# 07 Trek 1500 double vs triple



## iks (Aug 4, 2006)

I have a choice between an '07 Trek 1500 double or a triple. I rarely use the smallest front ring and I am more of a stand on the pedals type for hills. But one place I go to ride has lots of hills. Even so I am leaning towards the double.

1. What are your thoughts on the double vs the triple? 
2. Is the rear gear set on the 1500 double different that the on the triple? And if so what effect does that have?
3 Does anyone have the tooth count and gearing for these two bikes?

Thanks


----------



## paulieb00 (Aug 25, 2004)

looks like the cassette is 12-25 on both the double and the triple.
so the only difference are the cranksets, which are 53/39 for the double and 52/42/30 for the triple.

paul


----------



## iks (Aug 4, 2006)

*Thanks*

Thanks for the info. I believe the double gives you a bit more speed at the high-end and a little less climbing efficiency at the low end. The question is whether I want that "granny-gear" (or two) or not. If going with a double is the equivalent of doing without the bottom (climbing) two gears then I can do without it. Maybe its not that simple.


----------



## paulieb00 (Aug 25, 2004)

it will be like doing it without the 3 bottom gears
the double top gear is 116.5, the triple is 114.3
the double bottom gear is 41.2, the triple is 31.7
here is a calculator
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/

paul


----------



## iks (Aug 4, 2006)

The Trek dealer near me is going to Trek this weekend for the inside scoop on the 07's and I will post what they fnid out for me here. They also will build me a comparable double to try on the hills here. I'll also post that experience here.

Thanks!


----------



## hell_on_wheels (Jul 26, 2005)

If you are a strong rider, go with the double. You can always swap the rear cassette to a 12-27 if you need more climbing power. Triples are hard to work with, and not worth the trouble. Besides, triples are for sissies.


----------



## iks (Aug 4, 2006)

I bought the trek 1600 with 10-speed cassette and a triple. I stay in the top gear a lot but have been glad to have the triple on one or two occasions. Nice bike all around and feels half the weight of my 720 hybrid.


----------



## PSM (Sep 15, 2006)

*Don't do the triple*

I have a Pilot 5.2 with the triple. I went with it because I was getting back into road cycling and was not in the greatest shape. I'm riding 50-70 miles a week now... I haven't used the granny ring since my first couple of rides. The triple is also very sensative to cable length adjustments. My initial reaction was that it was a real pain in the a**. I've since adjusted for cable stretch and it seems to have settled down. 

Go with the double.


----------



## Zwane (Jun 30, 2006)

I'm not a fan of that 42 middle ring because it means that in some situations you'll have to shift to the small front cog earlier than preferred (and shift up a lot of gears in the rear too) in order to avoid shifting the front whilst climbing (out of the saddle for example). 53/39/30 is a lot better, my ideal climbing setup would however be something like a 50/34 with a 12-27 cassette. Good luck!


----------



## uzziefly (Jul 15, 2006)

53/39 with 12-25 or 11-23... That's what I ride on my Madone.. Ok the 11-23 would be for my new wheelset...


Hey post some pics of your new ride OP!

Have fun riding, and ride safe!


----------



## Richard (Feb 17, 2006)

Bucking the trend, Trek seems to have fewer bikes with compact options for '07. Even DuraAce has brought back the triple. My experience with Shimano triples is that they are, generally, a pain in the ass. The left STI is basically a "4 position switch" which makes it super sensitive to adjustment (read "unhappy customers!")

A 50-34 with a 12-25 or 27 should suffice for all but the steepest climbs or weaker climbers and be lighter and shift better to boot.


----------



## uzziefly (Jul 15, 2006)

Richard, err, he already bought the bike with a triple 

I have a triple on my hybrid that uses Shimano Deore but I NEVER use that small or medium chain even.

I can spin out even the ears on the large chainring on my hybrid.. well, sort of... anyway, no link.. whatever...


