Is a tiagra triple the right choice? Are there other options?

[rockyrut]

I don't know of any other triples with integrated shifting. I don't want bar ends. And really I would like at least 105 quality.
Any recommendations?

[driftlessregion]

you bet. Sugino has made triple cranksets for eons. Combine it with IRD shifters.

[froze]

Deore is another great option, used on many modern touring bikes without problems.

[Pat Lamb]

I'm not quite clear on the question.  Is OP asking about brifters, cranks, or derailers?

Tiagra triple anything is going to be an expensive hunt for the New Old Stuff (NOS) needle in the ebay haystack.  If you put used gear on an new build, good luck.  It may work fine, or you might find why the seller took it off and replaced it.  Shimano stopped making the rubber hoods that fit Tiagra triple brifters a half dozen years ago, so there's a good chance you'll have to hack something together to keep them usable.

Concur on the Sugino cranks and Deore derailers, at least for the rear derailer.

Microshift has rescued 3x9 systems with new shifters and derailers, at least.  They feel stiffer to me than Shimano, but they're usable and available (or as much as any bike components are right now).

[wildtoad]

Well, if you are satisfied with "road" triple gearing, it looks like you could put together a 2016 era Shimano 105 10sp drivetrain using brand new, leftover equipment that appears to be available from major online retailers (some bike specific retailers, others well know giant retailers of everything). Shimano 105 5703 series triple "brifters" and triple front derailleurs seem to be available. The GS cage 105 10 sp rear derailleur is still available new, but can only "officially" handle a 30T cog in the cassette when paired w/ a triple. There are some local bike shops w/ web sites advertising the 105 triple crank as still in stock. But if a new 105 triple crank is unavailable, then I presume the FC-4703 Tiagra triple (available from major on line bike retailers) would work.

Personally, I don't consider such road-geared triples as adequate for loaded touring. But plenty of stock touring bikes have come w/ road triples over the years...so horses for courses, depends on where you are riding, your preferences, etc.

You could widen the range of the 105 setup by using a 10sp long cage Shimano XT rear derailleur (would also gain a clutch which I find useful for "all road" riding). To resolve the incompatibility between Shimano road shifters and mountain derailleurs that Shimano introduced in the 10sp era, you would need to run the brilliant Wolf Tooth Tanpan in the inline configuration. The Tanpan works perfectly in my touring setup (Shimano XT 10sp rear, deore triple crank, and Dura Ace 10sp bar ends (the original BS-78s that include index and friction shifting options....Shimano ditched the friction in the later BS-79 bar ends).  Install of Tanpan took 15 minutes, and it's been "set and forget" since then.

Down the rabbit hole of esoteric drivetrains...the IRD Power Ratchet brake levers w/ Shimano bar ends or the Gevenalle (formerly RetroShift) levers featuring MicroShift bar ends provide a different approach to "integrated" shifters/levers. You would not need the Tanpan w/ Gevenalle. They are a niche, acquired taste IMO.

And yes, MicroShift makes 3x9 and 3x10 integrated "brifters." Never used or seen one in person so don's know if they can provide a "105" level shifting experience. My experience w/ 10sp MicroShift bar ends w/ Shimano derailleurs is that MicroShift bar ends are adequate and functional, but fall short of excellence. In contrast, the MicroShift Advent X 1x system is simply fantastic (this is a tangent, but I highly recommend Advent X to bring 1X shifting to an older but excellent mtbs).

Okay, it's warmed up to 17 outside and I have a bunch of snow to remove from the driveway (winter not over yet here in VT). Hope someone finds this rambling useful.

[dkoloko]

In use, I haven't found much difference between Tiagra and 105 drivetrains.

[froze]

Microshift shifters bar end shifters are great, I've used them for about 3 years on my touring bike and they work fine, sure you could find better ones like especially the old Suntour Barcon shifters were the best ever made, you can find these on Ebay, or a better modern one than the Microshift would be the Dura Ace bar ends, but do you need something as good as those two shifters?  I don't think so.  I guess the advantage with the Suntour Barcons is that you could crash on one and it would still work just fine, a modern Microshift or DA would break due to the plastic construction; but the Microshift one is extremely cheap to replace, whereas with the Suntour you might have trouble getting a replacement sent out to you in a one red light town with a tiny bike shop, for that matter even DA would be a tad difficult to get vs the Microshift; plus you're touring, you may be on limited funds, you might not want to spend $50 or more for one barend when you get a Microshift for $25...assuming you can buy just one and not the pair.  Just things to consider, and it depends on your personality how you want your equipment to be.  I have no problems using Microshift, but should one break I would probably switch over to Suntour since those cost as much as the DA except without all the plastic.

