# What is 105?



## DalyCityDad (Oct 11, 2009)

I've seen it mentioned a few places and haven't been able to figure out what they were talking about. Someone said something about a 105 level bike. Someone else said something about choosing 105 over some other component. It's all greek to me. Can someone explain this to me?


----------



## bcl489 (Sep 11, 2009)

105 is a level of shimano drivetrain. it is a 10 speed drivetrain in its newest iteration. the top three shimano drivetrains are: 1. Dura-Ace 2. Ultegra 3. 105. All other levels lower than 105 are 9 speeds or less. 105 is considered to be shimano's entry-level high-performance drivetrain, with lower levels like sora and tiagra having lesser performance.

http://bike.shimano.com/publish/content/global_cycle/en/us/index/products/road/105.html

you can compare these levels of drivetrains to campagnolo and sram drivetrains. check manufacturers websites, they'll usually list them in order, from most expensive and highest performing, on down.


----------



## asad137 (Jul 29, 2009)

105 is a level of component groups in Shimano's road component lineup. From least-expensive to most expensive, they go:

2200 (8 speed rear cassette)
Sora (9sp)
Tiagra (9sp)
105 (10sp)
Ultegra (10sp)
Dura-Ace (10sp)

It's commonly thought that 105 is the lowest level group that most people consider "pro"-level.

Asad


----------



## dekindy (Jul 7, 2006)

Shimano 105 is a name for one of their groupos (shifter levers, crank, bottom bracket, derailleurs, cassette, and chain). The order from highest level most expensive to least is Dura-Ace (pro level), Ultegra, 105, Tiagra, Sora, and 2200. The only major difference betweee DA, Ultegra, and 105 is weight. 105 is probably the most cost beneficial for serious recreational riders that ride thousands of miles per year. I have always ridden Ultegra personally. Hope that helps.

If you want to try the new doubletap system from SRAM, the Rival group is by far the most cost effective groupo on the market and probably equals Ultegra in performance at a 105 price. If you are starting new I would recommend SRAM Rival. SRAM has been doing mountain biking groupos for many years and just recently introduced their road groupo a couple of years ago. The podium on this year's Tour De France, Contader, Schreck, and Armstrong all road SRAM. Lance Armstrong road Shimano exclusively to his 7 consecutive wins prior to his comeback this year.


----------



## Guest (Oct 18, 2009)

Pretty much, though I would note that 105 didn't come about with their 10 speed drivetrains, they've used that name and the others in the past.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

dekindy said:


> Shimano 105 is a name for one of their groupos (shifter levers, crank, bottom bracket, derailleurs, cassette, and chain). The order from highest level most expensive to least is Dura-Ace (pro level), Ultegra, 105, Tiagra, Sora, and 2200. The only major difference betweee DA, Ultegra, and 105 is weight. 105 is probably the most cost beneficial for serious recreational riders that ride thousands of miles per year. I have always ridden Ultegra personally. Hope that helps.
> 
> If you want to try the new doubletap system from SRAM, *the Rival group is by far the most cost effective groupo on the market and probably equals Ultegra in performance at a 105 price.* If you are starting new I would recommend SRAM Rival. SRAM has been doing mountain biking groupos for many years and just recently introduced their road groupo a couple of years ago. The podium on this year's Tour De France, Contader, Schreck, and Armstrong all road SRAM. Lance Armstrong road Shimano exclusively to his 7 consecutive wins prior to his comeback this year.


In the interest of 'balance', it should be noted that SRAM is a relative newcomer to the road component scene and (while no make/ model is bulletproof) SRAM has had its share of teething problems. 

I don't agree with the bolded statement above. More, Rival is on a par with 105. Of course, YMMV.


----------



## Guest (Oct 18, 2009)

PJ352 said:


> In the interest of 'balance', it should be noted that SRAM is a relative newcomer to the road component scene and (while no make/ model is bulletproof) SRAM has had its share of teething problems.
> 
> I don't agree with the bolded statement above. More, Rival is on a par with 105. Of course, YMMV.



I would agree with you. Ultegra and Rival are both cost effective but appropriate for riders with different priorities.


----------



## DalyCityDad (Oct 11, 2009)

*Thanks, guys.*

That definately clears a lot of things up. The next question is do you think a noob like me would want 105 or would the lower level stuff be sufficient? At this point I'm not very serious but I was thinking of training for a century in march. What do you guys think?


----------



## Guest (Oct 21, 2009)

I think going with something like 105 or Rival is always a good idea for someone taking a serious enough look at the sport for something like a century. Its not uber expensive but the function is there, in fact we could all do just fine with it whatever our goals but it also doesn't place as many limiters on you if want to upgrade later. Which is to say its easier to upgrade a single piece of those groups than the ones below them as they have more in common with the groups above them.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

DalyCityDad said:


> That definately clears a lot of things up. The next question is do you think a noob like me would want 105 or would the lower level stuff be sufficient? At this point I'm not very serious but I was thinking of training for a century in march. What do you guys think?


kytyree makes some good points, but to offer an alternate 'argument'... since you used the word 'sufficient', IMO Shimano's 9 spd Tiagra group would suite your purposes just fine and probably save you $200 +/- in the process. 105 is the low end of Shimano's pro groups and as such, used for racing on a budget. Functionally, Tiagra works the same as the pro groups and IME the practical difference between 9 spd and 10 spd (on the 105 and up groups) is minimal.