----------



## PSM (Sep 15, 2006)

*Why the "triple" stigma?*

I've already chimed in that I'd prefer to have a double for maintenance issues and for how in frequently I use the granny ring... 

That being said, why do a lot of full time roadies turn their nose up at triples? It always seems funny to me to have your ego tied up in what someone else is riding. I know that I've been dropped by people riding bikes far less nice than mine. Who cares what the "other guy" rides? Isn't the whole point to have fun and stay fit? 

Cheers!


----------



## reh1966 (Mar 27, 2006)

Although I don't have the 1500 (I have the 2200), I have the triple. I feel that under most circumstances I could get by with the double, but there have been occasions that I am glad I have the "granny" gears. It usually happens when I am already tired from a long ride and then hit the hills. At least this way I don't have to walk.


----------



## mangotreat0808 (Sep 4, 2006)

*i've tried both but on an orbea opal*

I do ride about 50-100 miles per week averaging 20mph on flats, and about 8mph on hills with at least 10% grade. As much as my limited powers would allow, I try to stay with my middle ring (setup is 52-39-30; cassette 12-27), and when a really steep hill comes my way, or I'm just pooped after maybe riding 3 miles up a hill, the granny has been a bail-out gear for me. I'm probably at the baseline level for a roadie, which is that I'm no pro or even amateur racer, and I do get off-days whenI feel weaker than my normal energy level (with kids, work, the usual) - based on these two factors I went with a triple - the middle ring allows me to do off the saddle attacks on quick hilly sprints, and the granny allows me to stay seated after or during a prolonged uphill climb - I think having more available options is always good.


----------



## running red dog (Jul 6, 2006)

I had a '05 Trek 1500 with a triple. Living in NE Indiana, I rarely used the small chain ring. I went on vacation in Colorado and biked a few mountain passes and am extremely glad I had the granny gear. Since then, I have upgraded to the Madone 5.2 with a triple. Again, I rarely (almost never) use the small chain ring, but it may come in handy next summer in Colorado!!!! If you ever have a recovery ride with lots of hills, you may want the triple. I will say that the Ultegra is much easier to shift through the front chain rings than the 105's on my old 1500.


----------



## ljacobs2 (Dec 14, 2006)

I'm looking to buy my first road bike. I'm gonna go used and would like to go with good bike, CF if possible, that is a tad above my riding abilities so I can grow into it. However, a lot of the bikes that are mid-range bikes, and affordable to me used, are doubles up front. There are some slight hills in my neck-of-the-woods here in PA, and I think it may be beneficial for me as an inexperienced rider to go with a triple. If I see a good deal and its a double should I just say f*** it, suck it up, and get it anyway? If I would feel the need later to go with a triple, would it be a painful and expensive conversion? I'm looking at a used LeMond Chambery ('98) and need some honest opinions.


----------



## mangotreat0808 (Sep 4, 2006)

*I would suggest going with a triple*

or a compact. But the easiest thing to check this out is to climb up your PA hills on the double and see if you can handle it, and you may think you'll be fine, but.. the thing is you'll be hitting steeper and longer hills once you start riding further out. Climbing is one of the best joys of riding a roadbike, and but one (including myself) that beginners sometimes underestimate is that climbing well takes practice, patience, strength, endurance with the application (through research, practice, trial and error) of proper techniques in seating, pedaling, breathing and spinning. And it's just not like chugging down a six-pack of beer, and (to borrow your phrase) just "suck it in". Climbing (long, steep hills) humbles the best of us, and elevation of the inexperienced rider becomes very proportional to the number of available gears. Once you get stronger then tha't when you swap to a double, or just keep the triple, and don't use the granny.


----------



## iks (Aug 4, 2006)

As I said earlyer I ended up buying a trek 1600 triple. After a month or two I'm still happy with my choice of chainrings. There have been a few long hills that I was gald to have the small chainring, but generally I stay with the 50-39 rings. Now I know what I can do with a standard double (not using the granny-gears) and find that it's well suited to most of the rides in my area of central Massachusetts.


----------

