Double vs Triple

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by dhk
I've only had doubles, but am leaning strongly to a triple setup for the next ride. My low gear is a 39/26 now, which seems low enough for most of the hills around here. But, I want to do the big 10-12% local climbs, plus maybe the 6 Gap Century, which I now avoid. The triple looks like the way to go: can have a 30/25 low gear (1.2 ratio) when I'm over the top at max HR and need to sit back down. Plus, I like the idea of a 42 mid chainring with a tight 12-25 cluster for the most cruising-gear options on flats and rolling terrain.

My question is, how much weight does the triple actually add in total, and what other compromises are involved, if any? Am I missing something?

Probably the classic topic when it comes to decisions on the new bike. Would like discuss the pros/cons. Also would like to hear about other options, like a 29 tooth low on the cassette for a double, plus the compact 50/34 chainring setup. Thanks.

Weights for Shimano road components are listed at their web site:
http://bike.shimano.com/Road/index.asp
You will also need a triple left shifter and triple bottom bracket.
Your current RD will limit how large a cog you can put on the rear.
You FD and RD will limit the range you can shift in the front.

Dan

OK, weight difference total seems to be 128 grams, or .28 lbs (4.5 ounces) if I added correctly. About the same weight as the wallet and car key, or my spare tube or cell phone.

I'll likely go with an FSA carbon crankset on the new frame, which is about 100 gms lighter than Ultegra, so that will make up most of the difference anyway.

What about any other issues, eg, increased Q factor (crank width), more friction, difficulty in shifting?

Dan

I'm in the same boat. Have done many centuries but avoided 6 gap. Next year, though, I'm going for it. I've got an Ultegra double with 12-27 in the back, but even that's not low enough for 6 gap for me (YMMV). I've thought about a triple, but I really like how well the double shifts, and I make extensive use of the trim settings on the front. I'm concerned that a triple will lose both. (Well, I know it will lose the trim settings.)

The tentative plan I've got now is to put a FSA Compact Pro double on the front. It's a 34/50, which should get me up the hills in good shape. I want to talk to the LBS, however, to make sure that an Ultegra front shifter can handle a 16 tooth difference without compromising the shifts. I recall reading somewhere that 14 teeth was the max, but that may be out-dated. The folks at FSA claim no problems, but I still want to check. Another option is to build a TSA crank, in which case I'd go with a 36/50.

Stephen

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by sathomasga
I'm in the same boat. Have done many centuries but avoided 6 gap. Next year, though, I'm going for it. I've got an Ultegra double with 12-27 in the back, but even that's not low enough for 6 gap for me (YMMV). I've thought about a triple, but I really like how well the double shifts, and I make extensive use of the trim settings on the front. I'm concerned that a triple will lose both. (Well, I know it will lose the trim settings.)

The tentative plan I've got now is to put a FSA Compact Pro double on the front. It's a 34/50, which should get me up the hills in good shape. I want to talk to the LBS, however, to make sure that an Ultegra front shifter can handle a 16 tooth difference without compromising the shifts. I recall reading somewhere that 14 teeth was the max, but that may be out-dated. The folks at FSA claim no problems, but I still want to check. Another option is to build a TSA crank, in which case I'd go with a 36/50.

Stephen

Another option is to install a MTB RD and cassette for those steep rides. You can do that without changing shifters. You may need to adjust the inner stop on the FD as the chain will ride higher on a 32 or 34 in the back.
If you already have a MTB, you might borrow the cassette and RD for a trial.

For a 10-speed campy triple.... the gears come 53-42-30.. Can you put a 39 on the triple crankset, instead of the 42??

I'm used to a 39, not sure what it would be like with 42..30 with a 12-25 in the back??

Also anyone know the weight of the Campy Racing-T crankset?

Planning for the L'etape next year and want all the gears I can get.

Thanks for any replys..

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by pedalpedal
For a 10-speed campy triple.... the gears come 53-42-30.. Can you put a 39 on the triple crankset, instead of the 42??

I'm used to a 39, not sure what it would be like with 42..30 with a 12-25 in the back??

Also anyone know the weight of the Campy Racing-T crankset?

