# tried electronic shifting



## vette (Feb 1, 2009)

at the philly bike race campy tent & damn Im impressed looks like thats where things are headed ,I know its been out for awhile butI was kinda not accepting it just like carbon bikes 15-years ago ,havent tried the shimano stuff ,I just put a caad 10 together 7900 e dura ace, damn ,I was talkin to the rep and he said form an opinion after you try it,the only thing is that its still costly compared to the cable counterparts,anyone else try it, and it(di-2) won the race 1& 2 spots on a colnago bike,lookin on ebay now,lol


----------



## OldChipper (May 15, 2011)

I tried the Ultegra Di2 recently and honestly, it didn't really sell me. Granted I didn't ride it for miles and miles, but I really didn't notice much difference other than it's much easier to hit the buttons accidentally and get a shift you didn't really want. I suppose the best feature might be the auto-trimming of the FD but not worth the $1,500 or so difference by itself.


----------



## torch511 (Mar 4, 2012)

I got to take it out the Di2 on a 2 hour test ride and yes... it's nice. The shifts are flawless and the FD trimming is pretty sweet. My all-ultegra set-up took a lot of tuning to get to that point but you know... for the huge price difference I am not sold on it either.

I don't find shifting to be such a monumentally difficult task that I need it made easier. Plus, If need be I can fix a RD if I have to. I lose that if I went electronic.

Sorry, not for me at this point.


----------



## Dumbod (Dec 31, 2004)

I've had the Ultegra Di2 for about two months now. Is it worth the $800 upcharge? Not from a strictly functional perspective but if you're honest about it, if functionality were the only criterion, we'd all be riding Tiagra drives on no-name Chinese frames.

To answer the other objections, I suppose it's possible to shift accidentally but I haven't and you would have to have a strange hand position to make it likely. And yes, the manual RD is easier to fix on the road than the electronic but think about it, when was the last time you had to fix a RD that wasn't involved wasn't involved with either alignment or cables. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, I am saying it's pretty unlikely.

As you may have guessed, I like it. The shifting is crisp and responsive - sort of like the first ride after the bike's been tuned except the shifting doesn't deteriorate over time. In addition, I find that I shift more often. There's no real logical reason for that but I do (as do lots of others I've spoken to.) This means that I'm more likely to be in the right gear.

Finally, this won't affect everyone but I have the Di2 on my S&S bike. The Di2 does make setting the bike up easier after it's been disassembled because you don't have to worry about cable tensions.

All in all, I'd recommend it.


----------



## Oldguybikingnewb (Jan 25, 2011)

Dumbod said:


> we'd all be riding Tiagra drives on no-name Chinese frames.


Um, my Tiagra equiped Specialized that is now sitting on my trainer, shifts nothing like my Dura Ace equiped CF bike I ride on the roads. Huge differance in feel, sure shifts, chain derailments (a lot more chian slips with my Tiagra)... Not sure, as smooth as my Dura Ace shifts, that I would see a big improvement in an electronic shifter. Haven't tried it, but $800 for a functional non differance is a lot to pay, for me, for as much as I cycle. Also, would have to worry about issues with it breaking, who's going to repair electronics? The guys at the bike shop or the "Geek Squad" at Best Buy?

That's my opinion.


----------



## vette (Feb 1, 2009)

good points there ,as far as function they work just flawless ,its not like we are guinea pigs, seems like they have it perfected,yeh and the rd or fd if it should malfunction ,its easy to fix a reg one on the road,the cost is the biggest turnoff for me at least,but damn the campy I tried was just great


----------



## Rhymenocerus (Jul 17, 2010)

Oldguybikingnewb said:


> Um, my Tiagra equiped Specialized that is now sitting on my trainer, shifts nothing like my Dura Ace equiped CF bike I ride on the roads. Huge differance in feel, sure shifts, chain derailments (a lot more chian slips with my Tiagra)... Not sure, as smooth as my Dura Ace shifts, that I would see a big improvement in an electronic shifter. Haven't tried it, but $800 for a functional non differance is a lot to pay, for me, for as much as I cycle. Also, would have to worry about issues with it breaking, who's going to repair electronics? The guys at the bike shop or the "Geek Squad" at Best Buy?
> 
> That's my opinion.


Sounds like you need to tune your Tiagra setup. A chain should not be slipping at all.


