OT: minimum acceptable component level?

[Nathan Dushman]

What would you say is the minimum acceptable component level, for a first road bike for someone who probably won't ride that much (and will likely do mostly organized rides where there's support)? When I bought my first road bike, in order to do SF2G regularly, the consensus seemed to be that I wanted at least 105-level. For less-frequently use, though, are there problems with the less-expensive Shimano levels (Tiagra, Sora)? Design improvements often trickle down, and my older 105 shifters work fine; I wonder how different they are from modern Tiagra shifters. I know this isn't a completely straightforward question for a new bike since manufacturers mix and match (105 shifters but a Tiagra cassette, etc).

Nathan

[Alexandre Passos]

I use Sora on my road bike and I'm very happy with it. Indeed tried sram force and 105 when I was shopping for cross bikes and didn't find them noticeably better. I do awful things to my components (like shifting, even on the front, while standing) and they never caused me a problem.

This bike also has a really nice cassette which goes all the way to 32, which I find very, very, very nice.

This was my first road bike, fyi, and other than sram force (which I've used for ~4h now) I haven't really ridden with anything better.

On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Nathan Dushman <n...@abtech.org> wrote:

What would you say is the minimum acceptable component level, for a first road bike for someone who probably won't ride that much (and will likely do mostly organized rides where there's support)? When I bought my first road bike, in order to do SF2G regularly, the consensus seemed to be that I wanted at least 105-level. For less-frequently use, though, are there problems with the less-expensive Shimano levels (Tiagra, Sora)? Design improvements often trickle down, and my older 105 shifters work fine; I wonder how different they are from modern Tiagra shifters. I know this isn't a completely straightforward question for a new bike since manufacturers mix and match (105 shifters but a Tiagra cassette, etc).

Nathan

--
-- follow: http://twitter.com/sf2g | terms: http://sf2g.com/terms.html | bike prep: http://sf2g.com/bike-prep.html | unsub: http://groups.google.com/group/sf2g
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SF2G" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sf2g+uns...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

 - Alexandre

[Carlin Eng]

I rode a bike with Shimano 2700 components (one level below Sora, I think) for about 2000 miles before upgrading to Shimano 105. It was perfectly adequate. The new Tiagro 4700 group looks pretty solid: http://www.bikerumor.com/2015/03/31/all-new-shimano-tiagra-10-speed-4700-trickles-down-latest-tech-from-high-end-groups/

On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Nathan Dushman <n...@abtech.org> wrote:

What would you say is the minimum acceptable component level, for a first road bike for someone who probably won't ride that much (and will likely do mostly organized rides where there's support)? When I bought my first road bike, in order to do SF2G regularly, the consensus seemed to be that I wanted at least 105-level. For less-frequently use, though, are there problems with the less-expensive Shimano levels (Tiagra, Sora)? Design improvements often trickle down, and my older 105 shifters work fine; I wonder how different they are from modern Tiagra shifters. I know this isn't a completely straightforward question for a new bike since manufacturers mix and match (105 shifters but a Tiagra cassette, etc).

Nathan

--

[Ted Ketai]

Yeah, 105 is definitely not "required." Tiagra or Sora is good enough for somebody that's not doing a ton of riding. You just don't want to get down too much below that to the ultra economy stuff where they really start cutting corners. 

 

[djconnel]

On the SRAM side all 4 groups are very similar.  The main difference is a small difference is mass, essentially trivial for SF2G, and appearance.

Shimano has tended to have a bigger spread in quality, perhaps less than before due to competition from SRAM.  Tiagra/Sora level stuff always appeared really cheap to me.

[Georgia Andrews]

My first road & SF2G bike (now my commuter/town bike) has some combo of Tiagra & Sora, and it's held up well without problems. If someone's new to road riding they're not going to notice or demand a lot of difference in performance anyways. Also if they totally abuse it while they're learning it'll be cheaper to replace if necessary. (Thinking of how me learning to drive stick is at least 80% of the reason my mom's '86(?) car's clutch needed replacing when I was ~18).

On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Carlin Eng <carl...@gmail.com> wrote:

--

Women Who Code San Francisco City Director

womenwhocode.com

[David Goldsmith]

I had a rental with Sora components a few years ago. I rode it every day for a week for around 30-50 miles, and it was fine.

[Jason Thorpe]

On Apr 13, 2015, at 1:48 PM, David Goldsmith <d...@dgolds.com> wrote:

I had a rental with Sora components a few years ago. I rode it every day for a week for around 30-50 miles, and it was fine.

My sister-in-law has a road bike w/ Sora.  It works fine, but I have some complaints about it, at least the 3400-series 9-speed stuff… Specifically, it doesn’t use the same mechanism internally as Tiagra (which is essentially identical in mechanism design to the 5600-series 105 and the 6600-series Ultegra).  I’m not quite sure what they were thinking with a thumb lever to release tension (it’s kind of like the Campagnolo “escape”-type mouse-ear, which kind of sucks compared to the completely-awesome Ultrashift-type mouse-ear).  Also, the levers don’t have the outward sweep in their neutral position, which makes them less comfortable to throw, IMO.

