compact double v triple? (my new bike!)

[SadieKate]

We need to bear in mind that this isn't so much about what each of us rides, or even what would each of us would ride in the original posters situation, but what would best serve the original poster with the information we've been given. I think given her current level of fitness, where she wants to ride, and the negligible difference in cost if she has them change it out for a tirple now, she will be best served by a triple, especially if its her only high quality road bike.

I couldn't agree more with Triske and all the women who actually ride in the hills of Marin. Until you know what the grades and climbs are like here, the person's fitness level or other challenges (such as knee and back health), you can't really make a accurate recommendation.

One thing I do is look around at the strong and fast riders who ride these hills every day and put in the lots of miles and guess what? They're riding triples. They're riding triples with a 30 inner and a 29 to a 34 cog. Sorry, but a compact double with a 34/50 does not give you the range of a triple. Many of us use 24-26 inner rings. Until you know the hills of the California Bay Area, it's tough to understand the challenge.

Realize that a claim of 5.5 percent is the average not the maximum. You can easily run into sections of 10-15% that added into the entire climb are stated as an average of 5.5%. The top of Diablo is 17-18% for a long enough period that only the strongest riders can stand. Coleman Valley from the west - oy vey. And pavement condition can cost another gear. Northern California roads can be horribly rough which just makes them harder.

If in doubt, get a triple now while you're coming back to cyling and building strength. You can swap to a double much more cheaply, but if you put in the miles and climbs that it sounds like, you'll be loving that triple. Having a few extra gears now will help you get up hills and build fitness. You don't have to use them if you're strong enough, but if you don't have them you could be walking instead.

Sheldon Brown provides some great info and you can calculate gear inches easily.

http://sheldonbrown.com/gears/

BTW, all this talk of weight. If you run a touring triple (aka compact triple) with a 26-36-48 chainrings and a smaller cassette, I truly doubt there is much, if any, weight difference -- and that smaller cassette provides much more closely spaced gears for the times you're on flat roads and still have low gears for the climbs.

[maillotpois]

I have been riding for years. I am in good shape and am a strong climber and long distance rider. Most of my riding is in Marin, Sonoma and Napa counties.

I have a triple and use EVERY SINGLE ONE of those gears.

At least two people on my Death Ride team are regretting their compacts and going for an XT setup in the back to try to compensate. I have a friend who's a powerhouse and misses his big juicy power gear in his new compact set up. I love that power gear and would never give it up!

[IntenseRide]

I bought my first road bike last month and have ridden it twice. I have a double with a 53/39 set-up and I'm a fit 'mountainbiker' but here in Minnesota I'm unsure as to the hills and what there is to ride road-wise. After reading this, I'm wondering if I should have gone with a triple, but was told since I'm a strong rider I wouldn't need it. The bike is 17.3 pounds and riding it up hills hasn't proven an issue...yet. I figure long rides will tell. I'm wondering if my LBS will still swap it for a triple. This is great information!

[aicabsolut]

I started out with my current bike as a complete noob, and I'm not a natural climber. I have an FSA 50/36T compact crank and Shimano 12-27 cassette.

I really suffer on grades around 12%. I would need a triple for any consistent hills above that. However, I rarely use the 36x12 gear on hills (6-9% usually) anymore. And a 34T small ring is definitely easier than the 36.

I'm not sure I'd particularly want to do 18% hills even with a triple , but I wouldn't underestimate your climbing ability with a compact.

[Veronica]

How long does it take to climb a hill? To me hills take less than 15 - 20 minutes to get over. And yeah, I don't need a small gear for those.

But the long, sustained climbs we have here, the ones that take an hour or two, or sometimes even more, to get over... Oh yeah, I want a small gear on those.

V.

[SadieKate]

It's not the grade only. It's grade plus length of the climb plus length of the entire ride. A climb that is easy in the middle of a 30 mile ride may be a killer at the end of a century.

Even the pros use triples at times.

[Eden]

Even the pros use triples at times.

Very, very rarely - they really are a liablility on a race bike - though you will find that the pros get their bikes tailored to the day that they are riding them on. If they are riding a very flat course they will have a very different bike from when they are riding a mountainous one, both in gearing and other things as well. For most of us mere mortals, we need to find the setup that gives us the most flexibility to do all tasks.

My personal experience was going from a triple to a standard double. When I did not have a bike that truely fit properly I *needed* that triple - and it was even mt bike style gearing.... Now that I have a lighter bike that fits properly I find that I can climb anything thrown at me without hurting my knees (even double digit grades seated) with a standard double and fast too - but I am very small and light which suits me to climbing. I test rode a compact double and I could tell very quickly that I would be missing those top end gears - here's where the small and light becomes a liability - I need to chase downhill a lot... Personally if I was not racing I might go with a compact. If I was touring and carrying weight I would want the extra gears a triple gives you.

[RoadRaven]

Back on page 1 Regina said something I agree with...

A compact with a 27-12 cassette is probably all you will need.

A compact is lighter, narrower and less subject to dropping the chain.

I have only ever had a double and my most recent bike (EMC2 Fem Etape Pro) is a compact and is all I need. Our house is 600 feet above sea levele and all rides involve going down the hills to get anywhere and therefore always involve the climbs to get home again.

Also... If you look through a gearage chart for a triple, you will see there are a number of duplications.

[ehirsch83]

Also... If you look through a gearage chart for a triple, you will see there are a number of duplications.[/QUOTE]



That is the whole reason why I have never seen the point in a triple! I forgot to mention that yesterday in my semi-glazed state.

[maillotpois]

Sure there are duplications, but I do not want to give up my power gearing 52/12 or my long hill gearing 32/28 - there is no duplication at either extreme end and I want those gears.

Greedy, I suppose!

[Veronica]

You all do what you want.

Me - I'll stick with the gearing I have on my bikes. Heck, it got me through three double centuries so it must work all right for me. And in my world, it is all about me.

V.

[SadieKate]

Well said, MP.

Until you know what the grades and climbs are like here, the person's fitness level or other challenges (such as knee and back health), you can't really make an accurate recommendation.

Every single person who rides the same hills RussianHillGal will be has many years' experience riding centuries (or longer) and recommended a triple. These aren't newbies lacking fitness making the recommendation. Many of the strong male riders in this neck of the woods use triples. Those that don't are generally in split into two categories: 1) racers and genetically strong freaks and 2) idiots who due to their ego (or stubborness ) prefer to grunt, groan and fall over on the climbs (assuming they haven't already destroyed their knees).