# Shifter Locations Pro's and Con's.



## jsidney (Aug 24, 2011)

I am interested in the Pros's and Con's of different shifter locations in two different conditions.

1. In town while riding in a more upright position.
2. Riding in a lower more streamlined condition.

A. Vintage type seen on some older bikes on a lower tube on the frame. Pros and Cons for 1 and 2?

B. A lever on either side of the handle bar stem. Pros and Cons for 1 and 2?

C. Levers on the bar ends like found on a new Trek 520 Pros and Cons for 1 and 2?
It looks to me like this is a disaster for position 1.

D. Thumb shifters close to the center of the bar. Pros and Cons for 1 and 2?

E. Shifters on the same assembly as the brakes. Pros and Cons for 1 and 2?

F. What are the other shifter locations?


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

jsidney said:


> F. What are the other shifter locations?


Drive-side seat stay. To shift, you first loosen the axle in the dropouts with the quick-release lever. With the shift lever, you move the chain to your cog of choice. After the axle has repositioned itself in the dropouts for proper chain tension, you re-tighten the quick-release lever. All this was often done _while riding the bike_.

You don't see this shifter (Campagnolo Cambio Corsa) much any more. The cons must have outweighed the pros...


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

jsidney said:


> F. What are the other shifter locations?


Top tube. Believe it or not, this indexed three-speed shifter I remember from personal use. Enough of this, going for a ride.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Not many choices*



jsidney said:


> I am interested in the Pros's and Con's of different shifter locations in two different conditions.
> 
> 1. In town while riding in a more upright position.
> 2. Riding in a lower more streamlined condition.
> ...


In practice, you don't have much choice. If you have a modern shifting system, then brake/shift levers, aero bar levers, or bar-end levers are about it. You will find that the other systems are no longer made, or are specific to things like mountain bikes or hybrids. The fact that the standard road shifters are built into the brake levers should tell you something.


----------



## baker921 (Jul 20, 2007)

Or are you really trying to choose between a flat bar and drops?


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Downtube shifters aren't used any more because they're simply outdated. 

Flat bar shifters are alright on a mountain bike and hybrids, but those types of handlebars make the rider about as aerodynamic as a brick. Standard road bike bars allow you to shift in the drops or hoods with several places you can put your hands and vary body position.


----------



## andulong (Nov 23, 2006)

spade2you said:


> Downtube shifters aren't used any more because they're simply outdated.


Have to disagree with this. Some bikes still use these and you can still get a new bike made with this type of shifter. Probably not common on an assembly line bike but still in use. If your frame has bosses for this type of shifter they are easy to install. If not may be difficult.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

andulong said:


> Have to disagree with this.


On what premise? There's no advantage to having to take you hand off the bar to shift.


----------



## Mr. Versatile (Nov 24, 2005)

spade2you said:


> On what premise? There's no advantage to having to take you hand off the bar to shift.


I have to agree. I used down tube shifters exclusively for the 1st 25 years I rode. That's because there weren't any other choices aside from bar end shifters which I never liked. Downtube shifters are fun to see occasionally, but personally I wouldn't want to go back to using them. The only possible advantage that I can see would be weight savings, but if I was worried about that much weight I'd just take a leak before the ride. Some might say they like the brake & shift levers separated, but that's never been an issue for me.


----------



## kaliayev (Dec 25, 2008)

Bar end shifters are used a lot on touring rigs. Easy to use and maintain. They can also be mounted on the tops with Pauls thumbies.


----------



## jsidney (Aug 24, 2011)

baker921 said:


> Or are you really trying to choose between a flat bar and drops?


I am not trying to chose anything at this point.

I just listed everything I can think of and then will make a choice.

I was looking for someone to give certain answers without trying to coach the answers.

I am looking for two things that might be semi-mutually exclusive but maybe not.


----------



## jsidney (Aug 24, 2011)

kaliayev said:


> Bar end shifters are used a lot on touring rigs. Easy to use and maintain. They can also be mounted on the tops with Pauls thumbies.


Easy to use and easy to maintain is a plus. Can you tell me the negatives?


----------



## jsidney (Aug 24, 2011)

One thing I run into a lot is I will read one place that one group of riders say they do this because abc123 is more reliable. I read someplace else that there is not difference between 123abc and abc123. Someplace else I read that abc123 is stupid as it is not in the position you want to be in.

I don't think there is anything wrong with asking about all the shifter types along with the advantages and disadvantages even if a particular type will probably not be chosen. I am hear to learn but I will bounce back something one poster said against what another poster said in order to see which is more correct for my wants.


