Triple Crank

I am considering buying either a Fuji Professional or a Trek 2300. I noticed one of the principle
differences is the trek has a triple crank and the Fuji only has a double. Should i let this
influence my purchase? Does this make a big difference. Does anyone have any recommendations on
which i should buy

 

"tou" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:

> I am considering buying either a Fuji Professional or a Trek 2300. I noticed one of the principle
> differences is the trek has a triple crank and the Fuji only has a double. Should i let this
> influence my purchase? Does this make a big difference.

Are you an older person who plans to ride up mountains? If yes, then a triple might be a good idea.

 

unless you have a really flat landscape and/or are a cat 1 or 2 racer, I advocate triples.

If it's really hilly, I think it's very important to get a triple. Roberto Heras of US postal, one
of the 5 best climbers in the world, rode a triple on the steepest stages (up to 24%) of the 2002
Vuelta. ( He won the stage when lesser pros, like the 2nd place Vuelta finisher of the year before,
could hardly keep going)

Lance rode a 39-24 double on Alpe D'Huez. That's on a 16 lb bike with no spare, no food and one
water bottle.

That means if you are 90% as strong as Lance,don't carry a spare or more than one water bottle, or a
jacket- a 39-27 is just fine ( I'm being sarcastic, unless you are a a cat 1 or 2 who really IS 90%
as strong as Lance.

 

"remove the polite word to reply" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> unless you have a really flat landscape and/or are a cat 1
or 2 racer,
> I advocate triples.
>
> If it's really hilly, I think it's very important to get
a triple.
> Roberto Heras of US postal, one of the 5 best climbers in
the world,
> rode a triple on the steepest stages (up to 24%) of the
2002 Vuelta. (
> He won the stage when lesser pros, like the 2nd place
Vuelta finisher
> of the year before, could hardly keep going)
>
> Lance rode a 39-24 double on Alpe D'Huez. That's on a 16
lb bike with
> no spare, no food and one water bottle.

Don't forget no spare tire around his middle.

> That means if you are 90% as strong as Lance,don't carry a
spare or
> more than one water bottle, or a jacket- a 39-27 is just
fine ( I'm
> being sarcastic, unless you are a a cat 1 or 2 who really
IS 90% as
> strong as Lance.

It depends on your riding style. If you like to stand and stomp, a double is probably fine. If you
like to sit and spin, a triple is what you need. After so many years of mountain biking, I prefer
the latter. I like around a 30 inch gear for around here. I could deal with a 39-27, but I would
prefer not to.

Matt O.

 

You can get a triple or double put on any bike. Buy the bike that is the best fit, then get the
double or triple put on there.

As to whether to use a double or triple, I suggest you use a double. Even if you are new to cycling
you will get fit and not need the triple unless you are climbing a mountain. I live in the Atlanta
area which is very hilly. I get by fine with a double.

Also, I have heard that a triple sometimes doesn't shift as smoothly as a double. There is more
potential for foul-up.

"tou" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> I am considering buying either a Fuji Professional or a Trek 2300. I
noticed
> one of the principle differences is the trek has a triple crank and the
Fuji
> only has a double. Should i let this influence my purchase? Does this make
a
> big difference. Does anyone have any recommendations on which i should buy

 

On Thu, 05 Jun 2003 02:37:27 GMT, "tou" <[email protected]> wrote:

>I am considering buying either a Fuji Professional or a Trek 2300. I noticed one of the principle
>differences is the trek has a triple crank and the Fuji only has a double. Should i let this
>influence my purchase? Does this make a big difference. Does anyone have any recommendations on
>which i should buy

A triple is a good idea, in my opinion. It's more versatile, and the only real disadvantage is a
tiny bit of extra weight.

Jasper

 

>the trek has a triple crank and the Fuji only has a double. Should i let this influence my
>purchase? Does this make a big difference.

Well, that depends.

If you tend to have a low cadence and like to climb hills out of the saddle, a double is just fine.
If you like to sit and spin, a triple is probably a better choice.

Also your area makes a difference too. You can get by on short steep hills with a double. Longer
hills are more of a problem.

Also, for some people, a triple is seen as a wimp thing. So it depends on your attitude also.

 

"tou" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> I am considering buying either a Fuji Professional or a Trek 2300. I noticed one of the principle
> differences is the trek has a triple crank and the Fuji only has a double. Should i let this
> influence my purchase? Does this make a big difference. Does anyone have any recommendations on
> which i should buy

It makes a big difference for some riders in some terrains. If you think you may need it (now, or
some years from now) it's much cheaper to get it now. It really represents an insignificant penalty
(weight, shifting).

 

On Thu, 05 Jun 2003 11:31:49 GMT, "Rivermist" <[email protected]> wrote:

> I live in the Atlanta area which is very hilly.

