alleycatmag

I have a choice between purchasing a triple crank (which I thought I wanted) or a compact (which they say has almost the same range). I'm in decent shape, not a racer, a bit older I suppose (almost 50) and want a bike that I can ride charity rides, group rides etc. Did I just open a can of worms?

Retro Grouch 

Triple generally gives you a wider range of gears. Compact yields more style points. I have one of each.

10 Wheels

If you ever ride hills the triple would be best.

TJClay

Love my triple

GAtkins

Get the triple, who cares?

kayakdiver

Depends....... In my neck of the woods I really like having a compact for the road bike. Run an 11/25 cassette and with that combo I can get up anything. On my touring bike I run a trip and would never consider a compact for it.

Shifting a compact is much cleaner...... If I could get away with it on my touring bike I would run one.

My riding for reference has approx 75 ft of climbing per mile.... does not matter what direction I ride. Pretty hilly area and love the compact. YMMV.

RichinPeoria

Sheldon Brown has a good gear calculator. I have used it to prove to myself that a 53-42-30 X 13-26 makes a great drivetrain on a road bike.

gtofan

If you have to ask about it...get the triple. People who want a double go with it specifically.

f4rrest

It doesn't matter. Either will work fine for most.

Or just get them both and swap cranks on a whim.

Hot Potato

Standard double has a lowest gear about 15% higher than a compact double. A compact double has a lowest gear about 14% higher than a triple. So you lose one low gear going from a triple to a compact double, and another going from a compact double to a standard double. Gear range does not explain everything, however.

A standard double and a triple both have a 39 chain ring (sometimes 42). That 39 chain ring can handle my local hills and speeds up to 25mph. For me, I can go days and days without using the front dérailleur. On a compact double, I will either use the big ring big cog combo frequently, or use the front dérailleur frequently. So I prefer a standard double or a triple for riding locally. Having a triple means I can take my bike to steeper and longer hills and still have enough low gear. Having a compact double would work, but would annoy me for the 98% of riding I actually do.

The only negatives to a triple crank are weight, its slightly wider (may not be a negative), and it is unfashionable in some circles.

10 Wheels

With a triple you can go to a 50-39-24

Grumpy McTrumpy

why do you ask if it's a can of worms?

Velo Dog

Me, too. I don't give a #$%$ about style points--I converted one bike from the standard useless-for-me 53-39 to a 46-36-24 triiple, and it's perfect for riding in the mountains around here. Then I got a good deal on a used bike with a 50-34 compact, and that works fine, too, though at my advanced age I sometimes miss the granny gear going up the passes.
If I had to choose just one, it would be the triple going away--there are no significant disadvantages, and you have the option of the granny. Ignore the urban mythology about difficulty shifting or the onerous three ounces of extra weight.

Hot Potato

I have been told that it is not that hard to swap cranks. Assuming I started with a compact double, what additional adjustments would I have to do to put in a standard double.? Would I need to change the chain length? The height of the front deraillure? Something else?

I was eyeing a Specialized Roubaix which only comes with a compact double and I want a standard double.

I forgot about those aftermarket cranks, and was just comparing the typical OEM cranks. That's some serious low gearing, I would have to travel far from home to need it.

sstorkel

What front derailleur are you running that allows a 26-tooth difference between the smallest and largest sprockets? Most triple FDs I've seen are spec'd for a max 22-tooth difference. This explains the popularity of 22-32-44 MTB cranks and 26-38-48 trekking cranks...

Mr. Fly

As long as you don't shift into the small-small combo, it's entirely possible to run a 26T front chainring with a Campagnolo triple front derailleur (that has an official 23T range but is good for at least 27T). With a small-small combo, you may find that the bottom of the upper loop chain can rub against the horizontal tip of the derailleur cage.

stanridgespeed 

standard double please.

Unagidon

Compact double with 11-28 cassette. 34 x 28 is not too far off from 30 x 27 or 26. And as someone else mentioned, shifting is cleaner with double.

agarose2000

Get the triple. If you're a road racer, I'd say go double, but as a recreational rider, even a serious one, the triple will be well worth it.

