# 2012 Tiagra vs 105



## mpre53

Convince me that it's worth the extra $250 to buy the 105 equipped model of the bike I'm looking at, now that Tiagra has gone to 10 speeds.

All other things like frame, fork, wheels, seat post etc being the same on both bikes.


----------



## AndrwSwitch

I was going to say something about better wheels. But if they're the same on both bikes,

No, it's not worth it.

I picked up a new Tiagra front derailleur the other day. It's not quite as refined as the 105 front derailleur, but it does the job. IMO, it's totally not worth it for the crank, rear derailleur (near-identical) chain, or cassette. 105 shifters are a little nicer, at least have been in the past, but I don't think they're $250 nicer.

If you're going to develop a "need" for 105 stuff down the road, though, better to do it now. The cost of upgrade will be well over $250.


----------



## Rob

I'm a totally irrational guy who really likes the clean look of concealed shift cables so I would go for the 105 but that's just my own personal fetish.


----------



## PJ352

mpre53 said:


> Convince me that it's worth the extra $250 to buy the 105 equipped model of the bike I'm looking at, now that Tiagra has gone to 10 speeds.
> 
> All other things like frame, fork, wheels, seat post etc being the same on both bikes.


I'll offer upfront that I have no experience with the 5700 series 105, but have ridden 5600 literally thousands of miles (like 12k) and find it near flawless. The new Tiagra is said to be modeled after it, so out of curiosity I test rode a Tiagra equipped bike at the LBS the other day and my first impressions are that it's an impressive groupset - with refinement/ functionality on a par with the 5600 group. Coincidentally, I rode it back to back with an SRAM Apex equipped bike and preferred Tiagra's refined feel. 

As always, YMMV, but my vote is unless you're hellbent on the 5700's under bar tape cable routing and slightly improved brake modulation, save your money and go with Tiagra.


----------



## Shinjukan

I would assume that you're referring to the 2012 models of both Tiagra and 105 groupsets. It's common practice by companies like Shimano the so-called 'trickle-down technology', so the 2012 Tiagra is actually the 105 of not-so-distant yesteryears.

This year (2012) can be referred to as the overlap year for the two groupsets. They're somewhat identical in specifications, not unlike last year when the Tiagra was still 9-speed. I think it won't be long before the 105 inherits the technology of its 'better' brothers.

If only I could trade-in my current ride that has the old 4503 Tiagra 9-speed, I'd get the new Tiagra. 10-speed plus the cassette is now 12-30 instead of my 12-26 setup. I need all the help I could get for the hills in my area.


----------



## 1bamafan14

I would look into Sram Apex. I had a set of Tiagras on my old bike and the Srams are soooooo much better. Never thought I would that that. I have been a long time Shimano guy but my LBS talked me into try the Apex groupo and I fell in love! I think you will like it too!


----------



## AndrwSwitch

I have Rival on one of my bikes and I don't care for it.

Doesn't mean you won't like it. This should just illustrate that it's worth trying a good selection of what's out there. Except Campagnolo.  I don't think you can get Campy for a Tiagra/Apex price.


----------



## 13thcyclist

AndrwSwitch said:


> I have Rival on one of my bikes and I don't care for it.
> 
> Doesn't mean you won't like it. This should just illustrate that it's worth trying a good selection of what's out there. Except Campagnolo.  I don't think you can get Campy for a Tiagra/Apex price.


The way I see it, Shimano is like Microsoft- seen everywhere, used by nearly everyone. SRAM is like Apple, a new up and coming business, but some (ie most) people don't like their 'feel.' And then there is Campy.. which I guess would be like Linux, the first and arguably the best. (Except Linux is free.. Campy _definitely_ ain't  Also, these analogies don't take price into account. If they did, then Campy=Apple, Shimano=Microsoft, SRAM=...some paid versions of Linux? Whatever, it's usually the cheapest)

For the 2012 Tiagra, I can't comment on it, but reading about it with its move to 10 speed and 105 level shift levers makes me stoked about the whole 'trick-down tech' deal. I do have experience with 2011 9-speed Tiagra, cuz that's what my current Giant has. It's a great group, pretty much has never failed me despite a few minor & major crashes. As long as it's tuned correctly, all the groups will be the same essentially, except the shifting feel may be 'smoother' or 'faster', whatever that's worth for a beginner/non-racer.


----------



## Jett

13thcyclist said:


> The way I see it, Shimano is like Microsoft- seen everywhere, used by nearly everyone. SRAM is like Apple, a new up and coming business, but some (ie most) people don't like their 'feel.' And then there is Campy.. which I guess would be like Linux, the first and arguably the best. (Except Linux is free.. Campy _definitely_ ain't  Also, these analogies don't take price into account. If they did, then Campy=Apple, Shimano=Microsoft, SRAM=...some paid versions of Linux? Whatever, it's usually the cheapest)
> 
> For the 2012 Tiagra, I can't comment on it, but reading about it with its move to 10 speed and 105 level shift levers makes me stoked about the whole 'trick-down tech' deal. I do have experience with 2011 9-speed Tiagra, cuz that's what my current Giant has. It's a great group, pretty much has never failed me despite a few minor & major crashes. As long as it's tuned correctly, all the groups will be the same essentially, except the shifting feel may be 'smoother' or 'faster', whatever that's worth for a beginner/non-racer.


