Di2 - A technology too far?

For discussions about bikes and equipment.
Grandad
Posts: 1004
Joined: 22 Nov 2007, 12:22am
Location: Kent

Di2 - A technology too far?

Postby Grandad » 28 May 2019, 8:50pm

It sounds like an Etube programming issue, although if you say it didn't used to do it, perhaps it isn't. Just to be sure I would check this: The system is programmed to drop into the small ring and conversely, not allow movement to the bottom few cassette rings when in the small chainring because it doesn't think that us riders can make an informed decision on gears. It's to stop Muppets from using extremes of chainring and cassette. Get to a bike shop that has the Shimano software on a PC and you can set up the system exactly as you want. This may or may not be the issue but it would be an idea to take it out of the equation if you have continuing issues.


Reply to a query about a Shimano D12 problem on another cycling forum.

I think I will stick to my Campag ergo levers and decide for myself what combination to use without the need to find a shop with software :D

PT1029
Posts: 651
Joined: 16 Apr 2012, 9:20pm

Re: A technology too far?

Postby PT1029 » 28 May 2019, 9:12pm

I don't use DI2 either (bar end levers for me). It did occure to me that DI2 could be useful on (too) steep hills, as you get off to walk, you shrug your shoulders and say "Computer said no".....

dim
Posts: 88
Joined: 12 May 2019, 5:59pm

Re: A technology too far?

Postby dim » 28 May 2019, 9:47pm

I've got Dura Ace Di2 on my Trek Emonda SL6

(I love it!) ....

this video explains the different modes of setting it up (manual, syncro shift etc)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0pIqlOWpqE

User avatar
Gattonero
Posts: 3554
Joined: 31 Jan 2016, 1:35pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: A technology too far?

Postby Gattonero » 29 May 2019, 6:03am

Grandad wrote:
It sounds like an Etube programming issue, although if you say it didn't used to do it, perhaps it isn't. Just to be sure I would check this: The system is programmed to drop into the small ring and conversely, not allow movement to the bottom few cassette rings when in the small chainring because it doesn't think that us riders can make an informed decision on gears. It's to stop Muppets from using extremes of chainring and cassette. Get to a bike shop that has the Shimano software on a PC and you can set up the system exactly as you want. This may or may not be the issue but it would be an idea to take it out of the equation if you have continuing issues.


Reply to a query about a Shimano D12 problem on another cycling forum.

I think I will stick to my Campag ergo levers and decide for myself what combination to use without the need to find a shop with software :D


.... and since you can do updates and tweaks via Bluetooth, what's the problem exactly?
It is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best,
since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them.
Thus you remember them as they actually are...

User avatar
Lance Dopestrong
Posts: 1227
Joined: 18 Sep 2014, 1:52pm

Re: A technology too far?

Postby Lance Dopestrong » 29 May 2019, 6:51am

This e shifting is a technical marvel. I've tried it and its supernaturally efficient.

It just ain't ma thing.i like cycling for the simplicity, and for an olde curmudgeon like me i bicycle a wonderful piece of mechanical purity. E shifting adds nothing to the experience for analogue me.

However, if it tugs your rug then go for it and enjoy every second! It also doesn't mean that I don't find it interesting - I'm a curmudgeon, not a philistine.
https://themediocrecyclist.home.blog
Self employed MIAS L5.B Instructor.
Warwickshire Lowland Rescue Bike lead.
IPMBA certified member.
Cyctech C2 hammer and crowbar bodger.
Lapsed CTC Ride Leader, amateur hour stuff from the fun old days.

reohn2
Posts: 35235
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: A technology too far?

Postby reohn2 » 29 May 2019, 9:28am

Lance Dopestrong wrote:This e shifting is a technical marvel. I've tried it and its supernaturally efficient.

It just ain't ma thing.i like cycling for the simplicity, and for an olde curmudgeon like me i bicycle a wonderful piece of mechanical purity. E shifting adds nothing to the experience for analogue me.

However, if it tugs your rug then go for it and enjoy every second! It also doesn't mean that I don't find it interesting - I'm a curmudgeon, not a philistine.

