At 72yo, still enjoying using a mtn triple, 44/32/20, on my road bike to take advantage of close ratio cassettes, a 9-speed 11-28. Makes climbing easier. I coast going down since I'm not a descender anyway.
lol...I'm 75, and still do up to 100km treks in a day, albeit I prefer quality to quantity as I age. Weather, back-roads and/or rail trails essential, and the right state of mind. What's scary is winter, when I have to stop. As soon as the salt goes down, or temps below freezing, I hang it up for the season. And that's the part of the year I get old...
I have a triple setup on a not so vintage Kona cyclocross bike. The combination of 30, 40, 50 in the front and 10-speed 11 to 28 is really a wonderful set up for here in the mountains.
On a road bike, especially a classic/vintage bike, I'd rather have a triple chain ring setup than a pie plate cassette. It's always easier, especially under load, to shift onto a smaller ring than onto a larger one. Yes, with a triple you have to be cognizant of extreme chainline positions and extreme derailleur pulley positions. Going small-small or big-big is a bad idea, but it's a bad idea on a 2X system as well.
I've long-ago learned that one can run 'short-chained' (Incomplete spooling in the derailleur cage for smallest to smallest, or largest to largest) if you know the sound and the feel of gears and chain. Running short-chained also means being able to use a short cage, and vastly reducing the chain slop long cages present. But it's also one more reason not to lend your machine to anyone but the most astute of mechanics or riders, as only a few of us know the importance of keeping the chain aligned when shifting up or down.
My buddy won’t have it that you shouldn’t go small to small, no amount of explanation that this is never right gear will convince him, his argument is that it’s possible to do so must be ok
@@rodneyhanson9884 Your buddy probably also never replaces the fluids, filters and other replacement parts on his car because they still "work" so it's not necessary.
Yep. Varied terrain but not too hilly, stay in middle ring. Hilly, shift to small ring. Flat or downhill, shift to large ring. While in that ring, shift using only rear derailleur. So easy.
I've got triples on my two touring bikes, a Campag Victory and a Shimano touring one, I'm running a 5 and 6 speed blocks, work well and give me all the gears I need !
Hey Dan great video. I think Giovanni Battaglin. was the first to use a Campagnolo triple crankset in the Giro. Looking forward to seeing the your next video. All the best!
Haha I was attracted by the title, even though my titanium CC Serotta is 28 years old and not over 52. Now at 74, new knee and arthritis make me glad to have a 10-speed Campag racing triple - but I agree wholeheartedly, 30-28 or 30-29 is sufficient for most hills. Not sure I would retrofit my '72 Atala Record with a triple though - the 120mm rear drops leave you with maybe two usable gears with each chainring in a 5- or 6-speed setup. Glad to have the extra width to fit a 10-speed cogset - though not L'eroica-worthy, it works for me :-). Keep riding and cheers.
Love my commuter bike's 48-38-28 x 11-34 9s drivetrain. I can cut loose when i have the space, and spin up loaded climbs when i need to. And those 10 tooth front ring jumps let me really smoothly gear up and down in stop and go traffic.
The best shifting, and least well known vintage Campagnolo derailleur is the Rally. It has a long cage, and will easily handle 42 teeth difference between big-big and small-small cog combos. Velo happiness to all!❤
When the Eroica was still going in the UK, I did 2017 and '18 on an unknown frame fitted with a mountain bike triple, as it was all I had. Quite a few riders expressed dismay, saying, as I wafted past them uphill, that using a triple was somehow cheating. 100 miles is a lot, and some of the participants were using the kind of gearing that a young Merckx would have utilised.
Still riding a Campy Racing T set-up from thirty years ago converted from 8 speed to 10. Can’t push the Legnano with the original 52/42 up the hills here anymore.
Great vid and a lovely vintage house at about 4:48. Also Stronglight 80 and 100 on 86 BCD allowing 28T inner on doubles or triples for 70s and 80s style builds. Spa Cycles are a sound supplier of all sorts of interesting bike kit, not least new 86BCD chainrings and the Sugino cranks for them. SunTour created the slant parallelogram derailleur in 1964 and any of the V series (from 1969) should be considered a functional upgrade for the Campag. derailleurs of the time.
I do love a good triple...you can't beat it for touring or commuting. It's a little later than your focus, but I love the Ultegra 6603 and specced it on my neo-retro commuter with downtube shifters and modern brakes. Silver bling, still find chainrings without too much difficulty, uses a modern Shimano BB, and 3x10 means a huge gear range.
Yeah....downtube shifters. I bought an Argos 531 Renovated from the first year Argos were doing that. I found it used in Taunton (perhaps less than a thousand km on it, all Mavic, Simplex retrofriction shifters,) and I was addicted. As time went on though, and the original Maillard Sport 7 spd cluster was worn, then the Sachs one after, and change of chains, yada, yada, yada, and wear of the shifters, the ability to be able to 'snick' into gear was gone, and I had to replace the right shifter with an indexed one. It was too worn and slipping. I still have the original Simplex for the front triple, and friction shifting is still reliable for the front, but horror of horrors, I am going to do the 130mm rear drop-out spread for next season, and go to a free-hub/cassette system, albeit 8spd, since I can keep my downtube shifters and the wider chain....and as many of us know, when you have wider triples up front, 8spd at the rear is more than enough! Until I get an internal rear hub system (Shimano, Rholoffs, etc) I'm forever a triple front user,...and downtube shifters (I can use my present shifter for 8spd)
Dan, I know you’re more of a hardware guy but I see you sporting another classic…De Marchi. Great quality and a true vintage brand I buy it almost exclusively.
