Double or Triple?

I'm going to buy a new bike soon (probably a Specallized Allez Elite). Should I buy the triple or
stay with a double. I've always ridden doubles including riding a 100 mile tour that featured 10,000
feet of climbing. Occasionally it would be nice to have a lower gear but I understand doubles shift
better. I know almost everybody is going with the triple even on higher end road bikes. Am I just
being retro and should go for the triple?

Steve Gerdemann

 

My reason for a triple is that you can use a relatively tight cluster in the back (I use a 13-23 9
speed) and still be able to climb the big hills (28 tooth granny). And triples shift just fine.

"Steve Gerdemann" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm going to buy a new bike soon (probably a Specallized Allez Elite). Should I buy the triple or
> stay with a double. I've always ridden doubles including riding a 100 mile tour that featured
> 10,000 feet of climbing. Occasionally it would be nice to have a lower gear but I understand
> doubles shift better. I know almost everybody is going with the triple even on higher end road
> bikes. Am I just being retro and should go for the triple?
>
>
> Steve Gerdemann

 

Get a 110 bolt pattern double and 48/34 rings with a 12/25 or 27 cassette. The 34/27 is same as
30/24 or 39/32. You won't need a long cage rear derailleur either. Ritchey makes such a crankset and
your local shop can get Dimension cranks from Quality.

On 4 Apr 2003 17:46:59 -0800, [email protected] (Steve Gerdemann) wrote:

>I'm going to buy a new bike soon (probably a Specallized Allez Elite). Should I buy the triple or
>stay with a double. I've always ridden doubles including riding a 100 mile tour that featured
>10,000 feet of climbing. Occasionally it would be nice to have a lower gear but I understand
>doubles shift better. I know almost everybody is going with the triple even on higher end road
>bikes. Am I just being retro and should go for the triple?
>
>
>Steve Gerdemann

 

"KBH" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> My reason for a triple is that you can use a relatively tight cluster in
the
> back (I use a 13-23 9 speed) and still be able to climb the big hills (28 tooth granny). And
> triples shift just fine.

Certainly, if you need low gears go for a triple. Just as well, if you use a triple, use tighter
gearing in the rear.

>
> "Steve Gerdemann" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > I'm going to buy a new bike soon (probably a Specallized Allez Elite). Should I buy the triple
> > or stay with a double. I've always ridden doubles including riding a 100 mile tour that featured
> > 10,000 feet of climbing. Occasionally it would be nice to have a lower gear but I understand
> > doubles shift better. I know almost everybody is going with the triple even on higher end road
> > bikes. Am I just being retro and should go for the triple?
> >
> >
> > Steve Gerdemann

 

I agree, 110 BCD doubles are great. Look for a Sakae or Sugino from an 80s' road bike. Nice cranks
and usually cheap as long as you can find them. The more recent Ritchey and TA Zephyr cranks are
also nice, but they have one of the chainring bolts alligned directly under the crankarm, which is a
bit aukward.

Bruce

"Paul Kopit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Get a 110 bolt pattern double and 48/34 rings with a 12/25 or 27 cassette. The 34/27 is same as
> 30/24 or 39/32. You won't need a long cage rear derailleur either. Ritchey makes such a crankset
> and your local shop can get Dimension cranks from Quality.

 

We've got an article on just that question on our website-

http://www.ChainReaction.com/triples.htm

You mention that you've ridden tours with 10k feet of climbing, but you really don't have to
encounter very steep pitches to accumulate that amount. There are rides you could do of considerably
shorter duration, with fewer feet of total climb, that might leave you thinking twice about sticking
with a double.

Then again, if you grew up with doubles and are used to running relatively tall gears while
climbing, it may not be that big a deal.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles http://www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

 

There's an issue that people don't consider in this double/triple debate, and that's their
skeletons. I know it's quite possible to climb these big climbs in doubles and I see people doing
it. They are of course athletic people and so on. But if you continue putting that kind of pressure
on your limbs and back year in year out, you will pay in terms of arthritis, back pain etc. It makes
more sense to gear down and just winch away.

