compact double v triple? (my new bike!)

[7rider]

I had a triple on my bike for 5 years. I recently rebuilt the bike and put a compact (50/34) on it. The bike lost a lot of weight in the process (the rebuild shaved over 2 pounds off the bike - not insignificant when it was already just a 20 pound bike.) and the drivetrain is much less complicated. Although I opted to keep a 12-25 spread in the back, you can play with the cassette to an extent and not lose any of the low-end gearing you would get with a triple.
Frankly, I'd rather haul a lighter bike with slightly less low-end gearing up a hill, than a heavier bike up a hill with a granny. But that's me. If you are reasonably fit, and the hills are moderate in your area, I think a compact crank should be fine. Have them put a 12-27 on the back, and you'll never miss the gearing over a triple.
My $0.02.

[Veronica]

Have them put a 12-27 on the back, and you'll never miss the gearing over a triple.
My $0.02.

I have a compact double and I have a triple. I miss that very lowest gear when I am riding the mountains around here.

V.

[spokewench]

I have a compact double and I have a triple. I miss that very lowest gear when I am riding the mountains around here.

V.

I ride with a normal double (not a compact); I have a triple on my cyclocross bike since I ride it off road and the extra gears come in handy there. I do not like how slow the triple is to shift up front in comparison to a double.

When I bought my carbon fiber giant I went with the normal double cause the bike is so light and I didn't need much more than than because of the lightness of the bike. This works for me for 99% of my riding. The only time I was wishing for a COMPACT double was in the mountains of Colorado last year on the 5th riding day of a 6 day ride - Bicycle Tour of Colorado - mountain passes every day and on average 80 miles or so per day. But, I still made it with my regular double. I have been riding a long time, but am not really a great climber, just a steady one.

If I had a choice between a compact double and a triple, I would go with the double. For me the triple is just not responsive enough when shifting and too heavy.

[Veronica]

I've never ridden in Colorado. I have ridden where the original poster rides. This is the profile of just one of the climbs around here, and incidentally one she may do on the Marin Century. It's not a moderate climb.

The original poster hasn't been riding for years. Unless she is already really fit, a compact double probably won't serve her well.

V.

[spazzdog]

I'm (surprisingly) with Veronica and jobob on this in regards to the original poster...

If she's just starting out, riding in any of the states with big bumps, go with the triple. It'll be far more satisfying to be able to finish a ride without blowing out a knee... believe me, her butts gonna be sore as it is. The triple will give her a break.


I say surprising above, not because I ever disagree with you girls (nope, not me ), but because of my own "triple-avoidance-syndrome".

spazz

[jobob]

Have fun on Tunnel Road & Skyline today, spazz!

[jobob]

You know what, RHG? There are very good arguments for both the compact double and for the triple. You know your needs and temperment and fitness better than we do, and we can talk about what's better ad nauseum, but in the end you need to decide what's best for you.

Here are a few other threads where we hashed this all out - and there are a lot more where that came from...

http://forums.teamestrogen.com/showthread.php?t=6898

http://forums.teamestrogen.com/showthread.php?t=9187

http://forums.teamestrogen.com/showthread.php?t=9740

http://forums.teamestrogen.com/showthread.php?t=12463


Good luck on your decision. I don't think you'll go wrong either way (I'll always side for the triple, but I'm an old fart )

[7rider]

Well, you're right. I don't know what the hills are like where she's riding. And V., I would certainly not call that hill profile "moderate"! (That's why I load my response with caveats.) If that's a routine ride in her area, then a triple might be a viable option.
Here's a gearing chart where you can look at your gearing options. http://i1.net/~dwolfe/gerz/index.html
I think it's always good to have the numbers in front of you when you're making your decision. Look at the low end (and the high end) of your gearing options. Are you really losing anything? If you are losing more than you're comfortable with - then, sure - maybe it's worth it to opt for a bike with a triple. I think converting that bike to a triple might not be worth the added expense, when perhaps there are similar bikes in the Giant line that already have it. I don't know. I'm not familiar with their line (and haven't gone and researched it before posting this).
p.s. And yes, there was more to my rebuild than just the crank. There had to be to allow the bike to shift. And some of the rebuild was just bling.