----------



## Tommy Walker (Aug 14, 2009)

DalyCityDad,
Be sure to test ride the groups in your price range and the one above it as well, so also try a Shiman Ultegra and SRAM Force. Last months bicycling magazine had a great article on groups. IMHO you might decide you want Ultegra and that would take care of any thought of upgrading down the line. Also the older 105 left shifters have had some problems.
Good Lukc.


----------



## ccroy2001 (May 20, 2002)

*Geeky Question:*

Why 105?

All the other groups have names; DuraAce, Ultegra, Tiarga, Sora, ......... and 105?

Anybody know the significance of the number 105?

Or the names for that matter? Do they mean anything or just sound good?

To the OP: I have the older 105 9-speed on a bike and it's been fine for centuries, club rides, etc. I have about 10,000 miles on the group. I started with a Sora bike which worked OK, but it's the only Shimano group that doesn't have paddles behind the brake lever for shifting to smaller cogs. It's works fine, but I prefer the paddles which come on Tiagra and on up the line. 

Also, the better the group generally the lighter the wheelset and other components. So yes you pay a lot more as you move up the groups, but probably less than buying things like wheelsets at retail as you upgrade over time.

That being said: There's a young, very light and strong woman in my club that can throughly kick my butt on her Sora bike. It's all about the motor, you can do a century on anything if you've trained for it.


Chris


----------



## buck-50 (Sep 20, 2005)

Tommy Walker said:


> DalyCityDad,
> Be sure to test ride the groups in your price range and the one above it as well, so also try a Shiman Ultegra and SRAM Force. *Last months bicycling magazine had a great article *on groups. IMHO you might decide you want Ultegra and that would take care of any thought of upgrading down the line. Also the older 105 left shifters have had some problems.
> Good Lukc.


I'm pretty sure they haven't had a great article since the late 80s... 

But back to the original topic, For the amount of riding you are planning on doing, 105 will be fine. Tiagra will probably be fine as well. Seriously, unless you are putting on serious miles every week (say, 200+), it'll be fine.

Ultegra would be overkill.


----------



## clipz (Aug 28, 2008)

DalyCityDad said:


> That definately clears a lot of things up. The next question is do you think a noob like me would want 105 or would the lower level stuff be sufficient? At this point I'm not very serious but I was thinking of training for a century in march. What do you guys think?




i dont think lower level stuff would be sufficient. i made that mistake because money was tight for me at the time.my shifters are sora, and the rest are tiagra. the thumb shifter at the top doesnt really bother me much right now, im used to it, but the components to be honest suck. my gears will skip, it takes more time to change a gear and is not very smooth in the transfer process. im now currently upgrading my components to ultegra.

i am sticking with shimano because im new to cycling and know that the parts are readily available pretty much everywhere. ive heard alot of bad stories with sram, weather true or not, shimano is reliable.

sora/tiagra might as well be sold at walmart in my opinion.


----------



## Tommy Walker (Aug 14, 2009)

*Geeky Question Answer*



ccroy2001 said:


> Why 105?
> 
> All the other groups have names; DuraAce, Ultegra, Tiarga, Sora, ......... and 105?
> 
> ...


I was guessing that DurAce could be *Do you race *or *Durable Racing*


----------



## ccroy2001 (May 20, 2002)

*Since we're guessing*



Tommy Walker said:


> I was guessing that DurAce could be *Do you race *or *Durable Racing*


If I guess then I come up with marketing buzzwords

Dura-Ace = durable under the pounding of a race, "Ace".
Ultegra = Ulitimate Integrity
Tiagra = Sorry, all I can think of is "If you have an erection lasting more than 4 hours after using Tiagra, seek medical help immediately"
Sora = Soaring?

...but 105? maybe the meeting to name the new group was scheduled for 1:05 and they said forget about the meeting, long lunch instead! 

Chris


----------



## easyridernyc (Jan 10, 2008)

its ok to commit to the 105 group before you start shopping, but an equally important consideration may be the frame that accompanies the group.there are many variables between the framesets at the various price points, not the least of which are composition (aluminum vs. carbon, or combinations of the two throughout the frame), quality of construction, speed, efficacy under duress, or in relatively extreme conditions,etc. in the end, its not just the group that makes the bike.

there are consequently significant differences between the "entry level" and intermediate level frames you find with specialized, cannondale, trek, giant, jamis, felt, even cervelo or orbea. aim for your affordable price point and then compare across manufacturers to get an idea of where you are in the game; although some may contend that all such frames would basically be the same, you will soon learn that there are significant differences between the complete bikes the companies respectively market to consumers. in general, you may be able to expect similar performances between companies at a certain price range, sure, but when you look closer, listen to customer reviews, and test ride for your own edification, you will learn that no two bikes are really the same; in some cases the more you spend, the better bike you might tend to get. but in others, some bikes significantly outperform others at a relatively lower price point, and therefore give you a much better bang for your buck.

one way to differentiate between bikes is to look at the wheel quality along with frame and group qualification. some companies give half assed frame, 105, and shytty wheels and market like they won the tour de france and guess what, buy this bike and you will be the next le mond. those bicycles would be on the lower end of your performance spectrum. others give great frame and 105, then chuck on cheapish wheels to keep the overall price level down. more like it. you can always ride that way for a little while, and then when you get a few bucks--bang! buy a better set of wheels that take you to the next level. ask the cats on this site about wheels, its a totally different conversation, bro. i see riders use this strategy on bikes ranging from less than a thousand to four, five, six thousand and up. definitely something to seriously consider if you see a relatively low price on a bike with medicore wheels on a great frame. That might be the time to jump. start shopping before the xmas rush and before the local lbs stocks up for the spring, there are always good bikes around that someone needs to get off the floor or out of the warehouse.

good luck. and farewell, my son. my blessing season this in thee...