It looks like they’ve changed this with the 3500-series 9-speed Sora … it looks to have the same sort of action as the 5600-series 105, and the lever has the nice outward sweep.

That said, it does bug me that it’s still 9-speed.  This means they’re using a Sora-specific mechanism internally, rather than simply reusing the older 5600 mechanism.  Tiagra 4600 is now 10-speed, and is probably using the old 5600 internals.

Another thing to consider is the exposed cable that you’re going to have with Sora and Tiagra.  Some don’t mind this (even I can live with it, at least when it comes to Dura Ace 7800 levers because they’re just SO GOOD).  But if you want to keep the cockpit looking cleaner, then you need at least 5700-series 105 to get the hidden routing for the shift cables.

Another thing t consider is that SRAM Apex is a fantastic value — the internals are essentially identical to Rival / Force / Red; what changes is the materials (and maybe the presence of independent reach-adjust for the shift paddle vs brake lever; dunno, my most recent SRAM is a 10-speed Force kit).

-- thorpej

[Peter Colijn]

Yeah I think the shimano thumb lever things suck, and would definitely recommend moving up to something where you can easily shift in the drops or on the hoods. Christine hated those thumb lever things on her old road bike.

Beyond that though I think it's most important for a new(ish) rider to get something that is comfortable for them. One common problem that people with smaller hands have is the amount of reach needed for comfortable braking. There are shims and stuff but the degree to which they are effective varies across the different groupsets, so that can become a bigger factor than whether you care about a specific model or "level" of stuff. If you can't actually use it comfortably, it's kind of a deal breaker.

[Jacky Schuler]

Another thing t consider is that SRAM Apex is a fantastic value — the internals are essentially identical to Rival / Force / Red; what changes is the materials (and maybe the presence of independent reach-adjust for the shift paddle vs brake lever; dunno, my most recent SRAM is a 10-speed Force kit).

I have Force and Apex (both the older versions) and I love my Force setup. No issues (other than a few shifting issues caused by neglect) after 10k+ miles. I can't say the same for Apex. Perhaps the newer version of Apex is better (I believe mine may have been the first version but it doesn't look like it changed much) but as much as I love my SRAM Force I really can't recommend Apex*. Even aside from the mechanical failures I never really liked the way it felt. 

* DISCLAIMER: I have Apex on my CX bike, which has been crashed and neglected. I have also neglected and crashed my bikes with Force, Dura Ace 7900, XT and even Sora (which was my first bike with non-friction shifters) and had far fewer issues. 

[Jacky Schuler]

Yeah I think the shimano thumb lever things suck, and would definitely recommend moving up to something where you can easily shift in the drops or on the hoods. Christine hated those thumb lever things on her old road bike.

The newest version of Sora doesn't have those horrid thumb levers. There's also Claris, which I don't know much about but it seems to be a higher-quality replacement for the old 3400 (or whatever the level below Sora was).

One common problem that people with smaller hands have is the amount of reach needed for comfortable braking. There are shims and stuff but the degree to which they are effective varies across the different groupsets, so that can become a bigger factor than whether you care about a specific model or "level" of stuff. If you can't actually use it comfortably, it's kind of a deal breaker.

Very true. Apex does have the ability to adjust the reach of the levers (although if I remember correctly you can't adjust the inner and outer levers separately, which really doesn't seem to matter). The lever shape is MUCH better for smaller hands than something like Sora (although the newer versions look a bit better). If he/she isn't as hard on their components as I am (which few beginners are), Apex is probably fine. 

Perhaps I retract some of my previous statements... at least the implication that Apex isn't worth buying. It is probably good for an entry-level cyclist but not for somebody who abuses the crap out of and neglects their bike (although it is pretty cheap to replace bits).

- jacky

[djconnel]

Rival and up are 11 speed with "yaw" front derailleur, while I think Apex is still 10 speed without the yaw front. Yaw is a significant but still rather small improvement from what I can tell: one bike has it, two don't. 10 to 11 is rather marginal. 11 speed stuff is more expensive.

The whole front derailleur issue can be avoided with this: http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/product-news/sram-launches-1x-road-groupsets-166520

[Peter Colijn]

I haven't tried the SRAM "yaw" stuff but detest the previous SRAM front derailleurs.

I don't know if I would recommend a 1x groupset for a new rider, at least in any region where climbing is common. It's simpler, sure, but the additional range from a double is definitely useful.

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 1:39 PM, djconnel <djco...@gmail.com> wrote:

Rival and up are 11 speed with "yaw" front derailleur, while I think Apex is still 10 speed without the yaw front.   Yaw is a significant but still rather small improvement from what I can tell: one bike has it, two don't.  10 to 11 is rather marginal.  11 speed stuff is more expensive.

The whole front derailleur issue can be avoided with this:  http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/product-news/sram-launches-1x-road-groupsets-166520

[Jason Thorpe]

On Apr 14, 2015, at 1:42 PM, Peter Colijn <caff...@colijn.ca> wrote:

I haven't tried the SRAM "yaw" stuff but detest the previous SRAM front derailleurs.