I think all comes down to shifters. Which one feels better in your hand. Which shifting method do you like more. If you can test ride each group and see which one you like.

Personally, I have both Shimano & SRAM and can switch between the two without any problems. Can't stand the thumb paddle on the Campy. It doesn't fit my hand correctly. I have to lift my palm up and angling my tumb backwards to shift when I'm on the hood and I hate that.


----------



## Magickiller88

I would go for the tiagra's and spend that extra cash on a nice wheelset.


----------



## wotnoshoeseh

magickiller88 said:


> i would go for the tiagra's and spend that extra cash on a nice wheelset.


+1


----------



## AndrwSwitch

Or 3-5 nice dinners with your girlfriend. Or a few ski lift tickets and travel back and forth. Or a good trainer. Or... So many choices!


----------



## Z6_esb

my 2012 Felt Z6 came with the new Tiagra and I like it a lot. My LBS said that for me (a beginner) I would not notice much difference, if at all..I was considering getting the Z5 that had 105 groupp. 

They said what a lot of others are saying now: if you want it, go for it but you probably wouldn't be able to tell. 

For the hidden cable thing, that's preference and look. I don't even notice the cables being out and repairs and maintaining the bike will be much easier with externally mounted cables.

Side Question: do cables that are under bar tape take more effort to shift because of pressure on them?


----------



## Shinjukan

On the side topic of protruding cables on the Tiagra as compared to the clean look of the 105, the only obvious drawback of this that I can see based on personal experience is that it interferes with a headlight's visibility for those who use one. This can be worked around of course but still the 105 gets the thumbs up on this.


----------



## mpre53

Magickiller88 said:


> I would go for the tiagra's and spend that extra cash on a nice wheelset.


That's how I'm leaning.


----------



## teflondog

I would go with the Tiagra. I couldn't tell the difference between the new Tiagra and 105 when I was test riding some bikes. The Tiagra of today is probably the equivalent of 105 a couple years ago.


----------



## PJ352

Z6_esb said:


> Side Question: do cables that are under bar tape take more effort to shift because of pressure on them?


If installed correctly they shouldn't, but because the hidden routing necessitates more/ sharper bends, IMO it's more likely to encounter problems. 

Shimano (to name one) has recognized this by specifying PTFE derailleur cables and SP41 sealed outer casing in such applications. In previous models (5600, for example), Shimano only spec'd stainless steel der cables, but did recommend SP41 housings. JMO, but I view the latter as the standard 'use our products' recommendation. 

For comparison, both 5600/ 5700 brake cable/ housing specs are stainless steel (cables) and SLR housings.


----------



## Jett

mpre53 said:


> Convince me that it's worth the extra $250 to buy the 105 equipped model of the bike I'm looking at, now that Tiagra has gone to 10 speeds.
> 
> All other things like frame, fork, wheels, seat post etc being the same on both bikes.


If you have pull the trigger yet, here something you should take into consideration when determine 105 vs Tiagra. Hood shape, the ergomonics between the two shifters are different. Personally, I've never been a bigger fan of the old 105, which is now the new Tiagra, hoods. I found them a little too big for my hands, and on long rides they become some what uncomfortable. Just something to think about.


----------



## ammodawg

I've been trying decide between this same choice. Looking at getting a Giant Defy. My budget is around the 1500 mark and that puts me on either a Defy 1 with 105 group or step up to a Defy Composite 3 with Tiagra.


----------



## 13thcyclist

ammodawg said:


> I've been trying decide between this same choice. Looking at getting a Giant Defy. My budget is around the 1500 mark and that puts me on either a Defy 1 with 105 group or step up to a Defy Carbine with Tiagra.


Go for the Carbon! I have the Al Defy 2 with Tiagra, and Tiagra is only getting better, esp these days with the 10 speed and 105 aspects getting adopted into the design. Groupsets don't matter as much as you think they do.

At least, above Sora for Shimano. For SRAM, even the lowest Apex has the exact same shifting & levers as the highest RED. For Campy,.... If you can afford Campy, why should you even ask? :lol:


----------



## AndrwSwitch

13thcyclist said:


> Groupsets don't matter as much as you think they do.


Quoted for truth.


----------



## mpre53

Jett said:


> If you have pull the trigger yet, here something you should take into consideration when determine 105 vs Tiagra. Hood shape, the ergomonics between the two shifters are different. Personally, I've never been a bigger fan of the old 105, which is now the new Tiagra, hoods. I found them a little too big for my hands, and on long rides they become some what uncomfortable. Just something to think about.


I have a pretty good sized pair of mitts. :wink5:


----------



## nsk1

I'm building a 2012 64cm specialized allez frame set (1 of 12 left in country and discontinued for 2013). I like the lightness of the Tiagra shifting but like the under tape 105 cables. Both have the same shift styles (don't think I could get used to the Sram's). I'm leaning towards 105's to avoid regret and for the cable routing and would have a noteworthy increase in shifting effort that you probably would stop noticing after a few rides anyway. If I wasn't building I'd take the tiagra equipped bike. Down the road I'd like a good backup/ loaner bike and tiagra's would probably be my choice.... But by then tiagra's could be routed like the 105's anyway and sora's might not have that weird thumb shifter.