 

Steve Gerdemann wrote:
> I'm going to buy a new bike soon (probably a Specallized Allez Elite). Should I buy the triple or
> stay with a double. I've always ridden doubles including riding a 100 mile tour that featured
> 10,000 feet of climbing. Occasionally it would be nice to have a lower gear but I understand
> doubles shift better.

Triples shift fine at the rear. Front shifting can be more fiddly, but that's a price worth paying,
IMO. I think you need better reasons to avoid a triple, eg. the expense or 'Q' factor.

Touring doubles (74/110) can be ok but a triple will give you everything: wide range and close
ratios if you want.

~PB

 

You need a triple to haul a trailer up a hill; or you can tear up your knees, your choice.

Strength and endurance-wise you don't need a triple. When your knees hurt after a trailer-up-hill
ride though you rethink it.
--
Ron Hardin [email protected]

On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

 

1. My triples all shift just fine, thank you!

2. How old are you, your joints, and your lumbar?

3. Do you frequently ride in an area with high (20-30 mph or 35-50 kph) winds?

Actually, with my back problems, I do most of my climbing standing, so I can manage most hills in a
40x23 or x26. When the grades exceed 15% or so, though... (and I usually past folks trying to grunt
up in their double).

This past week of high winds, though, that granny has saved me serious grief.

(Oh yeah, to answer my own questions, I'm 51 with a lubar disk that tends to bulge a lot.)

[email protected] (Steve Gerdemann) wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> I'm going to buy a new bike soon (probably a Specallized Allez Elite). Should I buy the triple or
> stay with a double. I've always ridden doubles including riding a 100 mile tour that featured
> 10,000 feet of climbing. Occasionally it would be nice to have a lower gear but I understand
> doubles shift better. I know almost everybody is going with the triple even on higher end road
> bikes. Am I just being retro and should go for the triple?

 

SJ-<< (probably a Specallized Allez Elite). Should I buy the triple or stay with a double. I've
always ridden doubles including riding a 100 mile tour that featured 10,000 feet of climbing.
Occasionally it would be nice to have a lower gear but I understand doubles shift better.

Or get a larger rear cog, like a 12-32, get a long cage rder, like a XT, and still use the double.

Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St. Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535 http://www.vecchios.com "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

 

>I'm going to buy a new bike soon (probably a Specallized Allez Elite).

I'd avoid aluminum first of all but that's another issue.

>Occasionally it would be nice to have a lower gear but I understand doubles shift better. I know
>almost everybody is going with the triple even on higher end road bikes.

It's better to have and not need than to need and not have. I have a Lemond Buenos Aires triple and
have made a personal vow to not use the granny gear. However, I may face a long steep hill at the
end of a ride and need the lower gears. As for shifting, I see no difference in shifting from middle
to large on a triple if setup properly with ultegra or comparable gear.

 

> "Paul Kopit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...

> > Get a 110 bolt pattern double and 48/34 rings with a
12/25 or 27
> > cassette. The 34/27 is same as 30/24 or 39/32. You
won't need a long
> > cage rear derailleur either. Ritchey makes such a
crankset and your
> > local shop can get Dimension cranks from Quality.

"Bruce Lange" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> I agree, 110 BCD doubles are great. Look for a Sakae or
Sugino from an 80s'
> road bike. Nice cranks and usually cheap as long as you
can find them. The
> more recent Ritchey and TA Zephyr cranks are also nice,
but they have one of
> the chainring bolts alligned directly under the crankarm,
which is a bit
> aukward.

I think the question was about two particular choices available with a brand new bike -- a standard
road double or a standard road triple. You guys are suggesting something else, which is probably not
being offered, and would cost a lot of extra money.

Personally, I'd go for the triple. It's nice to have it when you need it, with no penalty when
you don't.

Thankfully, we're out of the days when only doubles were considered cool, and triples were for
wimps. These days even top racers use triples occasionally.

Matt O.

 

"Gearóid Ó Laoi, Garry Lee" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> There's an issue that people don't consider in this
double/triple debate,
> and that's their skeletons.

