that are the same in either of two chainrings for a very good reason.

The point is that you can't have your cake and eat it too. If you want to increase range with only two chainrigs, the number of duplicate gears is reduced, but the amount of cog shifting is increased. Modern brake/shift levers can shift up to 3 cogs larger with one sweep of a lever. The common 50/34 can require 4-cog shifts.

Adding chain rings will always add "duplicate gears". The additional duplicate gears with a triple are a GOOD thing, because you actually have 8 combinations that can be used without being forced to make another chainring shift. One good idea is to space the rings such that the same number of cog-shifts is required after each chainring shift. In that manner, it's a no-brainer to shift to a smaller ring, then 2-3 cogs smaller in order to produce a uniform gearing progression. Adding another chainring adds 3-5 more useable gear ratios, plain and simple. Increasing the jump between chainrings with a compact adds only 1 to 1-1/2. In both cases, the more ratios added, the fewer will be duplicates. Too few duplicates is not good, since it causes excessive cog shifting.

The common 53/39/30 is a uniform progression setup, while a 53/42/30 is not. My 53/39/28 is not uniform either, but I chose it for good reason. I want the additional low gearing offered by the 28T and I know that I MAY want to shift one more cog when I shift down to the little ring. I always shift down 3-cogs (with one push on the Campy thumb button) and try that combination first, before shifting any more. I also find that the 28 to 39 chainring shift makes a great transition between seated and standing pedaling with NO cog shifting. On long mountain climbs, I like to alternate between seated and standing pedaling, so this shift is quite handy.

I will say that if I was riding hills, I wouldn't like a triple as well as a double, but I also would never need a compact. I've never used anything lower that a 39/25 on hilly terrain, but if I were in need of an easier touring or long ride setup, a 53/39 with a 13-29 cassette would probably be my choice. I use a 53/39/28 triple these days because I almost always ride into the mountains. In the mountains, the duplicate gears allow me to stay in the little ring almost any time I'm pedaling seated. If I chose to pedal standing, I shift up to the middle ring. Out of the mountains, I lose the use of the 39/25 due to the extreme chainline. I don't often need a 39/25 or lower, but if I do, I certainly have the option to shift to the little ring on those occasions.

Edit: I should add that I weigh 135 (but I'm nearly 54 years old). Weight is not as much a consideration as power to weight. Obviously anyone who's carrying much extra weight will need lower gearing than those who are lean.

[Lifelover]

I weigh 160-165 and I prefer a triple (see my previous post). Sorry to violate your postulate...

Oh- and I like to climb. A lot :D

I weigh 250+ and have one bike with a compact triple and two with standard doubles.

However, I only climb on two or three trips a year.