Comfort, price, and ease of maintenance = Tiagra
Negligible increase in performance with arguably more stylish looks = 105


----------



## gabedad

The mechanics at my LBS Love the new tiagra. They suggested it over the 105 for the cost


----------



## PJ352

nsk1 said:


> ... sora's might not have that weird thumb shifter.


For 2013, it's gone. The new Sora (3500) is still 9 speed, but now employs inner/ outer levers a-la-Tiagra, 105, Ultegra.....
View attachment 264218


----------



## FindTheRiver

PJ352 said:


> For 2013, it's gone. The new Sora (3500) is still 9 speed, but now employs inner/ outer levers a-la-Tiagra, 105, Ultegra.....
> View attachment 264218


Wow. That's the first I've seen/heard that. Only a matter of time before the Tiagra has the inner cable routing. If it's not the next edition, I'd say the one after that at the latest.

BTW: I've got a 2011 Allez with the 9 speed Tiagra and have nothing bad to say about it. It does everything you ask of it, and smoothly at that.


----------



## NJBiker72

PJ352 said:


> For 2013, it's gone. The new Sora (3500) is still 9 speed, but now employs inner/ outer levers a-la-Tiagra, 105, Ultegra.....
> View attachment 264218


That's a nice change. Never liked the thumb shifting.


----------



## PJ352

Some additional info on a few of Shimano's 2013 offerings...
http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/shimano-sora-and-tourney-2013-first-look-33204/


----------



## SFTifoso

So if Sora is like the old 105, does that mean the new 105 is like the old Ultegra?


----------



## PJ352

SFTifoso said:


> So if Sora is like the old 105, does that mean the new 105 is like the old Ultegra?


I think it's more like new Sora is like the previous Tiagra and the new Tiagra is like the previous 105. But essentially it's Shimano continuing 'trickle down', where upgrades/ refinements/ enhancements introduced in a higher end model find their way into the next model down, then the next... over a period of time.

JMO, but 105 and Ultegra have been so close in performance in the past couple of years that I think differences are primarily in finish, weight, forged/ machined chainrings... Purely aesthetic changes like hidden der housings aren't what I'd call meaningful upgrades and may actually hinder performance. As always, YMMV.


----------



## FindTheRiver

PJ352 said:


> Some additional info on a few of Shimano's 2013 offerings...
> http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/shimano-sora-and-tourney-2013-first-look-33204/


*bookmarked

Thanks, PJ. I've always been a Shimano guy, even back when I was riding a Centurion Ironman that weighed a ton. Gotta love the trickle-down of technology.


----------



## .je

Is that for sure how the 'trickle down' works? 

I haven't every heard with certainty that they take their old group (or maybe just the levers), put on a new face, and sell it with a number that's 100 higher... I can see why, since it costs just about nothing to do.. and they only have to upgrade one group every couple of years. The parts go together a little like lego, so it's not hard to figure. It's always been legend and myth when I've heard it. It makes sense, but maybe it's an easy answer to connect dots for people, and not truth.

The way I figure, the difference in actual manufactured parts is only a few dollars when a group gets upgraded (maybe effort springs, return springs, lever fulcrum) which gets amortized over 100,000 or so units per year (I am estimating) so the parts cost is what, five bucks more? Amortized engineering and production tooling costs about the same... not counting bezel and trim differences, and only for one group, change costs aren't really great. This is how I figure that the new Tiagra is so highly regarded, because the old 105 was so good.

IMO, I tried the new 5700 105 and 4700 Tiagra, and 105 had much less effort and less action distance, and smoother. I was very impressed. The Tiagra felt like it needed a lot of distance. I almost wish I hadn't tried that 105.


----------



## PJ352

.je said:


> Is that for sure how the 'trickle down' works?
> 
> *I haven't every heard with certainty that they take their old group (or maybe just the levers), put on a new face, and sell it with a number that's 100 higher...* I can see why, since it costs just about nothing to do.. and they only have to upgrade one group every couple of years. The parts go together a little like lego, so it's not hard to figure. It's always been legend and myth when I've heard it. It makes sense, but maybe it's an easy answer to connect dots for people, and not truth.


Those are your words, not mine. What I said was... _essentially it's Shimano continuing 'trickle down', where upgrades/ refinements/ enhancements introduced in a higher end model find their way into the next model down, then the next... over a period of time._

Since I've never disassembled a shifter, I can't provide the specifics of how trickle down is employed, but the results speak for themselves. And that's the extent of my curiosity - what the enhancements will do for me and at what cost. 



.je said:


> IMO, I tried the new 5700 105 and 4700 Tiagra, and 105 had much less effort and less action distance, and smoother. I was very impressed. The Tiagra felt like it needed a lot of distance. I almost wish I hadn't tried that 105.


I run previous generation 105 on one bike and an Ultegra mix on another, and my impressions of the new Tiagra was that it matched both in function/ feel. Haven't yet tried the new 105, so have yet to form an opinion on that comparison. 

FWIW, I log in excess of 6k miles annually and am confident 10 speed Tiagra would fulfill most recreational riders _needs_. _Wants_ is another matter....


----------



## .je

Those are not just my words, I have read them many times over years. I couldn't make an assumption that the parts make their way down the line with each iteration, I can see why someone would, but that doesn't make it true. It would be great to know if that's the case or how the trickle down of technology happens.

