Electronic Shifting

[Brucey]

others have commented that it isn't necessary to hack the command code for the shifter wireless signals; it is most likely sufficient to simply provide a jamming signal on the same frequency in order to render a (all?) rider's wireless control signal(s) completely inoperative.

I don't know how likely this really is but if it is anything like some Wi-Fi connections I've used, it seems to take sod-all interference to completely knacker them....

cheers

[Samuel D]

But what’s the motivation for someone to hack you in this way, and what’s the worst that can happen if they succeed?

Not something I would worry about when there’s a laundry list of real problems to worry about!

[reohn2]

But what’s the motivation for someone to hack you in this way, and what’s the worst that can happen if they succeed?

Not something I would worry about when there’s a laundry list of real problems to worry about!

Think racing teams......

[Annoying Twit]

others have commented that it isn't necessary to hack the command code for the shifter wireless signals; it is most likely sufficient to simply provide a jamming signal on the same frequency in order to render a (all?) rider's wireless control signal(s) completely inoperative.

I don't know how likely this really is but if it is anything like some Wi-Fi connections I've used, it seems to take sod-all interference to completely knacker them....

I assume they're designed to work in close proximity to each other. So, they'd interfere with each other if they weren't designed properly. Surely SRAM's engineers would anticipate that and account for it in their design. Jamming itself might be less anticipated, and harder to protect against.

But what’s the motivation for someone to hack you in this way, and what’s the worst that can happen if they succeed?

Not something I would worry about when there’s a laundry list of real problems to worry about!

What's the motivation for people to point laser pointers at helicopter pilots? The 'motivation' may be that they're simply morons, rather than it being (e.g.) other teams involved in the jamming/interference.

I would guess that the worst that could happen is that derailleurs would start changing randomly, which would be worse than simply getting stuck in one gear.

[mercalia]

I suppose since they are wifi they will all have IP addresses and be part of IOT the Internet of Things together with your fridge and front door bell push I just hope that when some one presses your bell you dont change gear

There was a person on here complaining about noisey cyclists going thru country villages, if you want a motivation to put a spanner in their works or spokes here is one to interfere with their gears?


very funny to see them racing thru your village then all of a sudden they change down to small chain ring front and large on back and see their legs go up and down at breakneck speed like a scene from Monty Python

[Manc33]

Let's say it trickles down to 105 level or even Tiagra... then your shifting is still going to be inferior to the top group whether it has electronic shifting, or not. I went from 8-speed to 9-speed and the shifting was definitely impaired slightly. On 8-speed I can honestly say it was flawless and a joy to use while 9-speed seemed to need a knack to it I never could get used to. It just never had that lightening/immediate shifting enjoyed on 8-speed, on 9-speed. I just went back to 8-speed lol.

I pulled up a lot of posts from 2002-2005 before (on all manner of forums/blogs) where indeed, I found people talking about 9-speed just not having that snappiness to it etc, so I have no idea what 10 and now 11 speeds must be like. Yes the 11-speed shifters now may have more cable pull but there's 11 sprockets crammed in now and a thinner chain, the "physics of it" (as one guy put it heh) dictate the further back you go, the better the shifting was. So the top group like XTR in 8-speed shifts better than it does in XTR 9-speed, its something Shimano can't change, physics.

With 9-speed equipment like rear mechs working on 8-speed cassettes and 9-speed chains alleviating chain rub on the front mech when used on 8-speed FD's (while giving no reliability loss in shifting performance) seems the best bet.

11-speed to me is a silly gimmick, a reason to spend money, if you will.

10-speed gives little benefit over 9-speed.

9-speed gives a benefit over 8-speed for the sprockets but reliability suffers.

I never even tried 10 or 11-speed. I remember reading something like "Nobody knows anybody that got the shifting working right on 11-speed" but it might just be a silly rumour.

[landsurfer]

The main advantage to 11 speed i can see is the need for only 1 front sprocket and the reliability and weight saving that provides.
To be honest all my bikes are single chainring, 8 speed blocks, free hub and screw on.
Can never work out why i would need 22 gears.
My time trial bike has a 52 tooth chaining and my 2 tour / sportive bikes have 36 tooth chainrings.
Just in the process of building up an 80's / Eroica style bike and that will have a 42 tooth ring.

[reohn2]

The main advantage to 11 speed i can see is the need for only 1 front sprocket and the reliability and weight saving that provides.
To be honest all my bikes are single chainring, 8 speed blocks, free hub and screw on.
Can never work out why i would need 22 gears.
My time trial bike has a 52 tooth chaining and my 2 tour / sportive bikes have 36 tooth chainrings.
Just in the process of building up an 80's / Eroica style bike and that will have a 42 tooth ring.

Because they have the spread of ratios for all terrain,top can be reasonably high enough to pedal on the flat,bottom can be low enough for really steep stuff and ratios can be close enough for comfortable changes whilst maintaining an optimum cadence.

[landsurfer]

I live next to the Peak District where i do a great deal of my cycling. Using a 14 / 28 block i can manage 95% of hills with ease (and a lot of sweat).

