Double v triple

jag con

Hi all i am looking at a trek 1.5 double 34/50 and a triple 30/39/50 i am new to cycling friends advised me to go for the triple as it will help me on hills as im starting off on a road bike my cycling would be in Wicklow im told the double is a compact , any advice

Con

Nietzschean

i'd get the compact, smoother shifting and your only missing one gear on either end normally.

DirkVoodoo

A compact (34/50) with a 25 or 27 tooth cassette will get you up anything around these parts. I was a bit nervous about getting a compact, but I have never really missed the triple and you find that even if you have to grind out a gear on the steeper parts, you won't have to get off and walk.

My sister started cycling after about 10 years and has a compact on a trek 1.2, no bother to her.

Build up slowly with some flat and smaller inclines, don't tackle the big ones right away. A target (like the SK 100km in August) is good for focusing your efforts.

ROK ON

Difficult to answer withot knowing more. Are you a big bloke? How fit are you?
Both of the previous responders are light blokes compared to me.
I have a triple on one bike, and there are certain times I use the max gearing. Usually when gradient hits 7% or more.
A lot of times the 39 ring (middle) and the 24 or 27 cog on the back is sufficient.
It is a question of gear inches (the shorter the easier to spin up a big hill).
A triple with a big cassette of 27 teeth has a gear inch of 29.5inches. Same casette on the 34 ring of a compact is 30.5inches. From memory check sheldon brown website under greaing.
My new bike has a compact but I haven't been out on the hills with it yet - so I will let you know.
You don't have to use the 30 ring on a triple you know.
Also on a compact you can get a 28tooth on back casette - this replicates the lowest gear inch in a triple.

jag con

Che guys
Rok on i am 17 .5 stone and 5 11" not the fittest person around either

Con

Ryaner

There is less shame in having a triple than walking up a hill. Personally I'm quite fond of my compact double now that I have it and not having the lower gears has made me stronger.

RobFowl

There was aguy in my club (Swords cc) who turned up at the Donegal 3 day afew years ago on a bike with a triple. Proples were openly laughing at him.
Didn't laugh when he dropped them all going up one of the monster climbs!
No shame in a triple at all.
If your not too fit go for the trple, it'll give you lots more options on the hills.

blorg

A triple is a very good option if you are not racing. A double and to a lesser extent a compact does provide better front shifting/less likelihood of dropping a chain etc. that is better for racing. A triple does give you one gear lower than a compact... May not sound like a lot but it the difference between having a 24 and a 27 can be big enough if you are struggling up a steep climb.

Having said that you would probably survive on the 34 on the compact. It is a bit more difficult to spin up a steep hill though. What you would need to avoid at all costs would be a standard double with a 39 small ring, very bad idea that if you are new and planning hills.

ednwireland

i run a triple with a 12-25 rear got to say like the ability to spin up hills, mind you i'm not that fit and have dodgy knees (although i did do 94km last sunday) and i'm heavy

Ruprecht

In the same boat as Jag and live in the hills and about to upgrade.....Just a couple of clarification questions on the posts:

What are the advantages of a compact as against standard double?
What is the main difference between a double compact as against a triple.

RobFowl

Ruprecht wrote: »

In the same boat as Jag and live in the hills and about to upgrade.....Just a couple of clarification questions on the posts:

What are the advantages of a compact as against standard double?
What is the main difference between a double compact as against a triple.

1) easier and clearer shifting
2) weight and image

Ruprecht

Cheers.

In relation to point 1 what % of new road bikes now been sold would be compacts?
Why would anyone now buying not want a compact?

lukester

Ruprecht wrote: »

Cheers.

In relation to point 1 what % of new road bikes now been sold would be compacts?
Why would anyone now buying not want a compact?

Don't know what percentage, but I'd say the majority of entry level bikes are now sold with compact as standard.

DirkVoodoo

Yeah compact is definitely becoming more mainstream. I find that I have nearly the same range of gears as I had on a triple, with less overlapping of gears or "useless" gears. Basically, I would spend a lot of time flipping between the many combinations of gears, a compact is a lot less fussy as you have fewer choices.

They are also easier to keep clean, cleaning a triple is a PITA.

Ruprecht

Cheers -the image thing is that trebles seem to be poor image - right?

Would the Focus Cayo treble have a poor image - even though its carbon and good spec etc?

lukester

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Yeah compact is definitely becoming more mainstream. I find that I have nearly the same range of gears as I had on a triple, with less overlapping of gears or "useless" gears. Basically, I would spend a lot of time flipping between the many combinations of gears, a compact is a lot less fussy as you have fewer choices.

They are also easier to keep clean, cleaning a triple is a PITA.

+1

I have a triple, bought it before I really knew how uncool it was, (and it was cheaper than the double for some reason).

Apart from euro approval, compact is easier all round, one less thing to get right while indexing, pretty much all the gears you need, and easier to maintain.

lukester

Ruprecht wrote: »

Cheers -the image thing is that trebles seem to be poor image - right?

Would the Focus Cayo treble have a poor image - even though its carbon and good spec etc?

The image thing is all BS really, and yet it matters

If you'd happily drive a Skoda over a VW, then it's a non-issue.

Nietzschean

Ruprecht wrote: »

Cheers -the image thing is that trebles seem to be poor image - right?

Would the Focus Cayo treble have a poor image - even though its carbon and good spec etc?

At the end of the day image will get triumpthed by performance everytime , a Cayo will always look good. that said ,I'd get the compact , just don't do silly hills till you have the legs for it(though I have a compact on my cayo so I have to say that )

DirkVoodoo

Ruprecht wrote: »

Cheers -the image thing is that trebles seem to be poor image - right?

Would the Focus Cayo treble have a poor image - even though its carbon and good spec etc?

Best advice I can give: It's not about the bike.

If it is your first road bike, you might want to shop around town first and see if there are any good offers. The main benefit is sizing. Bikes aren't like pants, you can't really grow into them and a poorly setup bike will lead to trouble (just look at any of the threads here where people are in a lot of pain). If it was my first road bike, I wouldn't buy it off the internet.

The cayo is an excellent bike though, and if you are confident of your sizing go for it. A "triple" is fine really. There are also a lot of owners on here, so maybe try and see one in the flesh first. Also, make sure you get a bikefit after you buy it.

Ruprecht

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Best advice I can give: It's not about the bike.

If it is your first road bike, you might want to shop around town first and see if there are any good offers. The main benefit is sizing. Bikes aren't like pants, you can't really grow into them and a poorly setup bike will lead to trouble (just look at any of the threads here where people are in a lot of pain). If it was my first road bike, I wouldn't buy it off the internet.

The cayo is an excellent bike though, and if you are confident of your sizing go for it. A "triple" is fine really. There are also a lot of owners on here, so maybe try and see one in the flesh first. Also, make sure you get a bikefit after you buy it.

Thanks for advice - better than any I got in a Southside LBS yesterday where they tried to flog me everthing from a cheap crap entry level Viking to a four € figure Giant.