I don't know about the newest Tiagra vs 105, but I did test ride this stuff about 9 years ago and back then there was a difference, the shifting was smoother, faster, and more positive with 105, not to mention being lighter; however, Tiagra, being heavier obviously uses heavier materials that are said to make it more rugged, but I know the bearings and pivots in the derailleur are actually less dependable than 105.  However, if you want to run triples the Tiagra is more capable whereas the 105 is not capable.  New 105 the idiot engineers used plastic for a pawl inside the rear derailleur, this paw has been breaking, Tiagra does not have that issue.

Personally, I would use Deore instead of Tiagra or 105 for touring purposes, Deore being aimed at the MTB crowd vs the Tiagra aimed at the road crowd, means that the Deore FD T6000 is designed with more robustness to handle rougher situations and survive, as well as to being able to handle triples which I would highly recommend if you are doing loaded touring and expect to be climbing mountain roads, trying to lug 60 or so pounds of gear along with you and the bike up a steep grade using just doubles or a single will fry your legs and or knees.

You don't need a clutch drive for road touring, maybe for off road touring, but the clutch is for doing jumps and keeping the chain taunt while doing very rugged riding and or jumping, a clutch is useless on road touring, so there is no reason in even getting a clutched derailleur if it's not going to be used for the purposes it was intended for.  Thousands and thousands of bicycle touring people over decades of time, on road and off road (not rugged offroad), never had any issues with derailleurs that didn't have clutches, and they still don't to this day.

[wildtoad]

Froze, glad to hear that you enjoy the Microshift bar ends. I am a huge fan of old Suntour components and have some of their stuff on an old road bike. If someone doesn't want index shifting, then the Suntour barcons are a great choice. And there are good options for new friction-only shifters (e.g., Rivendell silver). My favorite shifters of all time are the early 90s Shimano XT thumbies...I still run a pair today after 30 years of dirt and road use.

Haven't heard mechanical 105 groups described as "not capable" before. Interesting. Does the plastic pawl issue apply to the older 10 speed 105 rear derailleur?

As to clutched derailleurs, I agree they are not necessary for pavement road touring and one doesn't "need" a cluch for ultra rough stuff either. But I have found them useful for "all road" riding/touring, the term I used in my previous post, which can include paved roads of various quality, gravel roads, dirt roads, former and abandoned roads that are more like trails, and so on. The clutch is helpful in the rougher stuff. I don't do "jumps."  In any event, my reference to a clutch was more along the lines of adding a mountain rear derailleur to the proposed 105 or tiagra triple drivetrain as I am of the opinion that "road" triple drivetrains provide insufficient low end gearing for loaded touring. In general, if someone wants to run a touring triple drivetrain nowadays, I recommend a deore or similar triple crank w/ corresponding derailleurs and Microshift or Shimano bar ends.

[froze]

Later models of the Suntour Barcons were indexed!  They also had a way to turn off the indexing.

The plastic pawl is for the newest 105's.

As far as triples providing inadequate low end gearing is not true.   My Masi Giramondo came from the factory with triples, the front chain rings are 44/32/24, the rear gear cluster has 11-36.  What does this all mean, it means that if I'm in my lowest climbing gear and spinning at 90 cadence I would be going 4.9 mph with 700x38 tires, is that low enough for touring with a load climbing a grade?  I think it is, in fact it's lower than what 80's touring bikes were doing with triples and they climbed grades loaded all the time and still do to this day.  My deceased 85 Schwinn Le tour Luxe had a 50/46/30, the rear gears were 14-28, that means that in my lowest climbing gear and spinning at 90 would equal 7.8 mph with 27x32 (1 1/4) tires; so the newer bike as better gearing yet the older bikes with gears like were used all the time for heavy touring.  However, on that older bike I replaced the gear cluster with a 32 which brought my climbing gear speed to 6.9 mph, that gear cluster wasn't available back when the bike was made.

Compare that to a 1x drivetrain with 32 chain ring and a 11-50 cassette with 29x2.3 tires and you lowest speed spinning at 90 is 7.9mph.  So the modern 1x is not as suited for touring as a triple is, not saying you can't tour on a 1x, just showing you the climbing difference in the lowest gear.  So deciding between a triple and a 1x for touring should now be more obvious that a triple is still better, or maybe the correct use of verbiage should the triple is more doable for loaded touring.