[roadie gal]

I like up in the mountains of California. My old roadie had a triple, my new one has a compact double. I think I'm pretty fit, but there are still quite a few times when I wish I had the triple. I say go for the triple. The times you use the granny gear you'll really appreciate it.

[roguedog]

Hey RHG!

Welcome to the Giant club.. and welcome to the Bike Nut one. Guys there are really, really nice and patient. It's how I ended up with my baby.. also a TCR.

I love my bike.

I bought it used from Huseyin since I didn't really want to spend that much on a bike.. and frankly cuz I think he just wanted me outta his store. I was standing there for hours trying to decide on a bike (and on whether to go with him or another bs).

Tell Huseyin that my black 03 TCR is doing great and that I've doubled the mileage on it since he sold it to me!

My bike did come with a double. A normal double... ok, ok, with a big honking cassette on the back that Huseyin put on for me. I don't know what a triple feels like..

I think as someone similar to your profile.. I'd go for the triple. And having grown up in Marin.. uh.. ya.. go for the triple. Gives you options. When you toughen up and have more mileage under you, then you can convert back if you really want to but I think for now, it's better to have options and to build up that confidence than to worry about weight (50-100 g) or whatever.

My newbie, unknowledgeable, .002

[lacyliz]

I went through what you're going through - what gearing to get- did all the research, asked new roadies, old roadies, my LBS etc. I ended up really learning a lot about gearing/gear ratios from various websites.

I ended up getting the TCRw with the compact (34/50)- and swapping out the cassette to a 12-27 (instead of the standard 12-25 that comes with it). This gave me all but the very lowest gear from my old triple (I had a 30/39/52 with a 11-28 cassette). The compact shifts gears easier and supposedly does not wear out so quickly. It is, as others have said, lighter.

Conrats on your new bike - it's beautiful!

[Triskeliongirl]

I had a triple on my bike for 5 years. I recently rebuilt the bike and put a compact (50/34) on it. The bike lost a lot of weight in the process (the rebuild shaved over 2 pounds off the bike - not insignificant when it was already just a 20 pound bike.) and the drivetrain is much less complicated. ....

I bet you made other changes besides the triple to double to shave 2 LBS. I didn't find much of a weight change at all going from a triple to a double, although I agree that I like the mechanical simplicity (and if you end up having to put on a larger rear casette and longer cage rear derailleur you are adding weight in the back as you take it off the front). But I think for the poster in question, she is better off with a triple.

[Ogresse]

Hi Regina,

I am about to inherit 2 great used 2006 bikes (long story with very happy ending, obviously!) in impeccable condition, one of which is a full Dura Ace carbon bike with 53/39 and the other an aluminum bike (w/carbon forks and stays) with Ultegra cassette, Dura Ace triple cranks, D.A. shifters and derailleurs (front is even a "D.A. triple derailleur"). On my old (old) bike I have an FSA Gossamer Mega-Exo 50-34 compact, which I love, love, love. I am in a really hilly area and to get into condition with the 53/39 was super tough. Now that I'm riding well, the 50-34 suits me just fine. I see no shame in triples at all (take care of your knees and enjoy your rides more my dears!!), I just don't want to deal with all the extra clicking around. A compact with a bigger spread in back has worked just fine for me and I enjoy the challenge.

Anyway, I wonder if you or someone else can advise me on this question: I want to replace the D.A. 53/39 on the carbon bike with a compact. Though I have this FSA compact on the old bike that I could use, I've heard that it is better to stick with Shimano when everything else is Shimano (and it is, even wheels and seatpost!), and have heard great things about the Shimano compact (and can even get it with 165mm cranks!). Question: if I get a Shimano compact, would it require just changing out the 53/39 and cranks or do I need to change shifters, derailleurs, or anything else (BB?)? I believe it is all compatible but since I want to do the work myself, I want to be really sure... (yes, my secret dream is to be a wench wrench). I am also not sure what, if anything, needs to happen re: bottom bracket. The 53/39 crankset is Shimano D.A. w/Integrated spindle, with Shimano Exterior Bearing System (and D.A. everything else). Another option would be to move the FSA over to the carbon D.A. bike - cheaper! - but I like the idea of sticking to all Shimano.

