12/3/16 12:04 PM

My only peeve with the MicroShift is up front.

You can not drop to the little ring when trimmed outboard on the big ring with one swing.

But, the little button sits in a different way for each trim position as to make you know the trim positions by feel. The release button sits outward and firm, or sits outward and you can feel it not be in that stiff position easily when it is not in fact in said position. For some reason this I find a good thing.

But like STI, each rear upshift requires a click. You get good at rapid firing them. But I miss that about my ERGO 9s frankly. Getting that back on the Di2, hold to go multi cog, adds something I did not have for my upgrade effort.

And something I like and missed from the ERGOs.

12/3/16 12:14 PM

Disc brakes?

Probably not commented on as you will not have the choice with that bike:

But perhaps some points are:

-Through axle complexity of flat fixing -
-Tubeless negating that to a degree +
-Wet riding +
-Rim life serviceability ++
-Dished front wheel for light or low spoke wheels?
-Wider 135mm spaced rear wheel and flanges ++
-Wheel lacing limits with load on disc side of wheel under braking ? No radial or ultra light wheels can be as stable as non disc arguably.


"Shimano recently impressed me by releasing reverse compatible (11 speed to 10) derailleurs to solve the problem of the 10 spd stuff being out of production. "

Wait! WHAT??


And to Dan E, I am of course still fan-boying and in the honeymoon period on my new Di2 Toy. Not ready for the reality check and your position of the opposite direction/justification. ;)

>>But best post in the thread is yours:

quote:

---

"Life is short, buy the damn bike."

---

12/3/16 1:14 PM

In fact, my next bike or frameset purchase will be to upgrade my 'cross/gravel bike to disks. Cantilvers and Mini-V brakes simply don't work well enough at high speeds on dirt roads, especially if it's wet.

On the road, I don't feel compelled to make the change to disks anytime soon, simply because I rarely ride in conditions where they would provide any significant benefit. If I get caught in the rain, it's a mistake. I don't commute to work by bike, so that's not an issue for me. For people who frequently ride in inclement weather, they would be a huge benefit.

So, while I don't have anything against disks on the road and I expect that they will eventually become ubiquitous on mid-high end bikes, I can't justify the cost to make the switch. At a minimum, it would require new frames, wheels and brake/shift levers, if not a complete bike. The resulting bike(s) would be heavier by at least a pound, which offends my "weight weenie" sensibilities, especially since I'd be lugging the extra weight around without needing it 99% of the time. Additionally, I suspect that road disks will continue to evolve and improve over the next few years. We're starting to see more advanced carbon/ceramic rotors and brake pads, among other things, so the weight gap should narrow soon.

I wouldn't be surprised if smaller, dual disks on the front became an option eventually, in order to balance the forces on the fork blades (this is common on road motorcycles). Currently, one fork blade has to be considerably stiffer than the other, which can affect the way the fork handles bumps. Thru axles help to alleviate the imbalance, so perhaps dual disks aren't really necessary on thru axle single bikes. However, they could be a benefit on tandems and touring/adventure/gravel bikes.

Sparky, what makes you think that thru axles complicate fixing a flat? They're no more difficult to deal with than a quick release. Although it's not an issue for most (if any) of us here, in UCI races where you are not allowed to remove the "lawyer lips" from fork dropouts, thru axles are as fast or faster than spinning a Q/R skewer. Compared to a Q/R fork with no "lawyer lips", swapping a wheel with a thru axle is somewhat slower, though some of that is made up for by not having to release and reset the Q/R on the brake.

12/3/16 1:29 PM

"thru axles complicate fixing a flat?"

For one, bits that are not attached during the process? Or has that changed since my early through axle MTB? Dirt possibly getting on axle before it slide back in, if wrong, see first point/question. ;)

12/3/16 4:51 PM

Having just done a ride with Jens, if I get a ridiculous bike like this, I want his bike so I can be a total fanboy. Plus from what I read the Madone is the most interesting. I'd have to make sure I'm comfortable with the "H1" geometry of course, but it looks to me like a 58 with a 130 stem would set up pretty much exactly like my Sachs, with the likely exception of bar height. Not sure how much flexibility there is for that on the bike, but I think I can deal with a lower bar OK if necessary. Fortunately my "new" LBS (after the old one closed) is a high end Trek dealer racer boy shop with good people, so I can get that sorted out if I decide to pursue it.

