A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Groupsets



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old June 4th 20, 08:30 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Dennis Davis[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 33
Default Groupsets

In article ,
jbeattie wrote:

....

I think that the curmudgeon handbook, chapter six, has a lengthy
discussion of the benefits of DT friction shifters. IIRC,
they a (1) slow and imprecise shifting, (2) missed shifts,
(3) conspicuous contrarianism, (4) longevity like an incurable
skin condition, (5) inconvenient location, and (6) conspicuous
contrarianism. Clearly superior to any STI/Ergo like system.


A double dose of "conspicuous contrarianism" ("3" and "6"). Isn't
that overkill?

Perhaps (6) is better replaced by:

(6) Requires levels of skill not present in modern cyclists.


....I'm planning to put some Simplex Retrofriction downtube levers on
my next bike...
--
Dennis Davis
Ads
  #12  
Old June 4th 20, 09:12 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Sepp Ruf
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 454
Default Groupsets

Dennis Davis wrote:
jbeattie wrote:
....

I think that the curmudgeon handbook, chapter six, has a lengthy
discussion of the benefits of DT friction shifters. IIRC,
they a (1) slow and imprecise shifting, (2) missed shifts,
(3) conspicuous contrarianism, (4) longevity like an incurable
skin condition, (5) inconvenient location, and (6) conspicuous
contrarianism. Clearly superior to any STI/Ergo like system.


A double dose of "conspicuous contrarianism" ("3" and "6"). Isn't
that overkill?

Perhaps (6) is better replaced by:

(6) Requires levels of skill not present in modern cyclists.


....I'm planning to put some Simplex Retrofriction downtube levers on
my next bike...


What a despicable demonstration of ableism!

Worst of all: Being able to lose 3+ pounds of bicycle locks, you'll also
lose significant traction!!
  #13  
Old June 4th 20, 03:31 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default Groupsets

On Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 12:30:27 AM UTC-7, Dennis Davis wrote:
In article ,
jbeattie wrote:

...

I think that the curmudgeon handbook, chapter six, has a lengthy
discussion of the benefits of DT friction shifters. IIRC,
they a (1) slow and imprecise shifting, (2) missed shifts,
(3) conspicuous contrarianism, (4) longevity like an incurable
skin condition, (5) inconvenient location, and (6) conspicuous
contrarianism. Clearly superior to any STI/Ergo like system.


A double dose of "conspicuous contrarianism" ("3" and "6"). Isn't
that overkill?

Perhaps (6) is better replaced by:

(6) Requires levels of skill not present in modern cyclists.


Really? So one should buy DT shifters to develop a useless skill? At least that should translate into some performance advantage, which it doesn't.

I raced for decades on DT shifters along with my cohorts -- who then ****-canned them because they were clearly inferior to STI. No more pack wobble going into or out of high speed corners on a rolling course as riders reached down for gears, no more sitting to shift while climbing out of the saddle, no wrong gear when sprinting because riders could just shift -- and shift a lot. And friction had all of its problems with missed shifts and shifters that would loosen and ghost shift. And I couldn't imagine friction shifting a modern 11sp cassette, but I'm sure more than five gears is somehow wrong or unnecessary.



...I'm planning to put some Simplex Retrofriction downtube levers on
my next bike...


I'm buying a musket for hunting!

I had Simplex DT shifters on my '69 PX10 which is thankfully long gone along with all of its odd-ball French metric components. My 26.6 Simplex seat post was heavy enough to use for home defense. And the bike came with the AVA death stem -- ah, the good old days.

-- Jay Beattie.

  #14  
Old June 4th 20, 03:48 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default Groupsets

On Wednesday, June 3, 2020 at 7:12:54 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/3/2020 8:02 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/3/2020 3:33 PM, wrote:

The end result would be a shifting/braking system that has extremely
light touch without ever having to recharge a battery. What do you gain
by electronic shifting other than automatic compensation for front chain-line?

I'm puzzled by the high value some people place on a "light touch,"
whether braking or shifting. ISTM light acting controls are a benefit
only up to a point.

Brakes that can lock a wheel with a few ounces of lever force make no
sense to me.