I'm using Stronglight 99, the later model (standard threading and axle taper, I'm using an SKF BB). Best I've ever had, last ones were the TA Cyclotouriste, like the 49Ds, but the 99s are mkuch more solid feeling. SPA Cycle in UK still sell replacement chainwheels for a very reasonable price.
@@carlosgaspar8447 I never intimated it was. It came stock 53/45/28, the intention being the half-step (by Alpine steps) afforded by the middle and high rings being so close. I no longer use such tall gearing. I moved the 45 to the outside (and frankly rarely use it either, save for long, open stretches) and ordered 36 or 38 for middle (they're only made in even numbers nowadays by Stronglight) and of course, 28 innermost. I live in Toronto, and SPACycle's shipper (Royal Mail) hand the orders off to Canada Post, and I'm not charged VAT or customs. I regularly receive them within two weeks, and even with shipping included, they're cheaper than equivalent Shimano etc over the counter here. SPA carry a massive range of chainwheels, they have an exclusive arrangement with Stronglight, who it turns out, have been making the TA chainwheels all these years! TA have their cranks supplied from elsewhere, and I'd been using Pro V models (interchangeable with 49D ) for decades until forced to switch when Mariposa stopped selling them here a few years back. And that's when I found the Stronglights, brand-new. It's time to replace the mid and inner rings again this winter service. Anyone care to buy some used TA pro-v cyclotouriste 170 mm cranks and a stack of worn chainrings going back 25 years?
I'm using the SunXCD reproduction of the 50.4 bcd crank, combined with T.A. rings. Lovely stuff, and it lets me use 50-34 rings with a 13-26 freewheel. Shifting is with a SunTour Cyclone GT, which wraps up the chain excess nicely. A great way to climb steep hills with vintage (or vintage style) gear! Thanks for the fun video!
My 9 speed Ultegra triple works just fine. Not really old, but pretty old. I got some of the newest 9 speed Shimano triple shifting brifters, SORA, it works better than the Ultegra shifters ever did. I have tried a 26 and a 28 for the small ring, and made it work. I run the 28, it came with a 30.
I used a 50/39/30 up until 2015, and had to revert to it for a couple of years from 2022. What I loved about it was that you could do 90% of your ride on the 39T. And if you were zooming down a slope on the big ring then piling on the sauce going up the next hill, then as the gradient began to tell you could drop onto the 39 and shift the RD up two notches at the same time and keep the same mechanical advantage without disturbing your pedalling cadence. Chums who hadn't worked this out usually lost a bit of ground, which is always pleasing. On the 50/34 the equivalent manoeuvre requires four notches on the RD and sets the chain whipping about. Shifting 39->50 is much easier on the kit than heaving the chain up a 16T difference, too. As for adjustment, it's no problem once you get used to it.
I view and use my 3x10 road bike's gearing like it's three 1x setups. Instead of memorizing what the next gear combo up or down is, which with 30 combos (some which of course I don't use because of extreme cross-chaining) and usually having to use both shifters to shift to it is kind of a pain, I stay in a given chainring and just shift the rear cog as needed. Usually I'm in the middle 42 up front. When I'm on a flat road in good shape or a downhill I shift to the 53, and when it's fairly hilly I shift to the 30. The range of cogs on my cassette is usually enough to stay in the same chainring. I run a 12-23 on fairly flat terrain and a 12-30 when it's hilly. Works for me. It's like riding three different bike setups, sort of like modes on a modern automatic car.
@@vintagevelos9517 fair enough, ‘perfect’ was probably overstating. How’s this, ‘chain wraps looks serviceable to me’. Kidding aside. Beautiful bike with a near ‘perfect’ build…….to me anyway. Out of curiosity, what’s the rear DO width? 120? I’ve made my peace with the 126 DO standard of the 70’s/80’s. I also don’t stress over pushing 130 DO cassette rear wheels in. Life’s too short to obsess over fussy vintage purity stuff. For me, any way. Ride on, brother.
Love triples! mechanically makes all the sense in the world especially for touring, keeps chain line straight and allows for multi ratios, best thing since sliced bread. 1x's are a waste in my opinion, no mechanical sense what so ever, 2x I can live with but 3x is the ultimate.
Depends on where and how hard you are riding - I prefer 2x and often just stay in the big ring - however, having that 3 ring as option is very attractive, Dan
I had forgotten about triples. My Dad had one on one of his bikes. He climbed Mount Greylock in Massachusetts with me and a few friends when he was in his 70's and used the triple. I suppose no one uses them on modern bikes.
If i have that chain length issue i prefer to make it one link longer and settle for the fact there will be a little chain sag in small/small but big/big will be safer,more asthetically pleasing and you could then put a 25t or 26t on.
Run a Stronglight double with 52/36 rings 11/28 on the wheel. This is for hilly time trials. 90s dérailleurs currently as using sti levers but with down tube shifters was using a 70s Suntour VX long cage which coped 52/34 11/28 . Raced mountain bikes in the 90s and pushed gear combinations to the limit and got away with it, 48, 36 22 with 12 /32 ...
