Double or Triple chainring?

It all depends on where you intend to ride.

artemidorus said:

It all depends on where you intend to ride.

Probably 98% on flat road, but I suppose my question is for the people with 2 chain rings: Are you ever in the situation where you wish you had that extra gear?

For example, Around the Bay is a yearly event here in Vic and is a 210km circuit which I'm led to believe is predominately flat, except for one decent hill (somewhere near Frankston). Rumour has it, that here it is not uncommon to see riders (who have already put in 150+kms) pushing their bikes. Would the extra chain ring avoid this?

Now, I’ve never participated in this ride (but hope to this year), but I think the extra few hundred grams to carry is probably worth the trouble to avoid this.

I’m wondering what everyone’s thoughts are on this.

Peter

peterlip said:

Probably 98% on flat road, but I suppose my question is for the people with 2 chain rings: Are you ever in the situation where you wish you had that extra gear?

For example, Around the Bay is a yearly event here in Vic and is a 210km circuit which I'm led to believe is predominately flat, except for one decent hill (somewhere near Frankston). Rumour has it, that here it is not uncommon to see riders (who have already put in 150+kms) pushing their bikes. Would the extra chain ring avoid this?

Now, I’ve never participated in this ride (but hope to this year), but I think the extra few hundred grams to carry is probably worth the trouble to avoid this.

I’m wondering what everyone’s thoughts are on this.

Peter

I reckon a double would be fine for the sort of riding you are describing. If you are planning on riding hills, get a 12-27 cassette for the rear which should get your gearing low enough for anything up to 15% gradient (which is pretty freaking steep.) I'd recommend you get a 12-25 as a standard set up. It's probably what will be on a 105 bike in a shop, but you should be able to get them to change it for no extra cost.

Going double will also give you more bike choices, and it will give you a higher standard of specification for the money you are looking to spend.

In order to climb, a 53/39 with a 12-27 would be similar to a 52/42/30 with a 12-23 and the added advantage of the closer ratios for the flats. I went the triple.

If you're someone who hates standing out of the saddle, then get the triple. If you don't mind it, get the double.

There's a better argument for a triple in slightly hillier Sydney, but even here I think that there's no clear winner.

Choose a triple for lower gears rather than closer ratios, as I fear that the advantage of the latter would be offset by the need for more frequent chainring gear changes.

artemidorus said:

If you're someone who hates standing out of the saddle, then get the triple. If you don't mind it, get the double.

There's a better argument for a triple in slightly hillier Sydney, but even here I think that there's no clear winner.

Choose a triple for lower gears rather than closer ratios, as I fear that the advantage of the latter would be offset by the need for more frequent chainring gear changes.

Thanks everyone for your feedback.
At this stage in my riding career I never get out of the saddle. And I'm not excited about losing the close ratios with a 12-27. Maybe the triple is the preferred choice for me.
I think I'm leaning to the Avanti San Remo Pro ahead of the Felf F70, has any one out there riden either of these?

peterlip said:

Thanks everyone for your feedback.
At this stage in my riding career I never get out of the saddle. And I'm not excited about losing the close ratios with a 12-27. Maybe the triple is the preferred choice for me.
I think I'm leaning to the Avanti San Remo Pro ahead of the Felf F70, has any one out there riden either of these?

I, too, got back in after nearly twenty years out... and I can safely say that you should go with the triple.

I have a Bianchi with a Campagnolo Mirage triple. Out of personal pride, I usually try to never go into the 30T in the front and just treat it like a double. I must admit that there are those days when on longer rides or climbing up steep hills, I just feel like I need to shift down. A firm click of the left thumb and there is that nice easy gear and I am on my way.

Good Luck!

strummer_fan said:

I, too, got back in after nearly twenty years out... and I can safely say that you should go with the triple.

I have a Bianchi with a Campagnolo Mirage triple. Out of personal pride, I usually try to never go into the 30T in the front and just treat it like a double. I must admit that there are those days when on longer rides or climbing up steep hills, I just feel like I need to shift down. A firm click of the left thumb and there is that nice easy gear and I am on my way.