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

clipz said:


> i dont think lower level stuff would be sufficient. i made that mistake because money was tight for me at the time.*my shifters are sora, and the rest are tiagra. *the thumb shifter at the top doesnt really bother me much right now, im used to it, but *the components to be honest suck*. my gears will skip, it takes more time to change a gear and is not very smooth in the transfer process. im now currently upgrading my components to ultegra.
> 
> i am sticking with shimano because im new to cycling and know that the parts are readily available pretty much everywhere. ive heard alot of bad stories with sram, weather true or not, *shimano is reliable.*
> sora/tiagra might as well be sold at walmart in my opinion.


IMO you're buying into 'marketing hype', the bulk of which comes from cyclists rather than Shimano, which is somewhat ironic.

Most of what you describe can be attributed to poor setup/ diagnosis/ adjustment and can occur with any level group, so throwing money at the problems won't necessarily solve them, long term. IMO you either need to find a good LBS or learn to do your own wrenching. And FWIW, above the Sora group, _all_ the Shimano shifters function the same as the 'pro' groups (as in, no thumb shifter).

Also, isn't it a contradiction to say Shimano's reliable, but Sora/ Tiagra components 'suck'??


----------



## Hank Stamper (Sep 9, 2009)

DalyCityDad said:


> That definately clears a lot of things up. The next question is do you think a noob like me would want 105 or would the lower level stuff be sufficient? At this point I'm not very serious but I was thinking of training for a century in march. What do you guys think?



Either way you'd have a bike that works fine for general use. The 105 would be a little better if you end up really pushing it or want to upgrade just bits beyone 105 but it's not as if Tiagra would sideline you at a certain point either. 
You're not very serious now but just the fact that you've thought enough to get on the internet and inquire and are thinking of centuries might be a good indicator that you will end up getting more serious.
I think the risk is greater going with Tiagra and later wishing you had a little better than it would be going with 105 and realizing you had a little overkill. Yes, it's not my money but a couple hundred isn't a big deal in the grand scheme of things and probably worth it so you don't end up realizing you should have gone 105 to begin with.


----------



## MCF (Oct 12, 2006)

If you plan on riding a century and all training to prepare for it, I would suggest not getting a bike with lower than 105 on it.


----------



## OldZaskar (Jul 1, 2009)

I just upgraded from an old Klein with Shimano RSX. At the time (RSX as a name is not used anymore) it was LOWER than 105. The bike lasted thousands of miles and I did numerous 50+ mile rides on it (185 pound rider at 20ish mph) and it never failed - and I mean smooth crisp shifts, quick drops, etc. 

As PJ352 and kytyree alluded too - set up is key! My "junky" groupo was dialed in perfectly and it worked perfectly. Don't buy the hype - buy the right bike. 

In the name of hypocrisy, I just bought an Addict SL with full Ultegra SL... And yeah, it's more perfect... uhm, perfecter... ;-)


----------



## Tommy Walker (Aug 14, 2009)

That's funny; I have some type of Shimano on my hybrid and I agree it works fine, but I did a ride yesterday on my road bike and changed gears to pick up speed in traffic, my Ultegra SL shifted without a tink of the chain and the derailleur, so smooth and ah yes so perfecter.


----------



## jaredmx5 (Aug 31, 2009)

DalyCityDad, here is some of the "logic" I used with my recent first bike purchase.

My budget started out at about $700 or so for what I thought I could get a nice entry level bike. Then I started doing lots of reading and research both on these forums and others and my budget quickly doubled. I came to the conclusion that I didn't want anything lower than 105.

The reasoning being that since I was new to this sport I didn't want to dive into doing my own wrenching because I've had bad luck with this in the past and have royally screwed up a drivetrain because of it and I also didn't want to have to keep taking my bike to this shop to have it dialed in every couple of months. I also didn't want to dive into the sport with something subpar and end up being unhappy with cycling because I was having hardware issues. So I was lucky enough to have the funds to support a higher level grouppo and have been very happy with my purchase.


----------



## Guest (Oct 26, 2009)

It is certain that one of the fun parts of this sport is not standing on the side of the road with a broken bike.


----------



## DalyCityDad (Oct 11, 2009)

If I were to buy something with tiagra and and wanted to upgrade to 105 or ultegra later, how much would it cost me?


