# compact or triple?



## g-dawg (Jan 30, 2009)

I'm looking to purchase my first road bike. What are the pros and cons of a compact crankset vs. a triple?


----------



## MerlinAma (Oct 11, 2005)

g-dawg said:


> I'm looking to purchase my first road bike. What are the pros and cons of a compact crankset vs. a triple?


This has been discussed/argued over and over and over on this and every other bike forum.

Do a search. You'll find threads covering all the gory details.

A google search will provide articles and the pros/cons from bike shops, etc.


----------



## RoadBikeVirgin (Nov 21, 2008)

Would you rather have granny gears and super high high gears, yet reduced shifting performance, or would you rather have crisper shifting but higher low gears and lower high gears?

It's a tradeoff. I bought a compact double last year cause I couldn't stand the shifting on the triple, but I am too chubby right now and too out of shape to make it up hills with a standard double, therefore I went in between :thumbsup:


----------



## Camilo (Jun 23, 2007)

RoadBikeVirgin said:


> Would you rather have granny gears and super high high gears, yet reduced shifting performance, or would you rather have crisper shifting but higher low gears and lower high gears?
> 
> It's a tradeoff. I bought a compact double last year cause I couldn't stand the shifting on the triple, but I am too chubby right now and too out of shape to make it up hills with a standard double, therefore I went in between :thumbsup:


I've never noticed a meaningful degradation in shifting with a good quality, well adjusted triple. I just don't believe that is a factor.

The factors are - wider range and smaller steps between shifts with a triple. Slightly lighter weight slightly shorter crank spindle, and (for some reason) a more manley mystique with the compact double. In other words, among some there is the perception that the triple is somehow wimpier than a compact double. I really don't understand that either because the only reason the compact exists is for the same reason: lower gearing. Seems to me the compact is a compromise between not quite as low or high gearing and a little lower weight and conventional crank appearance while the triple is simply the most direct way of combining conventional high gearing with lower gearing, but with a small weight penalty.


----------



## tihsepa (Nov 27, 2008)

I run a triple and dont use the granny. Ever. Like I dont think I ever have even tried it, no need.
As a matter of fact, I could probably get away with a single up front. I Almost always stay in the center ring being a 42 and like it just fine.


----------



## RoadBikeVirgin (Nov 21, 2008)

Camilo said:


> I've never noticed a meaningful degradation in shifting with a good quality, well adjusted triple. I just don't believe that is a factor.
> 
> The factors are - wider range and smaller steps between shifts with a triple. Slightly lighter weight slightly shorter crank spindle, and (for some reason) a more manley mystique with the compact double. In other words, among some there is the perception that the triple is somehow wimpier than a compact double. I really don't understand that either because the only reason the compact exists is for the same reason: lower gearing. Seems to me the compact is a compromise between not quite as low or high gearing and a little lower weight and conventional crank appearance while the triple is simply the most direct way of combining conventional high gearing with lower gearing, but with a small weight penalty.


I know what you mean - I don't agree with the whole "triples are for wimps" mantra - in fact, the guys at my LBS were talking like that when I bought my Synapse in November. Load of BS if you ask me 

But I still stand by my opinion that double shift better and more of the rear cogs can be used on the cassette with a double (without rubbing). I'm saying this from a 10 speed cassette POV. Consider this:

I just bought an Ultegra 10 speed cassette for my new Neuvation wheels. This is a direct quote from the intructions that came with the cassette: 
"If using the CS-6600 (14-25T, 15-25T, 16-27T) in combination with a
front chainwheel, use a double chainwheel. If you use it in
combination with a triple chainwheel, gear shifting performance will
drop, and the bicycle may fall over and serious injury may result."

