I have 650 wheels and run a 39 on the front and 12-25 on the back with no problem. I'd probaby be better served with a 27 for some of the hills around here.

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

Wow, 55/11 biggest gear. Even if you are a strong rider do you think you might be able to go to a 54/39 or even a 53/39? I know it is a sacrifice on the descents (what goes up must eventually come down) but the benefit and time you might save using a 39/23 on the climb and learning to use a resonable, comfortable cadence that works for you might be a net gain over using your "afterburner" 55/11 on the descent. Using a 55/39 is probably not going to work correctly because of the difference in size of the two chainrings. Going to a 39 might make the entire climbing thing much more enjoyable and faster. Good luck!

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

Your current low gear is 42/23 which is 46.75 gear inches, your choice is between a 42/27 which is 39.82 and 39/25 which is 39.94.

You may get chain rub with a 55/39 but I didn't on a softride. Going to a 53 means you will spin out quicker on the downhills. Going to a bigger spread on the back means you'll have bigger gaps to bridge when changing up on the flat.

Personally I'd go to a 53/39 12-25 until you're stronger.

Tom am I wrong or is a 650 wheel bike with a 55/42--12/23 almost the same gear ratio as a 700 wheel bike with a 53/39-----12/23 ??????? . This is the set ups that I ride and it feels the same!

Highlighter, a 55/42 with 650 wheels gives a biggest gear of 130" and a smallest of 47.48". Compare this with a 52/39 with 700 wheels which gives 132.36" and 47.48". Basically exactly the same gear range. I assume you now ride 9sp with a cassette of 11/12/13/14/15/17/19/21/23. Do you really need an 11 sprocket? How often do you push that 130" gear, except on downhills? If you like to spin and need some help on hills, a 25 or 27 will be much more useful than the 11. Try changing to 12/25 or even 12/27. I always used to push a 39/21 standing on hills, but knee problems last year meant I changed to a 25 sprocket. I now ride my local climbs faster than any time in the last 10 years with a lower heart rate because I stay seated and spin.

---

Put the bunny back in the box.

I agree! Where/how did you get the gear ratios????

Why don't you get a triple setup... you can do the conversion for a couple of hundred bucks, and keep the same rear cassete... its unglamorous but you will never be at a loss for enough gearing.

If these ratios are correct why do we hear people saying put a 53/39 on a 650 bike but never hear put a 42 /29 on a 700 wheel bike? Also why did 650 bikes quit coming with 55/42 and go to 53/39 is it just that they can put the same cog set on all bikes that way(650/700)? I am being serious I've always wondered this but no one has ever explained it to me. Maybe Dan or Tom may know.

He used the following formula:

front ring teeth/rear cog teeth X wheel diameter (inches).

This formula is not really all that accurate, esp since he's used the nominal wheel size (26") rather than the ERTO actual sizes. Its fine for this purpose, if you aren't comparing gearing from 700c to 650c. But if comparing gearing between different bikes & wheel sizes, better to use the actual wheel diameter X pi in the formula. This will give the distance travelled per revolution of the cranks.

If you're going to get a triple, buy an MTB and a paper bag to put over your head at races at the same time. As for 'a couple hundred bucks' for the conversion - new chainset, bottom bracket, shifters, front derailleur and rear derailleur? For $200? I don't think so. This also assumes that your frame is designed to accept a triple (many aren't). It will also mess up your chainline and give you less usable sprockets when in the big ring. Try changing the cassette to 12/27 first and if you still need a lower ratio, change your small front chainring to a 39. 39/27 gives a gear of 37.56", a 30/23 (triple - which I doubt your frame will accept) gives 33.91", a small enough difference as to make no difference unless you're riding the Angliru. Sorry to disagree with you taku, but that's my view of the easiest way to achieve what he wants to do.

---

Put the bunny back in the box.

Denewolf, they do put 42/29 on 700 bikes, or 52/40/30 in the form of triple chainrings. As for 53/39 on 650 bikes, this is probably high enough gearing for most mortals anyway.

---

Put the bunny back in the box.

Point taken...

here goes my rational for "a couple of hundred dollars"
Bar end shifters do not require changing to accomodate
Needs new bottom bracket
Needs new crank arms
needs small chain rings
new rear derailer
new chain...

now anyone who has ever shopped on ebay knows that ultegra cranksets retain their value very well ditto for the rear derailer... less so for the bottom bracket. so the crank arms would me a minimal cost and the bottom bracket a little more so if you shop around and sell all of the other stuff you are only looking at a capital investment of around 200.00

You may think that it is a bad idea but if he is really struggling on hills I think it is something to think about.

And yes there is a certain stigma about having a triple... but who cares what other people think as long as you can get up the hill also.

Also there is nothing about the biek that would make it non compatible with a triple crank set.

My point is that everyone I know and every double 700 bike I have seen has 53/39 or larger on it. 650 bikes with a 55/42 is very equal to that but just like you said 53/39 is big enought for mortals, why then do 99 percent of 700 wheel bikes have a 53/39? Using this reasoning wouldn't that be to big for a 700 bike?

Or you can use a handy gear ratio calculator and get lots of different outputs (gain ratios being my personal favorite).

Sorry to disagree with you again taku, but many race bike frames are NOT designed to take triple chainsets. The longer BB axle required for a triple messes up the chainline and hence gear shifting and very often there is not enough clearance on the seat tube for the greater range of movement required by the front derailleur.

---

Put the bunny back in the box.

"why then do 99 percent of 700 wheel bikes have a 53/39? Using this reasoning wouldn't that be to big for a 700 bike? "

Denewone, that depends which cassette you put on the 700 bike. A 650 with 53/11 and a 700 with 53/12 give roughly the same gear.

