RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - General


Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )


Double vs triple chain ring(16 posts)

Double vs triple chain ringhallcd7
Aug 27, 2002 12:04 PM
newbie question here .....

how much will i miss my triple when i upgrade from a sora bike to an ultegra with double?

triple is 30 granny with 25 on back, and double is 39 with 25 on back.

i guess i gotta learn good climbing technique, huh!
re: Double vs triple chain ringfirstrax
Aug 27, 2002 12:12 PM
Do you ever use the 30? If not you wont miss it. If you use it often, get ultegra triple.

Its ok to have a triple as long as your stem has less than 5mm of spacers, your bar tape is black and your socks low cut.
Heh heh... fashion rules codified at last! :-) nmOffTheBack
Aug 27, 2002 12:31 PM
re: Double vs triple chain ringempacher6seat
Aug 27, 2002 12:24 PM
I say go for the double. Your legs might hurt for a week or so as you get used to climbing in a harder gear, but you'll be a stronger rider in no time. Plus, 39-25 should be suitable for most hills.
Depends on terrain, fitness, your age and your self-imagecory
Aug 27, 2002 1:18 PM
I switched to all triples three or four years ago, and I'll never buy another double crank. But I live at 5000 feet in the mountains, with 9000-foot passes all around, I'm in my 50s and I don't care what the 20-year-old sprinters with their superhero jerseys and carbon fiber bikes think (I ride in T-shirts and mountain bike shorts half the time, too). If you're 23, 11 percent body fat and live in Florida, you'll probably do fine with a double. If you're a middle-aged average guy riding in Wyoming, you won't. But nobody can answer for you without those details.
That's true...empacher6seat
Aug 27, 2002 6:21 PM
Being 19 and in decent shape... I guess there's a lot of variables that can come into play (age, fitness, etc) that I didn't consider.

It sure is a better way to become a stronger climber though.
Where are you riding?Dave Hickey
Aug 27, 2002 12:54 PM
Does your ride include a lot of hills?

Do you use you're 30 now?

If you spend a lot of time in the 30 x 25 combo then, yes, you are going to miss the triple. However, if you're using a 30 x 16 combo, then you won't miss it as much.
What works for mebigrider
Aug 27, 2002 1:01 PM
This is one of my soapbox subjects.
I use a 39/53 and 12-27 combination.

That gets me up 8-10% grades without having to standup if I don't want to stand on the pedals. This saves me from extra shifting up front and gives almost the same gear range. The 30/25 is 1.2 ratio and the 39/27 is 1.44. That isn't a big difference.

Now for the soap box. As the rear cogsets have continued over time to increase in number from 5 cogs to 10 cogs, manufacturers and riders have focused on smaller jumps in shifting as opposed to a wider range of gears. I believe a slower rider or touring bike could get by with a 14-32 and normal riders could use 13-29 cogsets. You sacrifice sprinting speed and downhill windups for hill climbing gears while not stretching the incremental changes between shifts.

just a thought
What works for mepessot
Aug 27, 2002 2:24 PM
While we're on the topic of doubles vs. triples.
Why are most triples 52/42/30? I rarely used the 30,
so to get gearing closer to the 53/39, I swapped the
42 for a 40. Couldn't find a 39. Why aren't triples 53/39/30?

Al
I believe the DA is a 52or3,39,30 nmLone Gunman
Aug 27, 2002 3:23 PM
why would you hate 42?cyclopathic
Aug 28, 2002 7:31 AM
52 to 42 is much smoother shift then 53 to 39, you can do it w/o loosing any momentum. Not enough gear in 42? put 12-27 cass, 42x27 is equal to 39x25, and 42x25 equals to 39x23
so which bike are you thinking of?nn23
Aug 27, 2002 1:35 PM
re: Double vs triple chain ringhallcd7
Aug 27, 2002 5:42 PM
thanks for all the responses, helps me understand what to expect. once again this forum has provided insight that an inexperienced roadie wannabe needs :)

FYI, most rides are in north alabama, most elevation in the area is from 700' to 2000'. a few serious grades to, but most rides have mild climbs. Rider is 48 yr old male, 155lb, reasonably fit, split rides between single track/mtn, and road. the bike under consideration is 2002 fuji team.
How Hilly Is Your Terrain?jose_Tex_mex
Aug 27, 2002 6:39 PM
If you use the triple a lot or cycle through hilly terrain you should get the new triple. On my next purchase I will definitely get the triple.

A lot of roadies are too snobby or proud to do the triple. These are the people I truly enjoy cracking when on my mountain bike I drop them in the hills :-) They give me that look - he's on a mtb, thus I can beat him. Wrong. When your rpm's drop to a crawl you get dropped to.

The more Lance wins by spinning the more triples will be sold.

Also, do you find your cadence getting low? Low for me is under 90 - especially in the 70's. If so a triple might just be the way.
are you a high cadence sort of guy?DrD
Aug 28, 2002 3:23 AM
If you have some really steep stuff, and like to keep a high cadence, a triple might be the thing to do - otherwise, a double with a 12-27 in the back is fine to get you over most things - at least it is for me :-) though I suppose ymmv... I am in Albuquerque, NM and can get up the crest climb (around 5k feet going from 5k ft above to 10,700 ft above sea level, depending on where you start) with a 53/39 up front and a 12/27 in the back without having to stand much at all - and I would hardly consider myself a good climber...
double->triple is the best change I've made on my bikePeterRider
Aug 28, 2002 9:29 AM
... but as everybody mentioned, it is useful only if you have mountains. If you have mountains, a triple is MUCH better for the knees.

Pierre