Try MTB or Gravel descents, older MTB on steeper stuff the burn on the
forearms is real, and the older (tech) CX bike which had canti reminded me
of this few years back, present Gravel bike has cable disks which are okay
but not stellar, my MTB has hydro as does my old commuting beast which are
far better in high load sort of stuff. And let’s not forget the not needing
to adjust pads etc.


Adjusting pads is sort of a side issue, since I was talking only about
force on the controls. Although to me, not needing to adjust hydraulic
disc pads is kind of balanced by needing to prissily clean things with
cotton swabs when replacing pads.


I don't clean my disc calipers with cotton swabs. I just drop in a set of pads. Screw in the screw and replace the tiny little snap clip retainer. It takes less time than changing rim brake pads. Your proper complaint is price and longevity -- which can be recouped with savings on rims if you ride in the rain or dirty conditions, one hopes.

Also, adjusting caliper rim brake pads is a two second operation, and I don't see that as any reason for switching to hydro discs -- although it is a reason for going with hydro discs rather than cable discs. It's easy to forget to adjust cable disc pads, and you can end up with some braking surprises, IMO.

I understand the benefits of less lever force for long, steel mountain
bike downhills. Not that I ride those any more.

But even for road riding, there's been a long trend to less and less
lever force, long ago leading to in-line force-reducing spring gizmos so
people riding comfort bikes on MUPs didn't lock up the front wheel and
take headers. And I've seen a novice flip a bike because it had dual
pivot brakes, when she was used to single pivot.

BTW, our neighborhood paramedic just took delivery of a new gravel bike.
She asked me to solve a little problem with it, so I got a brief test
ride. It was interesting to me that her cable discs did not have
super-low lever force like some other discs I've tried. In fact, I
thought her back brake felt rather weak, which surprised me. (I don't
know the brake model; I'll have to check.)


Some cable discs are dreadful because of long, fully encased cable runs with hard turns that produce a lot of drag. You have to do some fussing to overcome it. My warranty replacement commuter frame had that problem when I threw on my old BB7 rear brake (which had notoriously weak return springs), so I switched to hydro. Works great now.

-- Jay Beattie.


  #15  
Old June 4th 20, 05:34 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Groupsets

On 6/4/2020 10:31 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 12:30:27 AM UTC-7, Dennis Davis wrote:


Perhaps (6) is better replaced by:

(6) Requires levels of skill not present in modern cyclists.


Really? So one should buy DT shifters to develop a useless skill? At least that should translate into some performance advantage, which it doesn't.


Perhaps the "useless skill" is the ability to ride with (gasp!) only one
hand on the bars?

I do know several cyclists who hate taking a hand off the bars. They
stop every time they want to swig from a water bottle.

And I recall the article linked here a few years ago, where several
young racers did a comparison test, riding a long climb on current bikes
vs. vintage (1980s?) racing bikes. At least one complained about feeling
insecure having to move a hand to shift - poor baby!

I raced for decades on DT shifters along with my cohorts -- who then ****-canned them because they were clearly inferior to STI. No more pack wobble going into or out of high speed corners on a rolling course as riders reached down for gears, no more sitting to shift while climbing out of the saddle, no wrong gear when sprinting because riders could just shift -- and shift a lot.


Yes, if I were racing, I'd want STI. But bicycling =/= racing; there are
other ways to ride. If someone prefers the simplicity or light weight of
downtube shifters over the convenience, complexity, non-repairability
and heavier weight of STI and its clones, I don't think it's a terrible
choice.

Me, I like bar ends - a sort of middle ground, in my view.

And friction had all of its problems with missed shifts and shifters that would loosen and ghost shift. And I couldn't imagine friction shifting a modern 11sp cassette, but I'm sure more than five gears is somehow wrong or unnecessary.


You've changed the subject. Downtube does not preclude index - or at
least, it once didn't. (I don't diligently follow the market.)

About more than five gears - well, I agree with Tom (!!!) that eight was
about optimum. Yes, in my view, more are unnecessary. Again, those kid
racers climbing on old bikes posted times indicating that _only_ the
bike weight made a difference. There was no apparent benefit from
micro-adjusting cadence. Lab data shows the same thing. The curve for
power output vs. cadence is very flat.

