# touring bike shifters



## surly boy (Sep 8, 2011)

Why do most touring rigs have bar end shifters and not Sti levers, ergo levers or downtube shifters?


----------



## MB1 (Jan 27, 2004)

Bar end shifters are easier to reach than down tube shifters, even more so on a fully loaded bike.

Bar end shifters are much less likely to be damaged in a fall over than STI levers.

If your derailleurs get slightly bent or just out of alignment with bar end shifters you can turn off the index function and shift away (as can down tube shifters but STI levers cannot).

Not a lot of Campy on touring bikes since Shimano has such a wide gear range possibility.


----------



## 0.2HP (Jul 13, 2011)

Also, some large handlebar bags get in the way of STI sifters.


----------



## Aushiker (Mar 23, 2008)

I would assume simplicity, ease of maintenance, that you can switch from indexed to frictionless and durability would be all valid reasons for their common use on touring bikes.

That said some touring bikes such as the Vivente World Randonneur come with STI shifters.










Regards
Andrew


----------



## seeker333 (Mar 15, 2002)

surly boy said:


> Why do most touring rigs have bar end shifters and not Sti levers, ergo levers or downtube shifters?


Mostly because of the cost / profit motive for sellers. Barcons cost the dealer 75 bucks, whereas STI/Ergo cost 2-3X more. If they cost the same, you'd almost never see barcons on a touring bike again.

DT is actually cheaper, but no one wants to reach that far to shift. It's not hard to do on a road bike, but can be difficult on a touring rig rolling up a hill at 4mph with 25lbs of pannier on the front. So barcons are the accepted cost/performance compromise.


----------



## SantaCruz (Mar 22, 2002)

Downtube shifters were for racing, the touring folks wanted something different. STI/Ergo came much later.


----------



## ClemY (Jun 24, 2010)

When I started riding 10 spd bikes 41 yrs ago, the bike I started with had downtube friction shifters. I tried a few different things and ended up with Campy friction barcons. I saw no need to change until about 20 yrs. ago when I built a new touring bike. I went to indexed barcons. I have now graduated to 9 spd rear clusters with indexed barcons and at the moment I see no reason to change. I am happy with the gear range I have, and the steps between gears, something I couldn’t say 40 yrs ago. I ride mostly on the tops and barcons are very convenient, more convenient than STI shifters would be. Recently I have discovered inline brake levers. I find I really love them and use them much more than the standard brake levers.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

SantaCruz said:


> Downtube shifters were for racing, the touring folks wanted something different. STI/Ergo came much later.


I saw lots of guys racing on barcons back in the day, this was done because it was faster due to not having to move your hand, and perhaps safer then the downtube, though I race using only down tube shifters and never had any issues grabbing gears.

touring folks wasn't interested in something different, they wanted to be able to shift a heavily loaded bike without having to take a hand off the bar which could make for a tricky ride, but lots of people toured with heavy loads before barcons came along. I think it was for more peace of mind of knowing they didn't have to move their hands to shift.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

MB1 said:


> Bar end shifters are much less likely to be damaged in a fall over than STI levers.


You hear this all the time, but I wonder if this is actually true. Most of the dead STI shifters I see stopped working because of old age gum-up, ingestion of broken shifter cable bits or operator hamfistedness. I see lots of crash-scratched ones which work just fine. If I were touring with STIs, the broken cable bits would be my concern, not a fall.


----------



## spartacus001 (Nov 28, 2009)

Or mount MTB shifters on your road bike drop bar.
Follow the link in my signature below


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

wim said:


> You hear this all the time, but I wonder if this is actually true. Most of the dead STI shifters I see stopped working because of old age gum-up, ingestion of broken shifter cable bits or operator hamfistedness. I see lots of crash-scratched ones which work just fine. If I were touring with STIs, the broken cable bits would be my concern, not a fall.


I've repeatedly crashed my cyclocross bike. Its shifters are still kicking. Tiagra STI.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

wim said:


> You hear this all the time, but I wonder if this is actually true. Most of the dead STI shifters I see stopped working because of old age gum-up, ingestion of broken shifter cable bits or operator hamfistedness. I see lots of crash-scratched ones which work just fine. If I were touring with STIs, the broken cable bits would be my concern, not a fall.


I agree, broken cable bits would be my main concern too, and these cables are breaking more frequently then the old systems. I have a bike with over 150,000 miles and only replace the cables maybe 3 or 4 times in all that time, not today, its almost mandatory to replace them once a year.

