deepakvrao

Not sure of the terminology but I hope I can get my question across.

Was looking at buying a road bike and found the following. Trek has compact doubles [50/34] while the Merida have standard doubles [52/39]. Thats all thats available where I live. Now what would be ideal for me [I think] is a triple crank like a 52/39/30. I think I would need the lower gearing of a triple.

The MTB I ride has a lower gearing in the middle chain ring [34/32] than the road bike in the smallest chain ring even wit the triple [30/25]. I know that some advantage of the lower weight and narrower tyres of the road bike will compensate but still the gearing is so much lower on the MTB.

So I had given up on the Merida completely till the Merida dealer told me that he is getting triple crank bikes soon. Now the issue is that the lowest gearing of the Trek will be 34/26=1.3 while the Merida will be [probably] 30/25=1.2. So the lowest gearing of the two would be almost the same. Then which would be a better bike to buy [given that all the rest is similar in specs] - a standard triple or a compact double? OTOH the lowest gearing of the standard double on the Merida currently is 39/25=1.56 so thats much higher and I think is out of the equation.

I sometimes find myself in the lowest gear of the middle cog of my MTB so next question is - do you guys often need the lowest gearing of a road bike?

I made a mistake I think in buying an MTB blindly without researching [should have bought a road bike in the first place], and this is significantly more expensive so I dont want to repeat the mistake buy buying a bike with wrong gearing.

Thanks for any help.

JMRobertson

I'll use the lowest gears on two occasions... first when I get to a really steep hill... like 10%+ grades. Secondly, I'll use the very low gear for less extreme hills after biking 80 miles or so. Low gears can be very important in adverse situations.

Then again, I'm no athlete... just a guy on a bike.

travkat

the compact double is the way to go. You don't lose much on top end speed and you get a weight savings, and you won't look like a sissy when you are out on the road.

TruckerMike

Chainline is the big difference. On the double, it's better because there's less extreme cross-chaining. If you want range, get the compact double crankset (110 bcd), and pair it with a cassette with larger cogs (27t or 30t). If you go much above 25t rear cassette, make sure you spec a mid-cage derailleur as the shorties won't be up to the task.

brian416

If you're worried about gearing, go with the compact. On the road you won't need nearly as low of gears as you do on a mountain bike.

I personally run a standard double crank with 11-23 cassette and have no problems on hills until they get >15% but I can still make it up, its just really painful

deepakvrao

Thanks for the replies guys - forgot to add that I am completely unfit [well almost] and am getting back to cycling after 25 years. So I am NOT a strong 25 yr old.

AEO

depends on the terrain. Do you encounter long and/or steep inclines regularly? if yes, get a triple.

AndrewP

I am old and overweight. I have 46/36/22 on the front with 12-23 in the back. This gives me a low gear that allows me to heave my weight up the steeper hills, without large jumps in ratios at the back.

threeflys

Having started on a compact double a year ago, I recently got a bike with a triple this fall and I'll have to say it's nice to have if you need it... As far as the "more weight" issue mentioned above, whatever... How many grams are we talking on a triple? Cut out a mocha a week and you're good!

sojourn

I researched this same technical issue coming from an MTB background. What I found that worked for me (I'm 55 218 and ride in some pretty hilly terrain in San Diego North County for data points) is the 50/34 compact crank 11/25 cassette. It gives me about 95% of what a triple offers and has worked out well thus far.

umd

Don't you think that the people that could cut out a mocha wouldn't be overweight and out of shape to begin with?

Crast

It's fairly easy to upgrade between a compact double and a standard double, mostly requires changing only the crank. It's significantly harder to move between a double and a triple, because you'll need to change your bottom bracket, probably front derailleur, and left shifter. If you think you'll want a triple, go for it now. Switching later will be very costly.

Everybody has their own preference, asking this question will get you the full gamut of answers. Some can manage on standard doubles, some use compacts, and some like the wider range of triples.

In terms of economics though, it's much harder to go and find a used set of triple shifters/FD/BB on ebay than it is to find a double for purposes of switching, so if you were to have a change of heart after buying your triple and decide you MUST change to some sort of double, it'd be much easier than going the other way.

My experience: I've got a bike with a triple, I like my triple. I have one with a compact double, and while the gearing is sufficient, it's irritating on flat road to have to keep switching between 36 and 50. Meanwhile on my triple-equipped bike I can sit in 39 all day, and keep a close ratio cassette. I've also had a bike with a standard double (sold it) and that was wonderful on flat/rolling roads, again I mostly stayed in 39; but steep climbs just hurt.

ericm979

If you're not sure what sort of gearing you are going to need, get a triple. The added cost on a new bike of a triple over a double (compact or regular) is small, usually $0-100. But if you get a double and find out that you needed a triple, you are looking at $400 minimum. Probably much more. You'd need new crank, derailleurs, shifters. Going from a triple to a double only requires a new crank and front derailleur.