Indeed! Are you running the Pro V vis Cyclotouriste? SPA Cycles in UK have all the chainwheel replacements. I used to have 49D triples for about five years or so (decades back) before moving to TA. I'm now using Stronglight 99 triples (the last version, standard crankpuller thread, etc) and find them far more 'rigid' than the TAs or 49Ds. And I got them for....tada...brand-new...in Toronto....C$50. Been riding them about five years now (replacing inner and middle rings every season). It was a match made in heaven... Btw: On your Campy shifter, I tried a number of triple mechs, and only one would work w/o binding/fouling in a road set-up (Mtn bike ones don't seem to work) and it's a decades old Durace 2X. It just has enough travel, but the cage geometry allows it to clear the rings.
I still use triple on my commuter bike (CBT Italia from the early 80s) and n my cyclocross bike (Kuota Kross carbon) - both work fine with Campagnolo Ergopowers and mechs
Yep, the late `80`s and onwards Campy triples are great (as long as the rear cage spring holds up - they can get a bit tired over time (as we all do...), Dan
It was a matter of principle back in the day to try not to use the "racing ring" in the winter months and see if you could get to spring with it still shiny. A kind of self imposed zone 2 training if you will. I now ride a 1x to commute on and I don't miss the front shifter one bit!
Hi Dan, I have a Nervar Triple on one of my vintage cycles ( Motobacane Jubilee Sport) with Sachs Huret front and rear derailleur’s. It rides and works beautifully really smooth. I honestly think they are brilliant if you use them correctly.
I've got a Nervar or Solidar (can't remember which) in my parts box, a triple, three bolt attach, the (outer or inner, I can't remember) is hung from the middle chainwheel! Even being alloy, they are on the heavy side though.
I LOVE the Campagnolo Racing-T stuff on my vintage bike. Polished aluminum, even the newer stuff looks vintage enough for me though I'm putting together a GIOS with some older bits including a Rally rear mech for some vintage rides in 2025. Coppi = COE--PEE, not COPPY! Fiorelli = FYOR--ELLI.
I with you on ‘Fyor-elli’ but I’d say the correct pronunciation of Coppi is mid way between ‘Coppy’ and ‘Coe-pee’? Without adopting a disastrous mock Italian accent it’s very hard to sound ‘right’ don’t you agree?
On a race bike, would you need to go as low as a 30 tooth granny, since you wouldn't be riding under the usual touring load. Wouldn't the front end shifting be even smoother with a 34 small ring, without loss of being able to take some hills with a 6 to 8 speed rear cluster?
It's always a trade-off. Clearing the frame with the cage to engage the inner ring is a major problem with the many mechs I've tried over the years. With the more compact chainwheel sets, the curve of the mech cage also doesn't match in many cases, albeit I've read some grind the radius smaller on the cage flange(s).
@@stephensaines7100 The only front mech I found that works with a classic racing triple, when I tried one, was usually a Sun Tour. They really made the best front derailleurs for triple cranks. I always felt that for a race bike, 30 tooth inner might be a little prone to chain dropping, something slightly large for the inner would be stable with a 52 outer and a 42 or 40 middle. Unlike a touring setup, you're prone to use the front more with a racing triple, with the back for fine tuning the cadence.
@@vintagevelos9517 It's a good point of discussion. Obviously a degree of denial was at play. The French, via early Stronglights and other competitors, were doing triple pre WWII (I believe I read the Twenties). Even looking back to early ten-speeds in the Sixties/Seventies, the gearing latitude was really limited. That being said, things corrected quickly when the triples became the norm, and Stronglight (or was it TA?) marketing a Quad Front at one point. I've just Googled, I like to reference my claims, not much showing until I hit on this: Google "Introducing Quintuple Rene Herse Cranks". He discusses the history as well as promoting his own product. Nice looking stuff!
My touring bike runs something stupid like 11-19 cassette on the back. It's not a huge problem because the crankset is 20/32/42, but I probably should get a bigger cassette and derailleur for it
Didn't Campagnolo produce the Rally rear mech in the 70's? Without checking my facts, i think the Triumphe rear mech was available with a long cage. Anyway that poor rear mech wouldn't live long if you were constanly forcing it work in smally small or biggy big. That would wear the spring out & the chain in no time.
I’m new to your channel and sorry to see yet another RUclips presenter explaining how to calculate chains length to accommodate extreme chain line. Just don’t use those gears! It’s really not hard to remember which gear you are in - even to the next nearest cog will do. And yes, I do have vintage bikes. I also have 3x10 set-ups and a 3x7 that works properly with a short cage mech. It’s worth noting that pre-index chains with their simple plate design cannot tolerate extreme chain-line.
Pretty sure I point out that its not acceptable to have such a tight/loose chain line - that was the point of the technical bit - its 100% rideable but you don`t use the big/big or small/small gears, so 13 or the 15 available gears, Dan
Definitely not. I had Campagnolo triple 53:42:30 and 13:26 cassette, not even 1:1 bottom gear. The chain occasionally overshot the big ring and the small ring. When the stop screws were adjusted to prevent this the chain often wouldn't climb onto the big ring or drop to the smallest ring. Add in the gear ratio duplication i founf it thoroughly awful. 20 years later ive refurbished the same bike with Campagnolo Chorus double. 48:32 and 11:34 . Agreat spread of gears and good low gear. I wont wax lyrical about mechanically inferior design
Not sure what point you are making? With vintage settups theres often a compromise with gearing range due to period limitations - you can always go the restomod route if thats not for you, or maybe just a new bike would suit your needs better? Dan
@@vintagevelos9517 My apologies, I worded that wrong. I'm agreeing with you. Wasn't referring to you in particular, just in general. My hybrid bike triple works just fine as it has for ten years now with minimal adjustment. I'm not into vintage bikes so period limitations doesn't apply to me. Just pointing out that a lot of people shy away from triple cranksets often citing difficulty in setting them up when they're no harder than 2X, and even 1X has its problems. The 105 double crankset on my road bike is more of a pain in the butt. And then they try to make up for it by adding more and more gears to the back because adding more gears to the back doesn't affect how hard it is to setup, but adding them the front apparently does.