But, I have seen crashes that jacked up STI levers...but those crashes would have jacked up ordinary levers too, difference is with non STI brake levers you can keep riding and use just one brake and still shift, and the cost to fix is a lot lower with non STI levers. 

Also while touring with a non STI system it's easier to repair on the road, or at least limp it in to the nearest LBS.


----------



## surly boy (Sep 8, 2011)

thanks for all the replies, I was curious. I have Ultegra STI levers on my Surly commuter/tourer. I find the STI levers the most convenient. I too ride on the tops or hoods a lot and the shifters are right there, and I also raced for quite awhile and had many crashes some really bad. Downtubers got dinged up, but the STI's survived well. Thanks again


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

surly boy said:


> thanks for all the replies, I was curious. I have Ultegra STI levers on my Surly commuter/tourer. I find the STI levers the most convenient. I too ride on the tops or hoods a lot and the shifters are right there, and I also raced for quite awhile and had many crashes some really bad. Downtubers got dinged up, but the STI's survived well. Thanks again


Odd, I've had crashes, howbeit not many over the past 40 years, and never had a down tube lever damaged; more importantly I knew lots of people who crashed and burned and never damage a down tube lever either. I guess you got the lucky crash...or perhaps better worded as the unlucky crash. But in most crashes brake levers do get dinged up frequently and with CF levers I've seen them snap.


----------



## ClemY (Jun 24, 2010)

froze said:


> I saw lots of guys racing on barcons back in the day, this was done because it was faster due to not having to move your hand, and perhaps safer then the downtube, though I race using only down tube shifters and never had any issues grabbing gears.
> 
> touring folks wasn't interested in something different, they wanted to be able to shift a heavily loaded bike without having to take a hand off the bar which could make for a tricky ride, but lots of people toured with heavy loads before barcons came along. I think it was for more peace of mind of knowing they didn't have to move their hands to shift.


I have raced and toured with barcons. As a big guy, reaching down for downtube shifters was a pain for me. Barcons answered that for me. It is just a matter of personal preference.


----------



## 0.2HP (Jul 13, 2011)

And another thing. Downtube shifters worked fine on racing biikes with low handle bars. Touring bikes with high handle bars mean a longer reach to get to down tube shifters, and a change of rider position as well. As mentioned above this makes it tricky to control a loaded touring bike, especaily when going up hill and you need to downshift to avoid dropping below your stall speed.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

0.2HP said:


> And another thing. Downtube shifters worked fine on racing biikes with low handle bars. Touring bikes with high handle bars mean a longer reach to get to down tube shifters, and a change of rider position as well. As mentioned above this makes it tricky to control a loaded touring bike, especaily when going up hill and you need to downshift to avoid dropping below your stall speed.


This may be true, interesting at the least. I have two touring bikes a 85 Schwinn Le Tour Luxe (my main touring bike), and a 07 Mercian Vincitore, Schwinn is currenttly equipped with downtube shifters, however I have a set of Suntour barcons that I will be putting on the Schwinn when I'm ready. So far I haven't done any heavy touring due to time constraints, I have done weekend tours but I only pack maybe 30 pounds of gear at best with no front panniers just a handle bar bag, so I'm not sure how the bike will handle once I put another 20 pounds of gear in front panniers. I do know this, the bike currently is extremely stable when I do my weekend stuff and grabbing the downtube shifters has offered no issues whatsoever and that includes going up hill. Even when not loaded friction shifting requires some pre planning, when I see a hill approaching, and or I know my pedal speed is dropping, I grab the next gear before I get below about 60 to 65 rpm's, so there's no reason to even get close into the stall speed zone, I could see that happening riding off road but not on the road.


----------



## wooglin (Feb 22, 2002)

Anyone remember crossover gearing? Where you'd have big jumps on your freewheel and you'd switch from big ring to little ring for your closer-spaced gears? Lots of front and rear shifting. Good application for barcons. 

But I think the ability to switch to friction mode so you can continue your journey with a bent hanger/derailleur is the big seller.


----------



## ClemY (Jun 24, 2010)

wooglin said:


> Anyone remember crossover gearing? Where you'd have big jumps on your freewheel and you'd switch from big ring to little ring for your closer-spaced gears? Lots of front and rear shifting. Good application for barcons.
> 
> But I think the ability to switch to friction mode so you can continue your journey with a bent hanger/derailleur is the big seller.