...I'm planning to put some Simplex Retrofriction downtube levers on
my next bike...


I'm buying a musket for hunting!


I have two good friends who hunt using black powder, and one friend who
is a bowhunter. You may not understand their choices, but they probably
don't care.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #16  
Old June 4th 20, 05:43 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Groupsets

On 6/4/2020 10:48 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, June 3, 2020 at 7:12:54 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Adjusting pads is sort of a side issue, since I was talking only about
force on the controls. Although to me, not needing to adjust hydraulic
disc pads is kind of balanced by needing to prissily clean things with
cotton swabs when replacing pads.


I don't clean my disc calipers with cotton swabs. I just drop in a set of pads.


Admittedly, I haven't done it because I don't use those brakes. But
these guys https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQXFFgRButo seem to say it's
important to get the Q-tips out. See about 2:20 and about 3:20 onward.

Is that only for super grungy brakes?

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #17  
Old June 4th 20, 05:48 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 824
Default Groupsets

On Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 4:31:19 PM UTC+2, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 12:30:27 AM UTC-7, Dennis Davis wrote:
In article ,
jbeattie wrote:

...

I think that the curmudgeon handbook, chapter six, has a lengthy
discussion of the benefits of DT friction shifters. IIRC,
they a (1) slow and imprecise shifting, (2) missed shifts,
(3) conspicuous contrarianism, (4) longevity like an incurable
skin condition, (5) inconvenient location, and (6) conspicuous
contrarianism. Clearly superior to any STI/Ergo like system.


A double dose of "conspicuous contrarianism" ("3" and "6"). Isn't
that overkill?

Perhaps (6) is better replaced by:

(6) Requires levels of skill not present in modern cyclists.


Really? So one should buy DT shifters to develop a useless skill? At least that should translate into some performance advantage, which it doesn't..

I raced for decades on DT shifters along with my cohorts -- who then ****-canned them because they were clearly inferior to STI. No more pack wobble going into or out of high speed corners on a rolling course as riders reached down for gears, no more sitting to shift while climbing out of the saddle, no wrong gear when sprinting because riders could just shift -- and shift a lot. And friction had all of its problems with missed shifts and shifters that would loosen and ghost shift. And I couldn't imagine friction shifting a modern 11sp cassette, but I'm sure more than five gears is somehow wrong or unnecessary.



...I'm planning to put some Simplex Retrofriction downtube levers on
my next bike...


I'm buying a musket for hunting!

I had Simplex DT shifters on my '69 PX10 which is thankfully long gone along with all of its odd-ball French metric components. My 26.6 Simplex seat post was heavy enough to use for home defense. And the bike came with the AVA death stem -- ah, the good old days.

-- Jay Beattie.


Gee Jay you still bother to respond? That is admirable but useless.
By the way yesterday was a glorious day: after multiple f*ck ups my gravel bike frame arrived at the LBS just (a couple of days) within half a year from the initial order (december 7 2019)! The last f*ck up was that they didn't include the right documents so the frame couldn't clear customs and was stuck at the Fedex depot for more than a week 18 km from the LBS. Unbelievable...

Lou

Lou
  #18  
Old June 4th 20, 05:52 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 824
Default Groupsets

On Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 6:34:48 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/4/2020 10:31 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 12:30:27 AM UTC-7, Dennis Davis wrote:


Perhaps (6) is better replaced by:

(6) Requires levels of skill not present in modern cyclists.


Really? So one should buy DT shifters to develop a useless skill? At least that should translate into some performance advantage, which it doesn't.


Perhaps the "useless skill" is the ability to ride with (gasp!) only one
hand on the bars?


No you stubborn dinosaur. There are situations (traffic, road conditions or riding in a pack) even you don't want to take one hand of the handlebar and in that case you can't shift with down tube shifters period. That is the deal.

Lou
  #19  
Old June 4th 20, 05:57 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 824
Default Groupsets

On Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 6:43:57 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/4/2020 10:48 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, June 3, 2020 at 7:12:54 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Adjusting pads is sort of a side issue, since I was talking only about
force on the controls. Although to me, not needing to adjust hydraulic
disc pads is kind of balanced by needing to prissily clean things with
cotton swabs when replacing pads.


