What makes a Shimano Deore better than a Alivio, etc.?
Will Scarvie
OK, so by the end of this message you'll have guess that I'm a rank
newbie to mountain biking. I've done enough homework to know that the
bikes in my price range usually come with Shimano components, usually
made up of various mixes of Acera, Alivio and Deore level shifters,
derailleurs, etc.
I've read enough to know that Deore is "better" than Alivio, which
is "better" than Acera. But I don't understand what "better" really
means here. What am I getting for the extra money? Smoothness? Ease
of adjustment? Durability? Less frequent maintenance? All of the
above?
Is there one place in the component suite where you'd definitely pay
for quality more than the others? Rear derailleur, perhaps? Seems
like that's the most mechanically complex piece, and the most prone to
being knocked about.
Thanks in advance for any help,
Will Scarvie
Matthew Paterson
Well Deore isnt that much better than Alivio, but if you can get Deore.
Deore replaced STX last year, and STX used to sit just below LX, which is
the best trade-off between price and quality. As for smoothness then Alivio
can be just as smooth as Deore, it just wont last as long, so i guess what
im saying is that the higher speccing in Shimano will last longer, but will
still need regular maintainence. I mean would World Cup Downhill bikes run
Shimano Alivio? No, they run Shimano XTR, amongst others. The most notable
place where you will notice a performance increase will be with the
chainset, as this is can dramatically improve your shifting and running
performance. The rear deraillieur isnt that much of a biggy, again, Alivio
can run as smooth as XTR, it just wont stay that way for very long. But
saying that an XTR is gonna bend all the same as an Alivio. The bottom line
is, go as high up the ladder as you can within your budget.
--
Matt
Fear of a flat planet
russell.pinder
> > I've read enough to know that Deore is "better" than Alivio, which
> > is "better" than Acera. But I don't understand what "better" really
> > means here. What am I getting for the extra money? Smoothness? Ease
> > of adjustment? Durability? Less frequent maintenance? All of the
> > above?
> >
> > Is there one place in the component suite where you'd definitely pay
> > for quality more than the others? Rear derailleur, perhaps? Seems
> > like that's the most mechanically complex piece, and the most prone to
> > being knocked about.
> >
> > Thanks in advance for any help,
> >
> > Will Scarvie
>
> Well Deore isnt that much better than Alivio, but if you can get Deore.
> Deore replaced STX last year, and STX used to sit just below LX, which is
> the best trade-off between price and quality. As for smoothness then
Alivio
> can be just as smooth as Deore, it just wont last as long,
This statement is just plain wrong IME. The lower level often (usually) last
longer than the highter end components as they are (usually) heavier and
therefore have more resistance to wear (exceptions are that some high end
components run better bearings so these will last longer).
>so i guess what
> im saying is that the higher speccing in Shimano will last longer, but
will
> still need regular maintainence.
No ! they'll not generally last any longer at all but they will (supposedly)
work (slightly) better, the latest developments usually work down one or two
groupsets a year and the higher groupsets will usually be lighter.
> I mean would World Cup Downhill bikes run
> Shimano Alivio? No, they run Shimano XTR, amongst others.
I think you'll find pro bikes in general will run whatever the sponsor is
trying to flog as the latest greatest thing for that particular year. :-)
> The most notable
> place where you will notice a performance increase will be with the
> chainset, as this is can dramatically improve your shifting and running
> performance.
I'd have said this was the least important bit - unless you use your front
shifters a lot which you probably shouldn't.
>The rear deraillieur isnt that much of a biggy, again, Alivio
> can run as smooth as XTR, it just wont stay that way for very long. But
> saying that an XTR is gonna bend all the same as an Alivio.
The higher end mechs run better bearings and will incorporate later
technology (this latter isn't necessarily a good thing). Also 9 speed starts
at a certain point so you want to make sure you at least get that. IMO the
XT cassette is a work of art compared with the LX or lower and the weight
difference is considerable.
> The bottom line
> is, go as high up the ladder as you can within your budget.
Not necessarily, I run XT (with a XTR rear mech) through choice - I could
run full XTR but the XTR gearings are designed for XC racing (big chainrings
and close ratio cassettes) and XT is far more suitable for XC trail riding.
XTR would seriously compromise my ability on technical stuff and on very
steep climbs where my non XTR legs couldn't cope.