----------



## qatarbhoy (Aug 17, 2009)

dunno bout you, but i find paragraphs like this, a little hard to read, just sayin', electronic or mechanical ,whatever floats your boat man, i kinda like to rock it old school also its' cheaper, trololol


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

vette said:


> at the philly bike race campy tent & damn Im impressed looks like thats where things are headed ,I know its been out for awhile butI was kinda not accepting it just like carbon bikes 15-years ago ,havent tried the shimano stuff ,I just put a caad 10 together 7900 e dura ace, damn ,I was talkin to the rep and he said form an opinion after you try it,the only thing is that its still costly compared to the cable counterparts,anyone else try it, and it(di-2) won the race 1& 2 spots on a colnago bike,lookin on ebay now,lol


Actually EPS has not been out that long. They made their world-wide introduction last November. I think shipments to supported teams started around that time and into the first of 2012. Shipments to bike manufacturers came next followed by shipments to dealers.

Below is a link to a thread that I started after I got to ride EPS back in December. Personally, I liked it and was surprised at how unobtrusive it was. It just works. Also, it should be noted that I have owned 7 cars and one truck. NONE of them have had automatic transmissions. So, from my viewpoint, I was not predisposed to like electronic shifting.

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/campagnolo/i-rode-eps-267503.html

One other point:
Unlike Shimano, the shift action on the Campagnolo EPS systems mimics the mechanical systems. The levers are essentially the same and in essentially the same locations. Shimano made a change such that their brake lever now only has one degree of freedom. Many have complained about the brake levers with 2 degrees of freedom, but the cost to change it was fashioning 2 levers for shifting in a space formerly occupied by one. Seemed a little tricky for me to manipulate.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

qatarbhoy said:


> dunno bout you, but i find paragraphs like this, a little hard to read, just sayin', electronic or mechanical ,whatever floats your boat man, i kinda like to rock it old school also its' cheaper, trololol


NOTE:

Periods and capitalization also help...


----------



## Dumbod (Dec 31, 2004)

Oldguybikingnewb said:


> Um, my Tiagra equiped Specialized that is now sitting on my trainer, shifts nothing like my Dura Ace equiped CF bike I ride on the roads. Huge differance in feel, sure shifts, chain derailments (a lot more chian slips with my Tiagra)... Not sure, as smooth as my Dura Ace shifts, that I would see a big improvement in an electronic shifter. Haven't tried it, but $800 for a functional non differance is a lot to pay, for me, for as much as I cycle. Also, would have to worry about issues with it breaking, who's going to repair electronics? The guys at the bike shop or the "Geek Squad" at Best Buy?
> 
> That's my opinion.


Anybody who rides Dura Ace should understand the difference. Based on a quick check, a new Dura Ace group is roughly double the price of a new Ultegra group (YMMV). Strictly from a functional perspective, do you really think that the Dura Ace is twice as good as the Ultegra? BTW, I have no quarrel with you buying Dura Ace; I just suggesting that your decision was not strictly a matter of functionality.

The repair issue is a red herring for me. First, let's distinguish between derailleurs breaking and becoming misaligned. I'm sure that there are people who disassemble and reassemble derailleurs on those rare occasions when it breaks but I don't know any of them. Most of us just replace it. I don't need anybody from the bike shop OR BestBuy to buy a new derailleur. As for routine maintenance, not only is the Di2 is less likely to need adjustment but it's easier to adjust when it is required.

As long as we're on that subject, the Di2 Ultegra costs approximately the same as the Dura Ace manual. So, for roughly the same cost as manual Dura Ace (or even a little bit less), I can have electronic Ultegra. I'm not suggesting that you replace your existing group but it's a lot more interesting choice when buying a new bike


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

Oldguybikingnewb said:


> Um, my Tiagra equiped Specialized that is now sitting on my trainer, shifts nothing like my Dura Ace equiped CF bike I ride on the roads. Huge differance in feel, sure shifts, chain derailments (a lot more chian slips with my Tiagra)... Not sure, as smooth as my Dura Ace shifts, that I would see a big improvement in an electronic shifter. Haven't tried it, but $800 for a functional non differance is a lot to pay, for me, for as much as I cycle.* Also, would have to worry about issues with it breaking, who's going to repair electronics?* The guys at the bike shop or the "Geek Squad" at Best Buy?
> 
> That's my opinion.


Who repairs your cell phone? Your MP3 player? Your TV? I think that's the model that will go forward, not the fix-at-your-LBS model. For Campagnolo EPS, and I assume for Shimano, the bulk of the electronics are in the control unit. I don't think it is intended to be opened by the user. Other than that, what's in the derailleurs are motors and encoders (this is technology related as one system has encoders and the other doesn't). Conceptually that may not be much different from changing a motor in an RC Car.