----------



## Tommy Walker (Aug 14, 2009)

jaredmx5 said:


> DalyCityDad, here is some of the "logic" I used with my recent first bike purchase.
> 
> My budget started out at about $700 or so for what I thought I could get a nice entry level bike. Then I started doing lots of reading and research both on these forums and others and my budget quickly doubled. I came to the conclusion that I didn't want anything lower than 105.
> 
> The reasoning being that since I was new to this sport I didn't want to dive into doing my own wrenching because I've had bad luck with this in the past and have royally screwed up a drivetrain because of it and I also didn't want to have to keep taking my bike to this shop to have it dialed in every couple of months. I also didn't want to dive into the sport with something subpar and end up being unhappy with cycling because I was having hardware issues. So I was lucky enough to have the funds to support a higher level grouppo and have been very happy with my purchase.


Same here. I was going to get me a good bike for $1,000; then hmm for $2,000 I can get; I was then looking at $3,500; so I had to compare all the $3,000 bikes to justify the $3,500; then I got a 10% discount and that made the $3,500 bile $3,150 and I AM SO HAPPY I DID THAT BECAUSE I LOVE MY CERVELO SO MUCH


----------



## Hank Stamper (Sep 9, 2009)

DalyCityDad said:


> If I were to buy something with tiagra and and wanted to upgrade to 105 or ultegra later, how much would it cost me?


Just google 105 or Ultegra groupset. Add $100 to $200 for labor. It cost A LOT less to get companents as part of a bike than to buy them later. (especially in this case where you won't have much resale value with Tiagra to offest the costs)
Buy less/upgrade later isn't a great financial move in almost all cases.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

There are many different ways to approach this, but if you're buying with an eye to almost immediately upgrading, it makes little sense to not just buy what you want upfront. Notice I said _want_.  

Because I fall on the side of more pragmatic/ frugal, I think (as I've previously posted) that Tiagra makes a fine entry level bike. And after years and thousands of miles you can replace/ upgrade parts as they wear. Many can be upgraded piece meal, but there are some (cassettes/ chains, as one example) that would have to be upgraded together. They're not big ticket items, so that's inconsequential.

If money weren't a factor, sure it would be nice to get a $3K+ bike with full Ultegra, but fact is, it really won't make you ride any better or faster - that has to come from the rider. And unless you're coming from a 27 lb., 20 yr old road bike, you're not going to see a marked performance difference between these road groups, once set up properly.

IMO the frame is the heart of the bike, so that's where the focus should be. Get the fit/ geo right and fret over all the 'bolt ons' somewhere down the road.


----------



## terbennett (Apr 1, 2006)

PJ352 said:


> In the interest of 'balance', it should be noted that SRAM is a relative newcomer to the road component scene and (while no make/ model is bulletproof) SRAM has had its share of teething problems.
> 
> I don't agree with the bolded statement above. More, Rival is on a par with 105. Of course, YMMV.


+1... Rival IS on par with 105. Even SRAM will tell you that. Initially, there wasn't a SRAM group on par with Ultegra- which is understandable since Ultegra is just a lighter weight (not buy much), shinier version of 105. Dura Ace is in a league of it's own when it comes to Shimano groups. Contrary to what many say, Ultegra and Dura Ace are not as closely related as Ultegra and 105. SRAM Force was targeted at Dura Ace but failed at the task. It is more like Ultegra. SRAM Red is the Dura Ace equivalent.


----------



## terbennett (Apr 1, 2006)

PJ352 said:


> kytyree makes some good points, but to offer an alternate 'argument'... since you used the word 'sufficient', IMO Shimano's 9 spd Tiagra group would suite your purposes just fine and probably save you $200 +/- in the process. 105 is the low end of Shimano's pro groups and as such, used for racing on a budget. Functionally, Tiagra works the same as the pro groups and IME the practical difference between 9 spd and 10 spd (on the 105 and up groups) is minimal.



I have to agree with this statement. I have a bike that was originally Shimano Tiagra and there isn't that much diference between 10 speed and 9 speed. That bike now has Ultegra and for the money, the Tiagra was a great buy. I put 13,000 miles on that group before I upgraded it. There was nothing wrong with it. It was just that I was convinced that the upgrade would make a major difference- which it didn't. Still I would go with 105 over Tiagra simply because the industry is heading toward 10 speed systems. Don't be surprised if Tiagra becomes a 10 speed system in 2010 or 2011. Knowing Shimano, they'll phase out the 9 speed immediately after leaving owners scouring ebay for 9 speed parts.


----------



## ccroy2001 (May 20, 2002)

*More $$ doesn't = more reliability*



kytyree said:


> It is certain that one of the fun parts of this sport is not standing on the side of the road with a broken bike.


But that doesn't neccessarily relate to how expensive the group is. I'm with the others that say set up is the key. 

When I started riding to the point where I could cover 30 miles or greater I was still riding my old Trek Hybrid with some sort of really low end Shimano. Alivio maybe? The bike was fine functionally. Where the really low end stuff hurt it was weight. The bike weighed ~28lbs before any racks or accessories. 

The main thing you're buying when you go up in groups is lighter weight and especially if buying new, lighter wheels. A Sora/Tiagra bike probably has sturdy, albiet heavy, wheels and tires. Higher group bikes have lighter wheels usually. 

I think if you find a bike you like and the price is in line, you'd be fine from a reliability standpoint with Sora on up. 

Get a bike that fits, and that you like the looks of and can't wait to ride it. As you get fit that will make a huge difference, much more than which group.