[wildtoad]

Huh? I also have a Masi Giramondo, quite familiar w/ the gearing. Gearing is great on that bike for touring. Masi spec'ed it unusually well for touring, except for the stock wheels and, arguably, the mediocre promax brakes on the earliest models.

A Deore triple is not a "road" triple in my parlance. A road triple typically has a 50 tooth big ring and a 30 tooth small ring (with maybe a 39 middle)....and often a cassette that maxes out in the 30-34 range.  See gearing on current Marin Four Corners as an example.  Those are the "road" triples that I am referring to. Plenty of bikes marketed as touring bikes have come w/ such triples over the years.  For some folks, they are fine.

Suntour barcons are "legendary" for those who appreciate friction shifting. The indexing era ushered in the unfortunate demise of Suntour.

Cheers.

[froze]

The Masi wheels are not that great, they are a bottom of the barrel wheelset, but they do seem to be very sturdy, they haven't gone out of true yet, so in that respect they seem ok.  The other weakness was the saddle was also bottom of the barrel piece of crap.  The other crap item was Kenda Drumlin tires, these things weigh 1,600 grams A PIECE!  Plus there is something wrong with the sidewalls, with a load and the psi set for that load they shimmied the bike, I had to put 35 more PSI than should have gone into the tires to stop that shimmy.

The brakes are now TRP including the brake levers.  When I bought mine they spec'd the bike with 180mm front rotor and 160mm rear, they now for some reason reduced the size of the front to 160, I think the 180 is better since most of the stopping force is on the front.  As far as I can tell from a quick glance everything else is the same except for the lack of paint on the new bike, they just clear coated over the raw metal.

[DaveB]

The brakes are now TRP including the brake levers.  When I bought mine they spec'd the bike with 180mm front rotor and 160mm rear, they now for some reason reduced the size of the front to 160, I think the 180 is better since most of the stopping force is on the front. 

I don't know what brake mounting format was used on previous model Masis but the current spec is "flat mount" and these are limited to 160mm rotors. 

I have the same TRP Spyre mechanical disc brakes on a Surly Midnight Special and they work very well.

[froze]

The brakes are now TRP including the brake levers.  When I bought mine they spec'd the bike with 180mm front rotor and 160mm rear, they now for some reason reduced the size of the front to 160, I think the 180 is better since most of the stopping force is on the front. 

I don't know what brake mounting format was used on previous model Masis but the current spec is "flat mount" and these are limited to 160mm rotors. 

I have the same TRP Spyre mechanical disc brakes on a Surly Midnight Special and they work very well.

So they changed the rotor in the front to 160mm due to being a flat mount caliper?  Why? does it matter whether it's flat mounted or not?  aerodynamics?  I think I would prefer the larger rotor on the front over aerodynamics considering a touring bike is not a racing bike so aerodynamics is not a thing with a touring bike, whereas stopping a loaded bike fast is a thing, but that's just me.

My wife has a Trek Verve +2 with Shimano MT200 hydro brakes, and personally, I like the TRP mechanical brakes better.  And my mechanical brakes have NO drag on the brake pad against the rotor, whereas the hydro brakes have a small amount of drag.  I took the bike back to the dealer about the drag issue and they said that's normal for hydro brakes.  I also like the mechanical one better due to the more tactical feel of the braking process that is lacking with the hydro brakes, but keep in mine, I'm use to using rim brakes, and mechanical disk brakes are similar in their feel, which I like over the hydro.

[DaveB]

So they changed the rotor in the front to 160mm due to being a flat mount caliper?  Why? does it matter whether it's flat mounted or not?  aerodynamics?  I think I would prefer the larger rotor on the front over aerodynamics considering a touring bike is not a racing bike so aerodynamics is not a thing with a touring bike, whereas stopping a loaded bike fast is a thing, but that's just me.

It wasn't aerodynamic considerations.  Flat mount calipers don't leave enough clearance to fit rotors larger than 160mm.

[froze]

So they changed the rotor in the front to 160mm due to being a flat mount caliper?  Why? does it matter whether it's flat mounted or not?  aerodynamics?  I think I would prefer the larger rotor on the front over aerodynamics considering a touring bike is not a racing bike so aerodynamics is not a thing with a touring bike, whereas stopping a loaded bike fast is a thing, but that's just me.

It wasn't aerodynamic considerations.  Flat mount calipers don't leave enough clearance to fit rotors larger than 160mm.

So why do you think they went to flat mount?