To me, Campagnolo made a giant leap forward when they put a decoupling mechanism in the rear derailleur. This does 2 things. If you fall on it, it decouples and reduces that chances that you'll break it. If it uncouples, you just pop it back into place. It will also allow you move it manually if you have a total electronic breakdown. It would be analogous to what some of the Drive-By-Wire cars have that is called a Limp Home Mode.

There is a write up of the new Dura-Ace 9000 Di2 set up. There are some significant advancements, but there was no mention of any sort of decoupling feature.

_Added: The 9000 Di2 article was on the Velo News site..._


----------



## Teo (Aug 10, 2004)

These conversations are funny. 
I think if given unlimited funds, we would all be riding bikes with e-shifting, cause the technology is cool. When prices for these systems goes down I’m sure a lot more of us will make the shift whether it’s functionally better or not.


----------



## dd74 (Aug 2, 2007)

Prices will come down when wireless shifting appears.


----------



## __PG__ (Jan 25, 2012)

But you'll still need wires from the battery to the derailleurs and shifter to provide power.


----------



## vette (Feb 1, 2009)

yeh I think Im gonna go electronic over the winter ,just gonna see what suits me better campy or DA,I had campy when they 1st came out and it was sloppy so I changed to DA a long time ago and never looked back,but the stuff I tried was perfect,like the guy said you have to try it in person & Im picky,I love the campy hoods


----------



## Erion929 (Jun 10, 2010)

Tried the Ultegra Di2, it was sweet....front der was crisp and flawless, fun and gimmicky to play with. However, I don't race, so super-quick, flawless shifts are really a modest luxury of little importance to me. I was able to get all-new mechanical Dura Ace for fairly close to the cost of Ultegra, so it was a no-brainer to stay mechanical. My mechanical Dura Ace is adjusted well, shifts perfectly, and I don't miss the idea of having Di2.

Also, even though you can go something like an estimated 1000-1500 miles (or sumpin' like that) on a Di2 charge, I didn't really want to be tied to a battery. I ride in a lot of hills, shift a lot, and don't want to have to worry about "over shifting" use of the battery while on a ride...or forgetting to charge up. A person I know charged his battery, but forgot to take the battery with him when he loaded up his car.....


----------



## marathon marke (Nov 14, 2011)

I'm just going to dig up my old Campy Record 5-speed friction groupo and be done with all this hoopla. 

Seriously, I tried Ultegra Di2 last year and thought it was cool. FD shifting is the best. But when I got my BMC Team Machine last winter, I decided to go Sram Red. I just like the feel of what the system is actually doing. And it gives me an excuse to be a weight-weenie!


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

marathon marke said:


> I'm just going to dig up my old Campy Record 5-speed friction groupo and be done with all this hoopla.
> 
> Seriously, I tried Ultegra Di2 last year and thought it was cool. FD shifting is the best. But when I got my BMC Team Machine last winter, I decided to go Sram Red. I just like the feel of what the system is actually doing. *And it gives me an excuse to be a weight-weenie*!


If that was the case, you should have bought Campagnolo Super Record...


----------



## zoikz (Sep 5, 2003)

TT1 who took the 1-2-4 and KOM rides Ultegra Di2.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Call me crazy, but electronic shifting has never interested me even a little bit.

There's some minor benefits but overall, seems like a yet another bike-industry solution in search of a problem. 
.


----------



## Travis (Oct 14, 2005)

what SystemShock said, its just clever but no significant upgrade. I read somewhere that the shifting is actually slower than mechanical (manual)


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Travis said:


> what SystemShock said, its just clever but no significant upgrade. I read somewhere that the shifting is actually slower than mechanical (manual)


Well, the front-shifting is pretty god-like, but how often do you front-shift? For most ppl, not too often.

And even if you do front-shift often, is shifting currently such a huge and onerous task that you're willing to spend a ton more on it? Or is it more about having the shiniest and newest toy? :idea:

Maybe when they finally combine it with some sort of 'autoshifting' logic to provide an 'automatic transmission' for newbies, it might make more sense, and could even might get more ppl into the sport (assuming the cost came way down too). 
.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

flatlander_48 said:


> Actually EPS has not been out that long. They made their world-wide introduction last November. .


Actually electronic shifting made it's debut in 1992 with the Mavic Zap and later improved it and changed the name to Mektronic. And we know how well that sold.