Chris


----------



## BlueGrassBlazer (Aug 4, 2009)

I haven't seen what your main goal is. Sorry if I missed it. You did mention centuries and if you're looking at touring versus fitness or even low end racing, it makes a difference. From what I've read on the forum, if you are looking for quick shifts and fast riding...the 105 is probably the least you should buy. If you really think you're going to race, upgrade to Ultegra or SRAM Rival.. If you're looking at general fitness or even slower, easy riding centuries, the Tiagra would probably work fine for you. 
I have an old bike with 105 on the front and RSX on the rear. When I'm pushing it and shifting under load, the RSX will miss. Since I'm not racing, I don't really care. I've learned how to compensate for it and I work around it now. Keeping the F/R deraillers in tune almost eliminates the issue but not entirely. But to the point, it works fine for the type of riding I want to do. You need to define what type you want to do.

Question for the group:
On a side note, I have RSX on the back derailler. I've googled but can't find anything on it. I realize the Shimano RSX was probably an entry level but what level...2200, Sora, Tiagra? The fact that they don't make them anymore speaks volumes.
Thanks.


----------



## jaredmx5 (Aug 31, 2009)

PJ352 said:


> Because I fall on the side of more pragmatic/ frugal, I think (as I've previously posted) that Tiagra makes a fine entry level bike. And after years and thousands of miles you can replace/ upgrade parts as they wear. Many can be upgraded piece meal, but there are some (cassettes/ chains, as one example) that would have to be upgraded together. They're not big ticket items, so that's inconsequential.


This to me is where starting out at 105 is an ever better idea. Having that 10spd rear cassette makes things much easier if someone saw a great deal on a DuraAce rear derailer or shifters and had a chance to upgrade. Its a much eaier proposition from say starting off with an 8spd Sora drivetrain.


----------



## Guest (Oct 27, 2009)

ccroy2001 said:


> But that doesn't neccessarily relate to how expensive the group is. I'm with the others that say set up is the key.
> 
> When I started riding to the point where I could cover 30 miles or greater I was still riding my old Trek Hybrid with some sort of really low end Shimano. Alivio maybe? The bike was fine functionally. Where the really low end stuff hurt it was weight. The bike weighed ~28lbs before any racks or accessories.
> 
> ...


Don't put words in my mouth. I said absolutely nothing about cost in relation to reliability. I said standing on the road wasn't much fun, and its not.


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 20, 2007)

BlueGrassBlazer said:


> Question for the group:
> On a side note, I have RSX on the back derailler. I've googled but can't find anything on it. I realize the Shimano RSX was probably an entry level but what level...2200, Sora, Tiagra? The fact that they don't make them anymore speaks volumes.
> Thanks.


Whoa! The fact that RSX isn`t made anymore means only that it isn`t made anymore- nothing for or against the quality. Component series evolve over time and some of them get new names at a certain point, others just go into the history pages. You`ll notice that they don`t make 600 anymore either, but there`s a demand for it.

I recently swapped the RSX rear derailler on my tandem to an almost new Deore (just to throw another ball into the game) model. Not because of bad performance, but because that shiny old half pound RSX is going to look GROOVY on my road bike and it`ll didn`t get to see enough daylight on the tandem! Also worth noting that my touring bike has the original `91 Exage deraillers ("lower" than Sora, I believe). I`ve yet to do a century on that bike, but I had a 90 plus day with it loaded last spring.


----------



## ccroy2001 (May 20, 2002)

kytyree said:


> Don't put words in my mouth. I said absolutely nothing about cost in relation to reliability. I said standing on the road wasn't much fun, and its not.


Sorry, I thought that's what was meant and misinturpted your post. My mistake.

Chris


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

jaredmx5 said:


> This to me is where starting out at 105 is an ever better idea. Having that 10spd rear cassette makes things much easier if someone saw a great deal on a DuraAce rear derailer or shifters and had a chance to upgrade. Its a much eaier proposition from say starting off with an 8spd Sora drivetrain.


My post was in response to DalyCityDad's post asking about an upgrade from Tiagra, not Sora, but that aside, your logic is somewhat flawed.

The upgrade to a 10 spd cassette and chain (total of about $80) can't be done_ until _the shifters are upgraded to 10 spd, so the bulk of the expense has to be done beforehand, so you've got it backwards saying you can upgrade cassettes/ chains and 'making things much easier' to get to a full 10 spd drivetrain. That (assuming you go w/ new parts) is going to cost a few hundred before it's completed, thus my opinion that it could be done piece meal - but not in the order you present.

Also, almost any rear derailleur will work with 10 spd, so no upgrade is required there.


----------



## WI B16 (Aug 28, 2009)

ccroy2001 said:


> If I guess then I come up with marketing buzzwords
> 
> Dura-Ace = durable under the pounding of a race, "Ace".
> Ultegra = Ulitimate Integrity
> ...


Sora is a bird in the Rail family. Very secretive, elusive and shy


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

rodar y rodar said:


> *Whoa! The fact that RSX isn`t made anymore means only that it isn`t made anymore- nothing for or against the quality. *Component series evolve over time and some of them get new names at a certain point, others just go into the history pages. *You`ll notice that they don`t make 600 anymore either, but there`s a demand for it.*
> 
> I recently swapped the RSX rear derailler on my tandem to an almost new Deore (just to throw another ball into the game) model. Not because of bad performance, but because that shiny old half pound RSX is going to look GROOVY on my road bike and it`ll didn`t get to see enough daylight on the tandem! Also worth noting that my touring bike has the original `91 Exage deraillers ("lower" than Sora, I believe). I`ve yet to do a century on that bike, but I had a 90 plus day with it loaded last spring.