I do, too.  But, that said, I put Force back on my BreakAway (for cable management reasons, vs. Dura Ace 7800), and installed a Force22 Yaw front derailleur.  It works perfectly with the 10-speed Force shifters, and also GREATLY improves the shifting vs the non-Yaw.  It works quite well, and essentially eliminates all the complaints I had about SRAM front shifting (except for the cold weather dexterity issue, but that’s the lever).

-- thorpej

[Daniel Connelly]

Yeah -- with 1x11 you need to choose your gears wisely.   44 front by 11-32 rear gives a rather nice range: that's like a 52/13 big gear and a 33/24 low gear.   That's plenty good for anything SF2G does but a bit lower gear would be nice for challenging century-type courses like the Death Ride.

Mark Slavonia, SFBC Board Member and former A-level racer with the Stanford Cycling team, presently rides the SRAM 1x11 and likes it a lot.  I also find it very attractive.  But it's not going to work for the sort of person who'd have wanted a triple chainring back in the 9-speed days when those were more popular.

SRAM will also release their wireless system electronic soon, maybe @ Sea Otter Classic, but that's also not a beginner system, obviously.  But it will be nice to just clamp on a rear derailleur (and perhaps front derailleur) and not have to connect any cables.... nice, anyway, until the battery dies.

Dan

---

From: Peter Colijn <caff...@colijn.ca>
To: Dan Connelly <djco...@gmail.com>
Cc: SF2G <sf...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 1:42 PM
Subject: Re: OT: minimum acceptable component level?

[Nathan Dushman]

On Tuesday, April 14, 2015 at 1:55:47 PM UTC-7, thorpej wrote:

On Apr 14, 2015, at 1:42 PM, Peter Colijn <caff...@colijn.ca> wrote:

I haven't tried the SRAM "yaw" stuff but detest the previous SRAM front derailleurs.

I do, too.

What do you hate about the SRAM front derailleurs? My newer Scott has Rival (from 2009) and it hasn't bothered me, once I got used to it. I haven't done a long (half-day or more) ride with it though, so maybe I just haven't spent enough time with it yet.

Nathan

[Carlin Eng]

Older versions of SRAM front derailleurs had a reputation for dropping the chain, and requiring a lot more force to shift.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KbR5fyhRsU

--

[Peter Colijn]

When I was using SRAM, the distance you had to mash the lever to shift from little->big ring was quite absurd and uncomfortable. The force required was also difficult to muster with cold fingers. Finally, it dropped the chain A LOT, and I was never able to completely solve that problem despite many attempts.

--

[Jason Thorpe]

The old SRAM front shifting was a bit mushy (especially pre-Yaw Red derailleurs, which used titanium cages — too flimsy!  A lot of pros back in those days ran re-badged Force front derailleurs to address that problem).  It also tended to over-shift going from the small to big ring, even when adjusted seemingly-correctly, resulting in the chain coming off to the outside.

-- thorpej

[Jason Thorpe]

On Apr 14, 2015, at 2:21 PM, Peter Colijn <caff...@colijn.ca> wrote:

When I was using SRAM, the distance you had to mash the lever to shift from little->big ring was quite absurd and uncomfortable. The force required was also difficult to muster with cold fingers. Finally, it dropped the chain A LOT, and I was never able to completely solve that problem despite many attempts.

A lot of the lever travel is fixed in the 11-speed groups by the lever itself.  And in the 10-speed stuff, at least the final-generation-10-speed-Red levers required less lever throw to get the desired cable pull at the derailleur, and this was a selling point in the product info.  The derailleurs themselves from 10- to 11-speed are seemingly 100% compatible in terms of cable pull ratios, so the change was all in the lever.  With the Force22 front derailleur on my BreakAway, I have yet to drop a chain (it doesn’t over shift to the outside, and it comes with a chain keeper for the inside :-)

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Nathan Dushman <n...@abtech.org> wrote:

On Tuesday, April 14, 2015 at 1:55:47 PM UTC-7, thorpej wrote:

On Apr 14, 2015, at 1:42 PM, Peter Colijn <caff...@colijn.ca> wrote:

I haven't tried the SRAM "yaw" stuff but detest the previous SRAM front derailleurs.

I do, too.

What do you hate about the SRAM front derailleurs? My newer Scott has Rival (from 2009) and it hasn't bothered me, once I got used to it. I haven't done a long (half-day or more) ride with it though, so maybe I just haven't spent enough time with it yet.

Nathan

--
-- follow: http://twitter.com/sf2g | terms: http://sf2g.com/terms.html | bike prep: http://sf2g.com/bike-prep.html | unsub: http://groups.google.com/group/sf2g
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SF2G" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sf2g+uns...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
-- follow: http://twitter.com/sf2g | terms: http://sf2g.com/terms.html | bike prep: http://sf2g.com/bike-prep.html | unsub: http://groups.google.com/group/sf2g
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SF2G" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sf2g+uns...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- thorpej

[Ken MacInnis]

I've got c 2014 Red w/yaw and c 2009 Force without and the difference is definitely huge. Not an issue anymore.