Odd Gearing for Crankset?
 

A friend just bought a 2005 Bianchi Nirone a 9-speed groupset mix of Bianchi-branded components (brake calipers, wheels, stem, crank arms) and Campagnolo Xenon (shifters, front and rear derailleurs), and with a triple crankset.

The chainrings, which look to have been replaced over the years, are 49t/39t/30t.
The Miche cassette is 14t-26t.

To me this is a weird combination. I'm used to 52t or 53/39t, with a 12-28t cassette, or pretty close to that. I do appreciate a compact 50/34t.

So what's the point of the 49t big ring? The previous owner didn't elaborate much about what sort of cycling they did, I think they probably just suffered along in whatever gear they were in.

Is this something people are doing for touring? I'm just curious if there is a logic to this (the triple to be able to climb up a wall if you want?), and maintaining enough overlap to get whatever ratio you want; or what I feel is more likely, this was just whatever was available that fit.

Thoughts?

It might make sense if you plug all the included gear sizes into a gear calculator.

Given it's 9 spd, the 14-26 would have a large group of single tooth cogs up to 19, which means nice, tight gear choices for most road riding between 100 & 60 gear inches, also allowing the rider to stay in one chainring for quite a variety of flat to punch rollers, and solo or group rides.
Not racing gearing, but certainly very nice for even fast group rides between 30 & 14 mph, then having the granny ring for those serious alpine climbs....

I have similar on my older Sworks Tarmac which I keep at my family home in Germany - 50/39/30 & 13-25 covers me for ANY possible ride!
The 49 being a bit 'different', but that may have been because IT was available at the time, and not a 50...
A well set-up Triple is still a thing of cycling beauty... when you want 'One Chainset to Rule Them All'.
If you're not in a 'race' (where an eight yard gap means you're shelled) and have time to consider your options, a triple can't be beat....
unless your self-assurance is tied to your equipment, as opposed to your legs... ;)
Ride On
Yuri

That won't tell me if this is a common thing, or what the logic may be behind what the previous owner may have been trying to achieve, based on the experiences of others.

But thanks anyway.

Ah yes, that makes sense. The rear cassette is 14-15-16-17-18-19-21-23-26, so yes very tight ratios.

I do agree on the rest, triples have their place and seem to be making a big comeback. My personal preference is for doubles, aesthetically, but also simply because it's just what I've been riding for so long and change is hard LOL

Cheers for that info

Sorry, but you didn't ask if it was a common thing, just "what's the point of the 49t big ring?" Again, if you plug the numbers into a gear calculator, it might give you a hint about the previous owner's logic.

In what universe? I do not recall seeing a new bike with a triple for quite some time. Things are going the opposite direction, I’d bet dollars to donuts there are way more 1x’s sold today than triples.


Shimano has not made a triple crankset above Tiagra since 2012. Campy last introduced a group set with a triple that same year, and SRAM never bothered with a triple.

With 12 cogs on the back you can cover a wide gear range with close spacing, without the need for a triple

all the disadvantages of a triple - and basically none of the advantages

the low gear is not low enough - the high gear not high enough

the tight spacing of the cassette is largely of dubious value on a bike with a triple

this setup does succeed to give triples a bad name

smh

:lol:

If you think what sells is what determines what is good, let me introduce you to "pop music", Taylor Swift, etc. :lol:

Your assertion, to which I responded is that triples are making a big comeback. I simply see no evidence of that, and you’ve provided none.

I never drew a conclusion regarding the merits of a triple from their lack of sales. I simply took issue with the assertion that triples are making a big comeback, which appears to a fantasy.

Perhaps in Grant Peterson’s dreams.

jfc. This site is worse than X sometimes.

You put out bad information; I call you on it, and you find that to be objectionable?

Since you asked: I find people like you obtuse, pedantic, insecure, and insufferable - a troll. "Dollars to donuts" you're a boomer; and if not, you've got the same mentality, you know everything, can't help expressing this to others, and will not be persuaded otherwise. Have a nice day.

Quite the opposite actually.

Edited to add: I see that another poster already pointed this out, and you seem to be taking it as some sort of personal attack. But it’s just a simple fact. Go to a bike shop and look around.

Now you resort to ad hominem attacks, and ageism. Our disagreement is an empirically observable fact. No reason to get upset, resort to logically unsound attacks, and insults.

So rather than resort to personal attacks, persuade me why I am wrong. Show me some evidence to support a claim that triples are making a big comeback.

Oh ffs, talk about "snowflakes"! Yeah, you're the victim of ageism LOL. "Show me evidence"? Jog on. You're not entitled to anything. You're exhausting.

This thread sure went south fast ...

You’re missing the point. When you resort to attacking someone because they’’re old, and insult their personal traits, you reveal the weakness of your argument.

If you can’t support your position with facts or logic, attack your opponent.

Try not to get hurt patting yourself on the back.

wut?

The 7 Best Hybrid Bikes For Exercise, Commuting and Casual Fun

Figured triples might be found on hybrids, if anywhere, so I searched for "hybrid triple crank." Bicycling! magazine's "7 Best Hybrid Bikes" report lists two bikes with triples (3x7 and 3x8), one with a double (2x9), and three 1x (one an electric bike).

So triples might be well represented among hybrids, anyway. But was there a time when hybrids had lost their triples?

For the record, a hybrid of reasonable quality that has a triple crank is, in my opinion, the most versatile bike ever conceived. Ironically, maybe the only topic that unites retrogrouches and cutting-edge roadies is that both despise hybrids. Makes sense. Neither group, despite the occasional lip service to the contrary, has much use for a people's bike.

Knock it off with the personal attacks and stay on topic.

If you can't post here without personal attacks, then find another thread.

Given the Miche cassette, which allowed bespoke combinations like this 14-26 with two 2t gaps and a 3t gap, I'm going to assume the previous owner put a fair bit of thought into ratios and that the 49t was no accident.

The only bummer about it would've been that since big rings need to be made with a specific size of smaller ring in mind and that 49/39 isn't really a thing, front shifting probably wouldn't be great.

I agree, but 10T jumps in front used to be the rule, not the exception. 52/42/32. Might be more of an issue with a more modern RD made for 16 tooth jumps, but many run 20T jump on the same setup (I think lift pins on the larger rings help a lot).