As an aside, I am guessing that Shimano did a lot of work on their 105 group for 2012 expecting it to be their volume item, almost a new brand face for new/intermediate cyclists. If you get the chance, it's a nice set to try out.

I agree with you, if you want to ride, just get on a bike that works and ride it.


----------



## PJ352

.je said:


> Those are not just my words, I have read them many times over years.


Gotcha. I misinterpreted your meaning, so... my mistake.



.je said:


> As an aside, I am guessing that Shimano did a lot of work on their 105 group for 2012 expecting it to be their volume item, almost a new brand face for new/intermediate cyclists. If you get the chance, it's a nice set to try out.


You very well may be right, but for a variety of reasons and considering the intro of the Tourney and upgraded Sora (along with last years Tiagra), I think the emphasis is slightly tilted towards the entry level, probably as a counter to SRAM's fairly recent Apex intro. 

Because general perceptions/ purchasing environments change fairly rapidly, I think it's hard to read market trends, but IMO ~1k actually buys a lot of bike nowadays. Good for the consumer....


----------



## nsk1

PJ352 said:


> For 2013, it's gone. The new Sora (3500) is still 9 speed, but now employs inner/ outer levers a-la-Tiagra, 105, Ultegra.....
> View attachment 264218


Well that was fast! For a non-competition bike that'd be just fine. Most bikes are overbuilt for their intended purposes anyway. Dura Ace all the way down to Sora doesn't make a difference for leisure riding.... Especially here in Illinois on the flats where I use 3 or 4 gears total depending on wind and how big of a hurry I'm in. Now that the comfort and ease of use have trickled down, it really doesn't make a difference for most.


----------



## snookanglr

Probably a little late to be responding to this but I have two 2012 bikes; one with Tiagra and one with 105 and I think I actually like the Tiagra BETTER. For my next bike I'll stick with Tiagra, try Sram, or go to Ultegra. Don't pay more for the 105, save the money and use it for something else.


----------



## Stephen Saunders

I just got a 2012 Specialized Tarmac with all Tiagra on sale for $1600 marked down from two grand. The same bike with SRAM was still at $2000. No difference but the component group. I just didn't see the difference being worth an extra $400 and went with the Tarmac with Tiagra. No regrets! Save the money and get something that will really make a change like a new wheelset. That's my plan!


----------



## PJ352

Stephen Saunders said:


> I just got a 2012 Specialized Tarmac with all Tiagra on sale for $1600 marked down from two grand. The same bike with SRAM was still at $2000. No difference but the component group. I just didn't see the difference being worth an extra $400 and went with the Tarmac with Tiagra. No regrets! Save the money and get something that will really make a change like a new wheelset. That's my plan!


Just a FYI, the 2012 Tarmac w/ Tiagra MSRP'd at $2k while the 2012 Tarmac Apex MSRP'd for $2200, so at $2k it was discounted, just not as much as your bike.

That aside, you got a good deal and a very nice bike, so congrats and enjoy!


----------



## NJBiker72

Stephen Saunders said:


> I just got a 2012 Specialized Tarmac with all Tiagra on sale for $1600 marked down from two grand. The same bike with SRAM was still at $2000. No difference but the component group. I just didn't see the difference being worth an extra $400 and went with the Tarmac with Tiagra. No regrets! Save the money and get something that will really make a change like a new wheelset. That's my plan!


Good luck. Not sure I would have Sobe the same but a Tarmac at that price is a good deal. 

You can upgrade to Sram later.


----------



## AndrwSwitch

NJBiker72 said:


> You can upgrade to Sram later.


I swapped from SRAM Rival across the board on one of my bikes to a Tiagra rear derailleur and Sunrace downtube shifters. I wouldn't have bothered if the Rival shifter hadn't died. But broken to functional is one of the few upgrades that makes a real difference. :wink5:


----------



## NJBiker72

AndrwSwitch said:


> I swapped from SRAM Rival across the board on one of my bikes to a Tiagra rear derailleur and Sunrace downtube shifters. I wouldn't have bothered if the Rival shifter hadn't died. But broken to functional is one of the few upgrades that makes a real difference. :wink5:


Wish I would have known you. Would have taken the broken set in exchange for a set of Sora.


----------



## AndrwSwitch

Kind of a wash.

I'd be going from one set of shifters I don't like to a different set of shifters I don't like. I might feel differently about the '13 Sora, but in general, give me Shimano Tiagra and up, Campagnolo, or just let me stick with downtube.


----------



## Zeet

IMHO, the new Tiagra is just as good as Shimano 105 if you're not racing, because Tiagra is more durable. Also Tiagra is a really good entry level gruppo for beginning cyclists who are on a slight budget, but want the experience of quality shifting. I think many cyclists have always underrated Tiagra. This is especially so, since Shimano has taken Tiagra to the next level with 10 speeds (it used to be 9 speeds only).

The main differences between Shimano 105 and Tiagra are weight and durability, due to the fact that they're made of slightly different materials. IMO, Tiagra is heavier, but more durable than 105 or Ultegra.

Shimano Gruppo Road Bike Hierarchy:

1- *Dura Ace **

2- Ultegra

3- 105

4- Tiagra

5- Sora

6- 2300

** Means the Best*


----------



## love4himies

I didn't like my Tiagras, now I have 105's and love them, so I would get the 105's.


