Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

triple to std double?

  • 19-01-2012 1:39pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 926 ✭✭✭


    as part of my new build i'm looking into groupsets at the min.

    on my first and only road bike i went for a triple, but have never used the granny ring (honestly!), and the only gear i need for climbing has been the 39-25.

    was thinking of going for a std double rather than a compact since it seems like a big jump to go from 50 down to 34 on chainrings.

    am i being short-sighted? i def don't need 52-12 (will prob get a 12-25 11sp cassette), but likewise 34-25 seems a bit low for what i usually use.

    any thoughts?


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,505 ✭✭✭✭DirkVoodoo


    It wouldn't hurt to have a compact and you can always stick an 11-23 cassette on it to give you nice and tight ratios. The jump on front shifting isn't THAT bad, not as smooth as a standard double, but then you would have the flexibility to whack on a 27 or 28 tooth cassette if you ever decide to take the bike off somewhere like the continent to do an Etape.

    Better to have it and not need it, rather than trying to buy a new crankset later on.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,313 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    G rock wrote: »
    the only gear i need for climbing has been the 39-25.


    any thoughts?

    Depends on the hill no?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 926 ✭✭✭G rock


    07Lapierre wrote: »
    Depends on the hill no?

    i guess it does!

    but so far, the hills i've been tackling (slieve mann, SE, etc) i've managed well enough on 39-25.

    although i suppose what dirk said makes sense, better to have backup in case i ever come across anything steeper/get fat/get lazy/get even more unfit!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,867 ✭✭✭Tonyandthewhale


    If you're a strong climber then you should be fine with a standard double and maybe a 12-27 or 12-28 on the back if you're really stuck. A compact will give you lee-way for even bigger and steeper climbs as well as getting old and fat or lazy or whatever.

    If you do go for a standard you might run out of gears some day but it's unlikely to be a problem on a regular basis, just slightly more regular than with a compact, maybe. Then again, there's nothing really wrong with a compact except slightly slower shifting.

    Either way I don't think it's something you should worry too much about if you haven't had any trouble with climbing before.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 594 ✭✭✭rurs


    You mentioned 11 speed in your OP, presume you're looking at Campag?

    There are a range of 12/13-29 cassettes available, from Chorus up you don't even need a long cage RD. 39-29 works out slightly lower than 34-25.

    I found this page invaluable when I was deciding on my first road bike. I had been riding a hybrid with a triple, I worked out the equivalent gearing versus various compacts and double combinations on this, and what I was used to riding. It even takes crank length into account.

    Another point is that if you're comfortable on 39-25, you may end up not using the lower end of the block much if you go with a compact.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 926 ✭✭✭G rock


    Looks like a similar page to the rabbit gear calculator, very handy indeed! Yeah looking at campag alright, that's interesting that I wouldn't need a long cage rd for even lower gears, thanks for that.

    Will take a good look at ratios in those calculators and hopefully make a decision soon, although I reckon that compact may be the safer option, with maybe an 11-23

    Thanks lads


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,684 ✭✭✭triggermortis


    rurs wrote: »

    I found this page invaluable

    That page looks like pure witchcraft to me


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 594 ✭✭✭rurs


    That page looks like pure witchcraft to me

    Witchcraft? Surely it's just simple maths? It's just a fancier version of the gear inch numbers people have been using since the days of the penny farthing.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,995 ✭✭✭✭blorg


    If you're a strong climber
    The other possibility is that you are a grinder with bad climbing technique. I am a reasonably strong climber myself and think a compact is ideal for most people. I use one myself on my non-race bike, and wouldn't be without it in the serious mountains in Europe.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 926 ✭✭✭G rock


    blorg wrote: »
    If you're a strong climber
    The other possibility is that you are a grinder with bad climbing technique. I am a reasonably strong climber myself and think a compact is ideal for most people. I use one myself on my non-race bike, and wouldn't be without it in the serious mountains in Europe.

    Try to keep cadence as high as possible even when climbing, and can usually manage to do so on all but the steepest small sections.

    Reckon I'm just gonna part it safe and go compact though, might be nice to have some gears in reserve!


  • Advertisement
Advertisement