----------



## jsidney (Aug 24, 2011)

I am guessing at a couple of these so don't yell at me if I get it wrong.

Here is the kind of info I want to see. Again what I post may be completely incorrect as this is an example.

Bar end shifters:

A little more reliable than some other shifters, easier to fix than (insert type). Can't shift in the more upright position when you are traveling slowly.

Risk of damaging levers is greater if the bike falls over.

Down tube shifters: 

Positives are they are lighter, they are less likely to impact the ground if case of a fall than bar end shifters. They are easier to repair and maintain that some other shifter types.

Negatives are you have to reach further than other types of shifters, hands have to leave the handle bars to reach the shifters.

Stem shifters.

Positives are easy to maintain, shorter reach than down tube shifters when riding in the upright position. Unlikely to take an impact in a fall over. 

Negatives, have to remove hands from handle bars when shifting, More awkward than down tube shifters when using the lower bar.


----------



## terbennett (Apr 1, 2006)

andulong said:


> Have to disagree with this. Some bikes still use these and you can still get a new bike made with this type of shifter. Probably not common on an assembly line bike but still in use. If your frame has bosses for this type of shifter they are easy to install. If not may be difficult.


+1..... There are many custom built bikes that use downtube shifters. If you look at the lightest custom bikes out there, they tend to use downtube shifters due to the weight of the current shifter/brake lever set up. Plus down tube shifters are much easier to service, repair and replace. Heck Shimano even makes 10 speed downtube shifters for current set ups. Manufacturers may not opt to use them but Shimano makes them. Shimano wouldn't make it unless there was still a considerable demand to keep making them.


----------



## brianmcg (Oct 12, 2002)

spade2you said:


> Downtube shifters aren't used any more because they're simply outdated.
> in.


I disagree also. I see folks with dt shifters all the time. My Surly LHT has a pair of friction only no less. 

There is more to cycling than race bikes.


----------



## jsidney (Aug 24, 2011)

spade2you said:


> Downtube shifters aren't used any more because they're simply outdated.
> 
> Flat bar shifters are alright on a mountain bike and hybrids, but those types of handlebars make the rider about as aerodynamic as a brick. Standard road bike bars allow you to shift in the drops or hoods with several places you can put your hands and vary body position.


While doing some reading I found several people that dumped their more modern shifters and went to down tube. 

From what I have been reading drop tube and bar end shifters are the easiest to fix in the field. I don't know, never tried but if this is the case drop tube and bar end is sounding pretty good to me.



Fed Ex tells me my first down tube bike will be arriving Wednesday.

It is an old 520. I was thinking of changing it to something other that down tube. Perhaps I should not change it at all.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Y'all can disagree with me as much as you want, but there is really no real-world advantage to DT shifters other than chasing nostalgia. Sure, the first geared bike I ever rode had DT friction shifters, but my first geared MTB back in the day had thumb shifters and indexed shifting. Didn't take time to adjust or realize that this was a good idea.

Even the older riders that frequent LBS rides aren't using DT shifters. Only one guy I've seen in recent years using bar end shifters on his road bike. Sure, there are a few vintage people in mid-town and the occasional rider on a pawn shop special, but that's about it.

Being slightly easier to repair is a nifty idea, but my Chorus shifters have about 40k miles on them with lots of shifting and no real problems. I once had some junk that made shifting a little difficult, but didn't take more than a few minutes to fix.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

jsidney said:


> I am interested in the Pros's and Con's of different shifter locations in two different conditions.
> 
> 1. In town while riding in a more upright position.
> 2. Riding in a lower more streamlined condition.
> ...


A - pros - they're cheap. If you're reasonable flexible and the bike fits you reasonably well, and your balance is good, they're not particularly difficult to use. Cons - those can be some big "ifs" for some users. I can't use mine when I'm out of the saddle. Modern frames don't always have the mount for them anymore.

B - if you can barely ride a bike, not having to reach further down is less intimidating. The reach to the shifters is awkward for someone in a lower riding position, like anyone who's comfortable on a bike and pedals constantly.

C - I hated these. It was a weird position for me to get to when I was riding the hoods, and that's most of the time. I'm not sure why people like them. I'd speculate that someone who rides a large frame size would benefit, because bikes with taller head tubes move the rider further away from downtube shifters.

D - My roommate had these. He was a very unhappy person. The shifters probably had nothing to do with it. Cons include compatibility problems - road bars and MTB bars aren't the same diameter - and the location is really only a little better than the stem. Honestly, not sure why you'd bother - it would be a modification on almost any bike.

