Question on Gearing - More specifically 2013 Ultegra Triple vs 2014 Ultegra Compact

[Judith_39]

Hi, So, first post here (after my introduction one in the sticky thread). Glad to have found you!

I started road biking "seriously" this year on a second-hand bike which fits ok, but given that I'm riding more and more, I've decided that it's time to splash out on a new bike, and I don't want to go below 105 in component level (although I know it will cost me some $$$). Following a trip to my LBS this weekend, I was looking at this years models, and previews of what to expect on next years. I have spotted two pretty good deals, but I'm in a bit of a quandry as to which would be best for me (assuming a similar frame)

Background info: My current bike is a men's/unisex 2003 Scott team issue, which has a Shimano 105 triple ring (50, 42, 30) and 13-25 on the back. I spend most of my time going up hills as I am fortunate enough to live very close to the Swiss alps, and I've been very happy with my triple in helping with that. I don't really race (the odd triathlon, but only for fun), enjoy going fast and the odd bit of acceleration for fun, but tend to do longish outings (100-150km) most weekends, either on my own, or in a small group (usually with guys). The two set-ups I've been looking at are the following:

Ultegra triple - 52-39-30 with Tiagra 12-30 (10)
Ultegra 2014 Compact 50-34 with Ultegra 12-32 (11)

I'm comfortable with the idea of a triple, especially one that gives me extra gears over what I have now :) but I've never ridden a compact before so don't know how it would compare. The gus in the LBS is setting up the triple (on a 2013 Specialized Ruby Comp) for me to test next weekend, but as the new 2014 models aren't out yet, just in the catalogue, I won't be able to test those (both Ruby and Amira) until later. The bike he has in he'll do me a good deal on, so I don't want to miss out on it if I ride it and decide I like it, but it's still a lot of money to spend before I've had the possibility to test the others! (Although I could take the risk it won't sell before the new models get in - he said he'd order them asap)

So either way I'm looking for any advice you guys might have on what the differences I can expect from these chainsets to be? Will I miss my middle ring if I go with a compact? Will the 32 on the back of the compact with the 34 on front be comparable to the easiest on the triple?

Thanks! and PS If you have any advice on the Ruby vs Amira I'd be happy to take any input from you (and also to suggestions for any other makes/models which might be worth taking a look at - I'll also be trying out a Canandale Synapse next weekend, and a Trek (can't remember the exact model... from a different shop), but I do like the look of the Ruby....)

[indysteel]

By my calculations using Sheldon Brown's gear calculator and using 700X23cc wheels and 170mm cranks as assumptions, your smallest gear on the proposed triple configuration will be 2.0 gear inches compared to 2.1 on the proposed compact configuration. You smallest gear with your current set up is 2.5 gear inches. So, from that standpoint, either set up will be provide a lower gear or gears than what you have now.

In my own experience in going from a triple to a compact (and then back to a triple), this is what I have to same in terms of differences" With the compact, I often found myself searching for that "sweet spot," i.e., that perfect gear, on the flats and/or in windier conditions, where microadjustments to gearing often seems more noticeable. With a compact, there are bigger jumps between some gears, especially if you use a wider cassette. I also missed a few of my bigger gears in downhill or tailwind conditions. I did run out of gears on occassion. I will say that shifting with a double, be it a compact or standard is often easier and smoother, and you will find yourself shifting more between chainrings that you might with your triple.

If you have the specifics for your cassettes, you might run them through a gear calculator and compare the specifis.

[Boudicca]

Whichever one you get, I will be jealous. I just switched out a 12-25 rear cassette to a 11-28 one (triple in the front), and love the extra gears it gave me in both directions. But I can't fit a larger rear cassette without also switching out the rear derailleur.

FWIW I have a triple on one road bike and a compact on the other, and even before the switch the triple was definitely better on the hills.

[Skippyak]

I have never had a triple but your option of 34/32 is pretty awesome, I live in the wasatch and I just got a compact on the front with 28 in the back (after standard double and standard double with 25) so climbing now is nicer, I am not spinning up the canyons but I can keep my HR below lactate thresholds on the decent climbs with the compact. I don't notice anything negative on50/34..11-28 as I just don;t see that much flat or fast riding. I My other bike stays as a standard double with 25 in the back should I want to punish myself or do flat rides. What is the weight impact of the triple over the compact? You are looking at more sporty bikes not tourers, but you should note what your LBS advises/sells most of as you live in the mountains. I bought my bike a little blind online so I learned the hard way. If I was under 40, I probably wouldn't have bothered with the compact, but at approaching 50. I conceded. I love to climb and I want to do it for a long time. The compact crankset in ultegra 6700 only cost 160 on comp cyclist though, it is not a huge expense to tweak if your mechanic works for food LOL. I mean that the decision you make does not have to be forever whatever bike you choose.

[Judith_39]

Muirenn, I looked at the bike you posted, I think that might be the model after mine (mine has a lovely yellow/silver colour scheme :rolleyes:) but it definitely has a scandium/aluminium frame like that the one you linked to, so I think it's probably pretty stiff. I had it measured at the LBS at the weekend, and they told me it was a 52 frame size which is probably very slightly on the big side for me - I'm 5ft5. I've not found the stiffness to be a problem, which maybe indicates that it suits me quite well. I'm not experienced enough to know if I ride hard - how do you know? I can generally keep up with the guys I ride with (hockey thighs come in useful sometimes) and I probably average around 30km/h on the flat/rolling stuff, and my average speed on a mountain outing with some decent climbing comes in around 25km/h if I'm on my own, both a bit faster if I'm with a group. I've not noticed any issues with my riding position on this bike (which I'm supposing, being a team issue is relatively agresstive?)

I hadn't thought about taking the frame stiffness into consideration, but they want to try me on a 51 frame Ruby Comp (the one with the Ultegra triple) this weekend, so I'll see how that goes. I might ask if they have a Tarmac in in the same size (or smaller) just to get a feel as I know they don't have an Amira in stock. After reading all the replies though I'm wondering if out of the two I might not be better off with an Amira... although I think that was only the 30, not the 32 option for the 2014 model.

I'm now looking to see if any of the shops in my area carry Pinarello - I don't see so many of them being ridden around here, but given they're Italian, they can't be too far away ;) I've also lined up looking at Kuota and potentially Merida over the new weekend too.

Thanks for all the advice so far, it's been really helpful - it's not easy buying a bike, but searching is proving fun! I've never spent so much money on any single item other than my car, so I want to make sure I make the right choice! Then I'll have to work out whether I want to keep my MTB pedals, or if I should get road pedals and new shoes (but that's a different topic).