Cycling UK Forum

MikeDee wrote:The "washing line" shifters are better in terms of cable life and maintenance. Uglier though. The cable routing is straight into the shifter, rather than the torturous bend on the newer shifters. Cables break more predictably at the button rather than 1" in.

Beauty is entirely in the eye of the beholder.

scottg wrote:Best to do away with the pesky cables.....
No washing lines, no cable beneath the bar tape.

I did that for 3 or 4 years.
Having educated my legs that "just right" gear ratios made no difference, my shifting went down to more like one shift per mile average, and I've not had any cable damage since.

scottg wrote:Best to do away with the pesky cables.....
No washing lines, no cable beneath the bar tape.
Routing is straight, operation, well, it takes some practice.
Explanation here...
https://mariposabicycles.ca/blog/2016/0 ... s-roubaix/

P-R-Derailleur.jpeg

I'd rather go with wireless shifting

andrew_s wrote:

scottg wrote:Best to do away with the pesky cables.....
No washing lines, no cable beneath the bar tape.

I did that for 3 or 4 years.
Having educated my legs that "just right" gear ratios made no difference, my shifting went down to more like one shift per mile average, and I've not had any cable damage since.

As a compromise, shifters which are mounted on the stem (knacker-threateningly) or under the tops (less knacker-threateningly) seem pretty good to me, on a touring bike. Much easier to access than DT shifters, but little in the way of cable problems, no bar bag obstruction etc and practically zero risk of knocking a shifter and damaging it.

If the right shifters are used (with downwards facing cable exits), there is only one (gradual, sweeping) 40 degree bend in addition to whatever there might be with a DT lever anyway.

cheers

Brucey wrote:9000, 6800, 5800 (11s) all use a different shift ratio -in both FD and RD- vs older groupsets and (with the right cables) shift OK. They use about 2.7mm cable pull per rear shift.

DA, Ultegra, 105 10s groupsets in hidden cable form (7900, 6700, 5700) use the 'old' shift ratios (~2.3mm cable pull per rear shift) and this combined with underbartape routing means that these groupsets tend to be very sensitive to cable condition.

Shimano had at least three goes at cable sets for these groupsets which used various forms of coated inner cable. These 'worked' in that they initially offered lower friction, but all too often the coating came off the inner cable and managed to clog the outer cable.

When Tiagra went 10s with 4700 (and GRX 10s arrived later on) they both used the 'new' shift ratios as per the 11s groupsets (about 2.8mm cable pull per rear shift, in 10s form, which happens to be near-identical to 8s cable pull per rear shift too).
When Sora went 9s, they stuck with the 'old' RD shift ratio (so about 2.5mm cable pull per rear shift) but used the new shift ratio for the FD. {edit; in doubles but not triples]

So all current shimano groupsets with hidden cables use at least 2.5mm cable pull per rear shift, and seem to work OK. But uniquely in the case of 9s, the same cable pull per shift is used in older washing line shifters too, which makes them more tolerant of cable condition.

Not exactly...

Shimano came out with 10 speed for its top three groupsets (Dura Ace, Ultegra, 105) as 7800, 6600, 5600. Tiagra was 4500 9 speed

The next versions (7900, 6700, 5700) was 'upgraded' with the under bar cables, so at this point they could make Tiagra 10 speed but with the 'lower end' washing line cables, so this was Tiagra 4600

Then it turned out the under bar cabling caused problems so for 11 speed they increased the cable pull i.e. 9000, 6800, 5800.

As 11 speed was new, the next Tiagra, 4700, didn't get it but instead got a version of the 9000/6800/5800 with hidden cables one less click and the same pull ratio as those.

A slightly different version was released as Sora R3000 with 9 speeds, and Claris R2000 with 8 speeds, which used the same pull ratio as older 8/9 speeds

The FD pull is I believe the same across all 2x hidden cable brifters except the first gen (i.e. 7900/6700/5700), so R2000 is the same as R9100 for example.

The 3x brifters (only for Tiagra, Sora and Claris) all then use the older pull because Shimano doesn't care enough about 3x to update it

I don't think there is any substantial difference between Claris and Sora beyond the extra gear click.

all 'in the context of current undebartape shifters, 9s or higher'; so out of that context you can pick holes in it to your hearts content. For example I also didn't mention 4600 which was the first Tiagra 10s groupset, because it has washing lines and the old shift ratio in both front and rear mechs, like many of the other early 10s groupsets.

The point was that most of the current underbartape shifters use a longer cable pull for the rear mech than previous shifter generations, the exception being 9s. So you might not be much worse off for having underbartape routing in 10s or higher current shimano stuff, but in 9s, the rear shifting is likely to be significantly more reliable with washing lines, because the shift ratio is the same. In fact 9s rear shifting uses the shortest cable pull per shift of any current system, so cable-wise is likely to be the most finicky in underbartape form.

cheers

I have both 7800 double and triple systems on my bikes and 4600 on my everyday bike. All washing lines and all 10 spd so cross-compatible. In terms of lever action they are very similar. Merlin cycles were selling the Tiagra shifters for £50 a pair at a time when Tiagra 4700 was the new thing. I could see it was a bargain so I bought two pairs.