Planning for the L'etape next year and want all the gears I can get.

Thanks for any replys..

Campy also has triples that are 30-40-50. (Record and Chorus, anyway.)

Stephen

Go for the triple , the levers will be ok ( if not durace ) just change the bottom bracket and the cranks + mechs , expensive I know but you still get a tight ratio plus low gears when needed . As for weight , you can diet off the diference in a week if your that manic about the weight , or not fill your two bottles to the top / carry a repair kit not a spare tube / mini pump not full size / buy a lighter helmet etc...........

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by pedalpedal
For a 10-speed campy triple.... the gears come 53-42-30.. Can you put a 39 on the triple crankset, instead of the 42??

I'm used to a 39, not sure what it would be like with 42..30 with a 12-25 in the back??

Also anyone know the weight of the Campy Racing-T crankset?

Planning for the L'etape next year and want all the gears I can get.

Thanks for any replys..

One online source says the Campy Record Triple weighs 715 gms, while the double weighs 632....Ultegra 6503 weighs 670. That's about 3 &1/2 oz.

I don't see why you couldn't put the 39T on the triple. I have the 39 also now, after changing from a 42 a couple of years ago to get a lower gear for climbing. I could live with either, but the 42 would mean less shifting to the big ring for my current riding style (as long as I had the 30T granny for really steep grades).

Dan

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by el Inglés
Go for the triple , the levers will be ok ( if not durace ) just change the bottom bracket and the cranks + mechs , expensive I know but you still get a tight ratio plus low gears when needed . As for weight , you can diet off the diference in a week if your that manic about the weight , or not fill your two bottles to the top / carry a repair kit not a spare tube / mini pump not full size / buy a lighter helmet etc...........

Agree with your comments on the weight. I'm not changing to a triple on my current 10 year old frame: that's just too much money for the few times I'd use the triple. Decision on whether to go triple on the next new bike is what I'm looking at. Even if I only need it once a month on steep hills or long rides, seems like it's worth getting now vs deciding in a few years I have to have it.....then spending again to upgrade everything.

Dan

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by sathomasga
I'm in the same boat. Have done many centuries but avoided 6 gap. Next year, though, I'm going for it. I've got an Ultegra double with 12-27 in the back, but even that's not low enough for 6 gap for me (YMMV). I've thought about a triple, but I really like how well the double shifts, and I make extensive use of the trim settings on the front. I'm concerned that a triple will lose both. (Well, I know it will lose the trim settings.)

The tentative plan I've got now is to put a FSA Compact Pro double on the front. It's a 34/50, which should get me up the hills in good shape. I want to talk to the LBS, however, to make sure that an Ultegra front shifter can handle a 16 tooth difference without compromising the shifts. I recall reading somewhere that 14 teeth was the max, but that may be out-dated. The folks at FSA claim no problems, but I still want to check. Another option is to build a TSA crank, in which case I'd go with a 36/50.

Stephen

The Compact Pro does look like an good option, but also a compromise since the 50/34 gap is so big. Riding most of the time in the 50 ring would work, but when the rolling hill comes, and you need to go below say 50/23, then you've got to shift to the 34 ring, plus then immediately shift up about 3 cogs to get back to that one-gear drop you were looking for. Lots of "extra" shifting then, plus tough on anyone sucking your wheel!

Dan

"Campy also has triples that are 30-40-50. (Record and Chorus, anyway.)"

That sounds like what I want... except I woud exchange a 53 for the big ring for the long descents.

"One online source says the Campy Record Triple weighs 715 gms, while the double weighs 632"

The weight is not really an issue.. The chorus or centuar triple is only 730 so I'll probably go with one of those.

Thanks.

I put on a Campy triple groupo last year. Gears were 53-42-30. Groupo was Chorus, but at that time, Chorus didn't have a triple crank, so crankset, BB, FD and RD were upgraded to Record. Added another $200 to the price (cbike.com) but that's a whole lot cheaper than trying to add a triple later.

This gets run with a 13-26 10spd cassette. Works out well for the rolling hills I usually ride, good range in middle and large chainrings, with the 30 gear in reserve for anything nasty.
This setup shifts very well. In slightly over a year of riding, it's dropped the chain off of the front ring only once, has yet to chainsuck.

