|What crank opinion (and triple vs. double)?||voodoo-1|
May 1, 2002 2:16 PM
|I'm kind of torn betwen two set-ups and was curious at the everyones opinion. I'm into either purchasing a Record set-up with either the 10sp Triple, or the 10sp Double.
But, I'm also 6'5", and not sure if what my plus or minus would be by going either way. With the triple, I'd be stuck with a 175 crank (which is what I ride on my mountain bike all the time), with the double I'd probably opt for the 177.5 (180 just sounds really long and feel that I'd whack it on the ground when cornering).
I live in Jackson WY, so the mountains are there when I want to do some climbing (hence the interest in the triple), but for the most part I'm probably going to be doing a bunch of flats.
Any opinions as to the plus and minus of going either way? I know I'll get more leverage with the longer crank, but will I just be spinning silly on the flats with the 175?
voodoo-1 (can't believe he's going to go with a roadbike over a dualie, but it seems way more efficient and better for a workout)
May 1, 2002 2:46 PM
|1. What do you weigh?
2. What gears do you use in the mountains now, and how do they work for you?
3. What gear range do you want?
I have both the Record 10 speed triple and double. The double shifts much, much better up front. It is brainless. The triple requires more messing with it and conscious effort. The triple can provide both a wider range and more steps in beteen. The weight difference is 100-150 grams, depending upon cassettes you are comparing.
I'd say this: if a 39x25 combination is not low enough for you, and you are suffering in that gear, I'd get the triple. While you can use a 26 or even a 29 cog, once you go that big the steps get larger, and the stock cassette then has a 13 small cog.
Bottom line: if you need the low gears, get the triple. If you don't need them, I'd stick with the double.
I doubt you'll notice a 2.5mm difference in the cranks.
|" I'm probably going to be doing a bunch of flats."||Ahimsa|
May 1, 2002 2:51 PM
May 1, 2002 3:51 PM
|I've ridden around Jackson a bit, and even did the Teton Pass hillclimb (do they still race that?) as a novice rider with a double. I'm 6'1" and 195#. Logan-Jackson last year with a double. Some climbs here in the Utah mountains are grunts, but for the most part a double works fine. My cassette now runs to 27 teeth as I've gotten older, 45 years young (how did that happen?)
May 1, 2002 4:05 PM
|I'm thinking the double is more suited to my needs, and saves me about $50, and a bit of weight.
So with a 39-53 front and a 12-25 rear, that should give me a big enough range, no? Or do you think I should go with a bigger middle in the 42-52 combo?
I've been so out of road riding that I've forgot what I used to have and what worked (going from 12 speeds to 20 or 30 is a huge jump).
I'm not going to be racing over the mountains, so if it takes me a little longer, and I have to work a little harder it's not a big deal. I'm 6'5", so I just want whatever set-up is going to be the most efficient, and I can power through the wind.
As for the hill-climb, they do have the running race up it, and there is a bike race to the top of the Tram at the Village (but it's dirt).
May 1, 2002 5:10 PM
|If you are already uncertain about double/triple, stick to the stock 53-39. Almost everything comes in 53-39 these days and the 39 will give you a bit extra gearing going up hill. I would go to 12-27 (on the DA cassette only the last 2 cogs are different from the 12-25) but I live in the center of the Allegheny mountain range and I am not sure if Campy makes it.|
May 1, 2002 4:00 PM
|I rode out in that area last summer. 16 day 1400 mile trip through Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Montana, and South Dakota. This trip included most of the major mountain passes including Trail Ridge Pass in Colorado and the Black Hills in South Dakota. The double seemed to work out ok. My previous bike had a triple and I didn't like it, I just felt much more comfortable in a double. Go with your gut though, if you get the triple and hate it you never have to use it. If you get the double you won't have the option to use the triple.|
|have you considered bigger cassette?||bianchi boy|
May 1, 2002 6:53 PM
|I've got Chorus 10 with the 13-29 cassette. It has all the gearing I need, and I live in a fairly hilly area and I'm no billy goat on the hills. The steps are a little wide, but not until you go above 23. Here are the cogs: 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, 23, 26, 29. The only downside, from my point of view, is the 12 gear is nice to have on long descents. The 13-26 cassette is the same except is has an 18. The 12-25 has the 12, 18, and ends with 25 rather than 26.|
|The decision looks different @ 50 than it did @ 25!||dzrider|
May 2, 2002 4:58 AM
|I have one of each and now that I'm 53 I much prefer the triple. It lets me hang on to the tight cluster, 12-23, on the back and still get some needed help on the longer or steeper climbs. Front shifting with the triple is not the 'on/off' of a modern double, but it's better than the downtube friction shifting on my commuter so it feels good to me.|
|The decision looks different @ mile 150 than it did @ mile 25!||cyclopathic|
May 2, 2002 5:21 AM
|given enough miles even small rollers start look like a mountain.
Steep climbs, extended miles, old age, extra weight --> triples
Flat country, 2-3hr rides, good fitness --> doubles
Triples let you sit and spin on climb you'd be standing on otherwise.
|damn straight it does. I'll never go back to doubles||retro|
May 2, 2002 6:58 AM
|I started using triples at about 50, and if I'd known how much I liked them, I would have done it 10 years sooner. Once you get over the macho aspect and admit that you not only don't need, but can't even USE a 53-11, it's all downhill. I'm running a 46-36-26 with 11/28 cassette, and I NEVER need a higher gear.
Would I feel different if I were 22? Probably. But I'd be wrong.
|my all around set up||cyclopathic|
May 2, 2002 9:00 AM
|is triples 52/42/30 and 12-27. I am about 15 years yonger, reasonably fit and occationally run out of 52x12 on flats with aerobars. For riding around where I live I barely go down to 42-19 (maybe 21) we have a few short less then 1mi/9-10% avg grade hills.
Yet given enough miles/hills in hillier country I know I'd use it all. It may be not macho, still better then walking. 30x27 gets me up 20% grade even when my legs're shot.
|re: What crank opinion (and triple vs. double)?||Icefrk13|
May 2, 2002 7:04 AM
|I am here in UT and a sh!t-e climber and on my new bike I went with the double and a 12-27 in the back. I ride mostly flats and some rolling hills. I have started to work on becoming a better climber. The gearing on my double just feels more comfortable than my triple ever did.|
May 2, 2002 9:13 AM
|I'd go triple. I have both, and can get by in both fine, though I have a bigger spread on my block on the double.
However, I do prefer the tighter group of the triple, and I don't have a great use for a 53/11. If I am going down a hill that steep, I've generally just come up the other side, and need the rest! It's also nice to spin some hills on the 3 sometimes if my legs are shot on a long ride, or if I am riding with some slower people.
If all else fails, you can take of the inner ring, and slip on a larger outer ring and you are on a double. I find my Campy tripe shifts just fine up front, and have never had a problem.
Rest in the knowledge that whichever you go for, you'll get on with it.
|Depends on the gears you actually use||Steve98501|
May 2, 2002 12:03 PM
|I have a triple on one bike with 12-23 cassette, 53, 42, 32 rings. My double crank bike has a 13-26 cassette, and I have a spare 13-28 cassette which gives me the same low gear as my triple equiped bike. A 10 speed double with a 13-29 will climb anything just shy of verticle.|| |