Triple vs. Compact

I just bought a new bike with a compact and moved from the triple. Took a little adjustment getting used to the shifting for me, though overall is very good for me. I have a 50/34 up front and that seems to be fine for any climbing I have to do.

Newbie question:

What's a triple and what's a compact?

I have a vague idea: chainwheel and rear cogs. But I would like someone to expand on the definition/description.

CDA 455 said:

Newbie question:

What's a triple and what's a compact?

I have a vague idea: chainwheel and rear cogs. But I would like someone to expand on the definition/description.

A "triple" is a 3-chainring sprocket, while a "compact" is a 2-chainring sprocket. 🙂

kokojo said:

Hi, I'm returning to cycling after a long 10+ year break. About to buy my first entry level road bike. Probably a medium to high end aluminium frame, some thing like the BMC Street fire SSX01 or Bianchi c2c via nirone with 105 or veloce.

My question is on gears, most bikes seem to come with compacts chainsets now and I am not sure whether to go for a compact or a triple. As I am just getting back into cycling I keep thinking I might need the granny ring for any decent hills.

I live in a reasonably flat area but planning on doing sportives in the north of England/Scotland where there are some decent hills.

Does anyone out there have a compact and regret not buying a triple or visa versa?

It took me a little while to get used to a compact over a triple, but now that I have the compact, I really like it. I haven't had much of an issue as far as climbing, other than a derailleur that refuses to work right, but that's through no fault of the compact design.

It does require a slightly larger amount of effort for some lightly graded hills, but that's all part of the game. As for regretting having a compact over a triple, there are times that I wish I had a triple, but I don't hold any resentment towards the compact. To explain it in the simplest form, I didn't base my bicycle choice over which chainset was included with the bicycle.

GT Fanatic said:

It took me a little while to get used to a compact over a triple, but now that I have the compact, I really like it. I haven't had much of an issue as far as climbing, other than a derailleur that refuses to work right, but that's through no fault of the compact design.

It does require a slightly larger amount of effort for some lightly graded hills, but that's all part of the game. As for regretting having a compact over a triple, there are times that I wish I had a triple, but I don't hold any resentment towards the compact. To explain it in the simplest form, I didn't base my bicycle choice over which chainset was included with the bicycle.

Depending on the model, can't a compact be swapped out for a triple?

CDA 455 said:

Depending on the model, can't a compact be swapped out for a triple?

You may also need to swap out the dérailleur and the shifters as well. On the other hand swapping a triple to a compact isn't as bad since you can just use the limiter screws to stop the shifters from access the third click.

kokojo said:

Hi, I'm returning to cycling after a long 10+ year break. About to buy my first entry level road bike. Probably a medium to high end aluminium frame, some thing like the BMC Street fire SSX01 or Bianchi c2c via nirone with 105 or veloce.

My question is on gears, most bikes seem to come with compacts chainsets now and I am not sure whether to go for a compact or a triple. As I am just getting back into cycling I keep thinking I might need the granny ring for any decent hills.

I live in a reasonably flat area but planning on doing sportives in the north of England/Scotland where there are some decent hills.

Does anyone out there have a compact and regret not buying a triple or visa versa?

I have both and like both.
What type of riding do you plan? long endurance type or fast pace training rides but shorter? or do you want to go as fast as you can all the time? Do you plan to do the maintenance work yourself?
I like my triple for long rides (60 miles plus), and when I'm not familiar with the terrain. It allows me to have a variety of spin ranges not possible with the compact. It requires a little more maintenance to keep the FD shifting flawlessly.
The compact is more agile, a little lighter and easier to maintain but if you have a lot of steep hills, nothing beats the triple.
Either one will work for you. You can swap cassettes from say... 12/25 to 11/30 on either set up
If I was going to just have one bike, I'd go with the compact and have several cassettes around: 12/25 for flat terrain; 11/28 for rolling terrain and 11/30 for climbing. It takes 5 minutes to change from one to the other.

I own triples and have ridden compacts when traveling. Both work fine and did the job. Unlike the prior poster, given a choice, I'd pick the triple. What does that mean?

It means we have different preferences. Maybe different strength levels. Maybe different terrain to ride. Maybe different experience levels.

Where I get into the smallest front gear is usually on a very steep, long grade well into the ride when I'm starting to get tired.

The safe choice is a triple in front with a pretty aggressive set of gears in back. It is much nicer to have the gears available and not need them than to need the gears and not have them.

CDA 455 said:

Depending on the model, can't a compact be swapped out for a triple?

I'm not sure. 🙂 I'm going to have to leave this one to someone else. 🙂

kokojo said:

Hi, I'm returning to cycling after a long 10+ year break. About to buy my first entry level road bike. Probably a medium to high end aluminium frame, some thing like the BMC Street fire SSX01 or Bianchi c2c via nirone with 105 or veloce.

My question is on gears, most bikes seem to come with compacts chainsets now and I am not sure whether to go for a compact or a triple. As I am just getting back into cycling I keep thinking I might need the granny ring for any decent hills.

I live in a reasonably flat area but planning on doing sportives in the north of England/Scotland where there are some decent hills.

Does anyone out there have a compact and regret not buying a triple or visa versa?

It depends on what hills those sportives go over. If it's gnarly stuff like Hardknott Pass, Rosedale Chimney, Park Rash or Bwlch y Groes etc then you'll want the triple and a 12-27 cassette in the back unless you're pretty handy on a bike.

A 105 triple setup should change pretty sweet. If needed you can run down to a 24 (could be a 26) inner ring if you've got a few extra pounds around the mid section.

There is a reason why the Bwlch translates directly to Hellfire pass... although it's not as hard or as steep as Hardknott. I know there's a few steeper roads than hardknott but most of them don't have the cr%p roadsurface - lower gears are better than walking. There are sections in the corners that are definitely steeper than 1 in 33 (33%).

I think you mean "steeper than 1 in 3 (33%)." 1 in 33 would be a 3.03% grade, which most folks won't need a triple for.

alienator said:

I think you mean "steeper than 1 in 3 (33%)." 1 in 33 would be a 3.03% grade, which most folks won't need a triple for.

iPhone retardation... I did mean 1in3 - good job i clarified it with 33%.

Fergie or Tony Z would need a quadruple chainset for that... 😉