I race occasionally and I'm no slouch on the climbs; I can take 20% inclines in a 12-23 cog (it's HARD) which would be very difficult for most non-racers to power up on. My other bike is a pure road bike with a triple, and even though I'm "strong enough" to not need a triple, I am very glad to have it - and Im definitely not "too strong" for it.

If you have any hills at all in your area, get the triple. If you're a Floridian with pure flatlands, ok, the double is ok, but even then, the triple is a good choice. Still, the reality is that there's not much of a difference between the compact & the triple, in price, performance, or weight. Those who moan that the triple doesn't "shift right" have poorly adjusted shifters - my Giant Defy runs a Sora/2200 (yup, LOWER than Sora) triple flawlessly. And I ride pretty hard on it - I ride with competitive roadies.

In my opinion, the "standard gearing" 12-25 is too aggressive for the vast majority of nonracing riders. I can hold 24mph on a 40k/1hr time trial flat course without drafting, and I feel that the standard double is aggressive even for me when there are any sort of hills.

rpeterson

I wouldn't necessarily say that you need a triple for the hills (unless you're on a touring bike or something). I just replaced my low-end triple for a higher-end double (bontrager race-x something or other triple for an Ultegra compact) and even though I have the same rear cassette there's hardly any difference in the low gear, I lost the smallest gear and that's about it, going to a 12-27 would give me an even lower gear than I had before.

And sometimes it really didn't shift right. If I got going up a hill in the 39 and hit a point where 39-25 was too high it was hit or miss whether it would let me shift down into the 30 without losing every bit of momentum I had, and no amount of adjusting would fix it. No problems if I shifted before the hill, but under any real load it just wasn't happening. But then, I paid more for bartape than the crankset, so I'm sure that had a bit to do with it.

RT

I have a 48-38-28, 11-25 on the road-worthy MTB, the other is a 52-42-30, 11-32 on my roadie. Can't imagine not having the granny ring, regardless of size.

dstrong 

I have done triple, standard and compact double. Currently have the triple on one bike and the compact on the other. I'm riding the compact more these days and still feel like the jury is out on it. My triple is a 52-42-32 and I would run the 42 almost my entire ride (12-27 on the back). With my compact, (50-34), I'm shifting the front a lot (which I expected). With the rolling hills around here, my average ride speed is in the 15 - 16 mph range...which is about the top of the 34-tooth chainring with the 12-25 on the back. If you know your average speed, you might want to use the gear calculator to figure out which combination will give you the most span around that average. With me, I either need to ride faster so I can spend more time on the 50 or maybe change the 34 chainring to a 36 to give me a little more range around my average.

joejack951

You can use any triple crank with a 74mm BCD (almost all of them) and mount a 24 tooth granny ring (available from Sugino and Salsa to name a few). The only triple cranksets that this won't work for that I can think of right now are the Dura Ace 7800 and new Ultegra 6700 triples. Both use non-standard granny ring mounts.

I run a 52/42/28 on my commuter bike. The only downside is the necessity for many shifts when going from the middle ring to the granny.

cyccommute 

You can also go with a trekking triple (a mountain bike crank with a larger ring) 48-36-26. The inner ring can go as low as 22. The advantage of the trekking triple over a compact or even the 50-39-24, is that the gear selection is better. The compact cranks have absolutely awful gear combinations and the 39 to 24 drop is very large.

Barese Rider

My problem with my triple is when shifitng to the middle ring from the small ring when under some kind of load.Ive had the damned chain fall off more than once. The first time I ended up falling down the side of a mountain in Vt. and the last time I was doing the Phili Cancer ride going over the Ben Franklin Bridge with 1000s of riders and a few times in between. So I just dont trust it and as I dont really need it here in NJ I dont want to spring for the money a top end front derailleur would cost. My latest bike has a compact and Im very happy with it including the fact that Im in the big chainring more that ever.