---

Put the bunny back in the box.

Thanks I actually assumed that this was possible for any bicycle... either way just out of curiosity I called cannondale and they said that the ironman 2000 which this person has is compatible with a triple setup...

This is not necessarily the right solution to his problem but it is another option

thanks for the info though...

for anyone who is interested Chain reaction a nice bike shop in california has a nice article talking about triple versus double cranks

http://chainreaction.com/triples.htm

denewone, i always have thought you need to go to a triple chain ring. you buy one and i'll install it for you.

It never ceases to amaze me that the people that believe that anyone who rides a triple is a loser are the same people that can't wait to get the new DA 10-speed, or already ride the Campy 10. Do these same people play the latest Titleist Pro V1 golf ball with their old persimmon woods?

Gears are gears- a triple means 9 more gears (OK, maybe more like 7 more, since the cross-chained gears are unusabe). Even if the $200 is sketchy, it is guaranteed cheaper than the Campy 10 or DA 10. Why the hangup over a triple? I've got one on my Trek 5200, and laugh my ass off every time I see someone trashing their knees at 40 rpm on a double up a 12% grade. My advice- get the triple!

So, everyone is going to recommend the bigger cassettes, or the triple chain ring. I'm not. I think that spinning on climbs is great for some people, but not for others. Lance spins, Merckx didn't. It may be comfortable for some, or not for others.

There can be a number of reasons for getting it handed to you on climbs - gearing, power, strength, muscular endurance, and of course, frame geometry. With the steep geometry of a tri bike, you can lay the power down on the flats when you are aero, but it truly sucks on climbs. Anyone who says it doesn't is really kidding themselves.

If your only bike is a tri bike, you can goof around with new gear ratios or triples, the M2 Racer gadget, etc. and try to make it a climber. But, if you are doing lots of races with lots of hills, or just regularly ride with a group of mountain goats, you may want to look at a road bike.

> Anyone who says it doesn't is really kidding themselves.

Wow! I can't believe I'm actually kidding myself so hard I get to affect the cyclocomputer reading ...

Dre'

Well EXCUSE ME, Mr K. For illustration purposes I was using Archaic Rudimentary Roadie 'Rithmetic. Just multiply my figures by Pi to get a (rough) indication of the distance travelled per revolution of the crank. In the absence of EXACT circumference measurements for the bikes we were trying to compare, I felt unable to use Tight Sphinctered Tri Math which, as we all know, is SO much more accurate.

---

Put the bunny back in the box.

Ela re Katsoudas, Ellinas eisai? With a name that like I thought you might be. Anyway, just to put you straight. In no way do I believe that anyone who rides a triple is a loser. In my book, anyway who wants to race triathlon, at whatever level, at whatever speed, on whatever bike, in whatever shoes wearing whatever he likes, is certainly not a loser. The guy or gal with the biggest grin at the end of the race is the winner as far as I'm concerned. I know full well that there are people of all abilities out there and that a triple is eminently suitable for those who are not so strong on hills. I just feel that for the guy who started this thread, Mr Highlighter (who, by the way, now appears to have sunk without trace) the simplest solution would be to change his cassette and maybe a front chainring rather than go through the whole process of changing to a triple. Also (and I would like to confirm this with Mr Highlighter) if his bike is a steep-angled tri-specific design and he is not so strong on hills, may I be so bold as to suggest that, if he wants to ride hills faster, then maybe this is not the bike to do it on? Steep angled bikes CAN be ridden fast uphill, but not everyone has the strength and technique to do it. Maybe he should keep the tri-bike for flat races and get a trad angled triple bike for hilly races? Just a thought.
Gears, as you so rightly state, are gears, but a well set up 10sp double will give you 16 to 18 usable gears (depending on chain line, chainstay length and chainring size) with minimal big to small chainring changes which is a big advantage in a race where speed is the most important factor. OK, if speed is not your main concern and you need a smaller gear on hills, ride a triple.
By the way, I ride 8 speed Dura Ace and have done since 1988 as parts are WAY cheaper than the new 9 and 10 speed stuff. Golf, I believe, is something that you do when you're too old to do anything else and your mental health has deteriorated to the point where you don't worry about the amount of money it costs. I well appreciate that it is a popular game and that millions of people enjoy it. I, however, am not one of them, but I do not begrudge them their fun.
If I see someone laughing their ass off whilst riding a triple up a 12% grade, I'll assume it's you. In my experience though, 12% grades tend to evoke emotions other than laughter. I'll keep on spinning my double, you keep on spinning your triple and let's see if we can't show a little mutual respect for each other's doctrines.
I apologise that my cheap jibe about wearing a paper bag over your head at races if you ride a triple upset you so, but amongst my immediate peer group a little playful banter of this nature is the norm rather than the exception and 'taking the piss' is considered, by some individuals, an art form which adds a little fun to the proceedings at hand. We all know we're not going to be the next Mark Allen (although I did get within 2 hours of him at Nice once) but we can at least have as much fun as him.
Have a good one.

---

Put the bunny back in the box.

Didn't mean to ruffle your feathers. Just pointing out that a 650c wheel does not actually measure 26" diameter. It's more like 24", including a 20mm tire. A 700 x 23 is around 26.3" diameter. As I stated, this does not matter if you aren't comparing between bikes. I actually use Euro Geek UCI math (metric), just converted to Tight Sphinctered Tri Math for the metrically challenged.

BTW, I can't stand triples. not because of the 3 rings (well yeah, because of that too, they are geeky), but because the increased Q factor makes them feel like I'm riding a horse.

J.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly