I hope everyone realizes that everyone is being sarcastic in claiming that triples are for old foggies and weenies (or at least hope so). No one here has to, or should be defending running a triple.

There is a " closed mind " attitude in cycling between the race weenies and against the guys (and gals ) who ride for fun and company in our great sport . In every club " they " moan the most , do the least and pay their subs ( if they bother ) latest of all ,and then only to get their free medicals . Then they go beserk if anybody says " can you give us a hand " , " I can´t " they say " I have to train ", then fail to complete half the laps , let alone the entire race because they are overgeared and overconfident .

Moral ? none just gear for your bad days not your good ones .

__________________
' too old to rock 'n' roll : too young to die '

Agree, nothing wrong w/ triple chain rings (or triple riders). To echo el Ingles (at least I think I am), racing isn't everything. We (as in all cyclists) are out there because it's fun and good for us (but a little competition between friends is always fun too). If you need a triple to get up the hill, so be it. At least you're out there.

I personally run a double on my Orbea, but can really appreciate the utility of a triple on some of the steep mountain roads out of Salt Lake City. There are a few punishing climbs where I'm wishing I had that smaller chainring. But I figure I deserve some punishment, since I'm carrying around some extra kilos.

Double or triple? Good for you either way.

Now if we are talking beer, I'd take a trippelbok over a dopplebok any day!

Cheers,
JMc

__________________
Don't go making snow cones at your local dog park. You will surely regret it.

My racing bike has a triple but my training bike has a double. I tend not to use the smallest chainring on my racing bike much.

__________________
Gibbo.

Army CU

More a rage against members who don´t pull their weight , funny that they tend to be the racers , ho hum .
Nice sport , nice people .

__________________
' too old to rock 'n' roll : too young to die '

What? What do you mean?

__________________
Gibbo.

Army CU

I ride a double, my wife has a tripple 105. You know what, I have tripple envy. You should see her spin up a killer slope. Nothing GRANNY about it.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by el Inglés
[B]Try riding the mountains in Europe during July and August , the Ventoux and the Angliru for example , even the pros used the 30 for the latter and the former killed Tommy Simpson ( pray it´s not a hot day ) .



Do you mean a 30 on the rear cassette? That would make me feel less of a wimp with my 25 on the significant hills around San Francisco.

I want to endorse what El Ingles says : nothing wrong with having a triple : cycling is about enjoyment first and foremost.
And if a person needs the triple to get through their route, it's their business.
Our sport is open to all - I've been there, done that in cycling terms, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with triples as far as
I am concerned.
If it means people taking up the sport and, more importantly,
letting them train and get fitter with the minimum amount of stress, I'm all for it !

If I'm reading your post correctly, triples are OK for beginners or people who need to get fitter. I don't think that's much of an endorsement for triples. The point to me is that a triple on a road bike reveals nothing about the rider's capability.

I agree with your view - having a triple on your setup is no reflection on the ability of a cyclist.
I agree with this view.
Only there are people in our sport that pour scorn on the fact that
a cyclist would have a triple on their machine.
This sort of snobbery causes people to feel inhibited and to stop
taking part.
I dislike this snobbery and my posts here hopefully reflect this view.
I've heard disparaging views being expressed by, in particular,
older cyclists (blokes in the late 40's onwards) who bleat on about
the fact that we should be all cycling 53x9's all the time.
Horse****e of the highest order.
I raced against this old wankers in their day and beat them :
yet I don't feel the need to disparage younger cyclists because they use triples.
If it keeps people interested in the sport and keeps them fit,
it's a good thing.

Just received my first road bike, a triple ... and currently looking to feel it in action on the road next summer.

Tried my gears on the rollers yesterday ( the day I had it!) and there doesn't seem to be a big difference between the first and the second chainrings, but I'm sure I'll find it useful!

__________________
That SUV makes you look fat.

I'm just getting used to my first triple here. The hill back up to my house is about a 15% grade for a 200 ft elevation gain. On my old bike, I just stuck it in the lowest gear, 39/26, and either sat back and ground up at 3-4 mph, or stood and climbed at 6-10 mph on days when I wasn't trying to stay below LT. No options.

With the triple and a 12-25 cogset, I've now got three ratios lower than the 39/26....feels like a whole set of climbing gears. Today I used 30/21 going up the hill, which is a bit lower than my old lowest gear. Out of the saddle was no faster, still only 6-7 mph, but just felt easier...didn't have to pull the bars to keep ticking over.

I like the idea of having a couple of low gears in reserve for those long rides in the mountains; will be a lot more useful to me than the 53/13 or 53/12.

I use a double because I find triples mechanically more problematic, and, I suppose more importantly, I don't quite need one yet. Which isn't to say that I won't someday... and isn't to say that I don't hurt rolling up and down some of the Bay Area's steeper climbs.

I'm just not at the stage where the extra trim positions and FD sweep feel worth the trouble. Again, yet.

Regarding the old fun versus competetiveness discussion, I'd like to once again offer my favorite point: in the grand scale of things, almost no cyclists are in the sport for financial gain. A preciously tiny percentage of racers hold contracts with fully professional, money-paying teams. The hard-core local guy who races a $4000 sponsorship-supported bike for his top area team will rarely make enough off competition to buy a pack of energy gels, even if he's a five-time regional champ.

In other words, even he's doing to for fun. Competetive, fitness-oriented fun, just like pee-wee football, surfing, skiing, and company softball. Some of us may take it more seriously, which is fine... let's all just remember the bottom line. I'm not Tyler, you're not Tyler; none of us are Tyler. Cycling is his only real paycheck.

Whether we ride Schwinns or Merlins, we're hobbyists.

__________________
...


i relish complicating the obvious and trivializing the stupendous

How rude! Come to Colorado and ride the front range with your double...if you are man enough. Seriously, I am a Grandpa and still ride the "Triple Bypass" with my Triple and the flats and rolling hills with my double. Nice to have both. It greatly extends my range for riding the hills that I love to do at my advanced age.