By George, I think she's (almost) got it! Compact Vs. Triple

Ok, I played with the gearing charts last night till after 2 :D - read the Gearing 101 site as well which was really helpful - and combed through the forums.

So, now, I'd like to hear from those of you that have triples and those that have compacts... What I don't yet understand are the actual downsides to a triple. Are there any? (Besides any weight gains - I'm no weight-weenie since I've been riding a mtb on road for years and any future 'racing' I do will be for enjoyment/ the experience, not to get 'best time'.) For those of you that are casual riders with compacts - what are your impressions?

Thanks for your help!

I admire you for your studiousness!

My Luna came with a regular double, and I needed more easy gears than I could get with just changing out the cassette. I originally planned on getting a triple, but that proved problematic with all the technicalities involved--I don't know enough about it to give you the details, but it had something to do with the derailleur and shifters. Perhaps someone else can explain it.

So I went with a compact double and it works great. I rode the bike up Skyline Drive in the Blue Ridge--50 miles each way (spent the night at a lodge). Coming back down was almost as much climbing as going up.

Recently, I've been riding my Bike Friday, which has a triple. Next week begins Bike Virginia, which will be in the mountains of Virginia and Tennessee. I don't expect any problems with the gearing--just my legs and lungs.

So, the solution, as I see it, is to get two bikes. At least!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tulip

I admire you for your studiousness!

---

LOL! I'm just a computer junkie. :D

And I really do want to understand why the bias from the mfgrs and bike stores to push compacts - rather than asking "How do you use your mtb triple now? What gears are your body's sweet spots?" And "Well, it sounds like you're using your full range but need a little more on the upper end. So I'd suggest _____."

no downside - perhpas a double shifts more precisely in my subjective and slanted view. go for the triple if it's what you need.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alpinerabbit

no downside - perhpas a double shifts more precisely in my subjective and slanted view. go for the triple if it's what you need.

---

I would agree with this. The double is a smooth shifter (I have Ultegra).

I built up my custom bike with a triple. I'm a recreational rider (100-150 miles/week)--a plodder, not a racer.

I'm no longer considered young by most and while I may still get stronger, I may not. Having the triple means that when I'm tired and the wind is strong, I have a gear I can sit back, enjoy the breeze and spin. Having a triple means that when I see that long hill and my energy levels just aren't where they should be, I can sit up, drop into a low gear and climb.

I know I could get the same low gear with a properly designed compact, but, you know, I like having another gear close to the whatever is the current so that on long flat or false flat stretches I can find the perfect happy gear. Call me old fashioned or just call me not-quite-in-shape, but I like my triple.

Oh, and I put on a 30-39-50 with a 13-26 in the rear. And, for me, I've yet to run out of gears, but a lot of women on this board are a lot stronger and would probably never consider such bizarre gearing. I love it. Do what your body and legs need and enjoy your ride.

I have a triple on my entry-level bike (Trek 1000).

I think there's a lot of ego involved in debate. And marketing. I like my triple, even though I rarely use the small ring anymore. I like being prepared for anything, and the triple makes me feel prepared.

I'll ride it that way until I get another bike, and then I'll probably take what's on the bike that I like best. I have an '83 Centurion on the stand right now getting an overhaul, and it only has 2 rings in the front. Since it's a touring bike, it probably has a different gearing set up than my Trek. (I don't pay much attention to such things.) I'll just ride it when it's done. I'll ride it for different reasons, of course, but I'll ride it.

It matters to some, and to some it doesn't. There's no one right answer. If you're unhappy for reasons other than someone telling you to be, change it!

Karen

Oh, and if you decide to go triple, consder Campy. With Campy, the front derailleur has "infinite" trim. That is, you have lots of little detents where the cage will stop. For me, this gives a better feel on the front derailleur than the Shimano where you only get 2 positions (one, if your mechanic isn't very good) Others, of course, will think differently, but it is worth checking out if you lean triple--Shimano and Campy work differently in the front.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tulip

I would agree with this. The double is a smooth shifter (I have Ultegra).

---

I keep reading the same... "smooth shifting"... by that do you mean "smoother"? There are moments where on my mtb shifting can be problematic - but that's on a hill when I didn't plan for what was coming. :rolleyes:

Thorn, thanks for the support. I'm definitely leaning toward the triple route for my first road bike - just want to make sure that I know what I'm getting into since the bike shop advice is the compact.

I have 2 bikes with triples (1 road, one mtb) 1 bike with a compact (road) and one with a regular double (road).

All have their good points.

I agree with Tulip: the question isn't "compact or triple?", the question is "how many of each?"

More bikes, more better! :D

(all that being said, if I was told I could only have one gearing set up I'd choose triples. And shifting is sweet and smooth when you use friction! Yummy!)

The only downside I can think of is it seems to be easier to drop the chain on a triple. On my first bike with low-end Shimano Sora I experienced this with some regularity. My current bike is a triple with Shimano 105/Ultegra and I have only dropped the chain one time that I can remember in 4,500 miles. Keeping the bike tuned and the chain lubed has kept the triple working just fine for me.

Of course I didn't have the budget to get my bike any other way, the next choice was full Ultegra with only a compact double and a $400 price tag increase.

Thanks for all the great support!

Quote:

---

And shifting is sweet and smooth when you use friction! Yummy!

---

Hmmmm, dare I ask?! :p

Aggie_Ama, that's another thing that I've heard - problems with the gear shifting, rubbing, chain falling off with triples - but those all sound more like its time for a tuneup ... ??

I'm buying mid-range'ish - a Scott Contessa CR1 that comes out of the box with a Shimano Ultegra Compact, the LBS is spec'ing it with a 12/27 cassette.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ciao

Hmmmm, dare I ask?! :p

---

Shimano barcons, silly! (hey, get yer mind outta the gutter!) :eek:;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ciao

Aggie_Ama, that's another thing that I've heard - problems with the gear shifting, rubbing, chain falling off with triples - but those all sound more like its time for a tuneup ... ??

I'm buying mid-range'ish - a Scott Contessa CR1 that comes out of the box with a Shimano Ultegra Compact, the LBS is spec'ing it with a 12/27 cassette.

---

Oh that is a nice looking bike. My husband drops the chain on his Dura Ace double as often as a do. For me it is all about keeping my drive train clean and tuned up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ciao

Aggie_Ama, that's another thing that I've heard - problems with the gear shifting, rubbing, chain falling off with triples - but those all sound more like its time for a tuneup ... ??

---

Not necessarily. Triples also have a tendency of ghost shifting. :rolleyes: I have a compact double on my road bike and a triple on my mountain bike. I am glad to have the triple for off road adventures and the compact is nice for climbing. It seems like I have fewer incidents of chain suck on the compact as well.