Why would anyone in their right mind want to ride small-small or large-large? They're not using the front changer as it should be used in triples if they are.. i love them btw and don't need anything so big as 50.
I had a TA triple back in the day, with a TA bb. The TA bb is undoubtedly the worst piece of engineering i have encountered ever. I think i moved to stronglight, something else, then grafton speedstix. With a royce bb. TA simply the worst.
TA loose cup? I went through about ten over the years...only to find though that when I had the Mavic sealed BB removed when I first got the used bike since I couldn't triplize the cranks (Mavic were a Record copy), I went to TA Cyclostouriste and loose cups, not realizing that the mechanic I was using in Plymouth, UK to do the work (I'd purchased the TA items elsewhere) he didn't chase out the threads before doing so, and you guessed it, for ten years I was using a cross-threaded cup. It was only in the the last five years I finally got wise and since the original (still in mint condition) Mavic sealed BB didn't have a long enough spindle for triples, I bought an SKF BB, and it's been faultless every since, even with the right side threads crossed, it aligned with the cuffing cup on the left side. When I had a major accident two summers back, and had the frame rebuilt, I finally had the R side thread chased and trued. The SKF remains faultless, but even better bedded. My chewing those TA cups (and some Stronglight too) over the years, and the axles, was mostly due to misalignment, but one also wonders about the intrinsic strength, or not, of those cups.
Yep, on am older vintage bike (pre mid `80`s) you`ll end up swopping bottom brackets, cassettes and front derailliur and probably rear - and no guarantee of smooth easy shifting - mid `80`s groupset triples started to really get the tech sorted, Dan
@@vintagevelos9517 531 (and equiv Italian/French) has not been bettered for comfort, albeit 531 came in a number of different variations. The improvement over the years has been the ability to weld rather than braze, and one wonders if that has actually done more to detract from the 'personality' of the frame while making production easier?
Doesn't even have to be vintage for me. I still love triples.
At 72yo, still enjoying using a mtn triple, 44/32/20, on my road bike to take advantage of close ratio cassettes, a 9-speed 11-28. Makes climbing easier. I coast going down since I'm not a descender anyway.
lol...I'm 75, and still do up to 100km treks in a day, albeit I prefer quality to quantity as I age. Weather, back-roads and/or rail trails essential, and the right state of mind. What's scary is winter, when I have to stop. As soon as the salt goes down, or temps below freezing, I hang it up for the season. And that's the part of the year I get old...
Triples certainly keep a bike rideable, Dan
@@vintagevelos9517 Yup! 2WD Hase Lepus' here. Wheelchair/dual forearm crutch accessible. Never a tadpole trike. Gearboxes now! Never cassettes when getting elderly!
I have a triple setup on a not so vintage Kona cyclocross bike. The combination of 30, 40, 50 in the front and 10-speed 11 to 28 is really a wonderful set up for here in the mountains.
30-28 would get you up pretty much anything, Dan
On a road bike, especially a classic/vintage bike, I'd rather have a triple chain ring setup than a pie plate cassette. It's always easier, especially under load, to shift onto a smaller ring than onto a larger one. Yes, with a triple you have to be cognizant of extreme chainline positions and extreme derailleur pulley positions. Going small-small or big-big is a bad idea, but it's a bad idea on a 2X system as well.
I've long-ago learned that one can run 'short-chained' (Incomplete spooling in the derailleur cage for smallest to smallest, or largest to largest) if you know the sound and the feel of gears and chain. Running short-chained also means being able to use a short cage, and vastly reducing the chain slop long cages present.
But it's also one more reason not to lend your machine to anyone but the most astute of mechanics or riders, as only a few of us know the importance of keeping the chain aligned when shifting up or down.
Yep, just have to pay attention to the gearing choice when riding, Dan
My buddy won’t have it that you shouldn’t go small to small, no amount of explanation that this is never right gear will convince him, his argument is that it’s possible to do so must be ok
@@rodneyhanson9884 Your buddy probably also never replaces the fluids, filters and other replacement parts on his car because they still "work" so it's not necessary.
Yep. Varied terrain but not too hilly, stay in middle ring. Hilly, shift to small ring. Flat or downhill, shift to large ring. While in that ring, shift using only rear derailleur. So easy.
I've got triples on my two touring bikes, a Campag Victory and a Shimano touring one, I'm running a 5 and 6 speed blocks, work well and give me all the gears I need !
Those late 80`s and onwards Victories work great, Dan
Hey Dan great video.
I think Giovanni Battaglin. was the first to use a
Campagnolo triple crankset in the Giro.
Looking forward to seeing the your next video.
All the best!
Yep, your correct - pretty sure it was kept a secret until the mountain stage - Stelvio? Dan
Triples are gorgeous.