If you want value for money and stuff that'll last then Deore is superb,
works very nearly as well as XT / XTR and will usually outlast the higher
groups due to being a bit more heavy duty. You do pay a slight weight
penalty and it doesn't have the fashion cachet though.
If I was on a budget I'd have Deore everything.
Someone who knew a lot more than me once said
Low Cost, High Durability, Low Weight - Select any two of three
Russ
William Mike Tyler Jr
"russell.pinder" <russell...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:a2qw7.41826$GT3.5...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> The higher end mechs run better bearings and will incorporate later
> technology (this latter isn't necessarily a good thing). Also 9 speed
starts
> at a certain point so you want to make sure you at least get that. IMO the
> XT cassette is a work of art compared with the LX or lower and the weight
> difference is considerable.
>
>
>
>
>
There has been many a backlash against 9 speed stuff, which is notoriously
more fragile than 8 speed stuff.
Most people Ive talked to, and all bike shop mechanics Ive talked to, say
that 9-speed stuff is a joke, introduced mainly to see how many people they
could get to upgrade and spend money. In my humble opinion, stay as far away
from 9 speed stuff as possible -especially- if you are a newbie and dont
plan to spend a few hours before and after each ride tinkering.
I agree with the 'get the highest up the ladder stuff you can afford' but
dont even think about 9 speed stuff, unless you weigh less than 110 lbs
(skinnier chains needed for the 9 speed stuff are notorius for breaking at
even moderate stess) and are a whiz at adjusting shifters (narrower
distances to move the chain = less tolerance for shifting wire adjustment =
more often the shifting will slip out of alignment)
-Mike
Russell Pinder
William Mike Tyler Jr <mik...@tippecanoe.com> wrote in message
news:9ptlf0$24cj$1...@news.aros.net...
>
> "russell.pinder" <russell...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:a2qw7.41826$GT3.5...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> > The higher end mechs run better bearings and will incorporate later
> > technology (this latter isn't necessarily a good thing). Also 9 speed
> starts
> > at a certain point so you want to make sure you at least get that. IMO
the
> > XT cassette is a work of art compared with the LX or lower and the
weight
> > difference is considerable.
> >
> >
> >
>
> more fragile than 8 speed stuff.
Which has now been largely disproven.
>
> Most people Ive talked to, and all bike shop mechanics Ive talked to, say
> that 9-speed stuff is a joke, introduced mainly to see how many people
they
> could get to upgrade and spend money. In my humble opinion, stay as far
away
> from 9 speed stuff as possible -especially- if you are a newbie and dont
> plan to spend a few hours before and after each ride tinkering.
>
> I agree with the 'get the highest up the ladder stuff you can afford' but
> dont even think about 9 speed stuff, unless you weigh less than 110 lbs
> (skinnier chains needed for the 9 speed stuff are notorius for breaking
at
> even moderate stess) and are a whiz at adjusting shifters (narrower
> distances to move the chain = less tolerance for shifting wire adjustment
=
> more often the shifting will slip out of alignment)
Have you any idea how far down the ladder you need to go to buy a bike with
anything other than 9 speed these days. It's quite impossible to buy
anything decent without. High end 8 speed spares are becoming increasingly
rare too.
9 speed works fine, at least as well as 8 speed IME and thats running two
bikes with 9 speed through the last two english winters (one SRAM, one
Shimano). It doesn't IME need any more or less cleaning or tinkering than my
previous 8 speed set-ups.
Shimano chains are useless but I've had no worse experience with SRAM 9
speed than I had with SRAM 8 speed chains. I'm certainly on the heavy side
of average for biking.
Over the last two years I've heard the above rubbishing of 9 speed a lot but
almost everyone I know that took that attitude has since been forced into
the move to 9 speed and none have regretted it, most appreciate the
increased range of gears available.
YMMV
Russ
Bubba
"William Mike Tyler Jr" <mik...@tippecanoe.com> wrote in message
news:9ptlf0$24cj$1...@news.aros.net...
>
Uhhhhh . . . I have to disagree with the assessment of the 9 speed Shimano
equipment. First, I weigh SIGNIFICANTLY more than 110 lbs, and I have
yet to break a 9 spd chain. I would also go out on a limb here and say that
my legs and my weight add up to a substantial amount of stress when I'm
climbing in big gears and my 9 speed shimano chains have NEVER snapped
because of that. OTOH, I broke an 8-spd chain pedaling up my driveway
and ended up endoing as a result (story available on request).
