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

Triple vs. compact gearing?

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    MediaMan
    Registered Users Posts: 454 ✭✭MediaMan


    I have a compact on my road bike, having come from a triple on a hybrid. As previous posters have said - someone with any level of fitness at all and of reasonable weight does not need a triple. I am not particularly fit, or a good climber, and the compact is fine for me.

    But it is a personal thing. For me the compact is good right through the ratios. They only problem - and it's not a trivial one - is that on your average rolling terrain I spend a lot of time switching both front and back rings as my typical speed and cadence means I am crossing between small front / small rear and large front / large rear frequently. This was mentioned by another poster and seems to be a common situation. But I don't have the legs for a standard double, so the compact is definitely the best compromise for me.

    So best to beg/borrow some bikes and try out each option, make an allowance for improving fitness, and away you go.


  • Options
    #33
    loinnsigh
    Registered Users Posts: 206 ✭✭loinnsigh


    Well I ended up going for the Felt z85, which is a compact. I took it out yesterday evening for a spin up some good hills and I definitely think I made the right choice. Some difference to my old steel MTB :)

    Thanks for all the advice.


  • Options
    #34
    johnk123
    Registered Users Posts: 1,031 ✭✭✭johnk123


    loinnsigh wrote: »
    Well I ended up going for the Felt z85, which is a compact. I took it out yesterday evening for a spin up some good hills and I definitely think I made the right choice. Some difference to my old steel MTB :)

    Thanks for all the advice.
    Best of luck with it!


  • Options
    #35
    Tinder
    Registered Users Posts: 199 ✭✭Tinder


    Sorry for hijacking this thread, but I am also riding a Giant Defy 3, I have no money to upgrade the bike and have no clue about gearing but what would the ball park figure of changing to a compact be, would it be worth it? I am well fit ;)


  • Options
    #36
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,754 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    MediaMan wrote: »
    They only problem - and it's not a trivial one - is that on your average rolling terrain I spend a lot of time switching both front and back rings as my typical speed and cadence means I am crossing between small front / small rear and large front / large rear frequently. This was mentioned by another poster and seems to be a common situation. But I don't have the legs for a standard double, so the compact is definitely the best compromise for me

    I've a triple (53/42/30) on my road bike, more out of happenstance than design, and just changed the cassette from 12-23 to 13-28 (9sp). With 42 in front and 13-28 behind I find I only need to change gears at the front for long or steep climbs or descents, and reckon its pretty good set-up. I find for very steep climbs 30/23 has me grinding more than I want, whereas 30/25 is fine. It's also nice to know you have one more gear available (e.g. 30/28 in my case) even if it doesn't get used, and at the high end 53/13 is plenty. So for a middle aged 80kg bloke like myself, the triple isn't so bad.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 76,477 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    smacl wrote: »
    So for a middle aged 80kg bloke like myself, the triple isn't so bad.
    ... the innocence of youth;)


  • Options
    #38
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,754 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Tinder wrote: »
    Sorry for hijacking this thread, but I am also riding a Giant Defy 3, I have no money to upgrade the bike and have no clue about gearing but what would the ball park figure of changing to a compact be, would it be worth it? I am well fit ;)

    Looked at this myself and the cheapest I saw was €335. You might pick up a second hand compact groupset cheaper, but I reckon given it's all moving parts subject to stress and wear, I'd probably go for new unless there was a real bargain.


  • Options
    #39
    cdaly_
    Registered Users Posts: 6,440 ✭✭✭cdaly_


    smacl wrote: »
    I've a triple (53/42/30) on my road bike, more out of happenstance than design, and just changed the cassette from 12-23 to 13-28 (9sp). With 42 in front and 13-28 behind I find I only need to change gears at the front for long or steep climbs or descents, and reckon its pretty good set-up.

    Gimme back my bike!!!


    Yep, pretty much the same setup on mine. I went for the 13-28t for the close ratios it gives in the higher gears. Incidentally, where did you get the cassette? I had to get a 13-25t and hack it with the big (24,28t) sprockets from an old 11-28t.


  • Options
    #40
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,754 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    cdaly_ wrote: »
    Incidentally, where did you get the cassette? I had to get a 13-25t and hack it with the big (24,28t) sprockets from an old 11-28t.

    Picked it up on Bike24 after some advice on a related thread here, but its for an older 9sp campag setup. This is what I ended up with.


  • Options
    #41
    Sionnach7
    Registered Users Posts: 35 ✭Sionnach7


    loinnsigh wrote: »
    This is great, thanks all.


    The lowest ratio on my favourite compact is 34/30=1.13 (gear ratio using online calculator = 2.2).
    The lowest ratio on my favourite triple is 30/25=1.2 (using online calc = 2.4).

    So the compact would actually be better for climbing.

