Compact vs Triple

[OakLeaf]

It really depends on the LBS. My bike (same as Amanda's) came with a 170 mm crank and I had to buy the 165 to swap out (although IIRC they did the installation no charge). It got me a spare set of chainrings anyway (which are right now getting installed at another LBS).

[ilima]

It really depends on the LBS. My bike (same as Amanda's) came with a 170 mm crank and I had to buy the 165 to swap out (although IIRC they did the installation no charge). It got me a spare set of chainrings anyway (which are right now getting installed at another LBS).

They didn't opt to credit you for the 170s? My bike came with a Cane Creek headset and I wanted a King ($$). The shop owner credited me full retail for the CC and then charged me for the King, which I thought was a fair deal. The CC headset was never installed.

[RolliePollie]

I have a triple and I pretty much use every gear combo on every ride...but I ride loads of hills. I think it depends on the terrain where you'll be riding. I would not give up my triple but it's only because I'd never make it up some of my hills if I didn't have my granny gear!

[Miranda]

My knowledge of switching the parts out is humble, but I do know that anything doesn't feel good to do ends up being something I don't look forward to doing.

My road bike has a triple. While I don't live in mountain land, I know my body could not probably take just having a double. Regardless of how strong my muscles are, I have some medical issues with weak facshia. Anything that causes me to torq on that tissue more than it can take, means pain = don't do it. My heart rate typically can take a lot more that the body parts, and recover.

Now, my situation is a bit unique, but the same principle still applies. With only having the double on the bike, will you look at a hilly route and think "ooohhh, dread/groan, grumble (maybe even avoid it)..." in time because the tools you have (a double vs a triple) to do it with make the activity a PITA, vs generally enjoyable (what the ride should be).

Just some food for thought.

[Bluetree]

Changing cassettes is a very easy way to get a wide range of gearing on a compact. Once you get the hang of it, it's very simple. I have compacts on both my road bikes and change out anything from an 11-23 to a 13-29!

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a triple. But the reasons why I gave up a triple is twofold. First is size/weight. I admit that I'm a weight weenie and I get a perverse sense of satisfaction getting my bike down to 14 lbs. Plus, shorter carbon cranks (sub 170) don't come in standard sizes very often.

But the biggest reason is quicker shifting. This may not be an issue with non-racers, but riding a triple turned out to be a big problem when riding hills/rollers with my racer-type friends. Upon cresting a hill or roller, the (bigger) guys can cruise for a few seconds and let their momentum caryy them as they upshift. With my lesser weight, I don't have the luxury of those few seconds as I would be dropped immediately. I have to get in my big ring quickly and immediately, and start mashing down the hill as hard as I can. Same as whwn the downhill suddenly becomes an uphill. That was cumbersome with a triple, and more than once I dropped a chain, and got dropped by the ride. When I got a compact, those issues disappeared. Two chainrings instead of three def. made my life easier.

[Crankin]

I'm like Miranda. I have always had a triple; right before I got my Kuota, I was actually thinking about switching out my 11-25 triple on my Trek 5200 for a compact double. I'm glad I didn't because about a year later, we moved to our house on a 10-15% grade hill. After about 2 months with my Kuota, we switched out both of our bikes to 11-27s.
I spin every chance I can get; mashing really aggravates my fibromyalgia. I've also lost a bit of strength in the past couple of years and I like the option of having lower gears. I am an OK climber for an "old lady," but I am not getting any younger...
Now, I am not a racer, but I do regularly climb steep grades. They are not usually long, but they are grades that a lot of people might walk. I definitely could not get up them without my triple. This summer was the first time I EVER got off my bike and walked up a very steep (18%) climb that was very long. At that point, I was thinking about Lisa's mountain gearing I had seen the day before! But, I was able to get back on the bike and finish the climb, which was not very easy, even after the steepest part.
And btw, my bike weighs about 15.5 pounds (without my bag).
If you are not racing, you need to think about the type of riding you do and not care what anyone else thinks. I've never had any trouble with my Ultegra triples.

[RoadRaven]

My 2c
I have only ever ridden a triple off-road on my entry-level mountain bike.

I have a 10 speed compact crank set on what is now my training bike (roadie). 50-34 on the front, 27-12 on the back. I raced on my EMC2 FemetapePro for about a year before getting a better race bike and turning this one into a pure road-training bike. I climbed several hills with gradients of 15-18%, I am no hill climber and did not have to get off and walk, though at times I was only going at 4 -5kph.

It does everything I require - my smallest gear gets me up hills, my biggest gear allows me , on the flat, to crank it up to about 35kph for short bursts (or about 48kph for ages with a tail wind).

The only issue I had with the compact was when I first got it (and sometimes still have), was changing in the middle of the block - sometimes I couldn't quite find the 'right' gear to be in and would spend some time changing around trying to find the 'right' place to be. That was no good during racing.

But apart from that it does everything I need.

[xeney]

To me, this answers the question:

I live in a very hilly area, and I did notice that when climbing, I was wishing for some smaller gears.

If you are wishing for them on the test ride, you are going to have times when you want them. I'd go for a triple.

[RoadRaven]

I agree with xeney, but only if the triple actually gives you a lower gear then a compact set, or 'normal' double.

Sometimes a triple gives no true advantage, and adds only the complexity of an extra ring to contend with.

Sometimes the only real advantage is psychological, that is, "the shop guy tells me if you have a triple I can climb anything, and I have a triple, therefore I can"

Sometimes cyclists new to understanding bikes and gearing dont get told (or dont believe - like me) that sometimes it is easier to go up a gear to climb a hill and NOT be in your lowest gear.

Bluetree makes a great point early in this thread - a triple weighs more than a double, and if you want to get up a hill more quickly every little bit you shed helps.

Ask at the shop what the options are in terms of lowest gearing and then bring all the numbers back to us if you feel unsure...

For example, here are my stats [front // back // lowest gear]:

50-34 // 27-12 // 34-27(training bike) - gets me up a local 800metre, 18% climb at about 4.8kph

53-39 // 27-12 // 39-27 (road race bike) - tough on a hill but do-able as the bike itself is very light and responsive

52-39 // 27-13 // 39-27 (time trial road bike) - but I avoid hills on this because the bike itself is heavy. The low front end combined with aero bars makes hills difficult and uncomfortable