Depends on the look and period of the bike - I`ve seen some that work well but look a bit mismatched and some that are spot on, Dan
Haha I was attracted by the title, even though my titanium CC Serotta is 28 years old and not over 52. Now at 74, new knee and arthritis make me glad to have a 10-speed Campag racing triple - but I agree wholeheartedly, 30-28 or 30-29 is sufficient for most hills. Not sure I would retrofit my '72 Atala Record with a triple though - the 120mm rear drops leave you with maybe two usable gears with each chainring in a 5- or 6-speed setup. Glad to have the extra width to fit a 10-speed cogset - though not L'eroica-worthy, it works for me :-). Keep riding and cheers.
Yep, each bike has its own considerations as to how to set up - I`d defintly leave the Atala well alone, Dan
Love my commuter bike's 48-38-28 x 11-34 9s drivetrain. I can cut loose when i have the space, and spin up loaded climbs when i need to. And those 10 tooth front ring jumps let me really smoothly gear up and down in stop and go traffic.
The best shifting, and least well known vintage Campagnolo derailleur is the Rally. It has a long cage, and will easily handle 42 teeth difference between big-big and small-small cog combos. Velo happiness to all!❤
Blimey, never seen one of them - looks good and period as well, Dan
When the Eroica was still going in the UK, I did 2017 and '18 on an unknown frame fitted with a mountain bike triple, as it was all I had. Quite a few riders expressed dismay, saying, as I wafted past them uphill, that using a triple was somehow cheating.
100 miles is a lot, and some of the participants were using the kind of gearing that a young Merckx would have utilised.
Thats a bit rum of them - just envious looks at L`Eroica Tuscany as the only riders moving on the Santa Maria are on triples... Dan
@@vintagevelos9517 tempted now to put a triple on my mercian, before next year's velo retro 🤔
@@Iamfromthetimebefore Where`s the Retro ride you are looking at doing? Dan
Velo Retro 2025, in Ulverston. Done it twice, missed it in 2023 due to a level 3 acj, but doing it in 2025. Fantastic event.
@@Iamfromthetimebefore Hmm... might take a look, Dan
Still riding a Campy Racing T set-up from thirty years ago converted from 8 speed to 10. Can’t push the Legnano with the original 52/42 up the hills here anymore.
But a 52/42 is sooo nice - though a swap to Stronglite 49d with 42/38 is not hard and rather tasty for climbing... Dan
Great vid and a lovely vintage house at about 4:48.
Also Stronglight 80 and 100 on 86 BCD allowing 28T inner on doubles or triples for 70s and 80s style builds. Spa Cycles are a sound supplier of all sorts of interesting bike kit, not least new 86BCD chainrings and the Sugino cranks for them.
SunTour created the slant parallelogram derailleur in 1964 and any of the V series (from 1969) should be considered a functional upgrade for the Campag. derailleurs of the time.
Yep, sometimes Campagnolo are not at the forefront of vintage tech, Dan
I do love a good triple...you can't beat it for touring or commuting. It's a little later than your focus, but I love the Ultegra 6603 and specced it on my neo-retro commuter with downtube shifters and modern brakes. Silver bling, still find chainrings without too much difficulty, uses a modern Shimano BB, and 3x10 means a huge gear range.
Yeah....downtube shifters. I bought an Argos 531 Renovated from the first year Argos were doing that. I found it used in Taunton (perhaps less than a thousand km on it, all Mavic, Simplex retrofriction shifters,) and I was addicted. As time went on though, and the original Maillard Sport 7 spd cluster was worn, then the Sachs one after, and change of chains, yada, yada, yada, and wear of the shifters, the ability to be able to 'snick' into gear was gone, and I had to replace the right shifter with an indexed one. It was too worn and slipping. I still have the original Simplex for the front triple, and friction shifting is still reliable for the front, but horror of horrors, I am going to do the 130mm rear drop-out spread for next season, and go to a free-hub/cassette system, albeit 8spd, since I can keep my downtube shifters and the wider chain....and as many of us know, when you have wider triples up front, 8spd at the rear is more than enough!
Until I get an internal rear hub system (Shimano, Rholoffs, etc) I'm forever a triple front user,...and downtube shifters (I can use my present shifter for 8spd)
Dan, I know you’re more of a hardware guy but I see you sporting another classic…De Marchi. Great quality and a true vintage brand I buy it almost exclusively.
Ah, De Marchi - fantastic quality, just the sizing is very much old school Italian Cycling if you know what I mean... Dan
Great Dan! Thanks for the Coppi Fiorelli content. Curious about the next one...👍
Yep, yet another winter project... Dan
I'm using Stronglight 99, the later model (standard threading and axle taper, I'm using an SKF BB). Best I've ever had, last ones were the TA Cyclotouriste, like the 49Ds, but the 99s are mkuch more solid feeling.
SPA Cycle in UK still sell replacement chainwheels for a very reasonable price.
don't believe that was a 50/40/30. or maybe need glasses.
@@carlosgaspar8447 I never intimated it was. It came stock 53/45/28, the intention being the half-step (by Alpine steps) afforded by the middle and high rings being so close. I no longer use such tall gearing. I moved the 45 to the outside (and frankly rarely use it either, save for long, open stretches) and ordered 36 or 38 for middle (they're only made in even numbers nowadays by Stronglight) and of course, 28 innermost.
I live in Toronto, and SPACycle's shipper (Royal Mail) hand the orders off to Canada Post, and I'm not charged VAT or customs. I regularly receive them within two weeks, and even with shipping included, they're cheaper than equivalent Shimano etc over the counter here.