Just something to think about... :idea:


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

*Careful reading.*



RoadBikeVirgin said:


> I just bought an Ultegra 10 speed cassette for my new Neuvation wheels. This is a direct quote from the intructions that came with the cassette:
> "If using the CS-6600 (14-25T, 15-25T, 16-27T) in combination with a front chainwheel, use a double chainwheel. If you use it in combination with a triple chainwheel, gear shifting performance will drop, and the bicycle may fall over and serious injury may result."
> 
> Just something to think about... :idea:


This only applies to the junior cassettes, on which the smallest cog is a 14, 15 or 16. Due to their relatively large diameter, a 14, 15 or 16 final cog can put the chain very close to the seatstay of some frames. Because the largest chainwheel of a triple is a bit further out from the frame than the large chainwheel of a double, a chain running on the largest chainwheel of a triple and the smallest cog *of a junior cassette* could contact the seatstay on some frames. With standard cassettes having a 13, 12 or 11 as the smallest cog, this is not an issue.


----------



## RoadBikeVirgin (Nov 21, 2008)

wim said:


> This only applies to the junior cassettes, on which the smallest cog is a 14, 15 or 16. Due to their relatively large diameter, a 14, 15 or 16 final cog can put the chain very close to the seatstay of some frames. Because the largest chainwheel of a triple is a bit further out from the frame than the large chainwheel of a double, a chain running on the largest front of a triple and the smallest rear of a junior cassette could contact the seatstay on some frames. With standard cassettes having a 13, 12 or 11 as the smallest cog, this is not an issue.


Thanks for schoolin' me  How you explained it makes sense.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

RoadBikeVirgin said:


> Thanks for schoolin' me  How you explained it makes sense.


Well, I don't want triples to get too bad of a rap. They suffer enough as it is from lack of cool.  

For what it's worth: I still ride really steep hills every so often, but have lost interest in working on my bike, like fitting mountain gears. So for this old geezer, the triple is perfect. My bike's ready for anything, all the time.


----------



## RoadBikeVirgin (Nov 21, 2008)

wim said:


> Well, I don't want triples to get too bad of a rap. They suffer enough as it is from lack of cool.
> 
> For what it's worth: I still ride really steep hills every so often, but have lost interest in working on my bike, like fitting mountain gears. So for this old geezer, the triple is perfect. My bike's ready for anything, all the time.


I know I know, you're right. I probably got duped into the double, cause when they switched my closeout '08 Synapse's triple, they talked me into the compact Red - those little weasels!!


----------



## sdjeff (Sep 4, 2008)

*+1 for the triple*

I'd rather have the range of gears I want/need when I need them... but then, I ride stuff like this: (if I've figured out the jpg upload... else try this link: http://bikeroutetoaster.com/Course.aspx?course=25992)


----------



## alexb618 (Aug 24, 2006)

this is cycling, its supposed to hurt

only the old and injured need a triple


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

alexb618 said:


> this is cycling, its supposed to hurt
> 
> only the old and injured need a triple


LOL, it hurts no matter what you got on your bike. My triple is about not having to walk up a 20% grade. My cleats slip on the asphalt. But I know what you mean about "the old"—back in the day, I raced up mountains in a 42 x 21 and the pain was just a normal part of staying with the group. Now at 64 and riding solo, I don't need or want to suffer that deeply any more.


----------



## baker921 (Jul 20, 2007)

Just so I'm clear , is running a triple wimpier than getting off and pushing?


----------



## Camilo (Jun 23, 2007)

alexb618 said:


> this is cycling, its supposed to hurt
> 
> only the old and injured need a triple


Word. I'm old and use every single gear on my bike, every single time I ride out and back from my house. I have enjoyed road cycling so much more since I got my triple (would probably say the same if I'd bought a compact though). I ride much more because I used to have a real problem with the last few hills getting home. But I live in a very hilly area with many long steady grinds as well as some very, very steep short sections getting home. A couple riding buddies have compacts on similar bikes and do fine, but I definitely can do a higher cadence at the same speed uphill and can pedal better/slower at high speeds downhill (in my opinion). Neither of us goes faster or slower than the others because of the gearing though. That depends on who's feeling better or who is just all around stronger. I'm not an animal by any means but do ride 100-150 miles/week in the summer and XC marathons every winter, fwiw.


----------



## g-dawg (Jan 30, 2009)

I don't have any problems climbing the hills in my area. I currently have a hardtail mtb. The big ring is a 44. My concern is the difference in the 39 tooth middle ring vs.the 34 tooth on the compact. I can ride almost everything on the 44 but 50 may be too much would the 34 be too little or would I be ok,and just use higher gears in the back? I have never ridden a road bike, and I plan on getting my first. Sorry for the "rookie" question. Thanks for all of the replies.


----------



## fthills (Dec 18, 2008)

I'm trying to make the same decision. There is, i think ,no pat answer. I started with the standard 53/39 at the front and 26 as the biggest at the back. Had to stand on climbs where the gradient was more than 6% and lasted more than 20 mins.Next changed to compact 50/34 ,a bit easier, but still had to stand once in a while on the same climbs. Then changed to 27 cog at the back . 2 weeks ago was able to climb 25 km hills average 6% gradient without getting out of seat. Now I'm less convinced I need triple but will keep an open mind .
I'd suggest trial and see how it feels .It can get a bit expensive but if you buy good gear there is always demand for it on the second hand market. In the end you'll be happy with the results because you'll have explored all the options to suit your requirements.


----------



## JCavilia (Sep 12, 2005)

*more information?*



g-dawg said:


> I don't have any problems climbing the hills in my area. I currently have a hardtail mtb. The big ring is a 44. My concern is the difference in the 39 tooth middle ring vs.the 34 tooth on the compact. I can ride almost everything on the 44 but 50 may be too much would the 34 be too little or would I be ok,and just use higher gears in the back? I have never ridden a road bike, and I plan on getting my first. Sorry for the "rookie" question. Thanks for all of the replies.


Where do you live? Tell us about the terrain you'll be riding. How long/steep are the hills you'll do? How old are you? How heavy? Will you do group rides, solo mostly, races? All these things are relevant.


----------



## fireplug (Nov 19, 2008)

I went with the compact....sometimes I wish the third chain ring was there but not going to get any stonger if I make it too easy.


----------



## Oldteen (Sep 7, 2005)

baker921 said:


> Just so I'm clear , is running a triple wimpier than getting off and pushing?


+1,000,000!!!!!

There always seems to be posers bad-mouthin' triples at the start of big hilly events. I often LMAO down the road when I see these "know-it-all" clowns WALKING their std doubles up 15-20% grades. 

In any sport you should choose the equipment that best fits YOUR game & the conditions.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

*In defense of walking.*



Oldteen said:


> +1,000,000!!!!!
> 
> There always seems to be posers bad-mouthin' triples at the start of big hilly events. I often LMAO down the road when I see these "know-it-all" clowns WALKING their std doubles up 15-20% grades.
> 
> In any sport you should choose the equipment that best fits YOUR game & the conditions.


Well, with a gear small enough, anyone can ride up any grade if they can keep from toppling over at pedestrian speeds. But there's not much glory in the words "I never walked." I've seen 20% grade walkers easily beat tiny gear people to the top.


----------



## frdfandc (Nov 27, 2007)

Most triples are standard with 9 speed cassettes. But with 10 speed set ups its either compact or standard doubles.

But its best to get what will work best for you.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

Since you will be buying and not changing from a standard double, I would say go triple. My bike is a triple and it shifts just fine, as I am sure your mountain bike does. If you read about compacts here you will find they have their fair share of shifting problems as well.

Why triple:

1.) the middle ring (39) is closer to what you are used to on your MTB.
2.) 52 or 53t big chainring is nice for speedy descents. 
3.) the 30t small chainring is nice security to have.
4.) the 70g weight penalty is no big deal compared to the piece of mind.

In my opinion compacts are great for those that want to convert from a standard for better suited gearing and want to save $ compared to going to a triple. Vanity should not be an issue. Both a triple or compact setup tells people that you need lower gears than a standard provides. There is no shame in that.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

frdfandc said:


> Most triples are standard with 9 speed cassettes. But with 10 speed set ups its either compact or standard doubles.
> 
> But its best to get what will work best for you.


Sorry, but there are plenty of 10sp triples available. In fact mine is a 2004 model. They are nothing new. Shimano makes them in 105, Ultegra and Dura Ace. Granted, on higher end bikes they need to be requested.


----------



## PBike (Jul 6, 2007)

alexb618 said:


> this is cycling, its supposed to hurt
> 
> only the old and injured need a triple


Funny. 

