Help - Triple vs. Compact & loads of hills

[mudmucker]

It's hard to say what you would be best with. I went from a triple to a compact three weeks ago when I bought my new Specialized Ruby Expert. I was wary when I ordered the compact because I didn't know how I would handle the hills. And believe me I live in the land of hills and mountains! But so far I have had no problems climbing. In fact I find that I am climbing faster and better.

My new Ruby is an 11-28 and the big rings are 50X34t

My old trek 2200 I believe has 30/42/52t
and rear 12-26

So with this setup you are actually losing I think, your lowest gear - about 1.5 gear inches from your triple? And you are climbing better and faster? Does the Ruby weigh less than the other - do you think it's bike weight or a difference in geometry?

But back to RolliePollie and to others who have hills who have been thinking about swapping out from a triple to a compact double....
I wonder if we need to think about the type of hills that we ride.

I myself have been thinking about swapping, then I get on a hill and sometimes go in my lowest and keep saying, boy, am I glad I have my triple, and ask, why do I want to change this?

But the type of hills I have are mostly abrupt acute steep up and downs that follow each other like a camel with 7 humps or successive stairs. They are fairly short, about 1/2 to 2 miles each, anywhere between 6-12% grades. As soon as you are done with one, the next one is so close that there's maybe only a 1/4 mile between, to the next one. Some of the grade changes so I shift slightly while on the same chain ring, but if I want to maximize the downhill then I'm really shifting up 2 chainrings and then maybe another within the ring to fine tune it. Yes, I can map it out and I've gotten quite expedient at shifting minimally, but sometimes I still feel as if I'm shifting till the cows come home. There are points with terrain like this where I just don't shift after the hill anymore because I get tired of it - I coast down in the gear I already know I'm going to need for the next hill. I think I would love a double. I would lose my lowest gear if I switched.

If the hills were of a different nature, with longer distances between hills, or a greater than 6-7% really long sustained climb, then you can rest comfortably in the small ring for a time, and use the middle or outer ring for lesser grades and not be shifting so much.

What kind of hills do you have and does any of that make sense? Some people can do better on acute hills and not so good on lower grade sustained climbs. What do you do better at?

For me it's a shifting issue, like there's too many gears and I need to make big jumps. But, my problem is I can do all the gear charts I want and numerically be able to see the differences, but my brain fully can't see how the spacing between the gears on a compact double would "feel" in my riding area. I would really have to get a bike with that gearing and do a test ride. I'd hate to spend all that money to swap out and find it isn't that suitable. So, for now I stick with my triple.

Edited to add: I saw saw yellow's post where she says it's of the steep up and down nature. And that for her, 2 gear inches makes a lot of difference. I can see that, which is why I stay with the triple.