That sums up the whole electrickery bicycle thing up IMO.
If it strums yers strings go for it,personally I want cable brakes and gears I can fix by the roadside if they go wrong,because my roadside can be be offroadside on some desolate moor,thatxand the cost presently is prohibitively expensive for what it offers me.

thelawnet
Posts: 2130
Joined: 27 Aug 2010, 12:56am

Re: A technology too far?

Postby thelawnet » 29 May 2019, 9:53am

Grandad wrote:
It sounds like an Etube programming issue, although if you say it didn't used to do it, perhaps it isn't. Just to be sure I would check this: The system is programmed to drop into the small ring and conversely, not allow movement to the bottom few cassette rings when in the small chainring because it doesn't think that us riders can make an informed decision on gears. It's to stop Muppets from using extremes of chainring and cassette. Get to a bike shop that has the Shimano software on a PC and you can set up the system exactly as you want. This may or may not be the issue but it would be an idea to take it out of the equation if you have continuing issues.


Reply to a query about a Shimano D12 problem on another cycling forum.

I think I will stick to my Campag ergo levers and decide for myself what combination to use without the need to find a shop with software :D


I'm not sure the initial premise here is correct.

Some of use are good with computers, some of use are good at maintaining bicycles. Some of us may not do either, or may do both.

If I had a Di2 system, I'd not be connecting to a computer in a bike shop, as while I'm sure a decent LBS mechanic is more competent at mechanical stuff than I, I have much more confidence in my computer skills, so I'd probably be frustrated watching them s-l-o-w-l-y navigating their way through the system.

There is a good argument that Di2 (not D12! - it is 'short' for DII, or Digital Integrated Intelligence) is bad for various purposes, but fundamentally if you are spending £5k+ on a road bike, dropping it off at your LBS every time something's not right, then whether it has Di2 or mechanical is not really here nor there - both are IMO rather impractical appliances.

And as I said, there is certainly a group of people who'd be quite happy hooking their bike up to their computer, but would never touch a barrel adjuster.

BrightonRock
Posts: 117
Joined: 4 Apr 2019, 7:37am

Re: A technology too far?

Postby BrightonRock » 29 May 2019, 10:01am

I've found adjusting mechanical gearing very easy and intuitive, and I'm by no means a mechanic. I don't think I'd make the move to electric shifting unless it was really foolproof, which currently it seems not...

Brucey
Posts: 34783
Joined: 4 Jan 2012, 6:25pm

Re: A technology too far?

Postby Brucey » 29 May 2019, 10:20am

thelawnet wrote: ….And as I said, there is certainly a group of people who'd be quite happy hooking their bike up to their computer, but would never touch a barrel adjuster.


yes, these people are mostly known as 'non-cyclists'.... :roll:

It doesn't matter how much electronic bullsquirt you add to a bicycle, it doesn't mean it isn't a mechanical device any more. If you have no mechanical aptitude whatsoever you are still going to have fairly massive and frequent bicycle problems with any 'posh' modern bike. Using electronic gear shifting just adds another layer of disparate complexity to the bicycle whilst offering very little in return.

Outside of professionally maintained bikes used in high level competition, there are about a hundred different things I would do to improve bicycles before I'd bother with that.

I've mentioned this before but things that are of real benefit to the majority of cyclists can be described as 'displacive technologies', i.e. they effectively replace the previous technology, which more or less disappears, certainly in any one manufacturer's range. IMHO the closest things we have had to a displacive technology in the last 40 years are indexed shifting/HG sprocket designs. [However the thing that has been of most benefit (to tourists certainly) has been the cassette hub. That this isn't a universally held view is amply demonstrated by the fact that cheap bikes have indexed shifting before they have cassette hubs.]

Anyway all the 'new things' (some of which are reinventions at best) that have become popular in the last few decades which includes

-A-head headsets
- 8,9,10,11, 12, 13 speed gearing
- STIs/ergos
- tubeless tyres
- different sorts of brakes
- carbon fibre parts
-Di2

all share one thing in common; none of them are truly displacive technologies; at best they have become common -but not ubiquitous- in one or more subsets of cycling. Manufacturers that offer these technologies have, by and large, thought it prudent to continue to offer the (older) alternatives too. This is at least tacit admission that their new stuff isn't going to suit everyone/everything if not an outright admission that it is seriously flawed.

cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

reohn2
Posts: 35235
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: A technology too far?