+1. Just because the names change (by the marketing guys) doesn't mean the product changes any. Back in the 'Shimano 600' days Shimano wanted to ease everyone into a new series so the Ultegra 600 series came to be, then mysteriously the 600 designation disappeared and the rest is history. The 600 group (like most Shimano products) was bulletproof, they simply wanted a name change and Ultegra sounded cool.


----------



## sf_loft (Oct 5, 2009)

Tommy Walker said:


> That's funny; I have some type of Shimano on my hybrid and I agree it works fine, but I did a ride yesterday on my road bike and changed gears to pick up speed in traffic, my Ultegra SL shifted without a tink of the chain and the derailleur, so smooth and ah yes so perfecter.


If you're comparing it to a Sora and maybe a Tiagra, you will probably notice the improved shifting smoothness. With the 105's, I couldn't tell the difference between that and the Ultegras when I test rode several bikes at my LBS. Ultegras just look slightly better and lighter. I'm happy with my 105 group right now, but my crank is just plain heavy.


----------



## BlueGrassBlazer (Aug 4, 2009)

Most times when something disappears its because there is no demand for it and/or quality issues. Usually when you have a successful product you don't want to change the branding you've spent time and money developing. Yes, there are exceptions.
I couldn't find much if anything on RSX nor do I see it anywhere. I do see Sora, Deore, 105, etc everywhere so I had no reference.
When I googled it before all I got were EBay offerings and misc discussions but no real insight into the quality of the components. Since my obvious faux pas, I've re-googled and found some info:

"RSX was replaced by Tiagra. I had '95 7-speed RSX w/STI on a bike and it functioned fine. The bike never saw a lot of miles so I can't really comment on it's durabilty, but I upgraded the bike to Ultegra, and was never convinced that it was $500 that was well spent.
It's not a high end group, but if it's all that you can afford, it works well enough."

...and

"7 speed RSX was less well finished and below 105/ rx-100 when they were 8 speed.It generally worked well enough,but was heavy.7 speed sti shifters are only availabe new as Sora for replacement.When other groups went to 9 speed the old 8 speed 105 was given a different finish and marketed as RSX 8 speed for a few years....7 speed RSX shifters would shift a double or triple,but the group suffered from chainrings that were 46/36/26 or 46/36 in size....8 speed RSX front shifters were triple or double specific, and chainrings were 53/39 or 52/42/30."

That's more of what I was looking for. When kept in tune, they shift ok and are fine for what I'm doing these days so I'm ok with them.. 

thanks.


----------



## Hank Stamper (Sep 9, 2009)

Kind of a peripheral point but all this talk about components is kind of pulling the hidden ball trick on what might matter most. OP, if you're thinking buy low and upgrade later, unless you are having problems with Tiagra (unlikely), you'd probably be much better off upgrading the wheels first. And to complicate things generally speaking bikes that come with 105 will have a better quality wheel set than those with Tiagra. So when trying to figure the cost of future upgrades, you might need to factor in wheels too if you truely want to upgrade to a faster bike and not just better shifting.


----------



## Slee_Stack (Jun 28, 2006)

Buy what you can truly afford to. My vote is Tiagra. 9 speed replacement parts are not going to disappear anytime soon. 

Sora I dislike altogether, but in reality, it would do the job too.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Hank Stamper said:


> Kind of a peripheral point but all this talk about components is kind of pulling the hidden ball trick on what might matter most. OP, if you're thinking buy low and upgrade later, unless you are having problems with Tiagra (unlikely), you'd probably be much better off upgrading the wheels first. And to complicate things *generally speaking bikes that come with 105 will have a better quality wheel set than those with Tiagra*. So when trying to figure the cost of future upgrades, you might need to factor in wheels too if you truely want to upgrade to a faster bike and not just better shifting.


I'm not being critical, but all you're really doing is expanding this 'argument' to include another component - that being, wheelsets. 

I disagree that there's any real difference between most Tiagra vs 105 equipped bikes and their wheelsets. I'm sure you could find an exception somewhere, but generally speaking they're very close in specs. Two brands that come to mind are Trek and Specialized. Using the Specialized Allez as an example, the base model ($740) shares the Allez Elite's ($1,300) frameset and has generic alloy hubs with Alex S500 rims, whereas the Elite 'upgrades' to (same hubs) Mavic CXP-22N rims. Are the Mavics _better_ rims? Arguably yes, but are they considered an _upgrade_ over the S500's? Not IMO, because there's not enough difference between the two to call it that.

In reality if _either_ bike were ridden thousands of miles over the course of 2-3 years (ballpark numbers), the owners would likely be looking to upgrade the wheelsets, so initially going for the Elite wouldn't avoid that.


----------



## Hank Stamper (Sep 9, 2009)

PJ352 said:


> I'm not being critical, but all you're really doing is expanding this 'argument' to include another component - that being, wheelsets.



yeah, I know. Hence I qualified it by saying it was a peripheral point.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Hank Stamper said:


> yeah, I know. Hence I qualified it by saying it was a peripheral point.