----------



## Zeet

love4himies said:


> I didn't like my Tiagras, now I have 105's and love them, so I would get the 105's.


*What was the problem with your Tiagras?

*TIA

* My opinion was shaped mostly from reviews of the new 10 speed Tiagra gruppo and personal experience from the old 9 speed Tiagras.


----------



## AJ88V

Ya know, for under $1500, you could get onto any number of nice carbon frame bikes with either Shimano 105 or SRAM Rival kits, at least if you're buying online. 

If you're buying at a local shop, you'll pay more, but that adds a different kind of value.


----------



## mpre53

OK, well, I started this thread over a year ago, and I have a new bike with Ultegra on order, due in next week, so it's now a moot point. 

It actually was moot 11 months ago.


----------



## Zeet

mpre53 said:


> OK, well, I started this thread over a year ago, and I have a new bike with Ultegra on order, due in next week, so it's now a moot point.
> 
> It actually was moot 11 months ago.


Thanks for starting the thread, Mpre53. If you hadn't, we wouldn't have the chance to review the pros and cons of the 4600 Tiagra gruppo and the 5700 105 gruppo.

Therefore, none of your efforts here have been in vain. :thumbsup:


----------



## Carverbiker

mpre53 said:


> OK, well, I started this thread over a year ago, and I have a new bike with Ultegra on order, due in next week, so it's now a moot point.
> 
> It actually was moot 11 months ago.


Still a good discussion, how about transitioning to mechanical vs electronic Ultegra?


----------



## love4himies

Zeet said:


> *What was the problem with your Tiagras?
> 
> *TIA
> 
> * My opinion was shaped mostly from reviews of the new 10 speed Tiagra gruppo and personal experience from the old 9 speed Tiagras.


It doesn't shift as "clean" as my 105's. FYI I have the 9 speed Tiagras and 10 speed 105's so that may make a difference.


----------



## mpre53

Carverbiker said:


> Still a good discussion, how about transitioning to mechanical vs electronic Ultegra?


The new ride is mechanical.


----------



## jeepsouth

My bike has 105's. My wife's Cannondale Synapse has Tiagra. I have had many more problems with the 105's than she has had with her Taigra components. The shifts are quick and accurate with the Tiagra (admittedly, we are both newbies and do not possess a great deal of experience to draw upon).
As some have said, I do not care for the cable routing of the Tiagra. I much prefer the "cleaner" look of the 105 routing. But, I must say the the Tiagra seem to be the equal of my 105 (at least the ones on my bike) in shifting performance.


----------



## nsk1

I think if you're caught between tiagra and 105... Might as well go with sora. I have 105 and do like them but getting accessories on the bars is slightly harder. I now have some experience with the new sora equipment as well. It does well for its price point just like the tiagra. 

Btw- if you have a cluttered garage or put your bike on a car rack a lot with other bikes, I like how I don't have to worry about snagging cables on stuff. I also prefer the firmer shift of the 105 caused by the cable routing now that I have some mileage on them.


----------



## regnaD kciN

I'm still using downtube shifters, but know that any new bike in my future is going to have some sort of brifters, so was wondering: at first glance, the main difference between the Tiagra and 105 shift levers is the lack of visual shift indicators on the latter. I'm wondering why this was done; I would think that having a quick visual reference to the gear you're currently in would be an advantage, not something that should be paired away in higher-priced components. Even with my bike, a quick glance at the downtube gives me an idea about my gearing; with the 105, it seems like you'd have to look back at the rear hub for that information. Do any of you who use the 105 find that lack if information a problem?


----------



## GrandJubile

regnaD kciN said:


> I'm still using downtube shifters, but know that any new bike in my future is going to have some sort of brifters, so was wondering: at first glance, the main difference between the Tiagra and 105 shift levers is the lack of visual shift indicators on the latter. I'm wondering why this was done; I would think that having a quick visual reference to the gear you're currently in would be an advantage, not something that should be paired away in higher-priced components. Even with my bike, a quick glance at the downtube gives me an idea about my gearing; with the 105, it seems like you'd have to look back at the rear hub for that information. Do any of you who use the 105 find that lack if information a problem?


I think that its not included for 1) weight? And 2) I think shimano is trying to imply gear selection based on feel rather than number. I, like you, also ride on DT shifters and I know how my bike feels in certain gears (speed, cadence etc.) Its just one of those things that come with time albeit with 10 gears rather than 6. 105 is aimed at generally more experienced riders who are not concerned about what gear they are in, rather they are concerned about effort and cadence.


----------



## mpre53

regnaD kciN said:


> I'm still using downtube shifters, but know that any new bike in my future is going to have some sort of brifters, so was wondering: at first glance, the main difference between the Tiagra and 105 shift levers is the lack of visual shift indicators on the latter. I'm wondering why this was done; I would think that having a quick visual reference to the gear you're currently in would be an advantage, not something that should be paired away in higher-priced components. Even with my bike, a quick glance at the downtube gives me an idea about my gearing; with the 105, it seems like you'd have to look back at the rear hub for that information. Do any of you who use the 105 find that lack if information a problem?


