rideon7

Have decided to switch to a triple crankset on my Specialized Roubaix, which I've been riding with a compact double for the last couple of years. Just didn't work out. We tried to get along, but it wasn't meant to be.

I cut my teeth on a triple with my old LeMond and it was great riding. Got swept up in the compact double fervor three or so years ago, so I built up the Roubaix with that crankset, but the gearing just doesn't do it for me. I miss the lowest gear or two that I lost on the double, and I find myself switching too much from the big to small ring and back up front, while also changing gears in the back. Too much hassle. With a triple, I ride mainly in the middle ring up front. Just one of those things.

Yeah, it will be pricey, but I like having the low gear or two on the mountains, and the simplicity of fewer simultaneous gear changes. Live and learn. Just wasn't meant to be.

cccorlew

I have a compact double and I'm thinking my next bike will be a triple for the reasons you cite.
I'm looking for a great deal on a white Specialized Roubaix Expert triple (2010 or 2009)

JimT

I just bought myself a Specialized Roubaix Elite and had the bike shop switch it from a compact double to a triple. I've already had occasion to use the bottom couple of gears, so it seems that I made the right decision.

Jim

Kurt Erlenbach

Switching to a compact double from a triple was one of the best things I've done for my bike. But then, the biggest hill I have is the interstate overpass.

Louis

It's rolling with some significant hills in my neck of the woods. I was riding standard doubles 52/42 with relative ease when I was in my 40's. As the years passed, I discovered the world of triples just in time.

Nowadays, at age 67, a compact double is out of the question for me. My next step will likely be mtb gearing on my go fast bikes.

rideon7

Yes, age and topography all have to do with the choice. Over on the Road forum, people have said that if you can't ride a compact double "get stronger." Been there, done that. Now I'm built for comfort not for speed.

JoeMan

For what its worth I switched from the FSA 50/34 to a FSA 46/36 compact crank set and it works fine for me on the hills and the flats. I believe keeping my body weight at BMI 22 and doing squats and leg presses in the winter has also helped me be a better rider.

oldster

same age here, just today changed my 52/42 to "semi compact" 48/39. gonna try that for a while and may change to the old triple I got the 48/ ring off of,
to the roadbike (they are both square taper)and end up with 48/38/28 and see how that flys with the 12/27 10 speed casette...got a triple front DR already...

Bud

LAriverRat

This last week i picked up a Trek Elance with a triple on it. I have to fix it up as i got it at a really good price. Needs new cables, seat, bar tape and break hoods. When it is ready to go it will be off to the hills. I also picked up a Giant OCR3 9 speed that used to be a triple but someone removed the small chain ring. I got this one about 2 weeks ago. When it is ready to go i will see which i like the best. So now i have a wide range of gearing on the bikes that i have( 7 + one project mystery frame, i have to cull the herd!).

tsl

I like my triples too, especially on my commuting rig. In the three-seasons I ride almost exclusively in the middle ring. It gives me enough low-end grunt for where I ride and enough at the top end that I don't need to shift the front. In winter, between the snow and the heavy studded snow tires, the granny is a blessing.

That said, my latest fun ride bike came with a standard double. I wasn't so sure about it, but I'm getting used to the idea. Unencumbered with the commuting stuff (and the extra weight of the triple), I was amazed at how well I could climb in the 39/27.

My big beef with the compact is having to shift the front all the time. Commuting, I'd either have to accept going slower, or shifting the front twice (once up and once down) between every stoplight.

jppe

Before you go to all that expense, have you considered just changing the rear derailleur to a Mountain bike RD and installing a 11-32 or 11-34 rear cassette on your present setup? It actually gives you a little easier gear than a 30/27 common on most triples plus a wider range with the 50/11 on the top end. You still have the 50/34 crank so that does not eliminate jumping between chainrings but it does take care of overall gearing issues. You can easily do it with either a 9 sp or 10 sp setup. I've been running that setup for 3yrs and it is terrific. I don't know your terrain but it is especially helpful for hilly stuff.