E - My two modern road bikes have these. Very convenient - I can shift from the two riding positions I use most frequently. If I'm not in one of those positions, it's a very, very easy reach from wherever I have put my hands. To me, the only real disadvantage is that this kind of shifter is a lot more expensive. Other disadvantages for some people would be that they're only available for contemporary drivetrains (7+ speeds, but I'd stick with 8+) and they're heavier. Pretty much every massed start racing bike has them, though, so apparently everyone else thinks the convenience outweighs the extra weight too. I think the wear life is a little shorter than for downtube shifters, but we're talking about a period of several years. I think they're maybe a little more vulnerable to riding in wet or dusty conditions, but I dunno - my Tiagras have made it through a few 'cross seasons and counting.

I think that if 1 and 2 are that different, something's wrong. My opinion, of course.


----------



## jsidney (Aug 24, 2011)

spade2you said:


> Y'all can disagree with me as much as you want, but there is really no real-world advantage to DT shifters other than chasing nostalgia. Sure, the first geared bike I ever rode had DT friction shifters, but my first geared MTB back in the day had thumb shifters and indexed shifting. Didn't take time to adjust or realize that this was a good idea.
> 
> Even the older riders that frequent LBS rides aren't using DT shifters. Only one guy I've seen in recent years using bar end shifters on his road bike. Sure, there are a few vintage people in mid-town and the occasional rider on a pawn shop special, but that's about it.
> 
> Being slightly easier to repair is a nifty idea, but my Chorus shifters have about 40k miles on them with lots of shifting and no real problems. I once had some junk that made shifting a little difficult, but didn't take more than a few minutes to fix.


I am not agreeing or disagreeing with you. I am trying to sort out the different things I read from different people.


----------



## Oracle7775 (Sep 16, 2009)

OP, some of the different components you list are geared for one type of riding/bicycle over another. So, information regarding what type of riding you will be doing (e.g., race training, commuting, touring, pleasure, off-road, etc.) and what type of bicycle you will be using (e.g., race geometry, commuter, hybrid, touring, mountain bike, etc.) would be helpful.

For example, I wouldn't recommend mountain bike shifters for a drop bar road bike, and I wouldn't recommend modern road shifters for a mountain bike or a hybrid. (I personally wouldn't recommend downtube shifters for anything, but that's just me).


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Still missing the point*



jsidney said:


> I am guessing at a couple of these so don't yell at me if I get it wrong.
> 
> Here is the kind of info I want to see. Again what I post may be completely incorrect as this is an example.
> 
> ...


Again you are thinking that you will have choices when in fact you typically don't. You get shifting systems that work together and the location of the shifters is tied into the total package. You're talking to yourself.

That said, there is NOTHING good about stem shifters and there never was. These were only found on really cheap bikes back in the day.


----------



## jsidney (Aug 24, 2011)

AndrwSwitch said:


> A - pros - they're cheap. If you're reasonable flexible and the bike fits you reasonably well, and your balance is good, they're not particularly difficult to use. Cons - those can be some big "ifs" for some users. I can't use mine when I'm out of the saddle. Modern frames don't always have the mount for them anymore.
> 
> B - if you can barely ride a bike, not having to reach further down is less intimidating. The reach to the shifters is awkward for someone in a lower riding position, like anyone who's comfortable on a bike and pedals constantly.
> 
> ...


Thanks, 

This is the type of answer I am looking for.


----------



## jsidney (Aug 24, 2011)

Kerry Irons said:


> Again you are thinking that you will have choices when in fact you typically don't. You get shifting systems that work together and the location of the shifters is tied into the total package. You're talking to yourself.
> 
> That said, there is NOTHING good about stem shifters and there never was. These were only found on really cheap bikes back in the day.


How is it that I am talking to myself? I have been riding a bike since the 60's but only cheap ones. Every bike I have ever had has had the shifters in the same placed except for single speed bikes I started on. I am asking these questions to see what people have to say and can affect my buying choices.

Lets say I am deciding between a 1986 and a 1991 Trek 520 or a brand new one. Price might be a consideration as well as how things are laid out. The 1986 model has DT shifters and the 520 has bar end shifters. Lets say for example that there is a $150.00 price difference between them. I am going to want to determine which makes more sense to buy. What if I like the 520 but do not like the either shifting system. Maybe then I add up the cost of changing it to something else or looking for another bike.

I don't see how asking these questions is a waste of time.