The Campy front shifter has seven positions, so knocking out chain rub is no problem.

On the road, it's a tradeoff - you can go to the super low gear and pull a steeper hill, but you're going a lot slower so you'll be pulling the load longer. The triple helps, but it is not a substitute for being in shape.

Being in shape is one thing but they have mountains here in Spain , and meer mortals need all the help we can get on long , hot , sunny days trying to climb cat . 1 hills , remember the Vuelta 2000 , the stage up Aitana ? That´s the great thing about the triple , you can fit a 13 ( or 12 if your in shape , for going down hill etc ) 23 and still be lower than a 39-29 when needed without screwing up your ratios the rest of the time , still the great thing about advice is YOU DON´T HAVE TO TAKE IT . Go for what feels right for your needs , consider the pros and cons , oh and remember Tyler Hamilton raced the " Grand Fondo " compact double chainring to victory in this years tour ( CCS planned to fit this for the " domestiques " to give them an easier ride in the mountains , then Tyler fell ... ) Also remember that last year for the Angliru Oscar Seville fitted a 23 when advised to use a 25 and Aitor , who used the 25 , survived the climb better to eventually win the Vuelta . the moral ? always give yourself ratios for when you have a bad day not just what works on a good one .

My bike got stolen recently and I'm now ordering the same bike but with a triple cranck.
I'm able to climb most hills but I noticed that I use the lowest gear (which was 39-27) very often, even when the slope is only ~5%. Apparently I just prefer to cycle on souplesse rather than force. Therefore I go for a triple now.

JohnO, el Ingles, Aernout: Thanks for the great responses. I carry top gears that I don't need and only use on my best days, so nothing wrong with low gears that are only there for the worst days/worst terrain. Plus, like the tighter midrange I can get with the 12-25 or 13-26 on the 42 up front.

I'm convinced I'll go with a triple setup on the new bike. Now, Campy vs Shimano is the next decision!

Dan

hills are few and short in Denmark, therefore most people (club racers) gear too high and come to an almost stand still at the end of those (few) climbs that actually are quite steep (>8%). Things are obviously different in continually hilly, mountaneous areas. But still - if you want to have that delicious rush of being able to race past the others at the end of the climb, go for the third ring in front and a 11-23 cog in the rear.

C.K. Thomsen

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by daveornee

And why does he need a triple front shifter,when he has not said what he currently has??? All the Campy fronts shift a double or triple and all the Shimano 9 speed fronts with the exception of pre 2002 DA shift aa double or triple.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by dhk
I've only had doubles, but am leaning strongly to a triple setup for the next ride. My low gear is a 39/26 now, which seems low enough for most of the hills around here. But, I want to do the big 10-12% local climbs, plus maybe the 6 Gap Century, which I now avoid. The triple looks like the way to go: can have a 30/25 low gear (1.2 ratio) when I'm over the top at max HR and need to sit back down. Plus, I like the idea of a 42 mid chainring with a tight 12-25 cluster for the most cruising-gear options on flats and rolling terrain.

My question is, how much weight does the triple actually add in total, and what other compromises are involved, if any? Am I missing something?

Probably the classic topic when it comes to decisions on the new bike. Would like discuss the pros/cons. Also would like to hear about other options, like a 29 tooth low on the cassette for a double, plus the compact 50/34 chainring setup. Thanks.

Dan

You have thrown out too many options. You know what you currently ride and might need.Get a gear inch chart and start figuring. I run doubles, triples and even a double with a 29 rear cog. They all have some pros and cons as to gearing options,but weight just does not figure in. FWIW,you can run a short cage RD with a triple,but may not be able to use some of the smaller cogs when in the granny depending on cog/chainring combinations. Not a big deal,IMO, since the granny is primaily a bailout anyway,and one typically just uses the big cogs when in it.

Done decision; I'm going with a triple. Understand each of the chainrings have limits; I never use the extreme combinations anyway on my double. My low gear will be a 30/25 or 26, depending on whether I go with Shimano or Campy.

Thanks for the input,
Dan