Which leads me to the second question...I would like to move the FSA compact from my old bike to the new aluminum-carbon bike with the D.A. triple. Here we go again -- what needs to change in shifters/brakes, etc. in order for everything to work smoothly?

Thanks so much for any advice you can offer! I really appreciate it.

- O

I had a triple on my bike for 5 years. I recently rebuilt the bike and put a compact (50/34) on it. The bike lost a lot of weight in the process (the rebuild shaved over 2 pounds off the bike - not insignificant when it was already just a 20 pound bike.) and the drivetrain is much less complicated. Although I opted to keep a 12-25 spread in the back, you can play with the cassette to an extent and not lose any of the low-end gearing you would get with a triple.
Frankly, I'd rather haul a lighter bike with slightly less low-end gearing up a hill, than a heavier bike up a hill with a granny. But that's me. If you are reasonably fit, and the hills are moderate in your area, I think a compact crank should be fine. Have them put a 12-27 on the back, and you'll never miss the gearing over a triple.
My $0.02.

[7rider]

[QUOTE=Ogresse;189226]Hi Regina,

Question: if I get a Shimano compact, would it require just changing out the 53/39 and cranks or do I need to change shifters, derailleurs, or anything else (BB?)? I believe it is all compatible but since I want to do the work myself, I want to be really sure... (yes, my secret dream is to be a wench wrench). I am also not sure what, if anything, needs to happen re: bottom bracket. The 53/39 crankset is Shimano D.A. w/Integrated spindle, with Shimano Exterior Bearing System (and D.A. everything else). Another option would be to move the FSA over to the carbon D.A. bike - cheaper! - but I like the idea of sticking to all Shimano.

Which leads me to the second question...I would like to move the FSA compact from my old bike to the new aluminum-carbon bike with the D.A. triple. Here we go again -- what needs to change in shifters/brakes, etc. in order for everything to work smoothly?
QUOTE]

Hi there.
My bike (a '99 Seven Axiom Ti) had full Ultegra 9-spd triple on it.
I rebuilt it with D.A. everything - EXCEPT the crankset which is an FSA SLK MegaExo compact (50-34). Going from a triple to a double required a new f.d. and shifter to handle it. It is generally required to get a compact-specific f.d. - one that can handle the big jump from 34 (or 36) to 50 teeth.
Since I also went from a 9-spd to a 10-spd, I got a new r.d. and shifter for the rear. The Shimano compact wasn't out yet when I rebuilt the Seven (October '05) - but was due at any moment. I just didn't want to wait! I have had no problems with compatibility. I did have the LBS put an "anti-chain-suck-thang" - or whatever they're called - on the downtube. No problems with chain suck, although if I'm not careful, I can throw the chain off the outter ring onto the crankarms with shift-ups. That's a user error and I need to watch where I am on the cassette when I make my shift.
Since I went to a MegaExo crankset, the BB came with it, so it was not an option to replace the Shimano BB (which was dead, anyway, and needed to be replaced).
So...in summary: I have a mix of FSA and Shimano parts and I've had no compatibility issues. Everything on the bike works fine. It's the rider who has the difficulty!

[RoadRaven]

Anyway, I wonder if you or someone else can advise me on this question: I want to replace the D.A. 53/39 on the carbon bike with a compact.

All I can say is I have a 53/39 on my TT bike and it is great. I can climb hills on it, I can wind up into a big gear on the flat.

On my road race bike I have a 50/34 compact... I climb hills more quickly on that because I spin and not grind so much (I'm a slow climber still). My only issue with it is trying to find the right gear when I am in the middle at the front and back...

They are both fab gearing. The compact would not be a good TT set-up for me, but it is ideal for road racing.

Dunno if that helps any, but thats my experience.