> I know it's quite possible to climb these big climbs in
doubles and I see
> people doing it. They are of course athletic people and so
on. But if you
> continue putting that kind of pressure on your limbs and
back year in year
> out, you will pay in terms of arthritis, back pain etc. It
makes more sense
> to gear down and just winch away.

That's been the case with my back problems. Pulling hard hurts, even if/when I can do it. And if it
doesn't hurt right then, it might later. Gearing down and spinning is a lot easier on the old bod. A
triple offers that option.

Matt O.

 

On 05 Apr 2003 15:47:38 GMT, [email protected] (Jkpoulos7) wrote:

>I have a Lemond Buenos Aires triple and have made a personal vow to not use the granny gear

Once you have the triple, a better vow would be to keep the chain on the middle cogs of the
cassette. It's less strain on your drivetrain and components will last longer.

 

On Sat, 05 Apr 2003 20:23:31 GMT, "Matt O'Toole" <[email protected]> wrote:

>You guys are suggesting something else, which is probably not being offered, and would cost a lot
>of extra money.

Not so. You can get a 110 bolt double crankset for ~$100 new. If you look for used, you can find
Sugino arms for less than $15.

 

"Steve Gerdemann" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm going to buy a new bike soon (probably a Specallized Allez Elite). Should I buy the triple or
> stay with a double. I've always ridden doubles including riding a 100 mile tour that featured
> 10,000 feet of climbing. Occasionally it would be nice to have a lower gear but I understand
> doubles shift better. I know almost everybody is going with the triple even on higher end road
> bikes. Am I just being retro and should go for the triple?
>
>
> Steve Gerdemann

Modern triples are not as finicky as classic setups. Test ride a modern Centaur equipped 3x10 bike
before making a commitment. That system has a nice front changer trim feature so the cage is
narrower that click-front systems. I think they're great.

--
Andrew Muzi http://www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April 1971

 

"Gearóid Ó Laoi, Garry Lee" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> There's an issue that people don't consider in this double/triple debate, and that's their
> skeletons. I know it's quite possible to climb these big climbs in doubles and I see people doing
> it. They are of course athletic people and so on. But if you continue putting that kind of
> pressure on your limbs and back year in year out, you will pay in terms of arthritis, back pain
> etc. It makes more
sense
> to gear down and just winch away.
>
>

I understand your point but as Paul pointed out earlier a sensible ( 36-48) double will give you
both simplicity and low gears

--
Andrew Muzi http://www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April 1971

 

On Sat, 05 Apr 2003 20:23:31 +0000, Matt O'Toole wrote:

>> "Paul Kopit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>> > Get a 110 bolt pattern double and 48/34 rings with a
> 12/25 or 27
>> > cassette.

> I think the question was about two particular choices available with a brand new bike -- a
> standard road double or a standard road triple. You guys are suggesting something else, which is
> probably not being offered, and would cost a lot of extra money.

Not a lot. It is far better to be aware of the options, rather than just presume you have to live
with gearing more designed as marketing than for riding. A 110 (or 94, which I prefer) mountain-bike
or touring crankset can be found for $50 or less. I prefer the 94/58 since it allows a very small
second ring. I use a 46/30 these days. I leave the 20-tooth granny ring off unless I am going on a
loaded tour, when I actually find such a thing useful.

> Personally, I'd go for the triple. It's nice to have it when you need it, with no penalty when
> you don't.

Well, that is not entirely accurate. Triples do not shift quite as nicely as doubles, especially
with large jumps between rings. With Campy shifters, it is possible to overshoot the shift, and with
Shimano, it is a delicate balance to get the shifting set up optimally.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | The lottery is a tax on those who fail to understand _`\(,_ | mathematics. (_)/ (_) |

 

> On Sat, 05 Apr 2003 20:23:31 GMT, "Matt O'Toole" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >You guys are suggesting something else, which is probably not being offered, and would cost a lot
> >of extra money.

"Paul Kopit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Not so. You can get a 110 bolt double crankset for ~$100 new. If you look for used, you can find
> Sugino arms for less than $15.

Yes. Or a new Sugino XD crankset complete at $69.95

--
Andrew Muzi http://www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April 1971