Most say go for a compact over triple

What bike and bike bits should you buy?
p1tse
Posts: 830
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 12:18 pm
Contact:

Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby p1tse » Mon Oct 29, 2012 20:46 pm

Most say go for a compact over triple

With weight, not required unless doing steep hills, those starting and being unfit etc

But I've found a bike with triple, is it less smooth on gear changes, Is gearing better on a compact?

Chadders81
Posts: 612
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 08:57 am

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby Chadders81 » Mon Oct 29, 2012 20:57 pm

Some people will say you get a better chain line with a compact and slightly better shifting. And they will say that a compact offers you the same range of gears.

But if you're happy, go for it.

p1tse
Posts: 830
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 12:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby p1tse » Mon Oct 29, 2012 21:02 pm

Chadders81 wrote:Some people will say you get a better chain line with a compact and slightly better shifting. And they will say that a compact offers you the same range of gears.

But if you're happy, go for it.


Thanks
As a newbie I thought that in my head, better chain line and therefore shifting

zippy483
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 12:21 pm

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby zippy483 » Mon Oct 29, 2012 21:13 pm

Similar gear range with compact and triple, but smaller jumps between gears on a triple , took advice from LBS when I ordered my new bike was thinking compact, but was advised triple for the above reason, apparently there can be a lot of swapping backwards and forward on the front chainrings on a compact.

Good article in the second issue of Cyclist magazine about gearing author is a big fan of triples although is reluctant to say so because they are seen as not cool, but really who gives a toss I'd rather ride up the hill than get off and push :)

zippy483
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 12:21 pm

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby zippy483 » Mon Oct 29, 2012 21:13 pm

Oh and as far as shifiting goes, my tiple shifts just fine :)

zippy483
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 12:21 pm

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby zippy483 » Mon Oct 29, 2012 21:19 pm

Oh and just another one the extra weight of a triple is immaterial unless your pared down to your fighting weight :)

Difference in weight between and Ultegra triple and Compact is 190g ish so less than half a pound, so for me being at least a stone overweight it is as you can see immaterial :(

User avatar
Herbsman
Posts: 1940
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 18:31 pm

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby Herbsman » Mon Oct 29, 2012 21:36 pm

A mate of mine does 3/4 and E/1/2/3/4 races on a triple. Nothing wrong with them.
CAPTAIN BUCKFAST'S CYCLING TIPS - GUARANTEED TO WORK! 1 OUT OF 10 RACING CYCLISTS AGREE!

Bordersroadie
Posts: 929
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 11:33 am

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby Bordersroadie » Mon Oct 29, 2012 22:14 pm

zippy483 wrote: there can be a lot of swapping backwards and forward on the front chainrings on a compact


This is absolutely true and an often overlooked major benefit of a triple.

My 12 mile ride to work is hilly (50+ feet per mile) and I ride it between 17-18mph average. The ace card of the triple is that on the middle ring (39 in my case) I can access all 10 sprockets, from 11 to 28, without crosschaining, so for the last few months I have never used either the big or granny ring on my commute. That's hundreds of miles.

It's the same story for generally rolling terrain with an averagely fit rider (me), where the 39 ring makes life very easy indeed as most of the time I want ratios that are 39 front and somewhere around the middle of the rear. It's ironic that having so much choice of gearing actually means you make fewer changes!

I'm a convert from a compact because as a compact user I was forever needing a "big-big" or "small-small" ratio (which is why you see a lot of compact riders riding with a bad chainline ("crosschaining") so to avoid this, on my compact, I was constantly hunting up and down the front rings to find the right cadence, and each such change needed a corresponding rear change too.

On Shimano 105 the difference is 150g.

Most triple skeptics don't understand (or believe) this benefit because you only really do so if you ride both systems extensively. And they are just far too cool to have (gasp!) three chainrings up front.

There are many other benefits but I've banged on about them on previous threads so I'll just stick to the (huge) benefit above for now. :D

pkripper
Posts: 636
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2012 19:27 pm

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby pkripper » Mon Oct 29, 2012 22:29 pm

my preference is for a compact over a triple, just because I found I just did not use the inner ring on the triple at all, and broadly spend most of the time on the big ring at the front anyway, as there's only a couple of hills in Surrey that defeat me on that. But, I do run a 12-28 on the rear, so there's a fairly decent spread.

User avatar
Omar Little
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 09:22 am

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby Omar Little » Mon Oct 29, 2012 22:59 pm

I have a double, a compact and a triple on various bikes.

The triple is good for loaded touring or hilly riding when it gets very steep but for for general riding i find it a bit annoying because it is more prone to the chain rubbing on the front derailleur even with the trim option.

I know in theory it has more gears with smaller jumps in the cassette but the actual useable gears is less than on the compact which i can set up and will work for months without any annoying noises before i need to fettle the gears again.

User avatar
Sprool
Posts: 958
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 19:32 pm

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby Sprool » Mon Oct 29, 2012 23:40 pm

I'm happy with my triple, theres not much trimming needed and the small ring is in constant use for uphill sections, middle for cruising the flats and the outer for any downhill. I like the extra choice available.

