Electronic Shifting

[SpannerGeek]

by Brucey » 11 Sep 2016, 8:49pm
as I hinted at earlier, what is 'the norm'....?

I'm not sure there is one, any more than there is an 'average cyclist'.

cheers

Well I think the 'norm' is whatever Shamano, campag etc have on their spread sheets and its what will dictate what direction they take. How close to reality this is can only be judged by their overall success.
Obviously they also have, to limited extent, the power to dictate what we will want. I can imagine future generations thinking it a bit weird to actually want cables running all over the place.

Precisely, to imagine consumers have any 'choice' whatsoever is fanciful. Shimano decides what the market wants two years ahead of schedule... You get the technology shimano wants to sell you, all they have to do is stop supporting legacy technology and it's as dead as a dodo in 18 months.

It's as simple as that.

[Brucey]

well if there is such a thing as an average cyclist, I think they mostly want a bike that is inexpensive, reliable, comfortable, efficient, (not necessarily in that order).

I don't think that flim-flam like electronic shifting addresses any of those things in any useful way. Racers might think they have to have it (or are paid to use it) and gormless mamils may go "meee tooo...!" with wallets open wide, to the joy of equipment manufacturers who have clearly run out of genuinely good ideas.... but that still doesn't make it a good idea for an 'average cyclist' (however you might define that...).

I personally think that in future times people will look back and ask 'what bunch of cretins decided to make a simple and intrinsically elegant machine like a bicycle as stupidly complicated and unreliable as that?' - and will laugh themselves sick.

cheers

[Stevek76]

If the price point between 105 di2 and mechanical 105 is £50, then dare I suggest that mechanical STI is just a
Breath away from extinction .

How do you kill off an outdated technology?

Stop selling it, and then stop supporting spares and repairs. It's quite easy, when you think about it.

Last I checked 105 di2 remains little more than a rumour. That shimano would wish to retail such a product for £350 given the current price gap between the ultegra mechanical and di2 versions seems highly unlikely to be something for the immediate future.

As for killing off outdated technology, it's probably worth noting that shimano are still making and selling 7 speed systems, square taper bottom brackets etc. It's going to be a very long time before you see electric shifting on the low end bikes.

You're right that shimano etc decides what the market wants but there's zero financial benefit to them to trickle stuff down too fast, particularly once you get below 105 where they basically have a monopoly.

[The utility cyclist]

My, there are a lot of forumers whom are condescending and look down their noses at the 'masses' saying they won't do this or that and slag off tech that they either have no experience of and/or take one or two instances of negative outcomes as the gospal truth or indeed just make up scenarios for the sake of arguing! why does that matter to you what X person does if they choose to buy electronic shifting, really, why? It has no bearing on your life in the slightest so if someone who doesn't maintain their bike gets the kit what really is the big deal, it appears to be an opportunity for miserable old farts to harp on how other won't do this or that long before the scenario unfolds if at all

Mechanical is not going away, whomever thinks this is so really has no grasp of things.

Brucey, pros have a choice, maybe you need to keep up with what's happening in the pro peloton, a few riders choose to have mechanical, riders also choose lots of different kit that aren't 'sponsored' and either blank off the labels or relabel them, so whilst pros are paid to ride bikes, they get to choose what they want and are not forced to have kit they don't want.
Electronic shifting, those that have it prefer it, it makes their life easier in a race, it means you can have shifting on the tops with satellite shifters, it means you can shift under duress especially to the big ring, it means you can shift easier when going over very rough roads like cobbles for instance, it's also better on chain wear, even the team mechanics prefer electronic as there is less maintenance for them to do or do you think all those pros and the mechanics are lying when they say they prefer it because of multiple reasons?

[reohn2]

Mechanical is not going away, whomever thinks this is so really has no grasp of things.

I think you're right,I think E shifting will stay in the top end gruppos with an option in the mid range at some point.

What's not been discussed is the growing popularity of Pedelecs as utility bikes,and the possibility of E shifting being added as part of the package which could if 100% reliable and able to stand the rigours of everyday use,be something that could be a selling point for such bikes.
Another point which I hadn't thought about when we first discussed the subject on the forum but was made aware of by CJ,was disabled people with badly deformed or arthritic finger joints,specifically thumbs,who can't or find it difficult,to use gear levers such as STI's road or MTB,for such people a simple button or up/down rocker switch could be a boon,though it's a small minority that Mr Shimano may not be interested in,perhaps a small third party electronics company could supply a need.


All that said I tend to agree slightly with Brucey on one thing,that the beautiful machine which has stood the test of time,is being laden down with electronics that really don't fit the ethos of it or any real need for the most part.
But then I'm in my 60's and having used mechanical gears all my life can't see the need,certainly not for tourists at least,I can see the so called 'MAMILS' and sportive types buying it but ATM for the vast majority it's impractical exotica.
ATM to buy and maintain ie;a replacement rear mech or STI costs a fortune,for the must have's and social climbers it's,well a must have with a tree top view,it was ever thus.

IMHO other than the a disabled application,outside of racing the need isn't there,but the want? That's another matter.

[Annoying Twit]

well if there is such a thing as an average cyclist, I think they mostly want a bike that is inexpensive, reliable, comfortable, efficient, (not necessarily in that order).