Good Luck!

I imagine that I'd use the small chainring a lot if I owned a triple, as I would not find 42/25 an acceptable lowest gear for routine use in Sydney. 42/27 might be OK. There's nothing macho about being in the wrong gear; pedalling at too low a cadence fatigues your muscles much more rapidly and leaves you at increased risk of knee damage if your bike set-up isn't perfect. The world of cyclists, however, seems to be divided into two groups: those that will happily use their lowest gear at the drop of a hat (including myself) and those that always need to keep a reserve lowest gear (or two) for hypothetical usage on that perfect hill, or perhaps not even then 🙄

If you don't like getting out of the saddle, definitely get the triple and swap out the stock 12-25 cassette that the bike will probably come with to a 12-27 (which holds the largest cog that a shimano road derailleur can deal with). Only the lowest two gears differ from the 12-25; the other 7 cogs are the same as on a 12-25, so you won't be sacrificing much gear ratio closeness.

peterlip said:

Probably 98% on flat road, but I suppose my question is for the people with 2 chain rings: Are you ever in the situation where you wish you had that extra gear?

Yes. I was set up on my bike by a friend who's an ex-racer that has the attitude that you'd have to be weak to want a triple....and that they belong on mountain bikes 🙄 WRONG!!
Over 90% of my riding is in the Dandenong Ranges (I live and work in them) and 9 months down the track, 15kg lighter and with stronger legs (gawd, they must be by now), I still often find myself in situations where I wish I had more gears.
It's probably my one regret with my bike that I didn't get a triple.
(I've got 12/25)

Definitely go with one, even if only 2% of your riding is in the hills. If I was buying my first road bike over again, I wouldn't hesitate.

artemidorus said:

I imagine that I'd use the small chainring a lot if I owned a triple, as I would not find 42/25 an acceptable lowest gear for routine use in Sydney. 42/27 might be OK. There's nothing macho about being in the wrong gear; pedalling at too low a cadence fatigues your muscles much more rapidly and leaves you at increased risk of knee damage if your bike set-up isn't perfect. The world of cyclists, however, seems to be divided into two groups: those that will happily use their lowest gear at the drop of a hat (including myself) and those that always need to keep a reserve lowest gear (or two) for hypothetical usage on that perfect hill, or perhaps not even then 🙄

If you don't like getting out of the saddle, definitely get the triple and swap out the stock 12-25 cassette that the bike will probably come with to a 12-27 (which holds the largest cog that a shimano road derailleur can deal with). Only the lowest two gears differ from the 12-25; the other 7 cogs are the same as on a 12-25, so you won't be sacrificing much gear ratio closeness.

I treat the triple like a double because my other bike is a double and I want to know if I will ever ride it again! Since I moved to San Francisco... I have not ridden the double. Just riding the steep hill back up to my house usually requires shifting down to the 30T in front.

I'm currently riding the San Remo, with a triple , and given the choice I would get a bike set up with a triple, if its not hills , one day head winds will get you, for the money it is a nice light bike, the pro is even better

Brian

Last year I inherited the free Great Vic Bike Ride bike from my brother in-law (he didn't use, he has a decent bike).

While it's a cheap and nasty bike, it served its purpose of getting me back into cycling after a 20 year break (and how bikes have changed).

So, 1000 km later it's time for an upgrade and I'm looking at road bikes.

I'm aiming at around the $1800 price range, and there seems to be plenty of 105 equipped bikes in that range, but only a couple with 3 chain rings (Felt F70 & Avanti San Remo Pro (with a bit of haggling)).

Is it worth limiting bike choices to get a 3 chain ring bike?

How restrictive is 2 chain rings to ride??

Any thoughts?

Peter.[/QUOTE]

brian f said:

I'm currently riding the San Remo, with a triple , and given the choice I would get a bike set up with a triple, if its not hills , one day head winds will get you, for the money it is a nice light bike, the pro is even better

Brian

Yes, I ened up getting a triple, a Felt F70. The extra cog has come in handy a few times, so I'm glad I went that option.