User avatar
drlodge
Posts: 3622
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 08:29 am

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby drlodge » Tue Oct 30, 2012 09:47 am

Unless you need a smaller gaer than 34-28, choose a compact. Lower gearing than that will need a longer cage RD anyway, so then you're into either bigger cassettes or a triple. I don't find double changing or chain line an issue at all. Understand where the cross over gears are, and use the right gear with the best chain line. I'm always double changing, and think nothing of it.
WyndyMilla Massive Attack | Rourke 953 | Condor Italia 531 Pro | Boardman CX Pro | DT Swiss RR440 Tubeless Wheels
Find me on Strava

dylanfernley
Posts: 400
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 20:29 pm
Contact:

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby dylanfernley » Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:11 pm

triple for the touring bike, compact for the carbon-- got 50/40/30- 12- 28 , but as pointed out earlier 34-28 is not far off, all that chainline stuff-- bit o nonsense-- its not going to make much difference to chain 'life' !

BuckMulligan
Posts: 655
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 20:18 pm

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby BuckMulligan » Tue Oct 30, 2012 13:56 pm

Bordersroadie wrote:
zippy483 wrote: there can be a lot of swapping backwards and forward on the front chainrings on a compact


This is absolutely true and an often overlooked major benefit of a triple.

My 12 mile ride to work is hilly (50+ feet per mile) and I ride it between 17-18mph average. The ace card of the triple is that on the middle ring (39 in my case) I can access all 10 sprockets, from 11 to 28, without crosschaining, so for the last few months I have never used either the big or granny ring on my commute. That's hundreds of miles.

It's the same story for generally rolling terrain with an averagely fit rider (me), where the 39 ring makes life very easy indeed as most of the time I want ratios that are 39 front and somewhere around the middle of the rear. It's ironic that having so much choice of gearing actually means you make fewer changes!

I'm a convert from a compact because as a compact user I was forever needing a "big-big" or "small-small" ratio (which is why you see a lot of compact riders riding with a bad chainline ("crosschaining") so to avoid this, on my compact, I was constantly hunting up and down the front rings to find the right cadence, and each such change needed a corresponding rear change too.

On Shimano 105 the difference is 150g.

Most triple skeptics don't understand (or believe) this benefit because you only really do so if you ride both systems extensively. And they are just far too cool to have (gasp!) three chainrings up front.

There are many other benefits but I've banged on about them on previous threads so I'll just stick to the (huge) benefit above for now. :D


Interesting point. Not one I can relate to living in the flatlands of Essex, but it sounds very logical! But my question is, if you don't use the granny ring, why not switch to a standard double (53-39) and then you have the best of both worlds.

IME, triples are good for loaded-up touring on variable gradients, but prefer a double (standard or compact) for general riding.

Bordersroadie
Posts: 929
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 11:33 am

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby Bordersroadie » Tue Oct 30, 2012 14:35 pm

BuckMulligan wrote: But my question is, if you don't use the granny ring, why not switch to a standard double (53-39) and then you have the best of both worlds.


Good question. Because I live in a hilly area and apart from my commute I generally ride very hilly routes, around 100ft per mile. On the steep road sections, the ratios of climbing gears I have on the granny are closer-spaced than on a compact. And of course I get a better bail-out gear for severely steep climbs like Hardnott pass.

I can see why someone in a non-hilly spot would not want a triple, fair enough.

User avatar
wilo13
Posts: 221
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 12:59 pm

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby wilo13 » Tue Oct 30, 2012 15:29 pm

As mentioned already, A triple is a waste of time unless you are doing a full on tour with panniers etc.
Carrot cake or Flapjack?

User avatar
Sprool
Posts: 958
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 19:32 pm

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby Sprool » Tue Oct 30, 2012 19:50 pm

wilo13 wrote:As mentioned already, A triple is a waste of time unless you are doing a full on tour with panniers etc.
spare some compassion for those of us who are not super athletes, struggling in a hilly region to lose weight and get fitter. For me, a triple is no waste of time, its essential to give me the gears to ride comfortably over the terrain.

User avatar
k-dog
Posts: 1432
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 13:49 pm

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby k-dog » Tue Oct 30, 2012 20:25 pm

I haven't had a triple in a few years but I found the chainring sizes annoying - the big ring was too big and the middle wasn't quite bit enough so I found myself changing a lot.

My 50/34 compact seems better for average riding - althought it is 10 speed and my old triple was only 8 I think.
I'm left handed, if that matters.

Bordersroadie
Posts: 929
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 11:33 am

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby Bordersroadie » Tue Oct 30, 2012 22:21 pm

drlodge wrote:I'm always double changing, and think nothing of it.


Precisely my point: I'm not.

huuregeil
Posts: 776
Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 10:37 am

Re: Most say go for a compact over triple

Postby huuregeil » Tue Oct 30, 2012 23:11 pm

For the same bottom gear (basically what all these arguments boil down to), a triple gives a bigger top gear and closer spacing. What's not to like? A triple is my first choice to take to an alpine sportive, not because I need the low gearing, rather I appreciate the tighter spacing and I also find it relatively easy to spin out 50/13 going downhill (40kph is ~140rpm on 50/13, whereas it's a relatively chill 120rpm on 53/12). A 13/26 or 29 being the cassette to take with a compact for me; vs a 12/23 or 25 on a triple.


Return to “Road Buying Advice”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CoalTheCat, Paulie Walnuts, skyeflyguy and 7 guests