Or :idea: people who live in very hilly areas who use their bikes for carrying loads and actually need the granny gear once in a while. I live in the Pittsburgh suburbs and routinely use my bike for shopping and running errands. I often carry 40 pounds or so, sometimes less, sometimes more. The granny is nice under those conditions on the steep hills. 

To each their own. If you feel you need it, get it, if you don't don't. I spent a good part of my biking life with just a single speed, I also had a three speed. Back in the day a ten speed, two in the front five in the back was the most you could get. Now we have choices, base your choice on what you want and feel you need, not on what others may think about your choice. 

Cheers


----------



## nor_cal_rider (Dec 18, 2006)

Speaking as a fit, but not race worthy (41 yr old guy @ 5' 9" and 155 lbs), rider I say go with the compact. They are pretty much a "do anything" setup. You loose a little on the flats, but it makes climbing so much more enjoyable (and SRAM and Shimano both are offering a 11-28 if you want the best of both worlds in your cassette). I was able to use a 50/34 with a 12-27 rear cassette to complete a serious climbing 2x-metric century (15.5k climbing) last summer and several centuries with over 6k climbing too. I ride a lot, but for the big climbs, I just remember I'm NOT racing - just sit back and spin in a LOW gear and enjoy the scenery. I've found climbing is almost more of a mental challenge - sure you need some degree of fitness, but otherwise try to remember that everyone else out there with you is hurting too, so embrace the pain and enjoy your ride!!

~Bruce in Redding, CA


----------



## frdfandc (Nov 27, 2007)

Blue CheeseHead said:


> Sorry, but there are plenty of 10sp triples available. In fact mine is a 2004 model. They are nothing new. Shimano makes them in 105, Ultegra and Dura Ace. Granted, on higher end bikes they need to be requested.



If you would have read my post more closely, I said MOST. Yes I am aware there are 10 sp triples avail, but its not what a person normally will see on a bike at MOST bike shops.


----------



## Camilo (Jun 23, 2007)

nor_cal_rider said:


> Speaking as a fit, but not race worthy (41 yr old guy @ 5' 9" and 155 lbs), rider I say go with the compact. They are pretty much a "do anything" setup. You loose a little on the flats, but it makes climbing so much more enjoyable (and SRAM and Shimano both are offering a 11-28 if you want the best of both worlds in your cassette). I was able to use a 50/34 with a 12-27 rear cassette to complete a serious climbing 2x-metric century (15.5k climbing) last summer and several centuries with over 6k climbing too. I ride a lot, but for the big climbs, I just remember I'm NOT racing - just sit back and spin in a LOW gear and enjoy the scenery. I've found climbing is almost more of a mental challenge - sure you need some degree of fitness, but otherwise try to remember that everyone else out there with you is hurting too, so embrace the pain and enjoy your ride!!
> 
> ~Bruce in Redding, CA


Actually, you describe why compacts are not "do anything" setups - they lose the big chain ring and therefore lose something in the higher gears.... as well as lose something in the lower gears compared to the triple. The compact is a compromise, sacrificing the high and low end both.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

frdfandc said:


> If you would have read my post more closely, I said MOST. Yes I am aware there are 10 sp triples avail, but its not what a person normally will see on a bike at MOST bike shops.


I originally read your post very closely. You followed up your first sentence with "But with 10 speed set ups its either compact or standard doubles" No "most" or "usually" in that sentence.

I know three guys at work that walked into a bike shop and walked out with 10 speed triples right off the floor. They varied between a 105 and Ultegra groupos. 

Your post implied to the reader that if someone wants a triple they are, for all practical purposes, relegated to a 9 speed. I just wanted to point out to to OP that 10 speed -triples are not hard to come by and should not be ruled out.


----------



## frdfandc (Nov 27, 2007)

OK, you got me on a technicality. I should have used a comma instead of a period and used the word AND instead of BUT.

Hows this instead.

Most triples are standard with 9 speed cassettes and with 10 speed set ups its either compact or standard doubles.


HMMMM. WOW its the same sentence. Just one word differenct.