[Brucey]

You can find people on the interweb who will happily support any particular view that you happen to share (and maybe this forum is a case in point too), but FWIW -having had the opportunity to ride lots of different groupsets- I'd say that through 8-9-10s the way the chain moves over the sprockets has improved significantly. To me, 8s seems 'rather clunky' by comparison with 9s, for example.

However the net effect (up to 10s) with shimano road systems wasn't great, because the shift ratio was pushed to the limit with 10s. By contrast campag 10s was so much slicker than their 9s and 8s, it was hard to believe they came from the same manufacturer.

The shifting on 11s systems seems OK too (and may stay better in the medium term vs 10s shimano road, because of the cable/shift ratio issue) but I'm not really in favour of it for several reasons, not the least of which are concerns over durability; in road form the rear wheel is more dished than ever, and the chains don't seem to last anywhere near as well as with earlier systems.

Every time they increase the number of sprockets they try to retain good chain strength/life by improving the coatings in the bushings, increasing the strength of the steel in the sideplates, improving the riveting and so forth. They also improve shift quality by attention to the design of the chain and the sprocket tooth forms. What depresses me somewhat is that If they applied these methods to (say) 9s, we'd have transmissions that worked better and ought to last about twice as long as they do. As it is, 'obsolete' systems soon become bottom end fodder in the food chain, and instead of benefitting from the latest improvements in materials etc, the equipment that you can buy tends to be of increasingly poor quality as time goes on.

Right now you can buy 11s road groupsets such as Dura-Ace in both mechanical and electronic forms. This is (I think) the first time that Shimano have launched a top end product where they gave you this kind of choice, and carried on with it; previously it has been 'new stuff or nowt' if you want the latest Dura-Ace groupset. Is this simply a sign that Shimano know that the system is unlikely to be accepted by all riders? Or is it in fact a sign that they too have real doubts about it?

I happen not to think that there is a 'one size fits all' gearing system, more that there are various systems that suit some people and applications better than others. So when I hear people say 'all my bikes are XYZ, because that is 'best' and God Forbid that I should ever use YZX' I am inclined to take this with a pinch of salt. For example I happen to like IGHs; I find they work well for me in a number of applications. But I wouldn't want to have all my bikes running IGHs (or try to force them down other people's throats in every application) any more than I would like to have my own bikes with one number of speeds or one number of chainrings; they are there to do entirely different jobs, why should they all be 'the same' in that respect? If they were, it'd make as much sense as them all having the exact same type of tyres, or something, wouldn't it?

This thread was originally about whether electronic shifting will make inroads into (effectively) the utility cycling market. Whilst I'm sure that there are folk who are busy scheming to find a way of selling such into that market, I don't think it is really very suitable, any more than (say) tri-bars and silk tubs are the ticket when you are nipping down the shops...

cheers

[amediasatex]

The physics of it actually dictate that the shift should be better, the chain is thinner, more flexible, and has to move less distance to change gear, add to that the sprocket teeth are more profiled for release and pickup than on older drivetrains so the shift is going to be quicker and smoother. BUT, this is also it's downfall, everything has to be more prescise, a tiny bit of misalingment in the system will manifest itself quickly and more noticeably.

A lower speed, wider spaced drivetrain will be more tolerant to a bit of mech flop, a misadjusted cable or a tiny bit of wobble in a freehub, the chain simply will not derail as easily so the worst you might feel is a little bit of rub, or chirping, that on an 11 speed system could easily lead to a derailment or skipping.

It's pretty well agreed that (shimano) MTB 9 speed was at the limit of what was/should have been attempted, the sysetm need to be very precisely adjusted as was not tolerant of grime, damage or misalignment, hence the change to 'dynasis' cable pull for MTB 10 speed which pretty mcuh cured the shifting woes. The same thing happened with road 10 speed, it was at the limit and cable pull ratios were adjsuted for 11 speed and resulted in much better shifting, so much so that the new pull ratios have been adopted for the current 10 speed Tiagra 4700 group.

Things were always a little different with SRAM as their pull ratio was differnet even at 9 speed and one fo the reasons that SRAM did so well in the 9speed MTB era was that their shifting was far more reliable and grime proof (even if their mechs were a little fragile!).

Campag again was a different matter as 10 speed was pretty much the pinnacle of shifting performance from them as far as I am concerned, but that doesn't mean they can't better it in future.

What you describe as a positive definite shift feeling, others desribe as 'clunky shifting'. A case in point is when I recently leant one of my bikes to a friend for our weekend club run while his was being repaired. the bike I gave him was 8 speed (Shimano 600 STI setup), but is one of the sweetest shifting 8 speed drivetrains I have ever had, and when he gave it back I asked him how the bike had performed, he praised it's comfort and handling but the thing that really surprised me was that he said he couldn't get on with the gears, felt they were clunky and to use his word 'thunked' a lot. We discussed it a bit for a while as I was convinced the biek was in tip top order and shifting well, but it dawned on me while chatting to him that he had only started riding about 2 years ago, and his entire road bike experience had been on a Shimano 11 speed (5800 105) setup, and he simply wasn;t used to 'feeling' the gear changing, he was simply used to a little click and then being in the next gear, but not the actual sensation of changing gear.