Riduculously expensive, but definitely cool!

12/3/16 6:25 PM

I bought a Domane 6.9 frame set and built it up with 2016 Chorus 11sp Mechanical, wanted to put Chorus EPS but Trek frames are not EPS compatible.
My wife's Silque SSL was purchased as a Complete bike that only came with Ultegra Di2.
My wife's other bikes both have Campy, one is a Pedal Force and her other is a Trek Silque SL. Both were frameset only purchaces that I built up.
Trek does not offer any Campy built bikes, even if you order a Project One.

12/3/16 11:37 PM

Until it becomes clear that the disc-brake frame/fork setups have the time-honed flex characteristics that evolved over decades, I would stay away from a disc braked road bike. The resulting need for a virtually rigid fork to prevent brake-steer usually results in the bike's entire front end having far less give than on the typical, well-evolved frameset, and with much bigger tires then being needed to allow for very low inflation pressures, to add back some give to the ride. It's a package deal that, overall, offers a new approach that is not necessarily better, just different.

Bicycle Quarterly tests various bikes at the more versatile end of the spectrum, and their reports tell the story about how such bikes perform under a wide range of conditions.

12/4/16 12:44 PM

"Di2 is worth the money"

I would be less patient and less cheap about getting the Di2 on a bike had I ridden one previously. I certainly will buy the next one faster and not let the money slow down the appropriations.

Already ordered a climbing switch and another battery holder to do a 1x Di2 on the Strong when I saw the setup on a bike. I will either get a SS 6800 DR and move the GS over, or splurge for a XTR RD and 11-42 cassette.

I figure if I do the GS Ultegra I will use a 28/40 XT crank I have and leave the left bar con on. ;)

If I get an XTR RD for x-mas, I will install the CX1 Force cranks I have with the 38T wide/narrow-tooth chainring being I already have that in a box waiting. Yada

12/5/16 10:59 AM

I'm attracted th the Sram eTap wireless but I'm repelled by it beihg Sram. I'll wait until Campy/Shimano have wireless and then make the leap- unless Sram goes downstream with a pretty cheap wireless system.

12/5/16 7:17 PM

FSA is introducing a wireless hybrid road system, uses WiFi from shifters to derailers yet has a battery wired to the derailers.

Possibly the best solution yet as the derailers use all the juice.

Hope it's not as expensive as SRAM, which is significantly more money then Ultegra Di2.

http://www.fullspeedahead.com/we-is-ready-fsas-11-speed-electronic-groupset-unveiled/

12/5/16 7:52 PM

I still don't like the wires in the fsa system.

12/5/16 7:57 PM

I still don't like the wires in the fsa system.

12/5/16 9:00 PM

To be clear, has a seat tube battery for the servos in the DRs. Di2 has one 2.6mm wire from the front end to connect it all up. Dare I say the one wire instead of additional batteries might make more sense.

12/6/16 4:52 AM

The wires from the shifters and the bars are the bane of those building Madones and Vias and assorted other aero contraptions. Not commenting on their worth just sayin'.

12/6/16 5:31 PM

Well to be fair, with Di2 it's (EDIT) a wire from each shifter to a fugly junction under the stem, then a wire to the inside of the bottom of the downtube at another junction.

I have no issues with the entire Di2 wiring scheme and system, it seems really easy to install on a frame designed for internal cable, but can also see the attraction to the FSA method and understand that it puts the most battery power to where it's needed at the derailers, which have the most power usage.

Last edited by Steve B. on 12/6/16 5:58 PM; edited 2 times in total

12/6/16 5:50 PM

"2 wires from each shifter to a fugly junction under the stem, then a wire to the inside of the bottom of the downtube at another junction"

Mine has one 2.6mm wire from each shifter to a rather small [11x16x40mm] junction [wire tied to the rear brake cable with two of the smallest wire ties I have ever seen] with a button for program/trimming and LED for battery state.

E-tube is co-axial. Maybe the bulky junctions were for the 5 wire prior to the e-tube stuff. The connector end is 5mm.

