# Ultegra 6600 vs 6700 FD, specs, capacity.



## GDTRFB (Feb 12, 2011)

Is the 6700 FD cage wider than the 6600 FD cage?

Do they each have different amounts of side-to-side travel?

If so, will a 6700 allow more range in terms of rear cogs, without the chain rubbing the cage?


----------



## baker921 (Jul 20, 2007)

Don't know. 6700 offers a 28 tooth cog, 6600 a 27 max. Plenty of people report running 32 tooth mtb cogs.
My best guess the differences are mainly styling and marketing hype, with the emphasis on the latter.


----------



## Straz85 (May 12, 2011)

baker921 said:


> Don't know. 6700 offers a 28 tooth cog, 6600 a 27 max. Plenty of people report running 32 tooth mtb cogs.
> My best guess the differences are mainly styling and marketing hype, with the emphasis on the latter.


You're talking about the rear, he asked about the front.


----------



## brucew (Jun 3, 2006)

I have both. To my eye there are no differences in size. (No, I don't have a micrometer and I'm not going to take them off the bikes for measurements.) There are differences in the finish.

Shimano says the 6700's return spring has 10% less tension. It does feel a smidge lighter shifting to the big ring, but not so much that it's worth throwing out a good 6600 one. And who's to say the difference I feel isn't down to cables or levers?

Bear in mind side-to-side travel is limited at either end by the high and low screws, and it's the lever, not the FD that determines the amount of throw between gears.


----------



## baker921 (Jul 20, 2007)

Straz85 said:


> You're talking about the rear, he asked about the front.


No. Read the OP's question.* will a 6700 allow more range in terms of rear cogs, without the chain rubbing the cage? *

He asks about differences in the FD *which will allow him to use a wider range cassette.*


----------



## GDTRFB (Feb 12, 2011)

brucew said:


> I have both. To my eye there are no differences in size. (No, I don't have a micrometer and I'm not going to take them off the bikes for measurements.) There are differences in the finish.
> 
> Shimano says the 6700's return spring has 10% less tension. It does feel a smidge lighter shifting to the big ring, but not so much that it's worth throwing out a good 6600 one. And who's to say the difference I feel isn't down to cables or levers?
> 
> Bear in mind side-to-side travel is limited at either end by the high and low screws, and it's the lever, not the FD that determines the amount of throw between gears.


What I'm asking is if the 6700 cage allows more cogs to be used without using a trim function than the 6600.
My 6600 shifts 1000% better than my Force FD, but because the cage is narrower, I lose the three smallest rear cogs with the 34t front ring. It's not a problem with the 50t, because there is a trim function on that ring.

If the 6700 is wider, I will have more available side-to-side travel for the chain.

Peter


----------



## brucew (Jun 3, 2006)

Pete2 said:


> What I'm asking is if the 6700 cage allows more cogs to be used without using a trim function than the 6600.
> My 6600 shifts 1000% better than my Force FD, but because the cage is narrower, I lose the three smallest rear cogs with the 34t front ring. It's not a problem with the 50t, because there is a trim function on that ring.
> 
> If the 6700 is wider, I will have more available side-to-side travel for the chain.
> ...


Actually, it's supposed to be the other way 'round--trim on the small, none on the big.

See "Operation of Front Derailleur Levers" here: http://techdocs.shimano.com/media/t...0A/SI-6SC0A-002-ENG_v1_m56577569830702876.pdf

And fix it here: http://techdocs.shimano.com/media/t...01/SI-5LW0A-001-ENG_v1_m56577569830671268.pdf


----------



## GDTRFB (Feb 12, 2011)

brucew said:


> Actually, it's supposed to be the other way 'round--trim on the small, none on the big.
> 
> See "Operation of Front Derailleur Levers" here: http://techdocs.shimano.com/media/t...0A/SI-6SC0A-002-ENG_v1_m56577569830702876.pdf
> 
> And fix it here: http://techdocs.shimano.com/media/t...01/SI-5LW0A-001-ENG_v1_m56577569830671268.pdf


I'm using Sram Red shifters. I am using the 6600 because of endless problems with my Force FD. Many people have posted that they use 6600, 6700 & DA7800 FD's with Sram shifters.
So far, performance & shifting has been great. Smooth, quick & no drops. The 6600 cage is considerably narrower than the Force, & the shifter only has a trim function on the big front ring. This means that I lose the 11,12,13 & possibly 14 on the cassette with the small front ring. It's not a bib deal, since those are overlap gears. But if the 6700 is a little wider, I might only lose the 11 (crosschaining, I never use it anyway) & possibly the 12.

Until Sram figures out front shifting, I'll stick with a 6600 or 6700 FD.

Peter


----------



## Peanya (Jun 12, 2008)

You shouldn't use the small ring with the smallest cogs anyway...
Supposedly the 6700 is shaped as to not need trim when used with the matching crankset.


----------



## GDTRFB (Feb 12, 2011)

Peanya said:


> You shouldn't use the small ring with the smallest cogs anyway...
> Supposedly the 6700 is shaped as to not need trim when used with the matching crankset.


I don't use the small cogs too much with the 34t front ring, I never use the smallest one, but occasionally I like to use the 12 or 13. I can easily live without them, especially since my front shifting is great now that I have replaced the FD.


----------