    Choosing a bike just got a lot easier - compact all the way :)

    Your expression "better for climbing" is a very relative expression. Even starting off training again after a 20 year break (I know!) with a 14kg hybrid with gear ratios lower than 1.0 (crazy), I never, ever, needed a gear as low as 1.13. Being honest I don't think you'll ever need it yourself either. 1.2 is PLENTY more than enough for any mountain - even with a heavy bike and low fitness level.
    So it means compromising a nice gear range with close ratios for one or two gears that you don't really need.
    But since you posted this 3 years ago, you probably have realised this already! :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Sionnach7
    Registered Users Posts: 35 ✭Sionnach7


    Lumen wrote: »
    A 65kg man with reasonable fitness should not need a triple.

    Unless.....they only have a 6 speed at the back, starting at 21t :)


  • Options
    #43
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users Posts: 24,995 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    Sionnach7 wrote: »
    ... 1.2 is PLENTY more than enough for any mountain - even with a heavy bike and low fitness level....
    Have you tried 'Priest's Leap'?

    With a light bike and high fitness level, I was at the pin of my collar on a ratio of 1:13 and down to 5km/h at times when the gradient hits the mid-20's.

    (PS - do you realise this thread is 4 years old?)


  • Options
    #44
    Lumen
    Registered Users Posts: 31,084 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    Wishbone Ash wrote: »
    Have you tried 'Priest's Leap'?

    With a light bike and high fitness level, I was at the pin of my collar on a ratio of 1:13 and down to 5km/h at times when the gradient hits the mid-20's.
    Is the road wide enough to zig-zag safely?


  • Options
    #45
    ford2600
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,457 ✭✭✭ford2600


    Lumen wrote: »
    Is the road wide enough to zig-zag safely?

    Road?

    You are too long in the Pale...

    Zig zag is fine for a 60km jaunt in the mountains.

    Try zig zag this
    http://www.audaxireland.org/events-calendar/gazetteer/300km-events/priests-leap-devils-elbow-300/
    and tell me how you are by Port Magee


  • Options
    #46
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users Posts: 24,995 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    Lumen wrote: »
    Is the road wide enough to zig-zag safely?
    Zig zag!! It's a tiny boreen with grass in the centre and the added hazards of gravel and sheep dung as well as awful gradients.


  • Options
    #47
    Sionnach7
    Registered Users Posts: 35 ✭Sionnach7


    Wishbone Ash wrote: »
    Have you tried 'Priest's Leap'?

    With a light bike and high fitness level, I was at the pin of my collar on a ratio of 1:13 and down to 5km/h at times when the gradient hits the mid-20's.

    (PS - do you realise this thread is 4 years old?)


    Haha! I do. But do you?! :)

    Here tell us what gradient is Priest's Leap? Is that down in West Cork??

    I did Mullaghanish on the 42/21 which was a ratio of 2.0! Now, I was....ahem....fairly grinding alright....ahem! But got there.

    Anyway...*apart* from Priest's Leap, I reckon I could do anything else with a 1.2/1.3....but then, maybe it's because I'm 55Kg. :)

    P.S. You're not allowed reply for another 4 years :)


  • Options
    #48
    Sionnach7
    Registered Users Posts: 35 ✭Sionnach7


    Lumen wrote: »
    Is the road wide enough to zig-zag safely?

    Haha!


  • Options
    #49
    Sionnach7
    Registered Users Posts: 35 ✭Sionnach7


    Wishbone Ash wrote: »
    Zig zag!! It's a tiny boreen with grass in the centre and the added hazards of gravel and sheep dung as well as awful gradients.

    Sounds like a job for a Yak! Good luck with that :)


  • Options
    #50
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users Posts: 24,995 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    Sionnach7 wrote: »
    ....I did Mullaghanish on the 42/21 which was a ratio of 2.0! Now, I was....ahem....fairly grinding alright....ahem! But got there.

    Anyway...*apart* from Priest's Leap, I reckon I could do anything else with a 1.2/1.3....but then, maybe it's because I'm 55Kg. :)....
    Good for you but as you say yourself it's all relative.

    How far into the ride were you when you did Mallaganish? Would you be able to do it on a 2:1 near the end of a 300k Audax?

    (And at 55kgs, you're half the weight of many posting here).


  • Options
    #51
    Sionnach7
    Registered Users Posts: 35 ✭Sionnach7


    Wishbone Ash wrote: »
    Good for you but as you say yourself it's all relative.

    How far into the ride were you when you did Mallaganish? Would you be able to do it on a 2:1 near the end of a 300k Audax?

    (And at 55kgs, you're half the weight of many posting here).

    Hey Bud, listen I was only being lighthearted, and think I've offended you. Sorry that I did.
    I wasn't being insincere or condescending about my weight btw. Sorry that it seemed that way. I was actually throwing the rightness of the argument more into your court, supporting your points. I'm sorry that I came across looking like a dick, it would definitely not be my intention.
    Em, 300k Audax....I would have to say I would need a LOT more fitness. I used to do Mullaghanish at the end of a 120 mile route I used to do. My Dad worked in the control building at the top. I hated that long winding descent so we'd drive home after. But that was more than a 'few days' ago.
    Look sorry, it really looked like I was being a dick. I was just being light-hearted as I said but sloppy. No offense meant.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement