Compact Double or Triple?

[mauisher]

I'm having a new bike built and will have a choice of installing either a compact double or a triple. I live in a very hilly place and have been using a Dura Ace triple 9 speed with a 12-27 on the back. I also take my bike on multi-day rides over varying terrains. The triple is good quality and it's worked fine. I also have an old Ultegra 7 speed that I converted to a compact double. It's ok but since it's a 7 speed it has big jumps between gears, so it's not a good comparison to the triple.

With the options out there today with the compact doubles (i.e., SRAM Apex or running a Shimano 10 speed mountain rear derailleurs with a 10 speed cassette) I'm considering perhaps a compact double with the ability to get the gears for the big hills. However, with the compact I'm still concerned about big jumps between gears and constantly having to shift the front derailleur. Many times with the triple, I can stay in the middle ring for much of the ride and have small jumps between gears. I do have a few knee issues and am getting older!

So, sorry for the long-winded post, but which would you recommend and why?

[alpinerabbit]

aaah the old staple discussion...

whatever makes you happy

there are a bunch of threads on this forum on the same topic if you care to search for them. There will be those who say that shifting is more precise on the double and all the counterargumentation will follow suit

I have one of each, Ultegra. I find the jumps not too too big, or put it this way: I don't notice any difference. note that the new gearsets are 10spd in the back so you have one more than you are used to now, meaning you have pretty small jumps.

I personally don't mind shifting on the front, I haven't counted whether I shift more on the double than the triple so I'm no help there...

on my compact, I managed to have a 30 "rescue" cog (from Marzocchi I believe) installed on the regular 12-27 Ultegra cassette, I gave up the 16 for that. That really helps me get up the big hills.

Just try to keep the equivalent of a 30-27 combo from your triple on the compact set and your knees should be happy. Or stick with the triple and try to treat your knees to the biggest granny gear you can get in the back....

[Veronica]

I put the SRAM Apex onto my Cervelo after a few months of riding it. My other two bikes have super small gears and my knees just prefer spinning up our hills. So now I have an 11 - 32 in the rear and a 50-34 on the front. The last three downshifts on the rear are pretty big jumps and I will often cycle back and forth between gears in the rear as I start a climb.

For shifting in the front, I know that once I'm doing less than 10 miles per hour, I need to be in the little ring.

I had Force on the rear before I got the Apex and I have to say the Apex shifts just as nicely as the Force did. I did end up adding 1/4 pound to my race bike when I made the switch.

Veronica

[indysteel]

When I built my last bike, I went with a compact not because I wanted to but because my right knee was not happy with the Q factor of the triple on my other bike. After figuring out that Shimano, SRAM and Campy triples all have roughly the same Q factor, I opted for a 50-34 Campy compact with a 10 speed 13-26 in the rear. If Campy made a 12-27, I likely would have gone with it.

From a climbing perspective, I'm generally pretty happy with the set up, as I've only lost my smallest of small gears, but I miss my triple for other reasons. I have a harder time now finding just the right gear for flat and/or windy conditions. I also hate compact on rolling terrain. I used to use my middle ring a lot for rollers. Now I find myself having to shift front and rear more than I'd like to power up them. I also occassionally run out of big gears.

So, but for my IT band irritation, I'd prefer a triple.

[ginaleah]

My sister (who is a cyclist) and I have had this discussion and we both come down on the triple side! When I bought my new bike nearly every shop tried to talk me out of the triple, saying it's not really necessary, not that different from a compact double, etc. But I sometimes pull my kid in a trailer and I love to be able to keep my cadence up going up the hills even without the trailer so I am totally attached to having those granny gears!

[Seajay]

Another case of the bike industry racer boys forcing us to choose from products we don't want. (white tires, white bar tape, compact doubles etc.)

[ny biker]

I just switched from a Shimano triple with a 9-speed cassette to a SRAM Rival compact double with a 10-speed cassette and so far I'm happy with the compact double. I tested the compact double on several hills that used to require the granny gear, and I had no problem with it. Last week I did a long flat ride and did not have any trouble finding comfortable gears.

I have a friend who recommended I switch to a mountain bike cassette on the back to get some lower gears there. I'm told it's an easy switch if I decide it's necessary.