The triple has a wider gear range and there's no large gaps in the coverage. The disadvantage? It weights about 1/4 lb more, front shifts may be a little slower, and it's not "cool". But to my mind, struggling or even walking a climb because you don't have appropriate gearing is so much less cool than having a triple that there's no contest.

The gearing that you need depends on your fitness, the climbs you will be riding, and your riding style (spin vs mash). Without knowing all of those its impossible to tell you anything meaningful. Statements like "I only need an XYZ" are pointless at best and bragging at worst. It's still useless if it's qualified with "pretty hilly terrain", since someone from a flat area may think that a freeway overpass is pretty hilly, while someone else may need a 3000' 10% climb to get their attention.

H.A.W.G.

If you arent a racer, get the triple, I know with the bike I am planning on getting it doesnt cost any more, and the weight really isnt that big a deal since you arent racing. If you dont use it oh well, it doesnt matter, but if some day you wanna go try to do some crazy climb you have it

airosen

+1

monk

Use the search function on BF and you'll find alot of posts on triples vs compact doubles. I've tried both, and much prefer the compact double. Like others have already mentioned, it's lighter, you have a better chain line and no one make fun of you for having a "granny" gear. I'm not a good climber so I run a 12-27 cassette in the rear. When I'm in my lowest gear, someone could almost walk beside me up a steep hill. I don't need a triple.

deepakvrao

Thanks guys. Did the search and read quite a bit but my real single question is:

The compact gives me 'almost' the same low gear ratio as the triple [34/26 versus 30/25]. So then is there any advantage in the triple?

In my MTB I use the middle chain ring most of the time and switch to large/small in the front if I'm going fast or if the going gets really tough. Is this the way a triple is also used on a road bike?

rollin

Deepak a compact will be fine. You may struggle initially but eventually you'll be fine. You could see if they can replace the rear cog so you get a 27 at the back (or more).

Welcome back to cycling.

TruckerMike

Spin brotha, spin! I can guarantte that your 39-23 on the twelve percent is slow-cadence slog at anything aerobic. Can you stay seated after 10 percent? Compact will save your knees and keep that cadence in the right spot.

RoboCheme

I went from a triple (52/39/30) with a 12-25 to a compact double with a 11-28, so I have pretty much the same gearing coverage. I much prefer the double because I find myself having to shift the chainrings a lot less.

Beaker

I recently went from a 50/39/30 triple to 50/34 compact double after my first full year back cycling. I liked the triple starting out because you get a bit more subtlety using more of the cassette with the 30T and it's good to know it's there. By the end of the year though, I was hardly using the 30T except for the more ridiculous climbs round here, so I switched to the compact and have only lost one gear compared to my triple. It does seem to run a little smoother which is nice.

Best thing you can do is test a couple of different setups on a typical ride if your dealer will let you, and work out for yourself what you think you'll be more comfortable with. At the end of the day, you could probably go straight for the compact and throw an 11-28 on there and be perfectly fine. It's definitely a different experience that a MTB.

Crast

A triple would have slightly closer sprocket ratios in the cassette. In this case it's probably between 11-26 and 12-25 so it's probably not going to be much difference, but if you were comparing a compact with say 11-30 casette to a triple with 12-25 then it'd be a bit more. Otherwise, no real advantage.

If you really want the 32 gear inch gear, you can put a 11-28 cassette and your compact will have the same low gear as the triple. But you'd lose one of your middle sprocket choices.

umd

I forgot that everyone is exactly the same

A triple or a compact double is fine, I have nothing against them and I've used them myself in the past. But as I got stronger I moved to a standard double. I run an 11-26, not a 23 but can spin up a 10% grade seated no problem. I actually plan to start switching to 11-23 cassettes as I usually don't use the 26 anymore unless I am really just cruising. Those mid-teen grades can be a bit of a slog, sure, but they don't usually last very long.

haimtoeg

Chart the ratio of a compact double and a triple with the same cassette and you'll see that the gaps in the triple are smaller, so you have the ability to fine tune your ratios a little better with a triple. This is mostly a theoretic advantage IMO, and I join the other in recommending a compact double.

icyclist 

When I bought my last bike, I thought advancing age dictated some extra-low gearing. I went for a triple, despite the salesperson doing everything in his power, except whacking me with a frame pump, to convince me to go for a compact double. He said - and he was right - that it wouldn't matter if I got older, I'd get stronger.

My lowest gears are never necessary, not even on grades that reach 20%+ - and those sorts of grades are usually short. Even a compact would have been overkill.

Even with a four ounce weight penalty of a triple, I have the best of both worlds. My 52/39/30 gives me a high, a low, a bushel of gears in between that don't require double shifting, and a super-low for when I want to just relax climbing a long, steep hill on a 100+ mile day.