Group Set Decision - Help!

[tzvia]

ivorygorgon

There is very little reason to use a triple any more with wider range cassettes and a mid cage length rear derailleur (to handle the extra chain needed for the larger rear cogs). Triples have so many overlapping gears that shifting can be a pain, and lugging the extra weight makes no sense.

I setup my commuter with a mid cage Ultregra SL rear derailleur but I'm still using an 11-28 with it. As the WiFli is compatible with RED and FORCE, it should also be compatible with Shimano, as RED and FORCE cassettes are. So it can be done with Shimano. It's really nothing new, mountain bikes have been using long cage derailleurs to provide the extra chain needed to wrap those larger cogs for decades. SRAM just put the pieces together as a road package first.

The chainline will also be improved over a triple (angle that chain deflects from rear cogs to front) so shifting will be smoother with less chance of the chain dropping off the chainrings. Q-factor was already mentioned here. Yes the gear jumps are greater at the lower end but I prefer living with that over shifting a triple any day.

[ivorygorgon]

Thank you for all of the food for thought. This is exactly what I need.

I want to build up my bike, but I an frozen with indecision.

[OakLeaf]

ivorygorgon

There is very little reason to use a triple any more with wider range cassettes and a mid cage length rear derailleur (to handle the extra chain needed for the larger rear cogs).

Except for the reason Indysteel pointed out.

It's not the range from high gear to low so much (you'll always lose a little with a compact vs. a triple, but only a little), it's the jumps from gear to gear. You can get from point A to point B in big steps with a compact, or in smaller steps with a triple.

HiHoSilver outlined it pretty well. The jumps in number of teeth may be large at the very low end of the cassette, but for one thing it's not necessarily that big of a jump from gear to gear when you're up there, and for another, when you're in your lowest gears you probably aren't spinning all that fast anyway.

I can't imagine going from 13 to 15. I can't even go from 15 to 17. I have to give up the 11 in order to get a 16 on either SRAM or Shimano cassettes with a low of 25 or greater. I don't race or hardly ever even join in sign sprints, so it's not like I need the 11, but I do miss it on descents. But not as much as I miss that 16 on every single ride, if I don't have it.

[tzvia]

Yes, I did mention the jumps Oakleaf- It's a matter of making note of what gears you need, and seeing if it is doable with a double up front. And remember, the bike will weigh less and the gears will feel different because of the better chainline. There is less compromise from not having to make the triple shift well at the two ends. And all those double shifts because the intermediate gears are a shift in back and front. Pita. IMO good riddance triple.

[Koronin]

Interesting thread, which I'll need to keep in mind when I can afford to get my new road bike. My current one has a triple and it looks like when I can get a new one it will have the compact double.

[Crankin]

Am I the only one who doesn't think a triple is a pain in the azz?
I've had 3 road bikes. The first one was a pain to shift, but only because of the crappy components.
Once I got a bike with Ultegra, it just isn't an issue. I don't drop my chain, unless it's user error, the shifting is smooth as butter, and I use all of those low gears. I do use the big ring a bit (I didn't until a couple of years ago), but generally, my knees will be aching the next day, if I'm in it for awhile. I am not a racer, who cares if the group set weighs a few grams more? My bike is extremely light to begin and even for me, a serious, but non-racing rider, this just doesn't matter.
I am beginning a build on a bike with couplers. I'm getting a compact with XTR on the back, but even this is worrying me. Not that I won't have enough low gears, but the difference in the "feeling" of shifting, what gears I will use, and those jumps. It was enough to convince the LBS I don't want SRAM, because I do not do well with change and I am not that coordinated. I almost guarantee that I will be in the small ring 75% of the time. Not because I can't push a big gear, but because my body reacts unkindly toward the bigger gears.

[indysteel]

I disagree that weight savings is a big selling point for a compact. We're talking grams not pounds here. The average recreational rider is not going to notice the difference, especially since it's not rotational weight. While my compact shifts easier, I often have to shift front and rear to find the gear I want. I just find it annoying on a long ride. I used to be able to just park it in my middle (42) ring for my average riding conditions. Now I'm constantly searching for the right gear on the flats.

If a compact works for ya, fine, but I disagree that triples don't offer their own selling points. The fact of the matter is that compacts are becoming more prevalent because bike manufacturers are specing more and more bikes with them. I get it; they're a decent compromise between a standard double and a triple, but I don't think they're a perfect solution for some of us.

[Crankin]

Thank you.
You said what I was trying to say. I guess my fingers will be busy.

[indysteel]

Thank you.
You said what I was trying to say. I guess my fingers will be busy.

No problem! And, no, you're not the only one who didn't find using a triple to be a PITA. My Campy triple shifted very well. A lot of the bikes still speced with triples are Shimano Sora or Tiagra. Well, none of that stiff works great over time so it's no wonder they aggravate people. Frankly, I'm half tempted to put my triple back on my Bianchi just to see if it still bothers my IT band. I miss using it, as I've just never warmed to my compact. We're getting ready to do our Katy Trail tour, and my touring bike has a triple. I'm looking forward to using it.