triple to a double?????

remington 700

I have a giant defy 4 triple looking to change to a scott speedster 40 18 speed what are yer views on it is a triple out dated?? Thanks

Inquitus

remington 700 wrote: »

I have a giant defy 4 triple looking to change to a scott speedster 40 18 speed what are yer views on it is a triple out dated?? Thanks

Unless you need ridiculous gearing on the hills there is nothing to commend a Triple, imho, in this day and age. A compact with a 28 on the back should get most people up the hills and serve them well on the flat.

smacl

Inquitus wrote: »

Unless you need ridiculous gearing on the hills there is nothing to commend a Triple, imho, in this day and age. A compact with a 28 on the back should get most people up the hills and serve them well on the flat.

Depends how much you're carrying, either in the panniers or around your midriff. When I hit Slieve Mann 120k into the WW200, I'm thankful enough of my 30/28 low gear. Similarly, I often take a ~180k spin down to my father's place with an overnight bag, and will spin a low gear on climbs.

That said, I see many of the new Canyons have a default low gear of 34/32 which is actually lower than my lowest gear on the triple, which makes the above a bit moot.

j0hn1

I have a triple and wish I didn't
I bought it a few years back because it covered all the bases, but if I was going again, or advising anyone starting out, I'd advise them to steer clear
It's troublesome and fiddly, and has been into the LBS several times for fixing. Also, I don't tend to use the smallest ring at all anymore.
I'd advise a newbie to get a compact double first, and then if they get into racing they can buy a standard double for cheap enough money. The cost for me to switch now from a triple to a double is just not worth it, probably €500+.
Next bike I buy will have a standard double.

cdaly_

j0hn1 wrote: »

I don't tend to use the smallest ring at all anymore.
I'd advise a newbie to get a compact double first, and then if they get into racing they can buy a standard double for cheap enough money. The cost for me to switch now from a triple to a double is just not worth it, probably €500+.
Next bike I buy will have a standard double.

You're currently riding your triple as a standard double with no cost involved. If you really want to, you can just adjust the low limit screw on the front mech and remove the granny ring and there's your standard double...

dragratchet

i recently made the switch from a triple to a compact double on a new bike.... rarely used the smallest ring unless it was some brutal climb, none the less as a 90kg rider i was apprehensive about changing to a compact but it's been absolutely fine and if anything improved my climbing by engaging my muscles a little bit more. i wouldn't worry about losing the triple at all

smacl

cdaly_ wrote: »

You're currently riding your triple as a standard double with no cost involved. If you really want to, you can just adjust the low limit screw on the front mech and remove the granny ring and there's your standard double...

Chain line might not be as tidy as a standard double cranks and the unnecessary long cage rear derailleur wouldn't be as snappy as a short cage. Still, the price is right

@John1, €500 is on the high side, even for a full new group set unless you're looking at 105 or better. What you would need is;

New chainset, tiagra 4600 €57
New rear mech, Tiagra 4600 short cage €29
New front mech, tiagra 4600 comes €18
New shifters, Tiagra 4600 €128

So €232 for parts, or just €104 if you stay with your current shifters and use the FDR limit screws to block the unneeded third front mech position. €360 would get you a full new 105 groupset. If I was going down this route I'd go for a compact.

j0hn1

@ cdaly & smacl

Thanks for the pointers there lads

Yeah its 105 I'd be replacing, still though, I really thought it would be a lot more expensive than that.
I'll leave well enough alone for the summer I reckon and then see what way the finances are come New Year.

Stop messing with my justifications for a new bike :pac:

cdaly_

j0hn1 wrote: »

Stop messing with my justifications for a new bike :pac:

Hacking on the existing bike is far more fun that just buying a new one...

BTW, if you do end up replacing your 105 triple setup, I might take the old gear from you...

youtheman

Not only is a triple not required, I'd go so far as to say they should be 'banned'. Complete waste of time, money and weight. Compact Double all the way (and I speak from personal experience of both).

smacl

youtheman wrote: »

Not only is a triple not required, I'd go so far as to say they should be 'banned'. Complete waste of time, money and weight. Compact Double all the way (and I speak from personal experience of both).

Guess you don't do much touring. Compact double is fine for most unencumbered road cycling, but there's more to cycling than that. Even then, my current bike is a triple, and my next bike quite possibly will be too. Quite fancy one of these.

Mercian Pro

youtheman wrote: »

Not only is a triple not required, I'd go so far as to say they should be 'banned'. Complete waste of time, money and weight. Compact Double all the way (and I speak from personal experience of both).

Couldn't disagree more!
Have recently switched to a compact with a 12-30 cassette after using a triple for the last six years. While the 34/30 bottom gear is pretty identical to the old 30/27, the gaps between the gear ratios is much greater. As a result, it is much more difficult to be in the ideal gear for the conditions. I could obviously ditch the 12-30 and go for a close ratio cassette but, at my age, the mountains are steep enough without making things harder. The triple has seen me over some of the toughest climbs here and in France.