I've never had a gear indicator on any of my road bikes, even on the one that had 8 speed Microshift shifters. No need for it. As the post above says, once you've ridden for awhile, you use effort and cadence, not visual inspection of any component, to choose the proper gear.

As far as avoiding cross-chaining goes, no worries. Your ears will let you know. :wink:


----------



## regnaD kciN

GrandJubile said:


> I think that its not included for 1) weight? And 2) I think shimano is trying to imply gear selection based on feel rather than number. I, like you, also ride on DT shifters and I know how my bike feels in certain gears (speed, cadence etc.) Its just one of those things that come with time albeit with 10 gears rather than 6. 105 is aimed at generally more experienced riders who are not concerned about what gear they are in, rather they are concerned about effort and cadence.


In other words, as I suspected, it's a macho thing -- "REAL men know what gear they're in by feel." Oh, well...


----------



## regnaD kciN

mpre53 said:


> I've never had a gear indicator on any of my road bikes, even on the one that had 8 speed Microshift shifters. No need for it. As the post above says, once you've ridden for awhile, you use effort and cadence, not visual inspection of any component, to choose the proper gear.
> 
> As far as avoiding cross-chaining goes, no worries. Your ears will let you know. :wink:


First off, I've been riding for well over 45 years, so the "once you've ridden for awhile" line is unnecessary. Granted, it's been the better part of two decades since my time and condition allowed me to do much in the way of cycling, but, ever since I started riding bikes with more than three speeds (


----------



## regnaD kciN

for the record, thirty-nine years ago), I've used a visual reference of glancing at the downtube. 

For me, shifting by feel works just fine as long as we're talking about rear shifts, but, with the way the gearing is set up on my bikes (and virtually every other bike I know), a smooth progression through the gears requires several double-shifts, with needing to go up or down on the rear by a differing number of sprockets depending on the gear I'm in to start with. Being able to know at a glance which gear I'm in makes that easy, otherwise, it's easy to shift into precisely the wrong gear -- too big or too small -- when shifting the front. This may only be a minor inconvenience on level terrain; on hills, it can result in a sudden stop and toppling over before I can get into the right gear. How do you in the "shift purely by feel" camp manage effective double shifts?

(And let me say I detest the iPhone's Tapatalk client, and its tendency to send a message when I'm trying to edit it!)


----------



## dnice

regnaD kciN said:


> for the record, thirty-nine years ago), I've used a visual reference of glancing at the downtube.
> 
> For me, shifting by feel works just fine as long as we're talking about rear shifts, but, with the way the gearing is set up on my bikes (and virtually every other bike I know), a smooth progression through the gears requires several double-shifts, with needing to go up or down on the rear by a differing number of sprockets depending on the gear I'm in to start with. Being able to know at a glance which gear I'm in makes that easy, otherwise, it's easy to shift into precisely the wrong gear -- too big or too small -- when shifting the front. This may only be a minor inconvenience on level terrain; on hills, it can result in a sudden stop and toppling over before I can get into the right gear. How do you in the "shift purely by feel" camp manage effective double shifts?
> 
> (And let me say I detest the iPhone's Tapatalk client, and its tendency to send a message when I'm trying to edit it!)


for me, it's the sound. the slight but still audible sound when the RR DR is in the 2 lowest gears.


----------



## regnaD kciN

dnice said:


> for me, it's the sound. the slight but still audible sound when the RR DR is in the 2 lowest gears.


O.K. Applying your approach to my own situation: I have two road bikes, a standard and a triple, both with a 7-speed cassette. (Maybe it's old advice, but I've always followed the adage that you should avoid the most-extreme cross-chain gearing, not the two most extreme.) Starting with the double-chainring first, if I were to start on the lowest gear, stay on the smaller chainring until I got to the next-to-the-smallest gear in the back, then shift the front and simultaneously downshift the rear to the next-highest effective gear and move up from there to the highest gear available, this is what I'd get:

L7
L6
L5
L4
L3
L2
H4
H3
H2
H1

for an effective ten gears available out of the theoretical fourteen. Coming down, it would be:

H1
H2
H3
H4
H5
H6
L4
L5
L6
L7

for, once again, ten gears used. Is this the approach you take? Not saying it might not be effective, but it flies it the face of the advice I'd always been given, which was to utilize every gear-inch in sequence except for the two cross-chain gears, which, looking at the spreadsheet I built for this, would involve three double-shifts going each direction, and would almost require that you be able to check visually to know which gear you're in at any time. 

(FWIW, the example with the triple would be, as you may well expect, even more complex, with use of thirteen of the twenty-one gears going each way, with EIGHT double-shifts going up, and five going down. Or have I just been over-thinking the whole matter all these years?)


----------



## PJ352

regnaD kciN said:


> In other words, as I suspected, it's a macho thing -- "REAL men know what gear they're in by feel." Oh, well...


I think you're misreading GrandJubile's response. Focusing on effort and cadence isn't a macho thing, it's about keeping a smooth pedal stroke, which is pretty important if you want to optimize endurance/ performance.

The only time I can think of that which cog I'm in would matter is when I'm facing a climb or a headwind, where running out of (rear) gearing would become an issue necessitating a shift to the inner ring and (as you mentioned), shift up at the rear ~3 cogs to maintain cadence. Examples would be before cresting the hill or in gusty headwinds. In other words, anticipating what gear I _will_ need. 