----------



## jsidney (Aug 24, 2011)

Oracle7775 said:


> OP, some of the different components you list are geared for one type of riding/bicycle over another. So, information regarding what type of riding you will be doing (e.g., race training, commuting, touring, pleasure, off-road, etc.) and what type of bicycle you will be using (e.g., race geometry, commuter, hybrid, touring, mountain bike, etc.) would be helpful
> For example, I wouldn't recommend mountain bike shifters for a drop bar road bike, and I wouldn't recommend modern road shifters for a mountain bike or a hybrid. (I personally wouldn't recommend downtube shifters for anything, but that's just me).


I wanted to get peoples pro's and con's for each one and see if people come up with different answers. I have noticed on many topics about bikes that I read the answers are all over the place and in others they are fairly consistent. This was more of a general question, to see how people stand on each of them. Even if some of the answers do not involve the next bike I get it might involve one I get a couple of years from now.

Now what type of riding to I plan on doing? None of it is pleasure or sport riding.

I will travel to a near by city once a month, it is about 100 miles each way and I could be doing as much as 50 miles of riding when there. It would be nice to be able to get there and back fairly quickly but in some degree of comfort. I have already made this trip on a bike not suited for this kind of thing.

I will be riding on ranch and farm land frequently.

I will hauling bulky but fairly bulky cargo M-F going to the post office. I make my living filling orders from my forum members (I am not going to spam my forum here). My store is attached to my forum. 20 or 30 boxes might not be heavy for each one but can be awkward, I do it sometimes in multiple trips if it was a busy day. On a slow day one trip will do it.

There are days that I go out and make 10 short 5 minute stops.

I do all my shopping on a bike.

This might affect the choice but not sure. There is no LBS any where around here. I am in an area where the population is fairly thin and where cattle, and horses outnumber people by a very large margin. The ability to lean and service the shifters might be a factor.

The bike will take a bunch of bumps and bruises even in storage just by the nature of my life.

I am thinking that one bike really is not ideal. 

Two bikes might be perfect and if it is two bikes at this point I am thinking a cargo bike and a touring bike combo makes the most sense. If it become three bikes perhaps a cargo bike, a touring bike, If I go three bikes maybe a fast mover to make the 100 mile each way trip to the city go faster but maybe I should stick with the tourer for those trips.
Maybe the third bike could be a cheap bike for running short errands to save wear and tear on my two primary transportation bikes. If I had one for short errands I would want it cheap enough where I don't get too upset of stolen but that is not likely to happen here.

I want to be able to do a good variety of things as 100% of my transportation is going to be on foot and on a bike.

I either want a cargo bike and a very versatile bike or I want a tiny collection of specialized bikes.

I am leaning towards two bikes if I think the second bike can do all the roles well enough. I will have a third bike but I might get rid of it.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

jsidney said:


> How is it that I am talking to myself? I have been riding a bike since the 60's but only cheap ones. Every bike I have ever had has had the shifters in the same placed except for single speed bikes I started on. I am asking these questions to see what people have to say and can affect my buying choices.
> 
> Lets say I am deciding between a 1986 and a 1991 Trek 520 or a brand new one. Price might be a consideration as well as how things are laid out. The 1986 model has DT shifters and the 520 has bar end shifters. Lets say for example that there is a $150.00 price difference between them. I am going to want to determine which makes more sense to buy. What if I like the 520 but do not like the either shifting system. Maybe then I add up the cost of changing it to something else or looking for another bike.
> 
> I don't see how asking these questions is a waste of time.


Get something new so you can have parts that are readily available if you're truly worried about compatibility.


----------



## Defisch (Oct 13, 2009)

wim said:


> Drive-side seat stay. To shift, you first loosen the axle in the dropouts with the quick-release lever. With the shift lever, you move the chain to your cog of choice. After the axle has repositioned itself in the dropouts for proper chain tension, you re-tighten the quick-release lever. All this was often done _while riding the bike_.
> 
> You don't see this shifter (Campagnolo Cambio Corsa) much any more. The cons must have outweighed the pros...


Dude, until I scrolled down to the pic I thought you were just being a smart ass. never seen anything like it.


----------



## baker921 (Jul 20, 2007)

If you want a bike to ride on farm land and cover 100 miles you need a cross bike. If you are going to ride high mileage I'd look for something with newish components which probably means a newer bike.

For a cargo bike you will get a flat bar of some description which means a mtb set up. Personally I think hub gears work well here. What others are trying to tell you is that you get the shifters that go with the bike, which you choose for more important reasons than where the shifter is. How aero do you want to be on a cargo bike?