I would agree in terms of sensible cyclists. Teenagers wanting to impress their friends may want fancy technology for no reason other than some perception of bike status.

[Brucey]

well if there is such a thing as an average cyclist, I think they mostly want a bike that is inexpensive, reliable, comfortable, efficient, (not necessarily in that order).

I would agree in terms of sensible cyclists. Teenagers wanting to impress their friends may want fancy technology for no reason other than some perception of bike status.

not just actual teenagers....

cheers

[meic]

Dont knock it!
It keeps the rest of us supplied with top quality components at a knock down price just because it is "last year's model".
or better still given away free because it is "obsolete".

[mig]

in the main it's racing kit. fancy racing kit at that. i saw a chap yesterday atop holme moss with a frame using very deep ZIPP rims and he was struggling to keep it in a straight line given the wind up there. most of that sort of stuff looks good on the telly but isn't the best choice on open roads, used by weaker riders, without regular fettling etc.

[Samuel D]

Not being lazy, disabled in the hands in some way, or mechanically incompetent, I find electric shifting to be quite useless.

But even if I thought it was practically useful, it runs counter to everything I enjoy about bicycles and cycling (simplicity, reliability, serviceability, durability, elegance, timelessness, self-sufficiency, environmental friendliness, etc.). So I wouldn’t use it.

However, I think you’re kidding yourself if you think it won’t become far more popular than it currently is. There is nothing expensive about electric motors, nylon gears, and lithium-ion batteries. It would not surprise me if these things end up being cheaper to mass-produce than precision-built mechanical systems. Of course they are not yet produced in the huge numbers that Shimano Tiagra and 105 are, but that time will come soon enough.

Don’t expect people not to buy them because they don’t need them. Customers are bombarded with advertising and biased or ignorant reviews; they have a lack of time (their own fault, but that’s beside the point); and they have a lot of disposable income. They apply no critical thought to most things they do, including buying bicycle parts (which they usually buy on built-up bicycles).

[meic]

I can see quite an attraction in getting rid of all those cables and stops from the frame.
If some future system was a couple of pressure sensors at your finger tips and two totally discreet, self contained derailleurs, all powered by batteries self charging from say the passing of the chain. Then I could go for that at a reasonable* price.

*ie. cheap

[reohn2]

in the main it's racing kit. fancy racing kit at that. i saw a chap yesterday atop holme moss with a frame using very deep ZIPP rims and he was struggling to keep it in a straight line given the wind up there.

I've witnessed the same,and in one instance on a very open stretch of local road I passed,giving them a wide berth,someone with very deep section CF wheels who was really struggling to stay upright,whilst I was just leaning on the wind a bit with odd correction,it was a real eye opener to witness.

most of that sort of stuff looks good on the telly but isn't the best choice on open roads, used by weaker riders......

I agree,I think some people have no idea what they're getting into with such impractical kit.

[ukdodger]

well if there is such a thing as an average cyclist, I think they mostly want a bike that is inexpensive, reliable, comfortable, efficient, (not necessarily in that order).

I don't think that flim-flam like electronic shifting addresses any of those things in any useful way. Racers might think they have to have it (or are paid to use it) and gormless mamils may go "meee tooo...!" with wallets open wide, to the joy of equipment manufacturers who have clearly run out of genuinely good ideas.... but that still doesn't make it a good idea for an 'average cyclist' (however you might define that...).

I personally think that in future times people will look back and ask 'what bunch of cretins decided to make a simple and intrinsically elegant machine like a bicycle as stupidly complicated and unreliable as that?' - and will laugh themselves sick.

cheers

I couldnt have put that better.

[reohn2]

Not being lazy, disabled in the hands in some way, or mechanically incompetent, I find electric shifting to be quite useless.

But even if I thought it was practically useful, it runs counter to everything I enjoy about bicycles and cycling (simplicity, reliability, serviceability, durability, elegance, timelessness, self-sufficiency, environmental friendliness, etc.). So I wouldn’t use it.

Some time ago a was chatting to a chap who was admiring my Vaya,outside the post office,he was in his 80's and he asked how many gears it had I said 24,he told me he only ever needed three to tour on in North Wales .The Times they are a Changin'

However, I think you’re kidding yourself if you think it won’t become far more popular than it currently is. There is nothing expensive about electric motors, nylon gears, and lithium-ion batteries. It would not surprise me if these things end up being cheaper to mass-produce than precision-built mechanical systems. Of course they are not yet produced in the huge numbers that Shimano Tiagra and 105 are, but that time will come soon enough.

Don’t expect people not to buy them because they don’t need them. Customers are bombarded with advertising and biased or ignorant reviews; they have a lack of time (their own fault, but that’s beside the point); and they have a lot of disposable income. They apply no critical thought to most things they do, including buying bicycle parts (which they usually buy on built-up bicycles).

Yer not wrong

[mig]

i do agree there is a certain triumph of tech over fitness. i once had the honour of attending an awards night in the company of JF Arnold, something of a trike rider in the 1950s who humbly went through the virtues of his three speed transmission used in the LEJOG record of, i think, 1954.