Postby reohn2 » 29 May 2019, 10:35am

Brucey wrote:
thelawnet wrote: ….And as I said, there is certainly a group of people who'd be quite happy hooking their bike up to their computer, but would never touch a barrel adjuster.


yes, these people are mostly known as 'non-cyclists'.... :roll: ........

cheers

I think you'll find that's not true,my SinL rides a bike 5k per annum,and I'd confidently say he's a cyclist,yet doesn't feel confident mechanically at all,he works at a computer screen all day long.There are many people of the younger generations like him
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

pwa
Posts: 9850
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: A technology too far?

Postby pwa » 29 May 2019, 10:39am

The bottom line for me is that you ride whatever tickles your fancy. If you think electronic shifting with all that software aspect appeals, and you can fund it, why should it bother me?

For myself, it is not what cycling is about. My own vision of cycling is of something that gets us away from the complexity of the rest of our lives, as an escape to something simpler. So my bikes have, and will continue to have, mechanical, non-electronic parts and I keep electronic things to a minimum. Usually just a phone, switched off but in a bag in case of emergency. But that's just me.

Bmblbzzz
Posts: 2712
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: A technology too far?

Postby Bmblbzzz » 29 May 2019, 10:42am

Brucey wrote:... This is at least tacit admission that their new stuff isn't going to suit everyone/everything ...

Is it meant to?

reohn2
Posts: 35235
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: A technology too far?

Postby reohn2 » 29 May 2019, 10:46am

pwa wrote:The bottom line for me is that you ride whatever tickles your fancy. If you think electronic shifting with all that software aspect appeals, and you can fund it, why should it bother me?

Quite!

For myself, it is not what cycling is about. My own vision of cycling is of something that gets us away from the complexity of the rest of our lives, as an escape to something simpler. So my bikes have, and will continue to have, mechanical, non-electronic parts and I keep electronic things to a minimum. Usually just a phone, switched off but in a bag in case of emergency. But that's just me.

I think it's a generational thing,people of a certain age don't have the confidence in electronic trickery the younger generation do.
That doesn't mean one sysrtem is better than the other but it does mean in some applications one can be :wink:
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

Brucey
Posts: 34783
Joined: 4 Jan 2012, 6:25pm

Re: A technology too far?

Postby Brucey » 29 May 2019, 10:47am

reohn2 wrote:
Brucey wrote:
thelawnet wrote: ….And as I said, there is certainly a group of people who'd be quite happy hooking their bike up to their computer, but would never touch a barrel adjuster.


yes, these people are mostly known as 'non-cyclists'.... :roll: ........

cheers

I think you'll find that's not true,my SinL rides a bike 5k per annum,and I'd confidently say he's a cyclist,yet doesn't feel confident mechanically at all,he works at a computer screen all day long.There are many people of the younger generations like him


I suspect that he would pretty soon learn how or give up cycling if you stopped fixing his bike for him....?... :wink:

I have known plenty of people who have no mechnical aptitude whatsoever and many of them have chosen (probably correctly for them) not to bother owning a bike; for them it will always be more burden than benefit. Hence the 'non-cyclist' comment. Having Di2 gears doesn't really change that, I'd say.

cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

reohn2
Posts: 35235
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: A technology too far?

Postby reohn2 » 29 May 2019, 10:53am

Brucey wrote:
reohn2 wrote:
Brucey wrote:
yes, these people are mostly known as 'non-cyclists'.... :roll: ........

cheers

I think you'll find that's not true,my SinL rides a bike 5k per annum,and I'd confidently say he's a cyclist,yet doesn't feel confident mechanically at all,he works at a computer screen all day long.There are many people of the younger generations like him


I suspect that he would pretty soon learn how or give up cycling if you stopped fixing his bike for him....?... :wink:

No he'd periodically take it to a shop when something wasn't working properly,most likely the brakes.

I have known plenty of people who have no mechnical aptitude whatsoever and many of them have chosen (probably correctly for them) not to bother owning a bike; for them it will always be more burden than benefit. Hence the 'non-cyclist' comment. Having Di2 gears doesn't really change that, I'd say.

cheers

I agree electronics wont increase cyclist numbers,but by the same token non electronic bikes won't reduce them.People cycle for sorts of reasons and use alsorts of bikes some ideally suited to the task in hand some not.It's the same story with cars.
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.