Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

Re: Dumb questions on triples

Started by Sheldon Brown · · Last activity · 2 posts · 496 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
25 September 2004
Last activity
27 September 2004
Original author
Sheldon Brown
Posts
2
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
496
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–2 of 2
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Retro Bob said:

    OK... thinking of converting one of the old bikes to a triple. This
    would be with a vintage square taper axle. But, I've never worked with
    triples before.

    Questions: Do I need a longer axle specifically designed for a triple
    or do some triples handle that via the arm ?

    It all depends. There is no standardization for bottom bracket lengths,
    every crank set has a recommended size, but some triples use a shorter
    BB than some other doubles. No general answer is possible.

    Quoted message said:

    I'll probably be looking
    at 20+ year old cranksets for this project.

    Older cranks tend to want longer spindles.

    Read this: http://sheldonbrown.com/chainline

    and have a look at: http://sheldonbrown.com/bbsize

    Quoted message said:

    Other than a long cage derailleur and a little more chain, is there
    anything else I should be thinking about as part of this ?

    You don't nneed any more chain unless you go to a bigger chainring (or a
    bigger rear sprocket in back.)

    You also don't necessarily need a long cage derailer, as long as you
    don't abuse the granny ring by using it with the smaller rear sprockets.

    You will benefit from switching to a triple-specific _front_ derailer.

    Sheldon "Easier Than You Think" Brown
    +--------------------------------------------------------------+
    | Readers of a historical bent may be interested in my |
    | great-grandfather's journal of life as a sailor 1859-1869 |
    | http://sheldonbrown.org/anders-junnila.html |
    +--------------------------------------------------------------+
    Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
    Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
    http://harriscyclery.com
    Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
    http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com

  2. Retro Bob said:

    I noticed that these seem to be popular now. I recall in the "old"
    days that we always saw a normal front with a triple. Range never
    seemed to be much of an issue but I did think a bit about height
    over the inner chainwheel.

    Do the fronts made for triples with the extended cages make a big
    difference?

    I think that's 'cause in the old days, the range of most triple
    cranksets was less (TA cyclotourist excepted), and triples were often
    set up with the middle ring closer in size to the big one (half-step, we
    called it). But that's only a guess.

    Modern triple front changers won't usually work with a half-step (that's
    not what they are designed for), but I can say from personal experience
    that a modern (campy) does shift a 30-42-52 better than an old-style
    (SunTour Cyclone II, which is a great derailleur for what it is). The
    big improvement is in shifting up from the smallest ring; the shaped
    cage makes the difference.

    Mark Janeba

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.