I have an extra 4 port small junction, it is 30x14x8mm. All E-tube connections are water proof supposedly. So you can use the smaller internal one above externally for TT bar junctions added alternate additional shifters etc. Easy to hide that little sucker in the TT bar set up I had read.

Last edited by Sparky on 12/6/16 8:34 PM; edited 2 times in total

12/6/16 8:13 PM

I've decided that I prefer the way that SRAM (mechanical) works compared to either Shimano or Campagnolo. I started using SRAM initially because they were the only manufacturer who still had compatibility between current road shifters and MTB derailleurs, to allow wide range cassettes on a touring bike. All the products listed on the web page https://www.sram.com/sram/mountain/technologies/exact-actuation are compatible, so their 11-speed road shifters work with their 10-speed MTB derailleurs to change across an 11-speed cassette. I'm now using Force 22 road shifters with X9 long cage MTB rear derailleur, and Deore XT 11-40 11s cassette. The X9 specs say it will only cope with a 36t cassette, but with the B-screw most of the way in the top jockey pulley clears the 40t cog without any problem.

As for mechanical vs electronic shifting, on a bike that I'm not racing and using in some fairly out-of-the-way places, I'll stick with mechanical as being easier to bodge back into working order if needed.

12/7/16 8:06 AM

I love being able to swap their road and MTB parts with ease. Linda's 'cross bike is currently running Red shifters and front derailleur with an XX rear derailleur and an MTB cassette on one set of wheels and a road cassette on the other. Everything works flawlessly.

Dfcas, what is your issue with SRAM?

I've only found one flaw with their road shifters, which is that when you get to the lowest gear, if you try to shift lower again, it upshifts. It would seem that they could add a position that would just indicate in either a tactile or auditory manner that you're as low as you can go, and not arbitrarily shift into a higher gear, which is the opposite of what you want.

12/7/16 9:37 AM

"being able to swap their road and MTB parts with ease"

I enjoyed this with Shimano for forever. One reason I only just put the 1st 11 speed Shimano bike. Still have 8/9/10 speed in good numbers across the fleet.

12/9/16 5:48 PM

" ...I'm now using Force 22 road shifters with X9 long cage MTB rear derailleur, and Deore XT 11-40 11s cassette..."

My technical source of info on 11s SRAM cable travel specification (Art's Cyclery web Blog) is down at the moment, but I recall that while 10s SRAM shifters/derailers were interchangeable between road and mountain groups, 11s gruppos from the road and mountain sides use a different actuation ratio.
Is that the case, or does the interchangeability of SRAM's 10s "Exact Actuation" format somehow still hold with 11s?
I did also note that they have given the actuation ratio a different name now, that depending on whether it's a road ("22") or mountain ("X") derailer.

12/10/16 5:10 AM

SRAM's 11s MTB stuff is called "X-actuation", and has a different cable pull to the "Exact actuation" components listed on the link I gave above. So while you can mix components on the "Exact actuation" list, you can't mix them with the 11s MTB components.

12/10/16 6:04 PM

I get it now. The X9 derailer you used is a 10s version, so with the "road 22" gruppo retaining the "Exact Actuation" ratio, they remain compatible.

Great to have the option of using an MTB derailer with it's big-cog range.

For Shimano's part, their 11s mid-cage road mech's are made for 32t and might handle an 11-34t MTB cassette if anybody were to make one (IRD offers this, but their 10s cassettes caused shifting-precision issues in many cases, so I remain leery of the brand).

12/11/16 11:50 AM

...back in the late '70s - early '80's, 34 tooth freewheels were common, but not so in modern cassettes. Most lines now jump from 32t directly to 36t.

12/11/16 12:55 PM

"Most lines now jump from 32t directly to 36t."

I have a 10 Speed 34 top cog cassette. I lent it to my friend for out Crater Lake ride. My 30 rear was just enough with a 22 tooth front even loaded to a 46 lb lite touring test load. I think it is SLX, The 32 or 36 being what XT and XTR 10 speed.

12/13/16 12:03 PM

Shimano made 9s 11-34t and 12-34t cassettes, also I have a 10s XT cassette with 11-34t.
It's with the 11s that the road cassettes "max out" at 32t and the mtb cassettes use much bigger largest cogs now, at least 36t, and Shimano's largest is now 45t.