SPA carry a massive range of chainwheels, they have an exclusive arrangement with Stronglight, who it turns out, have been making the TA chainwheels all these years! TA have their cranks supplied from elsewhere, and I'd been using Pro V models (interchangeable with 49D ) for decades until forced to switch when Mariposa stopped selling them here a few years back. And that's when I found the Stronglights, brand-new. It's time to replace the mid and inner rings again this winter service.
Anyone care to buy some used TA pro-v cyclotouriste 170 mm cranks and a stack of worn chainrings going back 25 years?
The 99 is a great crank, Dan
@@carlosgaspar8447 Let me count and check, Dan
@@vintagevelos9517 getting difficult to find chainrings in this part of the world.
I'm using the SunXCD reproduction of the 50.4 bcd crank, combined with T.A. rings. Lovely stuff, and it lets me use 50-34 rings with a 13-26 freewheel. Shifting is with a SunTour Cyclone GT, which wraps up the chain excess nicely. A great way to climb steep hills with vintage (or vintage style) gear! Thanks for the fun video!
Sounds like a good settup, Dan
My 9 speed Ultegra triple works just fine. Not really old, but pretty old.
I got some of the newest 9 speed Shimano triple shifting brifters, SORA, it works better than the Ultegra shifters ever did. I have tried a 26 and a 28 for the small ring, and made it work.
I run the 28, it came with a 30.
late `80`s onwards Campy triples work great - its the older Record/NV period that the issue are with, Dan
I used a 50/39/30 up until 2015, and had to revert to it for a couple of years from 2022. What I loved about it was that you could do 90% of your ride on the 39T. And if you were zooming down a slope on the big ring then piling on the sauce going up the next hill, then as the gradient began to tell you could drop onto the 39 and shift the RD up two notches at the same time and keep the same mechanical advantage without disturbing your pedalling cadence. Chums who hadn't worked this out usually lost a bit of ground, which is always pleasing. On the 50/34 the equivalent manoeuvre requires four notches on the RD and sets the chain whipping about. Shifting 39->50 is much easier on the kit than heaving the chain up a 16T difference, too.
As for adjustment, it's no problem once you get used to it.
Shifting 50/34 is a challenge - my Legnano is 52/38 and thats more than enough of an issue, Dan
I view and use my 3x10 road bike's gearing like it's three 1x setups. Instead of memorizing what the next gear combo up or down is, which with 30 combos (some which of course I don't use because of extreme cross-chaining) and usually having to use both shifters to shift to it is kind of a pain, I stay in a given chainring and just shift the rear cog as needed.
Usually I'm in the middle 42 up front. When I'm on a flat road in good shape or a downhill I shift to the 53, and when it's fairly hilly I shift to the 30. The range of cogs on my cassette is usually enough to stay in the same chainring. I run a 12-23 on fairly flat terrain and a 12-30 when it's hilly. Works for me. It's like riding three different bike setups, sort of like modes on a modern automatic car.
Your better with a triple than I am - best I can do to avoid the extremes, Dan
I love me a triple, especially for touring.
A must for touring, Dan
Chain wrap looks perfect to me. Vive le triple.
Pushing it for even my slack standards... Dan
@@vintagevelos9517 fair enough, ‘perfect’ was probably overstating. How’s this, ‘chain wraps looks serviceable to me’. Kidding aside. Beautiful bike with a near ‘perfect’ build…….to me anyway. Out of curiosity, what’s the rear DO width? 120? I’ve made my peace with the 126 DO standard of the 70’s/80’s. I also don’t stress over pushing 130 DO cassette rear wheels in. Life’s too short to obsess over fussy vintage purity stuff. For me, any way. Ride on, brother.
Love triples! mechanically makes all the sense in the world especially for touring, keeps chain line straight and allows for multi ratios, best thing since sliced bread. 1x's are a waste in my opinion, no mechanical sense what so ever, 2x I can live with but 3x is the ultimate.
Depends on where and how hard you are riding - I prefer 2x and often just stay in the big ring - however, having that 3 ring as option is very attractive, Dan
I had forgotten about triples. My Dad had one on one of his bikes. He climbed Mount Greylock in Massachusetts with me and a few friends when he was in his 70's and used the triple. I suppose no one uses them on modern bikes.
Yep, sounds like a fine memory and exactly what a triple is good for, Dan
I've got sram eagle 12 and triples on different bikes. Triples are easy and have a good chain line. Not a problem
No issues on a modern rig, 60 years ago was more of a challenge... Dan
My 12-25 9speed ultegra shifts beautifully with my triple.
9 speed is the period where triples really were sorted, Dan
If i have that chain length issue i prefer to make it one link longer and settle for the fact there will be a little chain sag in small/small but big/big will be safer,more asthetically pleasing and you could then put a 25t or 26t on.
good point, Dan
Run a Stronglight double with 52/36 rings 11/28 on the wheel. This is for hilly time trials. 90s dérailleurs currently as using sti levers but with down tube shifters was using a 70s Suntour VX long cage which coped 52/34 11/28 .
Raced mountain bikes in the 90s and pushed gear combinations to the limit and got away with it, 48, 36 22 with 12 /32 ...
I have used a TA tripple on my bike since 1985 and I use a Campagnolo Super Record fromt mech. This mech has no trouble with the three chainrings.