In defense of stem shifters they worked fine on my tricycle load lugger but I never went fast enough for it to be an issue!


----------



## early one (Jul 20, 2010)

Full speed ahead, Mr. Barkley, full speed ahead!
Full speed over here, sir!
All together! All together!
Aye, aye, sir, fire!
Captain! Captain!


----------



## jsidney (Aug 24, 2011)

baker921 said:


> If you want a bike to ride on farm land and cover 100 miles you need a cross bike. If you are going to ride high mileage I'd look for something with newish components which probably means a newer bike.
> 
> For a cargo bike you will get a flat bar of some description which means a mtb set up. Personally I think hub gears work well here. What others are trying to tell you is that you get the shifters that go with the bike, which you choose for more important reasons than where the shifter is. How aero do you want to be on a cargo bike?
> 
> In defense of stem shifters they worked fine on my tricycle load lugger but I never went fast enough for it to be an issue!


On the cargo bike I think I am going to go with the Surly Big Dummy or the Trek Transport. While I have seen neither of them from what I am reading I think the Big Dummy is the better bike and the Transport is the more affordable bike.

A 1986 Trek 520 arrived today, I got it fairly cheap. The reason I got this bike was just to see if I like the 520 and intended to get a newer one if this bike worked out. I did start to think if this bike is good enough there would also be no need to get a newer one.

I am pretty sure I could sell it and not take too much of a loss so it is a cheap way for me to test a bike since there is no LBS around here and an LBS would not want me to go on a month long test drive.

The bike does have drop tube shifters and I counted 5 gears in the rear and it has a triple crank. 

This is where thinking about the shifter can be a benefit. If I do like the bike I can keep it or I could get a newer 520 later on that has bar end shifters and more gears. 

If more gears and the bar ends are not going to help me much that I could stay with this one.

I can't test ride the bike as from what I have seen in pictures has Presta valves. I can't get anything to work with a Presta valve in this county so I will have to mail order something to put air in the tires.

This will be the first time I have ever used shifters that are not stem shifters. I am sure it will be an improvement.

I am assuming that the shifters are friction shifters.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

Defisch said:


> Dude, until I scrolled down to the pic I thought you were just being a smart ass. never seen anything like it.


Well, I was being a bit of a smart ass with my obsolete shifters in that I poked some fun at the OP. I think he's vastly overthinking this stuff.

The "Cambio Corsa" was an interesting, but dead-end engineering answer to the question of how to adjust chain tension if you have different-sized cogs. Someone eventually came up with the spring- loaded chain tensioner (located near the front chainwheel at first, see photo). Then someone else (Simplex, I think) put the derailing and the chain tensioning into one unit—the modern rear derailleur.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

jsidney said:


> A 1986 Trek 520 arrived today, I got it fairly cheap. The reason I got this bike was just to see if I like the 520 and intended to get a newer one if this bike worked out. I did start to think if this bike is good enough there would also be no need to get a newer one.
> 
> I am pretty sure I could sell it and not take too much of a loss so it is a cheap way for me to test a bike since there is no LBS around here and an LBS would not want me to go on a month long test drive.
> 
> ...


It's not the number of gears or the location of the shifters that counts... At least, as long as they're not on the chainstay.

There's a lot of machismo on the internet about the gear ratios people use. But really, if you have the right ones, you don't need that many. And the right ones, for most of us, are not that high.

Maintaining a 10-speed is a huge pain in the ass, though. Tons of the things that can break will be things you need to scour the internet to replace.

When you get a handle on how big a bike you want, buy something contemporary. It'll be much easier to keep rolling. You'll end up with either bar end shifters because they're fashionable or integrated shifters because they're near-ubiquitous.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

AndrwSwitch said:


> Maintaining a 10-speed is a huge pain in the ass, though. Tons of the things that can break will be things you need to scour the internet to replace.


Just curious why you think this, because IME parts are readily available.

_Unless_ you mean 10 speed as in 5 cogs and a double upfront. Then yes, I'd agree.


----------



## jsidney (Aug 24, 2011)

PJ352 said:


> Just curious why you think this, because IME parts are readily available.
> 
> _Unless_ you mean 10 speed as in 5 cogs and a double upfront. Then yes, I'd agree.



There are five cogs on the rear and three up front.

Going to go look up something on the Trek 520.


----------



## jsidney (Aug 24, 2011)

jsidney said:


> There are five cogs on the rear and three up front.
> 
> Going to go look up something on the Trek 520.