Electronic shifting doesn't interest me either, something about little motors failing and costing a lot to fix, and something about batteries failing while out on a ride and being unable to shift. That kind of technology nonsense I don't need.


----------



## bike981 (Sep 14, 2010)

SystemShock said:


> Well, the front-shifting is pretty god-like, but how often do you front-shift? For most ppl, not too often.


Since the FD shifts are fast and crisp (from what most of you are saying; never tried it myself), do any of these systems provide a shifting mode in which you always shift to the next higher or lower *gear ratio*, even if that requires both a front and rear shift to select the proper cog+chainring?

That would be a pretty useful feature in my opinion. Maybe I'm just lazy, but I have no idea except in coarse terms how the gear ratios from my outer chainring interlace with those from my inner chainring. Also, I consider a FD shift to be a bit of a hassle since it typically requires a RD shift as well, so I often find myself avoiding a FD shift even if it would be the better gear at the moment.


----------



## maxxevv (Jan 18, 2009)

bike981 said:


> Since the FD shifts are fast and crisp (from what most of you are saying; never tried it myself), do any of these systems provide a shifting mode in which you always shift to the next higher or lower *gear ratio*, even if that requires both a front and rear shift to select the proper cog+chainring?
> 
> That would be a pretty useful feature in my opinion. Maybe I'm just lazy, but I have no idea except in coarse terms how the gear ratios from my outer chainring interlace with those from my inner chainring. Also, I consider a FD shift to be a bit of a hassle since it typically requires a RD shift as well, so I often find myself avoiding a FD shift even if it would be the better gear at the moment.


Not off the shelf, but FairwheelBikes did a heavily modified, synchronous shifting Di2 MTB a few years ago at Interbike. It did exactly just what you described above. Only upshift or downshift, no differentiation between front and rear derailleur. The system will jump to the next closest ratio for you. :thumbsup:


----------



## DS1239622 (Mar 21, 2007)

froze said:


> Actually electronic shifting made it's debut in 1992 with the Mavic Zap and later improved it and changed the name to Mektronic. And we know how well that sold.
> 
> Electronic shifting doesn't interest me either, something about little motors failing and costing a lot to fix, and something about batteries failing while out on a ride and being unable to shift. That kind of technology nonsense I don't need.


Yeah all the electric stuff seems like junk. I keep on reading all these posts and articles about failed motors and batteries falling out and wiring problems. Tons of people stranded out on the road or spending all their time in shops waiting to have their gizmos fixed. 

Oh wait, I haven't read any articles or posts like that whatsoever, in all the time electronic shifting has been out. Even in threads such as this just begging for people with electrical problems to come out of the woodwork and slam it. 

I wonder why?

Maybe because the stuff just works and Shimano and Campy spent years working out the kinks and implementing rigorous quality controls. Knowing full well if the early versions came out with electrical problems it would set the electronic movement back years and give people ACTUAL ammunition rather than just the standard, ill informed, 'oh no, it has batteries and motors, its going to fail all the time like a cheap pair of headphones." Thats why the stuff is expensive. Because it is quality. If you don't like electronic shifting, or don't want to pay for it, fine. But don't slam it for problems it doesn't have.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

DS1239622 said:


> Yeah all the electric stuff seems like junk. I keep on reading all these posts and articles about failed motors and batteries falling out and wiring problems. Tons of people stranded out on the road or spending all their time in shops waiting to have their gizmos fixed.
> 
> Oh wait, I haven't read any articles or posts like that whatsoever, in all the time electronic shifting has been out. Even in threads such as this just begging for people with electrical problems to come out of the woodwork and slam it.
> 
> ...


don't be so ignorant. First off your not going to have tons and tons of people stranded because there are primarily very few people riding with them, and secondarily few ride into remote areas so their always near a plug. 

And to say someone is slamming electronics when no one is having problems...well I hope no one is having problems considering they've only been on the market for a year! But let's talk 5 years down the road or more. Lets say your cute little Shimano DI2 Dura Ace goes south either from motor failure or a crash, it will cost you almost $600 to replace...just the derailleur itself. The battery goes bad, oops there's another $80, and you know these bats only last an average of 3 to 5 years depending on use.