Indeed! Are you running the Pro V vis Cyclotouriste? SPA Cycles in UK have all the chainwheel replacements. I used to have 49D triples for about five years or so (decades back) before moving to TA. I'm now using Stronglight 99 triples (the last version, standard crankpuller thread, etc) and find them far more 'rigid' than the TAs or 49Ds. And I got them for....tada...brand-new...in Toronto....C$50. Been riding them about five years now (replacing inner and middle rings every season). It was a match made in heaven...
Btw: On your Campy shifter, I tried a number of triple mechs, and only one would work w/o binding/fouling in a road set-up (Mtn bike ones don't seem to work) and it's a decades old Durace 2X. It just has enough travel, but the cage geometry allows it to clear the rings.
`80`s onwards Campy front mech is fine as its parraleogram - its the earlier box NV type that run out of travel, Dan
I switched from using triples to 46/30 sub-compact cranksets on all of my bikes. Very rarely do I run out of high gears at 30mph +
I still use triple on my commuter bike (CBT Italia from the early 80s) and n my cyclocross bike (Kuota Kross carbon) - both work fine with Campagnolo Ergopowers and mechs
Yep, the late `80`s and onwards Campy triples are great (as long as the rear cage spring holds up - they can get a bit tired over time (as we all do...), Dan
It was a matter of principle back in the day to try not to use the "racing ring" in the winter months and see if you could get to spring with it still shiny. A kind of self imposed zone 2 training if you will. I now ride a 1x to commute on and I don't miss the front shifter one bit!
Yep - used to be several months of low intensity inner ring riding - bigger mileage though, Dan
Best setup.
Hi Dan,
I have a Nervar Triple on one of my vintage cycles ( Motobacane Jubilee Sport) with Sachs Huret front and rear derailleur’s. It rides and works beautifully really smooth. I honestly think they are brilliant if you use them correctly.
I've got a Nervar or Solidar (can't remember which) in my parts box, a triple, three bolt attach, the (outer or inner, I can't remember) is hung from the middle chainwheel! Even being alloy, they are on the heavy side though.
Yep, great bike and your correct, just use them correctly, Dan
I LOVE the Campagnolo Racing-T stuff on my vintage bike. Polished aluminum, even the newer stuff looks vintage enough for me though I'm putting together a GIOS with some older bits including a Rally rear mech for some vintage rides in 2025.
Coppi = COE--PEE, not COPPY! Fiorelli = FYOR--ELLI.
I with you on ‘Fyor-elli’ but I’d say the correct pronunciation of Coppi is mid way between ‘Coppy’ and ‘Coe-pee’? Without adopting a disastrous mock Italian accent it’s very hard to sound ‘right’ don’t you agree?
Ah, my poor Italian accent letting me down again... Dan
Yeah with a 46 approx big ring a 28 rear cog works. A lot of the CTC guys used them I noticed when I first joined one of there groups in the 70s
triple cranks definitely ! re-make em 3x 9 speeds timeless....
Just a bit of a challenge using period parts, late `80`s onwards no problems, Dan
On a race bike, would you need to go as low as a 30 tooth granny, since you wouldn't be riding under the usual touring load. Wouldn't the front end shifting be even smoother with a 34 small ring, without loss of being able to take some hills with a 6 to 8 speed rear cluster?
It's always a trade-off. Clearing the frame with the cage to engage the inner ring is a major problem with the many mechs I've tried over the years. With the more compact chainwheel sets, the curve of the mech cage also doesn't match in many cases, albeit I've read some grind the radius smaller on the cage flange(s).
@@stephensaines7100 The only front mech I found that works with a classic racing triple, when I tried one, was usually a Sun Tour. They really made the best front derailleurs for triple cranks. I always felt that for a race bike, 30 tooth inner might be a little prone to chain dropping, something slightly large for the inner would be stable with a 52 outer and a 42 or 40 middle. Unlike a touring setup, you're prone to use the front more with a racing triple, with the back for fine tuning the cadence.
Saya menggunakan 48-38-28 oval chainring..mudah dan selesa.
Got a triple CAMPAG record on my c40 love it
Thats the period when they really got it right, Dan
@@vintagevelos9517 It took the Italians decades after the French to go triple though. One has to wonder why?
@@stephensaines7100 Macho pride??? Dan
@@vintagevelos9517 It's a good point of discussion. Obviously a degree of denial was at play. The French, via early Stronglights and other competitors, were doing triple pre WWII (I believe I read the Twenties).
Even looking back to early ten-speeds in the Sixties/Seventies, the gearing latitude was really limited.
That being said, things corrected quickly when the triples became the norm, and Stronglight (or was it TA?) marketing a Quad Front at one point.
I've just Googled, I like to reference my claims, not much showing until I hit on this:
Google "Introducing Quintuple Rene Herse Cranks".
He discusses the history as well as promoting his own product. Nice looking stuff!
I use triple with a close ratio cassette no big leg wrecking gaps between sprockets.
yep, removes the need for big jumps in the rear gears, Dan
Normally, you would want to avoid running the chain on the extremes: largest chainring + largest cog, or small chainring + smallest cog.
Yep, just need a little self control on the small/small and the big/big and your fine, Dan
My touring bike runs something stupid like 11-19 cassette on the back. It's not a huge problem because the crankset is 20/32/42, but I probably should get a bigger cassette and derailleur for it
If it rides well for you i`d leave it alone - 11-19 shift really well, never as smooth as they get bigger, Dan
Vintage? Can still be bought. Got a Sugino recently 110/74 bcd and a good square taper BB to replace a failed middleburn set up.