The bottom line is that it's important to keep cadence up given the conditions we're presented with. IMO, an indicator doesn't help with that. Knowing your bike (gearing) and ability to push certain gear combos given riding conditions, does.


----------



## Cvoss1

I'm new to the whole road bike thing. I have a 1996 trek MTB and ride in a city. I'm a casual rider meaning short commutes and weekend rides. I need something light to carry in and out of basement with plenty of steps. I found a 2012 felt zw95 at lbs for good price ($850). It has a mix of parts including Tiagra, micro shifters, carbon fork, etc. wondering if it's a good deal and bike or if I should consider an upgrade in parts. Any other bike suggestions? Being lightweight is key and budget less than $1200 (and that's a stretch for only being a seasonal rider). Thoughts?


----------



## mpre53

Forget it. Not worth it.


----------



## dnice

i have two road bikes as well. one with a 50/39/30 triple, 12-27 which is the mileage eater, the other with a compact 50/34, 11-28. this was much more of an issue for me when i lived in denver than it is now that i'm in florida, but as i recall in denver my daily route with it's consistent elevation change would typically see a gear change as below.

Out the door of my apartment onto a flat doad: 50-19 (this is the gear i "lived" in)

Down the hill, still in the 50:
15
14
13
12

Base of hill, still in 50 Begin Climb:
15
16
17
19
21 (There's that sound) Switch to 39:


Cimb, still in 39:
19 through 27, depending on legs.

Back on the flat, switch to 50:
19

So, the 50-24 and 50-27 were rarely used. The 50-21 only ocassionally. The 39 for most of the climbing. I didn't use the triple much for fear of dropping the chain, but when i needed it, it was delightful thing to have.

Here in orlando, I live in the 39, mostly the 19-12. 

Does any of this make sense?


----------



## tihsepa

No it dosent make sense. How about just riding your bikes and forgetting about all this hooplah? 

By the time this funky gearing business makes sense, you wont need it. As said above, you will just know.


----------



## dnice

tihsepa said:


> No it dosent make sense. How about just riding your bikes and forgetting about all this hooplah?
> 
> By the time this funky gearing business makes sense, you wont need it. As said above, you will just know.


how about you allow me to determine which conversation i want to engage in and butt out? bikes get ridden. gearing makes sense. not hooplah. 

happy now?


----------



## regnaD kciN

dnice said:


> how about you allow me to determine which conversation i want to engage in and butt out? bikes get ridden. gearing makes sense. not hooplah.
> 
> happy now?


+1

FWIW, I thought the post quite informative. I need to look at it more when I'm not standing in line at a restaurant, as I am now, but glad to have it.


----------



## tihsepa

Nevermind, not worth the effort. 

Have a nice day.


----------



## PJ352

dnice said:


> how about you allow me to determine which conversation i want to engage in and butt out?


Just as you opted in on this convo, others have the right to do the same. It's the way public forums work.


----------



## regnaD kciN

tihsepa said:


> Nevermind, not worth the effort.
> 
> Have a nice day.


Nice self-deletion. 

But, as to your pre-deleted message (which was essentially "shift when your cadence demands it"), that advice is fine AS LONG AS YOU STAY ON THE SAME CHAINRING. It's when you start jumping chainrings that things get more complex -- there are any number of double-shift points, and it's not mere "hoopla" to figure out where the most sensible shift points are.


----------



## regnaD kciN

PJ352 said:


> Just as you opted in on this convo, others have the right to do the same. It's the way public forums work.


dnice's response was useful. A riposte of, essentially, "who the hell cares?" was, IMO, anything but...and,seeing as it was my question, I think my opinion on the matter is relevant.


----------



## PJ352

regnaD kciN said:


> dnice's response was useful. A riposte of, essentially, "who the hell cares?" was, IMO, anything but...and,seeing as it was my question, I think my opinion on the matter is relevant.


I don't recall offering an opinion on the value (or lack thereof) of anyone's post. I merely stated how public forums work. 

Ironically, by your responding to me, you're demonstrating the point. :wink5:

BTW, if you go back and reread some posts, your question re: shifting has been answered.


----------



## PJ352

Since the topic has shifted from Tiagra vs 105 to gearing/ cadence, here's a calculator that may help:
Sheldon Brown's Bicycle Gear Calculator


----------



## regnaD kciN

PJ352 said:


> BTW, if you go back and reread some posts, your question re: shifting has been answered.


Yes, they were...by dnice. NOT by posters telling him to, essentially, STFU because it's all just a bunch of "hooplah" (sic).


----------



## tihsepa

regnaD kciN said:


> Yes, they were...by dnice. NOT by posters telling him to, essentially, STFU because it's all just a bunch of "hooplah" (sic).


I just think its really funny you guys spending all this time figuring out shift patterens. Like PJ352 said the only time you need to think about a gear is anticipating a climb. thats really it. Do you guys really go down the road thinking of all this nonsense? I have an idea. Just get out and ride. Learn a good pedal stroke and a good cadence. You will be able to shift and stay in a gear to maintain good form, comfort and power. When any of those charicteristics change, shift. When you run out of gears either get stronger or get a lower gear. Thats it. 

Happy riding. Or math or thinking about riding or whatever it is you are doing.

Have a nice day.


