Originally Posted by
79pmooney
True, My 9-speed triple running a 12, 14-19, 21, 23 X 53, 42, 28 is a total waste. Having all the gears I could ever want for climbing with never a gap bigger that 2 teeth in back is so pointless.
(I'm one who loved being strong enough to ride most of New England's hills on a 42 X 13-19 5-speed n my racing days. I still love those gears. Even more when I can have those missing 16 and 18 cogs. Now adding a 21 and 23, yeah!! And to reflect that I am 40 years older, being able to have all those cogs uphill, another "yeah!!")
I am now setting up another "waste" bike to ride serious gravel. It is an old steel bike that I am not willing to stretch to 130 dropout spacing so I am going to run a 50-38-24 X 13-28 7-speed. So far , so good. Of course thehuge drawback of my setup is that it is so cheap. 110 BCD rings for old Sugino cranks are a dime a dozen. (I had all on hand since I have been riding the 110-74 standard so long.) Picked up a new Sachs FW from a parts box for $12. Excellent shifting with (gasp!) SunTour Power Ratchet DT shifters.
Oh, this "waste" 3 X 7 has 17 different use-able gear combos. 1 X 17s cost how much? and will be available when?
Ben
if you think you need a triple then you haven't taken the time to match your gears to the terrain , and have set your bike up wrong .
1x would be all you need if there wasn't an efficiency penalty ,
you can get the same performance with a double as any triple ,
shifting jumps mean nothing,
you shift and pedal and its done in less than a second ..
if you are just riding and doing adventure stuff , you don't need the smoothest shifting , where you don't feel a click .
even if you are racing you are pedaling so fast you will never notice it ,
its pointless to try and stick up for old worthless tech , when doubles are proven on the highest levels of cycling to be the better choice , let me know if anyone wins a legit title with a triple set up they found in the bottom of the parts box at recycle a bike , give me a break !!!!