Group Set Decision - Help!

[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.

[tzvia]

LOL we all should use whatever works best for US. I've had triples for ages in the past and always hated them. So I gritted my teeth and made due with a standard double in the days before compact- but I am a spinner, not a masher, and those big gears were rarely used. When I went looking for a modern bike (my road bike was an old Scapin SLX cromo bike from the 80s with Dura Ace 9 speed from the 90s on it) I was surprised to see the smaller gears up front and the wider gear options in back. It was like I died and went to heaven, and i knew I would not ever need a triple again. Back in the 70s and 80s, triples were waaaayy heavier than standard doubles. Even now, it may only be 1/2 lb or so, but it IS rotating weight so it will feel like 3x it's weight. (Even though I am not a weight weenie, I watch the weight as I am not a power rider by any stretch, I am a middle aged woman with less than stellar knees that have seen the knife in the past).

So a compact double up front, and the typical 12ish~27ish (currently using 25) works on the road bike. My commuter is another matter, that one will be going to 32 soon I think. It's sooo heavy with the racks and panniers, and I planned for it with a medium cage derailleur so it should be a quick swap.

Someone else may want all those gears but when I weighed the gear steps I am loosing to the weight+the chain angle+the better shifting+simpler use, I chose the simpler double. But this formula I created and applied to me, and it works. And I enjoy reading other opinions and other peoples rational for what they chose; that is how I came to buy that mid cage derailleur and compact double for the commuter over the touring triple I was about to by. I read about on a forum (maybe here?) last year.

[OakLeaf]

My triple shifts just fine and my 105 FD never even needs trimming (it will rub slightly if I'm cross-chaining, but if I haven't figured it out by the chain noise, that's its version of an idiot light ).

Even now, it may only be 1/2 lb or so

I can't find weight specs for Shimano componentry. And I'm not sure which Campy groupset is most comparable to their triple, but the highest level (lightest) aluminum compact crank they have is Centaur. Everything above that is carbon, so not a fair comparison, and a Centaur compact crankset weighs a whopping 46 grams more than a Campy Triple crank. (Did I mention my bra holds 80 grams of sweat? ) Even if you go all the way to the full carbon $uper Record compact, the difference is 163 grams, which is still a good deal less than half a pound (227 g).

http://www.campagnolo.com/jsp/en/com...m_guarCeCT.jsp
http://www.campagnolo.com/jsp/en/com...m_guarSRCT.jsp

[ivorygorgon]

FWIW, I don't think the triple is a pain. It doesn't bother me to shift at all. As a matter of fact, I am 90% sure I want the triple. I ride most of the time in the middle, which right now is a 39, I can't imagine using a 50 for most flats. Right now, I just use the 50 for some small downhill. I am really the most concerned about losing my granny. I am not a good climber (and we climb a lot), and I need all the help I can get. I am not too concerned about weight. If I could lose some weight off my body that would make a bigger difference than moving to a compact and saving a few grams there.

My dithering is mostly because I think, as I become a better and faster rider, I will probably want the compact, and I am intrigued by the SRAM. But where I am now, I think I need the triple. Maybe in a few years I can change to the SRAM.

I don't know why, but there does seem to be some kind of prejudice against using a triple. It befuddles me a bit. I have a actually been made fun of for having a triple. I can't figure out why it would matter to someone else what I have on my bike, but there you go.

[Hi Ho Silver]

FWIW, I don't think the triple is a pain. It doesn't bother me to shift at all. As a matter of fact, I am 90% sure I want the triple. I ride most of the time in the middle, which right now is a 39, I can't imagine using a 50 for most flats. Right now, I just use the 50 for some small downhill. I am really the most concerned about losing my granny. I am not a good climber (and we climb a lot), and I need all the help I can get. I am not too concerned about weight. If I could lose some weight off my body that would make a bigger difference than moving to a compact and saving a few grams there.

My dithering is mostly because I think, as I become a better and faster rider, I will probably want the compact, and I am intrigued by the SRAM. But where I am now, I think I need the triple. Maybe in a few years I can change to the SRAM.

I don't know why, but there does seem to be some kind of prejudice against using a triple. It befuddles me a bit. I have a actually been made fun of for having a triple. I can't figure out why it would matter to someone else what I have on my bike, but there you go.

There is absolutely nothing wrong about going with a triple. Two of the three bikes I own have a triple and I managed to get along just fine for over 20 years with them. I think people look down on them because they view them as "normal gearing plus a granny" ...and using a "granny" gear when the hills get tough just doesn't quite fit the macho/macha image that those people try to project.

Get what you feel comfortable with. Get what you are confident will give you the gearing you need for the type of riding conditions you are likely to encounter. And if you choose a triple, I'm sure the compact double design will be around in the future if you ever decide you would like to try it out.

[Owlie]

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.

I like having a triple, especially since I live in a hilly town. Since the shifters aren't even Sora, the shifting is terrible, but I like the fact that I have a tiny ring to give me a hand. I'd like a triple on my next bike, but finding an Ultegra triple is next to impossible!

[nscrbug]

My Trek 2100 WSD (my backup bike) is a 105 triple and I actually think it shifts better and easier than my Cannondale Synapse with Ultegra 6700. I have MUCH LESS mis-shifts with the Trek than I do on my Cannondale. The 105 triple just shifts flawlessly - and I admit, I haven't really taken good care of this bike. I don't think I've replaced a thing since I bought it (back in 2008)...yet it just keeps truckin' along beautifully. I'm almost afraid to touch anything on it, for fear that my good luck "streak" will forever be broken. If it were not for the fact that the frame is a bit too big for me, I'd likely ride it more than my Synapse...simply because the shifting is smoother and easier on my problematic hands.

Linda