My point is that the USUAL is a triple on a 9 and a double on a 10.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

Camilo said:


> Actually, you describe why compacts are not "do anything" setups - they lose the big chain ring and therefore lose something in the higher gears.... as well as lose something in the lower gears compared to the triple. The compact is a compromise, sacrificing the high and low end both.


Exactly! 

I only used my granny gear once last year and that was on a 5 mile 6% grade in Tennessee. I could have ground it out in the middle ring, but would have dropped my riding buddy. The granny allowed me to keep my cadence and yet reduce the pace so as to remain with my friend. When starting cycling I did use it on a couple short but steep climbs near home (15-20% grade) . With improved fitness I can now take those in the middle ring. On one of our regular group rides there is a long (4 mile) subtle descent (2%) where we often average 32 mph. It is a push to maintain that speed since it is not very steep. I would not like to deal with that with a 50t chainring.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

frdfandc said:


> OK, you got me on a technicality. I should have used a comma instead of a period and used the word AND instead of BUT.
> 
> Hows this instead.
> 
> ...


I will grant you this, "many entry level bikes (Sora/Tiagra) come equiped with 9 speed cassettes and triples". With regard to mid level bikes it totally depends on the bike model and location. Mid level comfort such as the Pilot and Roubaix can be had with triples just as easily as doubles it just depends how they were ordered. In Florida I would expect to find all doubles. In Colorado or the Sierra Nevadas you will find plenty of triples. Even here in Milwaukee I can walk into any number of bike stores tomorrow and walk out with a triple 10 speed. Do they have "more" mid level doubles, yes. 

The 9 speed issue is more of a groupset issue than a triple/double issue.

It will be easy enough for the OP to walk to into a bike store in his location and see what is available, either in stock or via order.


----------



## g-dawg (Jan 30, 2009)

I'M 43 yrs. old 160lbs. 5'8. I live in an area with lots of rolling hills. The longest hill is about 2 miles long. There are no hills around here that I can't climb. I'm just currious as to whether the jump between a 50 tooth to a 34 tooth ring is too much. I mostly ride alone,but late last summer I started riding with a group once a week. I have a hard time keeping up with the road bikes on the flats and downhills. This is the reason I'm thinking of buying a road bike.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

g-dawg said:


> I'M 43 yrs. old 160lbs. 5'8. I live in an area with lots of rolling hills. The longest hill is about 2 miles long. There are no hills around here that I can't climb. I'm just currious as to whether the jump between a 50 tooth to a 34 tooth ring is too much. *No, the Jump will not be too much* I mostly ride alone,but late last summer I started riding with a group once a week. I have a hard time keeping up with the road bikes on the flats and downhills. *This is where the 52 or 53 big ring on a standard double or triple would be nice. *This is the reason I'm thinking of buying a road bike.


See my edits above

By the way, you will be amazed how much faster you will be on a road bike.


----------



## Muaythaibike (Oct 26, 2007)

I have a triple and have used the lowes gear only a few times. Where I live I dont need it. However, this summer I was biking in the white mountains in NH and I could not imagine not having the option. I was able to make the hills while most guys were walking. Even in the lowest gears I was standing most of the time and pulling down on the bars. But was it fun to finally crest the hills and coast for 5 miles at 40 MPH...


----------



## Muaythaibike (Oct 26, 2007)

ALSO, I dont have any shifting issues with my triple... If you are sure you will never used the triple get the double. I always try not to wimp out but when you need it its great to have the option...


----------



## Camilo (Jun 23, 2007)

Blue CheeseHead said:


> I will grant you this, "many entry level bikes (Sora/Tiagra) come equiped with 9 speed cassettes and triples". With regard to mid level bikes it totally depends on the bike model and location. Mid level comfort such as the Pilot and Roubaix can be had with triples just as easily as doubles it just depends how they were ordered. In Florida I would expect to find all doubles. In Colorado or the Sierra Nevadas you will find plenty of triples. Even here in Milwaukee I can walk into any number of bike stores tomorrow and walk out with a triple 10 speed. Do they have "more" mid level doubles, yes.
> 
> The 9 speed issue is more of a groupset issue than a triple/double issue.
> 
> It will be easy enough for the OP to walk to into a bike store in his location and see what is available, either in stock or via order.