As far as drive componentry . . . I've been through every level of Shimano
drive train componentry (STX to XTR) and I've decided that for my needs
LX is the way to go. Best price/performance/weight trade off. If anything
I'd say that XT is a waste. Either go LX and settle with good performance
and reliability, or go with XTR and drain the wallet. XT just hasn't held
up
for me.
IMHO
Bubba
B. Sanders
> news:a2qw7.41826$GT3.5...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> There has been many a backlash against 9 speed stuff, which is notoriously
> more fragile than 8 speed stuff.
>
> Most people Ive talked to, and all bike shop mechanics Ive talked to, say
> that 9-speed stuff is a joke, introduced mainly to see how many people
they
> could get to upgrade and spend money. In my humble opinion, stay as far
away
> from 9 speed stuff as possible -especially- if you are a newbie and dont
> plan to spend a few hours before and after each ride tinkering.
>
> I agree with the 'get the highest up the ladder stuff you can afford' but
> dont even think about 9 speed stuff, unless you weigh less than 110 lbs
> (skinnier chains needed for the 9 speed stuff are notorius for breaking
at
> even moderate stess) and are a whiz at adjusting shifters (narrower
> distances to move the chain = less tolerance for shifting wire adjustment
=
> more often the shifting will slip out of alignment)
Mike, I'm right there with ya' - but even Sheldon Brown is saying "go 9
speed," and he's nothing if not sensible. Also - I have several 8-speed
bikes, and the parts for them are drying up very quickly. I'm betting that
by 2003, high-end 8-speed parts will be as rare as NOS Dura-Ace UniGlide
cassettes (my road bike uses those).
9-speed is an obvious marketing ploy, just as 8-speed was before it. The
difference is that 9-speed has begun to really eat into the durability
trade-offs much more than 8-speed seemed to. IE: Many reports of breaking
chains, shifting problems, etc.
My problem is this: Shimano is supposedly introducing 10-speed next year.
Now what do we do? Go from 8 to 10 in one jump, to stay ahead of the curve?
Will 9-speed die as 10-speed takes off? I guarantee that 8, 9 and 10 speed
will be incompatible, requiring all new everything. The only ones who
benefit are Shimano.
It's odd that a few years ago there was this anti-Shimano sentiment - it's
still brewing today - yet we seem to be lining up to throw the big bux at
them so they'll toss us a pricey new techno-toy instead of making tough,
long-lasting, compatible drivetrains. To look at the MTB parts scene today,
you'd think that we're all sponsored racers who can afford to replace
drivetrains several times a season. But the vast majority of us are just
riders who want parts that last. That's getting much harder to find
nowadays, and may partially explain the "retro" movement. You have to
admit - the old Deore and early XT stuff was bombproof, if nothing else.
I'm still running early-90's Deore parts on one of my bikes. It shifts
perfectly every time, never a problem.
Just my $.02 worth.
B
B. Sanders
news:VREw7.184$_S1....@monger.newsread.com...
>
> As far as drive componentry . . . I've been through every level of Shimano
> drive train componentry (STX to XTR) and I've decided that for my needs
> LX is the way to go. Best price/performance/weight trade off. If
anything
> I'd say that XT is a waste. Either go LX and settle with good performance
> and reliability, or go with XTR and drain the wallet. XT just hasn't held
> up for me.
I run a mixture of LX and XT, with some XTR when I can get it cheap (Ti
cassettes - sweeet!)
LX is definitely the best price/performance value - always has been. It's
the benchmark.
B
Will Scarvie
> You have to
> admit - the old Deore and early XT stuff was bombproof, if nothing else.
> I'm still running early-90's Deore parts on one of my bikes. It shifts
> perfectly every time, never a problem.
Which makes me wonder...would it be wise to buy, say, 2-3 complete
sets of XT 8-speed gear (or 9-speed...whatever is available now) now,
rather than wait until they wear out and possibly/probably have
trouble finding replacement parts?
Then again, what I'm "saving" myself from is the need to buy a whole
new drive train in a couple of years. And I'm pre-paying that price
now if I follow this approach.
Can't win, can I? :-)
Will