----------



## dnice

tihsepa said:


> I just think its really funny you guys spending all this time figuring out shift patterens. Like PJ352 said the only time you need to think about a gear is anticipating a climb. thats really it. Do you guys really go down the road thinking of all this nonsense? I have an idea. Just get out and ride. Learn a good pedal stroke and a good cadence. You will be able to shift and stay in a gear to maintain good form, comfort and power. When any of those charicteristics change, shift. When you run out of gears either get stronger or get a lower gear. Thats it.
> 
> Happy riding. Or math or thinking about riding or whatever it is you are doing.
> 
> Have a nice day.


i think it's funny that you believe that we give it that much thought while riding. i just came back from a 30 mile ride and never gave it a second thought. as i said to regna, it took me a bit to think aboout that sequence, but since he asked me a direct question, i felt it was worth taking a while to calculate it. 

not sure what offends you about the discussion so much, but really, it's not that serious.


----------



## regnaD kciN

tihsepa said:


> I just think its really funny you guys spending all this time figuring out shift patterens. Like PJ352 said the only time you need to think about a gear is anticipating a climb. thats really it. Do you guys really go down the road thinking of all this nonsense? I have an idea. Just get out and ride. Learn a good pedal stroke and a good cadence. You will be able to shift and stay in a gear to maintain good form, comfort and power. When any of those charicteristics change, shift. When you run out of gears either get stronger or get a lower gear. Thats it.
> 
> Happy riding. Or math or thinking about riding or whatever it is you are doing.
> 
> Have a nice day.


Proving once again why dnice was right to tell you off. Answering my concerns, as he did, was useful. Telling us both, essentially, that we're stupid to think about these things isn't. 

And, once again, none of this is about knowing when to shift WHEN ON THE SAME CHAINRING. It's about double-shifts which, depending on the shift point chosen, can either drop you right into the next gear up or down, or else leave you flailing about in a gear that's too low, or straining to mash a gear that's too high. Sorry it offends you that some people want to use their brains to figure out how to ride with more efficiency and, yes, more enjoyment. 

Lastly, I find it amusing how you consider this discussion "not worth the effort"...except when it comes to make sure you get the last word, of course.


----------



## PJ352

regnaD kciN said:


> ... none of this is about knowing when to shift WHEN ON THE SAME CHAINRING. It's about double-shifts which, depending on the shift point chosen, can either drop you right into the next gear up or down, or else leave you flailing about in a gear that's too low, or straining to mash a gear that's too high.


If you go to the gear calculator that I linked to earlier, plug in the values that match your drivetrain and estimate cadence, it'll illustrate how many rear shifts it'll take to match (cadence) after shifting at the front (or vice versa).

As far as _when_ to shift, it's really nothing more than _anticipating_ the need, ideally before cadence drops and effort rises. Saves the knees and keeps the pedal stroke smooth.


----------



## demonrider

I have Tiagra (4600), 105 (5700), Ultegra (6700) on 3 bikes these days and I cannot tell a difference between 105 and Tiagra. None. The differences are mostly cosmetic with hidden cables for 105 and slight weight increase plus gear display for Tiagra. Ultegra is definitely a jump up in shifting performance. The Ultegra RD has a visibly (and audibly) stronger, snappier spring, and the front also shifts with more authority and crispness.

As far as racing goes, I have been racing with people on 10 speed Tiagra and they are doing better than me on my Ultegra equipped bike.


----------



## nsk1

At first I wished the 105's had the indicator. Now it doesn't really bother me. If I'm on the big gear and spinning a big (lower) rear gear I experience crossing and gear noise. When that happens I generally go to the small front and shift around in the rear until I'm comfy again. I don't shift to hit a specific gear number, I shift to get back in my sweet spot. The only time I really wish I had an indicator is when I am going lower in gears trying to finish getting up a hill without messing with the front gear. I seem to always be one gear short on one particular hill but I know I have to go to the baby gear now so I know to make the gearing change before I even start going up it. No problems once you familiarize yourself with the bike and the roads you ride.


----------



## AndrwSwitch

What just happened to this thread?

I find now and then, I glance at my drivetrain. My shift patterns are now pretty ingrained though. The only wrong answer is cross-chaining, and that's not even that big a deal if it's only for a couple minutes at a time.


----------



## charlox5

AndrwSwitch said:


> I have Rival on one of my bikes and I don't care for it.
> 
> Doesn't mean you won't like it. This should just illustrate that it's worth trying a good selection of what's out there. Except Campagnolo.  I don't think you can get Campy for a Tiagra/Apex price.


a full centaur group from ribble is comparable or even cheaper than the SRAM/Shimano counterparts. but, this means you'll have to put it on yourself, and you're technically buying grey market and not sure what the warranty ramifications are.

in a head to head comparison Centaur v. 105 v. apex, Centaur is my favorite of the three, but i'm a proud campagnolo apologist.


----------



## Alias530

Forget 105, splurge for Ultegra.

I made the mistake (if you want to call it that) of the first road bike I ever rode having Ultegra components. Then I rode 105 and immediately felt that the decreased shift quality would bother me so I didn't even try Tiagra.

Ultegra is fantastic, you don't even have to slow your pedal stroke to shift. Just hammer away and shift. The only way you even know it shifts is the sound it makes and the fact pedaling becomes harder, that's how smooth it is.


----------