Agreed, it totally depends on the location. Where I live, 10 speed triple groups are very common. Very hilly here.


----------



## sdirep (Jan 28, 2009)

my sister is getting a road bike very soon. Do females normally ride compacts, triples, or normal?


----------



## TomH (Oct 6, 2008)

cranksets arent gender specifc.


----------



## real stonie (Mar 30, 2006)

True (pathetic) Story

I bought my Trek 5000 two years ago, I frequently clean it, maintain it, all the right stuff, etc.

Last night I was cleaning/checking my front der when I noticed it said "Ultegra Triple." I blurted "What the hell?" I have absolutely no recollection of having a triple, nor have I EVER shifted into the grannies.

I've either forgotten what I bought or I've been eating lead chips.

Moral of the story, unless you have weak/injured/aged legs or are planning on cycling up Everest, you really don't need a triple...but somehow I have one?????


----------



## Camilo (Jun 23, 2007)

real stonie said:


> Moral of the story, unless you have weak/injured/aged legs or are planning on cycling up Everest, you really don't need a triple...


There you have it! He knows that those of us who have them and use them are all old weak or injured.


----------



## real stonie (Mar 30, 2006)

Camilo said:


> There you have it! He knows that those of us who have them and use them are all old weak or injured.


Apparently I fall into that category too...after all, I bought one.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

*Selective cycling.*



real stonie said:


> I've either forgotten what I bought or I've been eating lead chips.


You forgot the obvious third explanation: you stay away from real steep hills.


----------



## real stonie (Mar 30, 2006)

wim said:


> You forgot the obvious third explanation: you stay away from real steep hills.


That's funny.


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

Over the 6,000 miles I have riden my current bike I have used the granny maybe 5 miles. I am thinking when I do the Horribly Hilly Hundreds this summer that 5 miles will increase substantially.

It's kind of like carrying jumper cables in your car. 99.99% of the time you don't need them, but when you do, they are pretty darn handy.


----------



## willtsmith_nwi (Jul 25, 2006)

Blue CheeseHead said:


> Since you will be buying and not changing from a standard double, I would say go triple. My bike is a triple and it shifts just fine, as I am sure your mountain bike does. If you read about compacts here you will find they have their fair share of shifting problems as well.
> 
> Why triple:
> 
> ...


On relatively flat terrain, you will spend far more time in the big ring. A proper double moves the big ring inward and cleans up the chainline. Horses for courses.


----------



## DrTom (Feb 28, 2009)

Buy a triple if you will regularly ride in hilly terrain (i.e. 8%+ grades) or if you have knee problems and need to keep the cadence up. Otherwise buy a conventional double and enjoy the speed. I can't see the point of a compact -- like many compromises, it does everything poorly. 

When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. The triple puts three tools in your toolbox, for three different uses (climbing, flats, descending); the compact is like using vicegrips for everything. Effective, yes, but crude and ultimately unsatisfying. And all so the hotshots won't think you're a wuss. 

I'm 54 and about 10-15 lbs overweight; the 70 gram penalty of the triple would be quickly fixed by dialing out the chocolate chip cookie after lunch. 

The real issue is that with a really nice bike, you can't blame the equipment if you can't keep up with the pack -- clearly the problem is with the motor.


----------



## RoadBikeVirgin (Nov 21, 2008)

DrTom said:


> Buy a triple if you will regularly ride in hilly terrain (i.e. 8%+ grades) or if you have knee problems and need to keep the cadence up. Otherwise buy a conventional double and enjoy the speed. I can't see the point of a compact -- like many compromises, it does everything poorly.
> 
> When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. The triple puts three tools in your toolbox, for three different uses (climbing, flats, descending); the compact is like using vicegrips for everything. Effective, yes, but crude and ultimately unsatisfying. And all so the hotshots won't think you're a wuss.
> 
> ...


Compact does everything poorly? hmmm. I tested my bike with triple, compact, and double before I ultimately decided on the compact. I liked the shifting of the double better than the triple, but the double was too rough on my body, as I ride in Washington. If I lived in CO, I'd probably have purchased a triple. If I lived in Florida, I'd probably have purchased a double.

Happy I went with the compact


----------