I don't clean my disc calipers with cotton swabs. I just drop in a set of pads.


Admittedly, I haven't done it because I don't use those brakes. But
these guys https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQXFFgRButo seem to say it's
important to get the Q-tips out. See about 2:20 and about 3:20 onward.

Is that only for super grungy brakes?

--
- Frank Krygowski


You never pry the metal parts out of the brake pads because they are grinding away the rims? That is more time consuming than running a swap along the pistons when changing the brake pads, which is also quicker than changing the brake pads of rim brakes.

Lou
  #20  
Old June 4th 20, 05:58 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 824
Default Groupsets

On Wednesday, June 3, 2020 at 9:33:14 PM UTC+2, wrote:
The main groupsets are Campagnolo, Shimano and SRAM.

They all now have electronic groupsets.

Shimano, the originator of the Di2 which forced the others into the business uses a wired system like the Campagnolo EPS.

Shimano is a highly technical design that settled upon a method of powering and communicating with each component over the same two-conductor wire. Originally it used multiple wires and I can just picture an electronics engineer looking at that and asking Shimano management, "Why?" In any case since each part communicates with the others, you absolutely must have interchangeable components. These can be anything from 105 to Dura Ace but everything down to the battery itself much be a component interchangeable with the particular group. Why they would have different groups that are not interchangeable I couldn't say. You can get the 9000 series Di2 or the 9780 (which I have). Of course this might be nothing more than mistaken documentation on the Internet which is famous for that.

Campagnolo EPS is also a wired group and I know very little about it except that it is a 12 speed group and cost slightly less than a Tesla S model with full extras. As I've said before, my opinion of Italian engineering is that they are more artists than engineers and I wouldn't be surprised to discover that they need to go through many iterations to get it to work reliably. Though it would look pretty.

SRAM groupsets are real trash from my point of view. Their cranks for instance, have different size bearings on each side of the bike and the steel of the cranks is relatively soft so that they wear away rapidly leaving the cranks to rattle loosely in the bearings. Their electronic shifting idea became rather strange as well. Whereas Shimano has a single battery that lasts probably too long leaving you to eventually run out of juice a month after the last recharge after you've forgotten you even need to recharge, the SRAM is wireless and everything has its own battery to die on its own. They also have the odd idea that the right level shifts to a lower gear and the left to a larger gear. This means that there must be extra intelligence somewhere in this rig to calculate which is a larger gear - the upper chainring and the larger cog or the smaller ring and the smaller cog. Good luck if the battery for that component gives up the ghost. And some of these components uses a coin cell. Hope you're battery rich. Judging from my TV remote which has a three AAA cells and only lasts a month or six weeks, coin cells that go flat shifting you into a granny gear to limp 20 miles home doesn't seem all that brilliant to me.

The Chinese presently have a manual high end groupset from a couple of companies but the tests on them aren't very pleasant and it is likely that the means they are using to get around SRAM and Shimano patents in the USA make for not very well working setups.

Sooner of later I suspect that Shimano will replace the Di2 and Manual groups with hydraulic which will solve most of their problems since people are now seeing just how simple it is to bleed hydraulic systems. Changing the derailleurs to hydraulic would make the changes so soft that it would make Di2 seem like a real effort. Also you could build in chain rub compensation so that it relieves a little pressure if it detects the chain rubbing. Of course this implies that it always has to be setup so that rub is from the high pressure side.

The end result would be a shifting/braking system that has extremely light touch without ever having to recharge a battery. What do you gain by electronic shifting other than automatic compensation for front chain-line?

It would also allow a piston design for the derailleurs that was made out of plastic so it would be lighter and last forever. Maybe that is why they are holding back.


Shimano will never replace Di2 with hydraulics.

Lou
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Groupsets sam[_9_] Racing 5 March 24th 11 07:08 PM
Groupsets Ryan Cousineau Racing 0 March 21st 11 05:56 PM
Groupsets Ryan Cousineau Racing 7 March 21st 11 10:21 AM
Groupsets Ryan Cousineau Racing 0 March 19th 11 06:13 PM
Shimano groupsets Chris Walters UK 8 April 26th 04 08:33 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.