BluesDawg

For me, the need to shift the front ring so often is a bigger drawback to the compact double than the limited gear range. I am happier with either a standard double or a triple. I am currently running a 38/50 setup on the crank of my fast road bike. With a 12-28 cassette, I get just enough range to handle the hills around here on a sporting ride. For my more relaxed road bike I run a 26/36/48 triple with a 12-25 cassette which also works well for me. I just can't seem to find a happy zone with a 16 tooth difference up front.

rideon7

I'd thought of that and talked about it with my local LBS guy, but decided to go with the triple crank because of the hassle of seeming to always having to shift the front rings. Cost-wise, what I'm doing is more expensive (a lot more), but I've already started buying the parts. Have not really bought any bike gear for a couple of years, so I justify it a bit that way. And I *am* looking forward to having a triple set-up again. But your suggestion is a good one.

oldster

I hope that works for me as well, I never used the 52, so put a 48 on it and replaced the 42 with the 39, I hope climbing in the 39/27 plays for me as well as it is for you....gonna try it today....
Bud

tsl

Bear in mind, my climbs are nothing like yours. I've ridden out your way. We have speedbumps by comparison.

rumrunn6

I hear yah. I recently had 2 rides over 40 miles, each with a different bike, one with a triple and one with a standard double. each has it's pluses and minuses and they are quite different. I'm kinda glad to have both but I can see how someone would have a preference for one over the other. good luck with the swap and I hope it doesn't keep you off the road for too long!

Ludkeh

I just picked up my new Specialized Roubaix, elite , triple also! Due to the louse weather I haven't had a chance to ride it yet. The young stud salesperson tried to talk me into a compact double but I resisted. I've been riding an old heavy Trek triple for quite some time and have been happy with it. My reasoning is that the hills in Central New York aren't getting any flatter and I'm not getting any younger.

Retro Grouch 

What kind of compact double and what would you consider a fair trade for it?

oldster

Here is a first report on my change from 52/42 to a 48/39 (with 12/27 10 sp.) The 48seems to put me in an area where the rear 10 sp spacing makes it really easy to keep an even 80 to 100 cadence over a 20 mile ride in the city.Ihardly ever used the 52before,,,next ride will get me to a section whereI will have some not to serious climbing and try out the 39.and report back.
Bud

cyclinfool

I switch from a triple to a compact double on my Simoncini, I really like it. Most of the time I am in the big ring, but when I get in the hills I drop to the small ring. I have done some pretty sustained climbs with the compact double. However with that said - for teh big hills my climbing bike has a triple and I am thinking about taking the inner 30 ring down to a 26.

Wogster

What works best, depends almost entirely on terrain, if your on a pretty much flat terrain, then a single crank would probably be sufficient. If you live in an area where the terrain tends to go up and down, considerably, then sometimes a triple is needed, no matter what. Some riders look at a hill, and think it's huge, while other riders look at the same terrain and think, hill, what hill? The rest of it is rider fitness, this time of year, there are a couple of hills, then even a gear that would embarrass granny to be caught in, isn't low enough. By late summer you drop a couple of gears from flat, and power up the same hill, without even thinking hill.

The issue though, when it comes to changing cranks on a bike, is whether the rest of the bike is sufficient for the riding you do. When I look at the bike I ride, and the bike I would like to ride, they are different. To turn the bike I ride into the bike I would like to ride, would mean replacing the fork, bars, crank, stem, shifters, brake levers. Probably cost more then to simply buy the bike I would like, and sell the existing one, or keep the existing one as a second bike.

Phil85207

On another forum I just read a post foretelling of the demise of the triple. I said they will have to pry my dead cold hands from my triple to get it away from me. I am thinking of a new ride and it's hard to find a non entry level bike with a triple nowadays.

Wogster

Shimano Dura-Ace according to their web site, doesn't have a triple option, not sure they ever did, probably not a huge call for 10 speed triples, the issue though is that compact doubles are a compromise, between the low end of a triple and the low end of a standard double, the real question though is are they a good compromise. If your constantly shifting the front, then it probably means not enough overlap between the lower and upper chain rings.

love2pedal.com

Love my triple 30-42-52 with a 12-27.

Tried a compact and just never liked it

rumrunn6

my commute is HILLY and I prefer the triple, especially since I strained my IT Band. for joy rides wihout hose 3 big hills, I think I prefer my double. there's just less to deal with.