I think this highlights the fact that it's partly a perceptual/expectation thing.

A well setup (current) 10 speed to 11 speed system shifts so smoothly and quickly as to be nearly invisible, you don't really 'feel' the shift, you feel a small click, and then a change in cadence or resistance, but you don't actually feel the chain derail from one sprocket and engage on the next like you do with older more widely spaced drivetrains.

There are many reasons for picking a 7/8 speed drivetrain over a 10/11/12 for general use, reliability, durability, longevity, cost of spares, tolerance to damage and poor adjustment, but I really dont think quality of shifting is one, ability to maintain that quality over normal use sure, but not the actual quality of the shift of a well adjsuted system.

It would be nice if some of the technology used at the top end had filtered down more so that there were actually quality parts at the lower speed end rather than what happens with lower speeds being relegated to 'budget' groups and the number of sprockets being seen as a defining feature. I would love a 7/8/9 speed version of current Dura Ace/Ultegra for example, using all the modern tech but simply with more robust and durable consumables.

as a final thought:

11-speed to me is a silly gimmick, a reason to spend money, if you will.

10-speed gives little benefit over 9-speed.

9-speed gives a benefit over 8-speed for the sprockets but reliability suffers.

I never even tried 10 or 11-speed.

This kind of thing is very common, discussion and comment on a product or system from someone who has never used it, let alone used it long term, sold it or had to repair it for customers. I don't wish to single you out or pick on you Manc33 but I do wish people would either be a little bit more reserved when commenting on the feel or performance of things they've never used, or at least say up front "I don't have any experience of this but I imagine..." as post like yours are exactly how internet rumours spread and false information perpetuates.

I remember reading something like "Nobody knows anybody that got the shifting working right on 11-speed" but it might just be a silly rumour.

Case in point ^, a rumour that has lodged itself in your brain and persisted enough for you to repost it, despite not knowing if there's any truth to it, I wonder how many people will also pick that little nugget up in future searches and reads of this thread

EDIT - I was typing all this out while Brucey was apparently also replying, and it seems there is some overlap in what we said

[reohn2]

I live next to the Peak District where i do a great deal of my cycling. Using a 14 / 28 block i can manage 95% of hills with ease (and a lot of sweat).

But you're not everyone,I don't know your weigh or fitness level or age,or if you carry a touring load or if you climb 10 to15% gravelly tracks picking your way slowly around fist sized stones,or if you're our all day riding or just ride for a couple of hours,etc,etc.
Like some people need pedal assist,the overwhelming majority of riders need a wide spread of gearing,off the top of my head I can think of a number of rides where I need the full 20" to 90" range of gears.
It's a comforting thought to know when the heavens open and I'm cold and miserable and 40 miles from home with a fair few climbs ahead of me,that I'll have enough gears to get this wisen old wreck of a body I live in home without issue or concern and can climb anything up to 25% .

[reohn2]

FWIW I can't for the life of me feel/see/experience a difference in shifting between 8,9 or 10sp when set up well even on the tandem they all change exceptionally well unless in need of lubrication when the performance falls off slightly but not majorly and the 8 and 9sp are custom cassettes with ramps misaligned,the 8sp on Kelly's D/T levers and the 9sp on tandem on road STI's(both on 9sp chains) are as sweet as the 10sp stock cassette MTB STI's.The only time I have any problems it's down to 'user error'

EDIT:-totally forgot to mention the new Circe tandem on 3x custom,misaligned ramped 8sp cassette operated with DT levers in Kelly's also changes as sweet as a nut .

[Annoying Twit]

Returning to the original topic:

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/pro ... set-216443

Taiwanese firm Microshift might not be the first company you think of when buying a new groupset, but that could change in the next few years as it is looking to launch an electronic groupset aimed at the most affordable end of the market.
Read more at http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/pro ... vRBf8Bg.99

[MikeF]

I live next to the Peak District where i do a great deal of my cycling. Using a 14 / 28 block i can manage 95% of hills with ease (and a lot of sweat).

But you're not everyone,I don't know your weigh or fitness level or age,or if you carry a touring load or if you climb 10 to15% gravelly tracks picking your way slowly around fist sized stones,or if you're our all day riding or just ride for a couple of hours,etc,etc.
Like some people need pedal assist,the overwhelming majority of riders need a wide spread of gearing,off the top of my head I can think of a number of rides where I need the full 20" to 90" range of gears.
It's a comforting thought to know when the heavens open and I'm cold and miserable and 40 miles from home with a fair few climbs ahead of me,that I'll have enough gears to get this wisen old wreck of a body I live in home without issue or concern and can climb anything up to 25% .

Yes I'm not everyone either. Yesterday I used the range 23-113 inches. (20" is the lowest) on roads and I don't think a single chainwheel could accommodate that. It might be possible with a double though.

With ease and a lot of sweat seems like two conflicting conditions to me.