And I'm not faulting you for making it, but I disagree with where you went with your peripheral point, and detailed why in my response.


----------



## SkiRacer55 (Apr 29, 2005)

*I'd say...*



DalyCityDad said:


> That definately clears a lot of things up. The next question is do you think a noob like me would want 105 or would the lower level stuff be sufficient? At this point I'm not very serious but I was thinking of training for a century in march. What do you guys think?


...if you're going to ride a century in March, or even a metric century, you need to get a reliable bike that fits and start riding...now. For me, Shimano Ultegra is the minimum opening bet, with, of course, a commensurate frame that, of course, fits well. 105 is okay, but I wouldn't go below that for all the reasons you've already heard. Here's a couple of options that I think would pretty much work, for less than a grand:

http://www.performancebike.com/bikes/Product_10052_10551_1075971_-1_56000_20000_56003

http://www.rscycle.com/Tommaso-Mondial-Road-Bike?sc=7&category=18536

There are Performance Bike outlets all over California, so I'd drop into one soon and see what they have to say. I just got a Tommaso Mondial for a winter bike through the Randall Scott outlet in Boulder, and it's a really good, solid bike with all Ultegra...


----------



## asad137 (Jul 29, 2009)

SkiRacer55 said:


> ...if you're going to ride a century in March, or even a metric century, you need to get a reliable bike that fits and start riding...now.


Eh...depends how good of shape he's in to begin with. March is 5 months away. I got my bike mid-August, had never done anything longer than 20 miles beforehand, and did my first metric century (solo) 2 months later and 92 miles a week later with a friend, but without drafting much of the time (and when we did, I was usually pulling).

In some cases it's worth taking the time to make sure you make the right decision -- not just for now, but for the long term, to avoid having to possibly spend money twice. You know the saying: Buy once, cry once.

Asad


----------



## Zuckerkorn (Sep 29, 2009)

Ever felt underdressed at the party? Having Tiagra, Sora, etc will feel exactly like that.
Buy 105 or Rival.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Zuckerkorn said:


> Ever felt underdressed at the party? Having Tiagra, Sora, etc will feel exactly like that.
> Buy 105 or Rival.


Hyperbole, IMHO.


----------



## asad137 (Jul 29, 2009)

PJ352 said:


> Hyperbole, IMHO.


Agreed, 100%. With a quick glance, most people probably wouldn't notice the difference between Tiagra and 105.

Asad


----------



## Zuckerkorn (Sep 29, 2009)

PJ352 said:


> Hyperbole, IMHO.


Not in my village.


----------



## Hank Stamper (Sep 9, 2009)

I think this one has kind of descended into financial management advice and not necessarily what would be best for someone. And what makes "what's best" for someone isn't able to be answered by anyone but themself. Maybe it's shallow but I anticipate a lot of people are like me and don't like asking "what if" and get a certain pleasure out of owing higher quaility even if they haven't fully verified they "need" it. So I weigh in on the side of getting all the quality (percieved or real) you can right off the bat to prevent the temptation of just buying more later. Others think get the cheapest that'll do the job makes sense. That's perfectly logical and smart too......but we can't say with certainty which side will float another's boat.

And there's not much point in difineing "needs" and " wants" here because the truth is 99% of don't even "need" a road bike, nevermind specific parts on it.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Hank Stamper said:


> *I think this one has kind of descended into financial management advice and not necessarily what would be best for someone. * And what makes "what's best" for someone isn't able to be answered by anyone but themself. Maybe it's shallow but I anticipate a lot of people are like me and don't like asking "what if" and get a certain pleasure out of owing higher quaility even if they haven't fully verified they "need" it. So I weigh in on the side of getting all the quality (percieved or real) you can right off the bat to prevent the temptation of just buying more later. Others think get the cheapest that'll do the job makes sense. That's perfectly logical and smart too......but we can't say with certainty which side will float another's boat.
> 
> And there's not much point in difineing "needs" and " wants" here because *the truth is 99% of don't even "need" a road bike, nevermind specific parts on it*.


For the record, I'm in complete agreement with all you've offered, save for the first sentence. It should be noted that you prefaced it with "I think", and no one (except maybe Zuckerkorn) can argue someones opinion, but IMO offering advice to go with a lower end group to someone that in some cases hasn't yet thrown a leg over a TT, _is_ giving the best advice. Sure there are financial implications simply because stuff costs money, but that (again, IMO) is on the fringes of this argument.

As far as your last statement. Well, I must be in that 1%, cuz I really _need_ my road bike.


----------



## Hank Stamper (Sep 9, 2009)

PJ352 said:


> As far as your last statement. Well, I must be in that 1%, cuz I really _need_ my road bike.


ha, yes. Like Yogi Berra might have said: Most of us are in that 1%.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Hank Stamper said:


> ha, yes. Like Yogi Berra might have said: Most of us are in that 1%.


Exactly, and I'm happy that I am.  