Brucey wrote:all 'in the context of current undebartape shifters, 9s or higher'; so out of that context you can pick holes in it to your hearts content. For example I also didn't mention 4600 which was the first Tiagra 10s groupset, because it has washing lines and the old shift ratio in both front and rear mechs, like many of the other early 10s groupsets.

The point was that most of the current underbartape shifters use a longer cable pull for the rear mech than previous shifter generations, the exception being 9s. So you might not be much worse off for having underbartape routing in 10s or higher current shimano stuff, but in 9s, the rear shifting is likely to be significantly more reliable with washing lines, because the shift ratio is the same. In fact 9s rear shifting uses the shortest cable pull per shift of any current system, so cable-wise is likely to be the most finicky in underbartape form.

cheers

Interesting info, thanks for that.

As it happens, once I'd built the bike and done initial tinkering, I never, and I really mean never, had any problems with rear shifting. And still don't. To be honest very few problem with front shifting, once I'd learned how to do it. Which, considering this is the first derailleur bike I've built, hell, the first derailleur bike I've even ridden, is amazing. Either I'm very lucky or some sort of idiot savant.

I'm focussing on 9 speed triple because:

1. It's still the easiest way to get wide gear range and a low bottom gear on a road bike with STIs.

2. It's got the best compatibility shifter/derailleur wise, both at the front and back.

So my fascination with washing lines is less to do with shifting, and more to do with availability and longevity. We are at a point where somebody, AKA me, who wants to keep running triple nine-speed, can stock up with NOS/lightly used kit, enough to see me out. Which is my intention. If better shifting with washing lines vs Sora under-tape is a by-product, all well and good.

A secondary by-product may well be STIs that work better with my BB7s. Much as I like the look of Paul Klampers, and I'm sure they're worth the money, I can buy four BB7s for the price of one Klamper.

I'm busy setting up the various parts, trying combinations to make sure they work (FDs with smaller chainrings needs testing). Once I've settled on a setup I'll just get loads of them.

I have even less technical knowledge then claimed by the OP! But 3 months ago I did change back to non-index downtube shifters with 3x8 after 20 years of Ergo and STI. Mainly a financial decision but dead easy to set up and I enjoy it! Maybe because it's reminiscent of times when the bike I had was the bike I had with no wish for anything more elaborate. I have to pay a little bit more attention to when to change because of taking a hand off the handlebar of course. But now the STI levers have been replaced with plain Tektros the braking is better and very noticeably so, that's with 57mm calipers.

Bob999 wrote:I have even less technical knowledge then claimed by the OP! But 3 months ago I did change back to non-index downtube shifters with 3x8 after 20 years of Ergo and STI. Mainly a financial decision but dead easy to set up and I enjoy it! Maybe because it's reminiscent of times when the bike I had was the bike I had with no wish for anything more elaborate. I have to pay a little bit more attention to when to change because of taking a hand off the handlebar of course. But now the STI levers have been replaced with plain Tektros the braking is better and very noticeably so, that's with 57mm calipers.

I'm think you might have misunderstood my question. I'm talking about the difference between Shimano combined brake/gear levers that have their gear cables under the bar tape, and those that don't, AKA as "washing line" shifters. I wasn't asking a question about downtube shifters.

Mike

Every thread will drift back to the benefits of down tube levers sooner or later... It's a fact!!!

Cheers James

Jamesh wrote:Mike

Every thread will drift back to the benefits of down tube levers sooner or later... It's a fact!!!

Cheers James

Yes, the answer usually seems to be downtube shifters and/or friction shifting. Whatever the question is. What's that old one:

"Excuse me, how do I get to Skipton"

"Oh, well, if I were going to Skipton I wouldn't start from here".

Why Skipton!

I almost went there today and my wife and kids wanted a walk so I was saved from a cold ride via langbar and embassy to Skipton and back! Is that local?!!

Cheers James

Jamesh wrote:Why Skipton!

I almost went there today and my wife and kids wanted a walk so I was saved from a cold ride via langbar and embassy to Skipton and back! Is that local?!!

Cheers James

I always wondered where the British Embassy was in Yorkshire, I must have ridden past it a few times.
Love it at Langbar, remote feeling but local, all at the same time!

colin54 wrote:

Jamesh wrote:Why Skipton!

I almost went there today and my wife and kids wanted a walk so I was saved from a cold ride via langbar and embassy to Skipton and back! Is that local?!!

Cheers James

I always wondered where the British Embassy was in Yorkshire, I must have ridden past it a few times.
Love it at Langbar, remote feeling but local, all at the same time!

Embsay I expect.