53-11 alltheway

I have learned a lot since my high speed pedal mashing days with my double.

First thing is that anybody training hard in a mountainous area should use a triple

Why? Because if you are really training hard you will be at times spinning hard in a fast gear.....nothing sucks more than killing yourself for 3+ hours ( I did this in the summer everyday) and finding yourself with not enough gear. Besides what's wrong with an 11-21 on the triple. On paper it looks awesome....

Cutting your ride short, zig-zagging up hills, walking........these things hurt you as a cyclist. A real cyclist always spins his gears at high cadenece (never walks or zig zags).
My philosophy has changed .........Have two bikes though.

1. 15 lb carbon fiber bike with double and tubular tires for "racing".....obviously low gears aren't needed...otherwise you lose race because going too slow.

2. Steel bike with triple for "training"........lets you train harder and stay out longer in mountainous areas. More Saddle time = better cyclist. Any way you cut it.....the longer you can ride the better you will be.



All you guys who do your hill training on freeway overpasses and "bridges" will never understand this.

I'm seriously thinking of turning one of my old steelies into a triple just to see what it is like.....What wrong with having the tight cassette. It just seems like a better machine. The more I ride the better I'll be.....I'd be riding today if it wasn't raining (already have moisture in my STIs already)

53-11 alltheway

For all you guys that have limited time to ride and you live in a flat area.......nothing wrong with a double. I agree it looks more sleek.

TripleCrank

How true!! Hardly does a bit of good explaining the merits of a triple considering the many biking styles (leisurely to competitive) and terrain (flat to mountainous) represented in this forum. All I know for sure is that my triple has afforded me riding opportunities in the cascade mountain range that many a double rider can only dream of.

There are too many different styles in this forum to have a civilized discussion. In the real world this isn’t a problem. Take my biking group for example -- civil discussions come easy because our biking styles are similar, the weak and leisurely are off doing their own thing. Here in cyberspace there’s no separation. The weak and strong are only decided by average posts/day and who talks the best game.

Rank and order would change drastically around here if actual riding was part of a forum membership.

53-11 alltheway

On paper the triple looks like a better machine. 3 chainrings and a tighter cassette always beats two rings and a sloppier cassette......at least on paper. How much heavier could the triple be? Not very much heavier at all.

I suspect a lot of people hate triples because they don't know how to use them....

I read a post by Sydney that stated that the 30T ring was in the same position relative to the 39T ring on a double. The 42 T ring is roughly in the same position as a 53T ring on a double. The 52T ring on a triple is farthest away.......and should not be used like a 53T ring on a double. The Doubles 53T ring can use more gears of the cassette because it is closer to the centerline of the bike.....try using 8 cogs with the more outboard 52T ring on a triple and you are bound to get rub.

Mismangement of the chainline is probably the biggest reason people hate triples.

SDS

About 9mm of bottom bracket spindle length, as I recall....

53-11 alltheway

I'm guessing the small and middle rings have the best chainlines.......and are the rings that you are able to use most of the cogs with.

Besides the 52T rings only needs to be used with the first few small cogs anyway....

Surferbruce

for me it's 3 or one(fixed).
my training bike is an aluminum cyclocross bike with triple and mtn cassette, sti shifters. (bianchi axis). i can use some nice 23mm road tires for pavement only and go up to 38mm knobbies for fireroads and mellow singletracks.
other training bike is a bianchi pista that feels like a rocket ship. steel, light, aero, and all about the motor spinning. coasting not allowed.
i'd still like a campy equipped colnago someday though.

brent_dube

What gradient range is typically best for training? Does it really just vary person to person? Or is it mostly always the steeper the better?
Seems like if a rider is training for climbing, it would make most sense to use a gear that they can always spin at on the steepest parts of their rides. The steepest part is theoretically the most important, so proper technique there would be a must.

jslopez

Not really trying to hijack but I seriously believe that a lot of people "hating triples" is an overstatement. that's like saying all motorist hate cyclists or that all roadies as elitists (vs. other bikers). I agree though that there will be some loudmouth triple hater out there but make any category and you'll find an AHOLE.

Reason I'm saying this is I feel there's no need to stereotype or generalize groups.

Raise of hands on the triple haters (and the non triple haters) and I'm sure you'd be surprised.

Non-triple hater -

Now back to topic...

53-11 alltheway

I knew I should have included a poll......So now there is one under "which is the better machine?" thread

ggg300

If you value form you will be smart about gearing. It computes. If you want to train with good form (as in controlled breathing, minimal rocking, straight lines, high efficient cadence) then you will always want the right gear to keep you in that zone.

I own a 52/39 and a 50/34, but a lot of my friends have triples. A triple will give you the options you need to stay in form when you just getting back into the season or when you finishing. We ride hills—something over 5% grade for at least ¾ a mile…at very least.

I’m a bit sloppy on the 52/39 early in the season and get better, but the 50/34 should keep it clean year around. We’ll see… just got it.

Get the triple with and do the death ride….