Double to a triple

Limestone1

I wouldn't mind having a go at the Wicklow 200 but I struggle a bit going up the big hills such as the Wicklow and Sally gaps and don't think I could do 4 or 5 biggies on one trip.
The set up I have is a 39/53 and 13-23 and after seeing a guy spinning past me last weekend on the Sally Gap I think a triple chainset might sort me out.
I could spring for about €800 for a new bike if necessary but it might be a bit of a waste as I'm not sure it would be much better than what I have apart from the improved gearing. Therefore I was wondering about upgrading my current Diamondback to a triple. My current set-up is :

Front Derailleur Campagnolo Mirage
Rear Derailleur Shimano 600
Shifters Shimano SORA Flightdeck

Presume I would have to change the crankset, bottom bracket, chain and cassette - but does anyone know if the front derailleur and shifters would have to go too ?

E@gle.

i think the whole 13-23 is where the problem lies. try a 12-26 you may have a better chance

Raam

I agree with Eagle. Just change the rear cassette. You can even get a 12/27, the extra tooth will work wonders.

kincsem

I plan to do the W200 this year. In 2006 I did the W100 on a triple 52/42/30 and 12/26. This year I have a 53/39/30 and 12/27 for the W200, and I will need it. With a 30 on the front a 25, 26, or 27 on the back will allow you to get up most hills.

Raam

kincsem wrote: »

I plan to do the W200 this year. In 2006 I did the W100 on a triple 52/42/30 and 12/26. This year I have a 53/39/30 and 12/27 for the W200, and I will need it. With a 30 on the front a 25, 26, or 27 on the back will allow you to get up most hills.

I did it on a 53/39 12/27 last year, some of the steeper hills take a bit of grinding. I don't have the strongest legs, so it's definitely do-able on a double. I'm hoping this year I'll be somewhat stronger due to some training I've been doing, but I'll find that out next week when I head back out to Wicklow for my first spin there this year.

Chips Lovell

As the lads said, a 12-27 cassette is probably the easiest and cheapest thing to try first. If that isn't enough you could consider a compact (50-34 or 50-36) rather than triple crankset as they're less hassle to switch to.

Limestone1

Thanks for the advice - I'll try the rear cassette first then if that might make a noticeable difference.

tunney

Compacts maybe, 27s on the back maybe, but never a triple.

bazman

You would definitely have to get new front derailleur and shifters also, so changing to triple is really not worth while - by the time you add up the cost, you might as well be getting a new bike.

Go for the 27 at the back. Campag do a 29 cassette, but not going to work with your rear derailleur.

Oh and as others have pointed out the next step would be a compact crankset

ba

dont buy a new bike, for €550 you could get an ultegra group set. cos imo you wont get much of a machine for €800.

Limestone1

tunney wrote: »

Compacts maybe, 27s on the back maybe, but never a triple.

Didn't realise a triple was taboo

Seems to be less 8sp for sale now so am struggling to find a suitable 27 (plenty 26s) - then came across this :

http://www.parker-international.co.uk/ProductDetails/mcs/productID/3781/groupID/3/categoryID/38/v/e3353d67-8169-4e34-9019-55b2b75a1951

Has an 11/28 option ....but can't establish if it is for an MTB though as there does seem to be more big rings available for the MTBs - Shimano even do a 13/34 Megarange.
Which set me thinking - what would the difference be exactly if it is compatible with my freehub ?

garo

You could try this:

http://www.nashbar.com/profile.cfm?category=600087&subcategory=60001109&brand=&sku=15539&storetype=&estoreid=&pagename=Shop%20by%20Subcat%3A%20Freewheels

8-speed and Shimano compatible.

Freddy687

There is no difference in a shimano MTB and Road rear cassette. It is just that the MTB will be big sprockets to 34 and road cassettes will be smaller 11-25 etc.
Both will fit a shimano free hub. The problem is that the chain on a road bike will probably not be long enough to handle a 34 rear sprocket with a 39-53 front. Also the rear d. may not be able to be adjusted enough to keep the jockey wheel from touching a sprocket that big.
Triples are not taboo, most of the guys I know run triples for the Wicklow and the Etape, you can never have enough gears. But they are expensive to retro fit as almost every thing has to be replaced.

Limestone1

Thanks for all the help on this - have got and put on the 11/28 and can shift in and out of it smoothly enough. The jockey wheel is close to the large sprocket but far enough apart so as not to impinge on the shifting . Changed the chain too and am all set for a trip to the Wicklow mountains this weekend to see what difference it makes.
I just hope the wind isn't as bad as the current forecast ....

Freddy687

If the jockey wheel is to close to the biggest rear sprocket you have, then you can adjust the screw on the back of the derailluer (the one the hanger). Make a note of the number of turns you give it so it can be put back if you change the cassette.
You will know if it is too close from the noise off the chain when out on the the road. Shimano have good data sheets for all their parts, may be worth getting the sheet for your rear d. as reference.

blorg

Serious roadies sneer at triples. I have one myself and I know I overtook lots of people with doubles who looked in severe pain on the ascents ;-)

Diarmuid

blorg wrote: »

Serious roadies sneer at triples. I have one myself and I know I overtook lots of people with doubles who looked in severe pain on the ascents ;-)

Yea I love that. Unless you are a pro or are never going to climb any serious mountains I think a triple is a must. Of course if you already have a double then you are going to have to look at alternatives to get the gearing you need.

bunnygreen

If any of you have done some of the Sportives like the Etape Du Tour,you'll notice lots and lots of the French guys have triples,wonder why?,this whole triple snobbery thing is such a load of b////x,your going to suffer anyway so why not enjoy it.

tunney

Diarmuid wrote: »

Yea I love that. Unless you are a pro or are never going to climb any serious mountains I think a triple is a must. Of course if you already have a double then you are going to have to look at alternatives to get the gearing you need.

I've yet to come across a mountain in ireland that a 39x25 can't handle. For some races in the UK and some trips to Italy and I would put a 27 on the back.

kincsem

The one thing missing from this discussion about gearing is the ability of the cyclist. Some might be able to go up any mounain road on 39/25. It does not follow that all can do the same. I am 57 and use a triple. I did not sit on a bike from the age of 18 to age 55. If it takes a triple to get me up a hill I'll use it.

Diarmuid

tunney wrote: »

I've yet to come across a mountain in ireland that a 39x25 can't handle. For some races in the UK and some trips to Italy and I would put a 27 on the back.

I'm talking about serious mountains in the Alps and Pyrenees.
If you have a 39x25 and pedal at (a relatively slow) 70rpm you will be doing 13.6kph, at a more normal 90rpm 17.5kph. If you can climb 7% gradient for 20km at that pace then you don't need a triple. Most people can't, hence the need for a triple

Limestone1

tunney wrote: »

I've yet to come across a mountain in ireland that a 39x25 can't handle. For some races in the UK and some trips to Italy and I would put a 27 on the back.

I think it also depends of what sort of legs you are using. The ones I have on my roadbike are fine for riding on the flat but they are not great for climbing with .:)