# Rival Front, Red Rear shifters



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Are these shifters physically the same size? Would I notice a difference? Maybe some new HUDZ would give them both the same feel?

Other than weight, is there any advantage to the Red front shifter?

My shifters would have a total weight similar to Force, but performance of Red.

Just brainstorming a new build.


----------



## asad137 (Jul 29, 2009)

All of the SRAM shifters have the same shape/ergonomics. The Red front shifter has a carbon shift paddle, what looks to be UD carbon on the brake lever (vs. woven carbon on Rival), and different graphics but is functionally identical to the Rival, Force, and Apex front shifters.

I would say go for it if you're ok with having mismatched looks.

Asad


----------



## MarvinK (Feb 12, 2002)

Red actually has Zero Loss on both shifters, rather than just the left shifter. Other than that and materials, they are all the same in terms of ergonomics and features. Zero Loss is nice, but most important on the front shifter (which is included in all but first year Rival & Force).


----------



## AvantDale (Dec 26, 2008)

I would skip the Red rear derailleur and go with Rival then put the cash towards the shifters.

Even roll the Force shifters instead of the Red to save more cash. I recently went from the 1st gen Force to Red. The big difference is the Zero Loss on the front shifting...the rear isn't that big a deal to me.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

AvantDale said:


> I would skip the Red rear derailleur and go with Rival then put the cash towards the shifters.
> 
> Even roll the Force shifters instead of the Red to save more cash. I recently went from the 1st gen Force to Red. The big difference is the Zero Loss on the front shifting...the rear isn't that big a deal to me.



Definitely going with a rival rear derailleru! That Red rear is just insanely expensive, and I don't buy into the whole ceramic bearing pulleys either. Would you say the zero loss on the rear is not worth it? I've only ridden a Rival equipped bike and the rear seemed to shift pretty snappy and fast. The front just shifted OK, no better or worse than my 105 shifters. For front shifting, I just can't justify spending more $$ for Force or Red when the shifting is identical and the weight gain is minimal.


----------



## AvantDale (Dec 26, 2008)

What do you mean by the front shifting is "ok". Did it feel vague, tight, or sloppy?

I think the shifting performance on Sram is all in the adjustment. Some people can get it right the first time...and some can never get it right.

The *rear* Zero Loss isn't a big deal for me in that I didn't feel too big a difference. There is a difference in lever throw...but its something I can live without.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

AvantDale said:


> What do you mean by the front shifting is "ok". Did it feel vague, tight, or sloppy?
> 
> I think the shifting performance on Sram is all in the adjustment. Some people can get it right the first time...and some can never get it right.
> 
> The *rear* Zero Loss isn't a big deal for me in that I didn't feel too big a difference. There is a difference in lever throw...but its something I can live without.


The front shifting just felt long in the throw. Kind of makes the whole process slow. Adjustment wise it seemed fine. 

Would the Red be equal to Rival in terms of throw on the front?


----------



## RC28 (May 9, 2002)

88 rex said:


> .
> 
> *Would the Red be equal to Rival in terms of throw on the front*?


Yes. Performance-wise, Front Shifting is the same across all SRAM road groups.


----------



## paul l (Aug 3, 2009)

The only thing you can do is pull the inner lever in towards the bars when you shift up as it shortens the throw. Same principle for Rival, Force and Red


----------