Boy is that true.

>I get by fine with a double.

You sir have my respect. Every time I slugging up one of those Cobb County hills I wish I
had a triple.

 

"tou" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:

> I am considering buying either a Fuji Professional or a Trek 2300. I noticed one of the principle
> differences is the trek has a triple crank and the Fuji only has a double. Should i let this
> influence my purchase? Does this make a big difference. Does anyone have any recommendations on
> which i should buy
>
>
>

The time when you have no energy left and a long hill in front of you, you'll be glad you
got a triple.

 

"Ken" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> "tou" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:

> Are you an older person who plans to ride up mountains? If yes, then a triple might be a
> good idea.

Wow, that's interesting advice! I have observed many young, fit cyclists taking advantage of their
granny ring on steep hills.

I have had doubles and triples, but I have never wished to be without my lowest gear, whatever it
was at the time, even when I was doing centuries and double centuries.

There seems to be an anti-triple chic that has some sort of vaguely macho aspect to it. I am
surprised that some of these folks don't remove the smaller of their two chainrings and the front
derailleur and shifter. That would save several ounces and clean up the crank area. After all, only
out of shape weanies need anything less than 52 teeth, right?

 

"Review Boy" <review [email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> "Ken" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > "tou" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
> > Are you an older person who plans to ride up mountains? If yes, then a triple might be a
> > good idea.
>
> Wow, that's interesting advice! I have observed many young, fit cyclists taking advantage of their
> granny ring on steep hills.
>
> I have had doubles and triples, but I have never wished to be without my lowest gear, whatever it
> was at the time, even when I was doing centuries and double centuries.
>
> There seems to be an anti-triple chic that has some sort of vaguely macho aspect to it. I am
> surprised that some of these folks don't remove the smaller of their
two
> chainrings and the front derailleur and shifter. That would save several ounces and clean up the
> crank area. After all, only out of shape weanies need anything less than 52 teeth, right?
>
>
>
Plus, the real benefit of a triple occurs when you're tired. You might be able to crank up a hill (I
use a 39 front chainring and a pretty large rear cog) in the beginning of your ride that you won't
be able to get up at the end.

--
Bob ctviggen at rcn dot com

 

> After all, only out of shape weanies need anything less than 52 teeth, right?

Get with the program man, that was yesterday. 52 teeth? No self-respecting cyclist would ride with a
52 tooth chainring! Shimano knew that when they designed the triple with a 52 large instead of a 53
like the double has. So, not only do you have to remove the inner two chainrings, you even have to
tear off that worthless 52 and replace it as well.

Geez. The quality of info here on the 'net sure has declined over the years! :>)

More seriously, I have a piece on doubles vs triples on our website at

www.ChainReaction.com/triples.htm

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

 

Ken wrote:
> Are you an older person who plans to ride up mountains? If yes, then a triple might be a
> good idea.

It's also good for people with bad knees.

 

Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:03:07 -0700, <%[email protected]>, Bill Davidson
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Ken wrote:
>> Are you an older person who plans to ride up mountains? If yes, then a triple might be a
>> good idea.
>
>It's also good for people with bad knees.

It's handy to have when towing loaded trailers.
--
zk

 

A nice alternative to the triple (which can be more temperamental than a double) is a double with a
long-cage derailleur (from, say, Shimano's mountain bike components groups) and a 13-34 cassette on
the back. The 39-34 makes a pretty good climbing gear, not all that much different from, say, a
30-27. "tou" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> I am considering buying either a Fuji Professional or a Trek 2300. I
noticed
> one of the principle differences is the trek has a triple crank and the
Fuji
> only has a double. Should i let this influence my purchase? Does this make
a
> big difference. Does anyone have any recommendations on which i should buy

 

How did this become a "Triple Crank" from a "Triple Chainwheel" or is this one of the many oddities
of bicycling jargon? I can't imagine what a third crank on a bicycle would do.

Jobst Brandt [email protected] Palo Alto CA

 

[email protected] wrote in message news:<U04Fa.996$%[email protected]>...

> How did this become a "Triple Crank" from a "Triple Chainwheel" or is this one of the many
> oddities of bicycling jargon? I can't imagine what a third crank on a bicycle would do.

I suppose it's related to the "front willie" thread.

Stella

 

Jobst Brandt wrote:
> ...I can't imagine what a third crank on a bicycle would do.

In our case, it allows the second stoker to pedal

John Thurston Juneau, Alaska

 

John Thurston writes:

>> I can't imagine what a third crank on a bicycle would do.

> In our case, it allows the second stoker to pedal

On which side of the bicycle is this "third crank" (as in the title of this thread) in contrast to
those of a customary pair of cranks?

Jobst Brandt [email protected] Palo Alto CA