Yep, in 1986 the 520 was indeed a 15 speed. 3 on the crank and 5 in the back.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

PJ352 said:


> Just curious why you think this, because IME parts are readily available.
> 
> _Unless_ you mean 10 speed as in 5 cogs and a double upfront. Then yes, I'd agree.


I was just about to get all defensive.

But yeah - I meant 10-speed in the 1970s sense.  I like my contemporary road bike quite a lot.


----------



## pdxr (Sep 9, 2011)

I have a cannondale 3.0 with friction shifters on the down tube. I'm not really comfortable with this setup. What's the minimum I need to do to convert to brake/shifter combo? Is it just the new levers and cables? Thx.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

pdxr said:


> I have a cannondale 3.0 with friction shifters on the down tube. I'm not really comfortable with this setup. What's the minimum I need to do to convert to brake/shifter combo? Is it just the new levers and cables? Thx.


Tell us more about your bike (year, drivetrain setup), but if it's 7 speed (7 cogs at the rear) you could hunt down Shimano RSX STI's. At minimum, you also need cable/ housings and d/ tube cable stops.


----------



## pdxr (Sep 9, 2011)

Not sure about the year, but I think mid/late 90s. I inherited it from a relative. It is a 7-speed with a double upfront. 

I am new at this and trying to come up to speed on all the jargon. RSX STI's is a line of Shimano components? Would this have been one of the original equipment options on this bike or is it current?


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

pdxr said:


> Not sure about the year, but I think mid/late 90s. I inherited it from a relative. It is a 7-speed with a double upfront.
> 
> I am new at this and trying to come up to speed on all the jargon. RSX STI's is a line of Shimano components? Would this have been one of the original equipment options on this bike or is it current?


Mid 90's sounds about right and yes, they're Shimano RSX STI's. It's not a current offering, but was OEM'd on similar bikes of that era. I don't believe the RSX STI's were offered until ~'97.


----------



## pdxr (Sep 9, 2011)

I came home and did a little research on the bike. Found the serial number. It's a 58cm manufactured in '89, so older than I thought. Current components say suntour, the rear derailleur is suntour blaze. 

Does this info change your recommendation to look for RSX STI's? Thanks again for the advice.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

pdxr said:


> I came home and did a little research on the bike. Found the serial number. It's a 58cm manufactured in '89, so older than I thought. Current components say suntour, the rear derailleur is suntour blaze.
> 
> *Does this info change your recommendation to look for RSX STI's?* Thanks again for the advice.


Just to clarify, I recommended the RSX STI's based on what was known about your bike and why you were considering the upgrade, but I did so with reservations. 

As bikes age, _good_ options to upgrade dwindle and usually aren't without some pitfalls. In this case, buying used STI's you take the chance that they'll have a limited life cycle remaining, so if you do decide to pursue this, that's something to consider. 

Depending on where you position your hands most often, you might want to consider bar end shifters. It would be a _closer_ reach (than 'down tubes') and they're mechanically simpler in design. Another option would be to go with more current 2300 or Sora 8 speed STI's. Because you're mating them to a 7 speed drivetrain, you'd use what's called alternate cable routing at the rear derailleur. This option won't give you the most accurate shifting, but the advantages are that you're getting new, reliable shifters positioned where you'd (presumably) prefer and it would be a first step towards a future upgrade to 8 speed, if you so desired. 

FWIW, those are what I see as your best bets, but all with potential advantages and disadvantages. Hope this helps, and if you need further clarification or have more questions post and we'll try to assist.


----------



## smokey422 (Feb 22, 2004)

*I've had Sora STIs on my Poprad that came with bar-ends*

And they worked fine, if a little noisily on upshifts. Presently I am running Rivendell noodle bars with bar end shifters and they also work good. I switch back and forth as my mood moves me. I do like the simplicity of the bar ends but the added control of STI is nice, too.


----------



## Drew Eckhardt (Nov 11, 2009)

> Being slightly easier to repair is a nifty idea, but my Chorus shifters have about 40k miles on them with lots of shifting and no real problems. I once had some junk that made shifting a little difficult, but didn't take more than a few minutes to fix.


I shift like I have ADHD, wear out a set of right G-springs in a few years, sometimes break G-spring carriers (it's a fatigue failure), and have broken one front lever return spring (fatigue failure like a brake return spring). 

Rebuilding them is not a big deal with adjusting the rear derailleur the hardest part of that whole process.


----------