In the old days, with only 5 spd clusters, crossover gearing could provide closer gear spacing within the desired gear range. Fortunately with the 8, 9 and 10 spd clusters available now, you can have the gear spacing you want with the range you want.


----------



## wooglin (Feb 22, 2002)

ClemY said:


> In the old days, with only 5 spd clusters, crossover gearing could provide closer gear spacing within the desired gear range. Fortunately with the 8, 9 and 10 spd clusters available now, you can have the gear spacing you want with the range you want.


You're absolutely right. I didn't mean to imply otherwise. I was just thinking about the context that barcons became associated with touring bikes in, which was pre-indexing.


----------



## Reynolds531 (Nov 8, 2002)

wooglin said:


> Anyone remember crossover gearing? Where you'd have big jumps on your freewheel and you'd switch from big ring to little ring for your closer-spaced gears? Lots of front and rear shifting. Good application for barcons.
> 
> But I think the ability to switch to friction mode so you can continue your journey with a bent hanger/derailleur is the big seller.


I still "dance the half step with Granny" on an old touring bike with Suntour Barcons. 52-47-34 Sugino Mighty tour in front and 14-17-22-28-38 in rear shifted with a Suntour V GT derailleur. It works really well. It might take 2 seconds, tops, for a double shift. the jumps between gears aren't bad.

I do like indexed shifting better, and use barcons on it, too. I tried brifters and didn'l like them as much.


----------



## Matt1986 (Mar 19, 2010)

froze said:


> This may be true, interesting at the least. I have two touring bikes a 85 Schwinn Le Tour Luxe (my main touring bike), and a 07 Mercian Vincitore, Schwinn is currenttly equipped with downtube shifters, however I have a set of Suntour barcons that I will be putting on the Schwinn when I'm ready. So far I haven't done any heavy touring due to time constraints, I have done weekend tours but I only pack maybe 30 pounds of gear at best with no front panniers just a handle bar bag, so I'm not sure how the bike will handle once I put another 20 pounds of gear in front panniers. I do know this, the bike currently is extremely stable when I do my weekend stuff and grabbing the downtube shifters has offered no issues whatsoever and that includes going up hill. Even when not loaded friction shifting requires some pre planning, when I see a hill approaching, and or I know my pedal speed is dropping, I grab the next gear before I get below about 60 to 65 rpm's, so there's no reason to even get close into the stall speed zone, I could see that happening riding off road but not on the road.


I'm touring with downtube shifters at the moment (Simplex) and despite my bike and gear weighing roughly 90 pounds I have no complaints whatsoever. I'm of the opinion that if you're used to using downtube shifters on a road bike it won't be difficult on a fully loaded tourer. I was sceptical before riding it, for the reasons mentioned, but I find that I can comfortably downshift even when crawling up very steep grades (read: pyrenees, alps).

Plus, as far as maintainence goes, downtube shifters are the easiest to repair/replace in the field and the least likely to incur crash damage in the unlikely event of an accident.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Matt1986 said:


> I'm touring with downtube shifters at the moment (Simplex) and despite my bike and gear weighing roughly 90 pounds I have no complaints whatsoever. I'm of the opinion that if you're used to using downtube shifters on a road bike it won't be difficult on a fully loaded tourer. I was sceptical before riding it, for the reasons mentioned, but I find that I can comfortably downshift even when crawling up very steep grades (read: pyrenees, alps).
> 
> Plus, as far as maintainence goes, downtube shifters are the easiest to repair/replace in the field and the least likely to incur crash damage in the unlikely event of an accident.


Interesting, I'm glad you chimed in. Europeans have been touring those steep mountains for years with downtube shifting and never thought anything of it. Once I start touring with more weight it's quite possible that I won't think anything about it either since I've been using downtube shifters forever.

And mechanically, your absolutely correct.


----------



## scott967 (Apr 26, 2012)

Half step with 28 granny on my Fuji touring series III. I have downtube shifters, but the next-step up, the series IV, had the barcons. That was considered more "high end".

scott s.
.


----------



## duececity (Mar 19, 2012)

Here is a believer of following logical technology. STI shifters are super convenient and a reliable way to go. Don't worry about the expense of repairs if damaged. Look what you are saving in gasoline costs alone. After all, if you're riding a Surly you have already incurred a lot of expense with your investment. Most people do not like changes in their lives and might say they are purists following old technology, but that leaves them a step behind the rest oif the world. Enjoy your rides.


----------