One additional thought (also for the record). I believe in tayloring advice to the audience, so this being a beginner's forum, my advice reflects that. OTOH, if someone here or elsewhere were to post that they had been riding for X number of years and thousands of miles and was contemplating an upgrade, I wouldn't dissuade them from doing so. I've been riding for 25+ years and have one road bike w/105, one with Ultegra and a trainer with a mix of all, including SRAM - sometimes we do what we can to keep the things rolling.  

But my point really is that anyone that thinks their first road bike will be their last is kidding themselves. Or, they will simply not ride it and end up selling it. That given, I think it's wise to tread softly and slowly into this arena and see how things progress. With some years and miles under their belt, I see many benefits to owning a bike costing thousands, but only when it's somewhat justified.. if that's ever really possible to do. 

And with all that said, off this 'soapbox' I go....


----------



## easyridernyc (Jan 10, 2008)

no real difference between the sora/tiagra group and ultegra? dude, are you mad?

105 and ultegra i will give you. i hear that, or have heard that quite a bit over the years. and i will say that the "new" compact 105 i have on my felt is pretty much f uckin dynamite. light, quick, and up up up the hill in excellent form, shifts like butter. really nice derailleur, when i compare i dont think 2300 or tiagra, i think ultegra, that's just the reality of how the equipment performs. and i dont doubt that the ultegra group is even better, despite the ad hoc comparisons....

there's also been a lot of buzz about the quality of the "new" tiagra group. someone above mentioned the marketing mix, and i might agree that shimano was looking to provide high (intemediate) quality at the entry level for a solid price with the 09 groupo. from what i hear slightly better than old tiagra, but still not 105. dont be fooled into thinking, yeah 105 is as good as ultegra, tiagra must then be as good as 105. doesnt work that way. 

105 is a solid way to go, it has always met and exceeded my expectations for transitioning to intermediate level performance, the same, as others mention above, can probably not be said for the sora (lol) or tiagra groups, which are fine for entry level performance, but cannot hang with the big dogs when the hammer starts to go down. 105 can hang. when i contemplate upgrades, i look to ultegra for shimano. never regretted not buying sora or tiagra lol...


----------



## gundamzaku (Oct 12, 2009)

PJ352 said:


> IMO you're buying into 'marketing hype', the bulk of which comes from cyclists rather than Shimano, which is somewhat ironic.
> 
> Most of what you describe can be attributed to poor setup/ diagnosis/ adjustment and can occur with any level group, so throwing money at the problems won't necessarily solve them, long term. IMO you either need to find a good LBS or learn to do your own wrenching. And FWIW, above the Sora group, _all_ the Shimano shifters function the same as the 'pro' groups (as in, no thumb shifter).
> 
> Also, isn't it a contradiction to say Shimano's reliable, but Sora/ Tiagra components 'suck'??


that is a very interesting way of looking at a the topic discussed and i should have asked this before buying my bike because my friend told me i would be way happier with at least the 105 groupset. i have also bought a sora set for my old schwinn so maybe i'll get someone knowledgeable to set it up for me to test to see if what you say is really true. not saying your wrong, but i am just curious to find it out myself....i do like your points tho and it does sound logical!!!


----------



## gundamzaku (Oct 12, 2009)

Hank Stamper said:


> Either way you'd have a bike that works fine for general use. The 105 would be a little better if you end up really pushing it or want to upgrade just bits beyone 105 but it's not as if Tiagra would sideline you at a certain point either.
> You're not very serious now but just the fact that you've thought enough to get on the internet and inquire and are thinking of centuries might be a good indicator that you will end up getting more serious.
> I think the risk is greater going with Tiagra and later wishing you had a little better than it would be going with 105 and realizing you had a little overkill. Yes, it's not my money but a couple hundred isn't a big deal in the grand scheme of things and probably worth it so you don't end up realizing you should have gone 105 to begin with.



that's the other side of the argument and that's exactly what my friend said and i took his advice. but i guess i'm a bit curious as to whether a close-to-perfectly setup bike with lower-end groups will perform the same? just curious.


----------



## Hank Stamper (Sep 9, 2009)

gundamzaku said:


> but i guess i'm a bit curious as to whether a close-to-perfectly setup bike with lower-end groups will perform the same? just curious.


I think it depends what you're doing with the bike and how strong you are. The performance for the person going 12 mph through the park would be the same as far as dectectable difference goes. The performance for a person really kicking butt and stressing the components would not be the same.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Hank Stamper said:


> I think it depends what you're doing with the bike and how strong you are. The performance for the person going 12 mph through the park would be the same as far as dectectable difference goes. The performance for a person really kicking butt and stressing the components would not be the same.


While it could be argued that this is literally true, I think it's overstated. Because of functional differences between Sora, Tiagra and 105, IMO the latter has a slight edge in a racing environment, but even using the lesser groups in fast training rides (or similar), those functional differences aren't going to matter, performance wise. Setup is still key.


----------



## nearptr (Mar 18, 2009)

ccroy2001 said:


> If I guess then I come up with marketing buzzwords
> 
> Dura-Ace = durable under the pounding of a race, "Ace".
> Ultegra = Ulitimate Integrity
> ...


Huh.

I thought dura ACE was supposed to be pronounced as though it were Italian  i.e. (ah'-cheh) ...
much like Veloce (veh-loh'-cheh), which is remarkably absent from this thread in which mid-range (and low-end) components are being discussed in the context of cost/performance...


----------