Definatly still available - just a challenge to set up properley on a vintage ride (unless you want to swop out most of the chainset), Dan
Didn't Campagnolo produce the Rally rear mech in the 70's? Without checking my facts, i think the Triumphe rear mech was available with a long cage. Anyway that poor rear mech wouldn't live long if you were constanly forcing it work in smally small or biggy big. That would wear the spring out & the chain in no time.
Had Campag Rally rear mech and triple on front since mid seventies and still works a treat.
I’m new to your channel and sorry to see yet another RUclips presenter explaining how to calculate chains length to accommodate extreme chain line. Just don’t use those gears! It’s really not hard to remember which gear you are in - even to the next nearest cog will do. And yes, I do have vintage bikes. I also have 3x10 set-ups and a 3x7 that works properly with a short cage mech.
It’s worth noting that pre-index chains with their simple plate design cannot tolerate extreme chain-line.
Pretty sure I point out that its not acceptable to have such a tight/loose chain line - that was the point of the technical bit - its 100% rideable but you don`t use the big/big or small/small gears, so 13 or the 15 available gears, Dan
Definitely not. I had Campagnolo triple 53:42:30 and 13:26 cassette, not even 1:1 bottom gear. The chain occasionally overshot the big ring and the small ring. When the stop screws were adjusted to prevent this the chain often wouldn't climb onto the big ring or drop to the smallest ring. Add in the gear ratio duplication i founf it thoroughly awful. 20 years later ive refurbished the same bike with Campagnolo Chorus double. 48:32 and 11:34 . Agreat spread of gears and good low gear. I wont wax lyrical about mechanically inferior design
Needs setting up properly
If you can't setup 3 gears at the front, what makes you think you can setup 10+ gears at the back?
Not sure what point you are making? With vintage settups theres often a compromise with gearing range due to period limitations - you can always go the restomod route if thats not for you, or maybe just a new bike would suit your needs better? Dan
@@vintagevelos9517 My apologies, I worded that wrong. I'm agreeing with you. Wasn't referring to you in particular, just in general. My hybrid bike triple works just fine as it has for ten years now with minimal adjustment. I'm not into vintage bikes so period limitations doesn't apply to me.
Just pointing out that a lot of people shy away from triple cranksets often citing difficulty in setting them up when they're no harder than 2X, and even 1X has its problems. The 105 double crankset on my road bike is more of a pain in the butt. And then they try to make up for it by adding more and more gears to the back because adding more gears to the back doesn't affect how hard it is to setup, but adding them the front apparently does.
@@bradl7439 Ah, makes sense now, modern triples are spot on, Dan
I have a couple of Campagnolo Record triple 50-40-30 crankset if anyone interested.. Get in touch..
what sort of years? Dan
@@vintagevelos9517 record 10spd crankset triple
10spd Record triple crankset late 2000s
@@armasks Hmmm, could be a proprietary tang unless you have matching BB.
@@stephensaines7100 it takes a 111mm C Record BB.
Why would anyone in their right mind want to ride small-small or large-large? They're not using the front changer as it should be used in triples if they are.. i love them btw and don't need anything so big as 50.
I had a TA triple back in the day, with a TA bb. The TA bb is undoubtedly the worst piece of engineering i have encountered ever. I think i moved to stronglight, something else, then grafton speedstix. With a royce bb. TA simply the worst.
Yep, some questionable engineering there - Campy or Stronglight for me, Dan
TA loose cup? I went through about ten over the years...only to find though that when I had the Mavic sealed BB removed when I first got the used bike since I couldn't triplize the cranks (Mavic were a Record copy), I went to TA Cyclostouriste and loose cups, not realizing that the mechanic I was using in Plymouth, UK to do the work (I'd purchased the TA items elsewhere) he didn't chase out the threads before doing so, and you guessed it, for ten years I was using a cross-threaded cup. It was only in the the last five years I finally got wise and since the original (still in mint condition) Mavic sealed BB didn't have a long enough spindle for triples, I bought an SKF BB, and it's been faultless every since, even with the right side threads crossed, it aligned with the cuffing cup on the left side. When I had a major accident two summers back, and had the frame rebuilt, I finally had the R side thread chased and trued. The SKF remains faultless, but even better bedded.
My chewing those TA cups (and some Stronglight too) over the years, and the axles, was mostly due to misalignment, but one also wonders about the intrinsic strength, or not, of those cups.
Triple better than double. Single both came into, and has now gone out of, stupid, short-lived inadequate style!
Double for me, just not diciplined enough with my shifts... Dan
Do they have the hassle?
Yep, on am older vintage bike (pre mid `80`s) you`ll end up swopping bottom brackets, cassettes and front derailliur and probably rear - and no guarantee of smooth easy shifting - mid `80`s groupset triples started to really get the tech sorted, Dan
That is NOT 50/40/30 on your bike; the difference from big to mid is way bigger than from mid to small. Maybe 53/40/30…
Let me count and check, Dan
Hate triple never had good experience.
That has been my previous experience until this one, Dan
The problem isn’t triple cranksets, it’s vintage frames. Who rides these things comfortably?
A lot of us - I ride antique through to modern with `90`s my favourites - its a broad church, Dan
@@vintagevelos9517 531 (and equiv Italian/French) has not been bettered for comfort, albeit 531 came in a number of different variations. The improvement over the years has been the ability to weld rather than braze, and one wonders if that has actually done more to detract from the 'personality' of the frame while making production easier?