I did have some knee problems (actually on the outside of my leg at knee-level) with the compact double, but I was just at the bike shop today having things adjusted to account for the different q-factor. I've mostly used the small chain ring so far, due to the knee problems, so I don't know yet if I will be annoyed by the big jump between the big and small chain ring.

[indysteel]

Another case of the bike industry racer boys forcing us to choose from products we don't want. (white tires, white bar tape, compact doubles etc.)

Most of those racer boys use standard doubles. That used to be our choice--between standard doubles and triples. So, from that standpoint, I like the addition of compacts to the market. They are a very good compromise for a lot of people.

What I don't like is that triples now have a wider q factor than they used to, which cause more IT band problems. I also don't like the fact that it's getting harder to buy triples. Campy just makes one (or maybe two), and last I checked they're not part of their regular lines. I have one and while it seems like its nicely made, I still think it's kind of BS.

[ridebikeme]

I built a bike with a compact this summer, after always riding a regular double.After roughly riding the compact 1200- 1500 miles at home, I decided to take it on two hilly tours. What i found was that when I wanted midrange gears, i no longer had them. So i would definitely agree with Indysteel on this one.In the big ring(50) I am fine, and likewise in the small ring(34) I am fine...but there's nothing adequate in between. I ride a 10 speed Campy cassette(12-25). Quite frankly, I was happier with my regullar double.

If I lived in flatter area, I would be happy with the compact because I could stay in the big ring longer. But the reality to me is that this is something that the bike industry has told us that we need, and in the hilly areas a triple is much more accomodating!

[Eden]

Another case of the bike industry racer boys forcing us to choose from products we don't want. (white tires, white bar tape, compact doubles etc.)

Wow that's pretty harsh....some of my teammates who have black and white bikes were looking forward to getting their white tires and were gravely disappointed when the company was unable to send them..... and no they are not boys....

Like Indy says most racers use standard doubles and to be really honest its not been all that long since that was all you could get....and "10 speeds" really had 10 speeds..... I think it was probably the 80's when triples appeared. At that time I believe 7 speed cassettes were the technology of the day - my first adult bike was a Trek with a triple and 7 on the rear, I believe that was around 85 or 86. Compact cranks were accepted and made by all the major manufacturers by around 2006.

Jump ahead now - we have 10 on the back - with 11 coming out. The range of a triple - and all the redundant gear ratios they have seems less and less necessary. I can also imagine that it is getting trickier to make a triple that works well with chains and rings getting more narrow and shifting needing to be more precise. I'm sure that they will always be out there and available, but I do think that there are reasons why they may be becoming less and less popular that don't have anything to do with racers - who don't often use compacts, much less triples....

[indysteel]

In an ideal world, I would have two road bikes, one with a standard double and one with a generously geared compact. Most of my rides are pretty flat, but our climbing rides are rough. I'd prefer the ease and minor jumps of a standard for my everyday bike though.

[TxDoc]

aaah the old staple discussion...
whatever makes you happy

I have to agree here, the gearing choice is a common debate here, and is very personal. The terrain definitely is a factor - but also personal preference and riding style.
Try a few bikes with a triple, then a few with a standard double, and then a few with a compact double - and see what suits your riding style best.
The 'big jumps' you mention were common with 5-6-7 speed cassettes, but are very unlikely today with 10 or 11 cogs.

[mauisher]

Thanks for the replies. Sorry this is an "old" subject but it seems the technology keeps changing which keeps this discussion going. It's hard for me to try any bikes here in my size (small or 52 cm c-t) without a triple due to a limited inventory at the local bike shops. Most of the bike shops here recommend a triple due to the mountains and wind and that's pretty much what they carry. I can only compare what I have (7-speed compact and 9-speed triple), so your opinions are important. Thanks, again.

[Cataboo]

Another case of the bike industry racer boys forcing us to choose from products we don't want. (white tires, white bar tape, compact doubles etc.)

Who's we?

I love my compact double.

[kacie tri-ing]

Who's we?

I love my compact double.

Ditto. I had my standards and never liked the feel of a triple, but I LOVE LOVE my compact...and I'm no boy