Personally I don't care if you, or others, like to spend money for stuff like that, it's a hobby and you can spend your money anyway you see fit. But I don't have a unlimited income to be sitting there with a hobby that the industry tries to figure out how to make it more expensive to to do both in terms of initial cost and in terms of future repairs and the frequency of said repairs. I like things simple, it's the same reason I don't buy new cars anymore, in fact I now drive a 72 Chrysler Newport as my main driver! I can afford a new car, and I have plenty of times, I got to the point where I got sick and tired of dumping thousands into cars with failed engine computers, failed little electric motors, failed internal electronics, failed wiring systems...no thanks, last year I said forget it. Of course I have a collection of classic cars I spoke of here in the past and I work on all of my cars myself, so it wasn't a stretch to get the Newport, but the simplicity of such cars is...well simple, very little to go wrong and when something does go wrong their simple to work on and cheap to get parts for. Oh, and before you start screaming gas mileage I now get 20mpg in that Newport more then people with big trucks and SUV's, and I can haul up to 6 people with their luggage! 

I'm not saying all of this to argue that you should buy a an old car, or that you should not buy a electronic shifting bike, but face it, when complication of technology rises so does the problems and the cost of said problems, it's a proven fact of life.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

Travis said:


> what SystemShock said, its just clever but no significant upgrade. I read somewhere that the shifting is actually slower than mechanical (manual)


Where did you see that? Doesn't sound true to my experience...


----------



## maxxevv (Jan 18, 2009)

froze said:


> ....The battery goes bad, oops there's another $80, and you know these bats only last an average of 3 to 5 years depending on use.


That will be pretty incredible if you can zap the life out the batteries in 3-5 years. 

From personal experience, the Di2 Durace batteries bare minimum last 1000km per charge before you even need to consider recharging. 1500km for most people and will last as much as 2000km for conservative users.

Its a Lithium Ion battery, which takes at least 300 charges (with a proper charger) before it starts to deteriorate. And about 500-600cycles before it completely goes to the dumps. If you can ride 300,000 to 500,000km in 3-5 years ... :yikes::crazy: (Or the other extreme being 1,000,000 km !! )


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

froze said:


> Actually electronic shifting made it's debut in 1992 with the Mavic Zap and later improved it and changed the name to Mektronic. And we know how well that sold.


I believe he was referring to the Campagnolo system and not the Mavic system. Sort or apples and oranges anyway as I believe the Mavic system was only on the rear derailleur.



froze said:


> Electronic shifting doesn't interest me either, something about little motors failing and costing a lot to fix, and something about batteries failing while out on a ride and being unable to shift. That kind of technology nonsense I don't need.


Unfounded, I believe. This is not rocket science, but I think that's where a lot of people are stuck. The drive and control technologies have existed for many years. The only thing different is applying them to a bicycle application. Technically the systems could have been introduced years ago, but the big hurdles were battery technology and solid waterproofing.


----------



## gordy748 (Feb 11, 2007)

I had the Mavic Zap groupset. Actually worked really well, with 2 sets of buttons you could place anywhere you liked on the bars. In many ways it was the most ergonomic of all groupsets. But the seals on the rear derailleur (the only one in the system) were poor so failure rates were high.

Campagnolo has had their system for several years, perhaps a decade. They were very reticent to introduce it, though, due to their worry over the failure rate. Now that it's out, I would not be surprised if they have managed to make sure the failure rate is very low.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

maxxevv said:


> That will be pretty incredible if you can zap the life out the batteries in 3-5 years.
> 
> From personal experience, the Di2 Durace batteries bare minimum last 1000km per charge before you even need to consider recharging. 1500km for most people and will last as much as 2000km for conservative users.
> 
> Its a Lithium Ion battery, which takes at least 300 charges (with a proper charger) before it starts to deteriorate. And about 500-600cycles before it completely goes to the dumps. If you can ride 300,000 to 500,000km in 3-5 years ... :yikes::crazy: (Or the other extreme being 1,000,000 km !! )


In the perfect world for a battery your right they will last about 300 charges, problem is all manufactures who make such claims way overestimate how many charges their battery will do and real life use shortens the life even more. Also as the battery ages it doesn't stay charged as long, so while new it may last 1500km to 2000km, but after about 150 charges that has slowly decreased to about 800 to 1000km, and continues to drop off till it no longer holds a charge. These batteries don't just keep working at full strength and rated time till one day it just no longer works. Look at your cell phone battery as an example, you bought it new it stayed charged for one or two days of active use, one year later it won't stay charged for even a day till eventually you have to charge it up every 6 hours or so, and beyond that it gets worse and dies. So no, your not going to get 300,000 to 500,000km due to the death cycle of a battery.

But aside from the battery, you still have the problem of motors failing and the expense to replace derailleurs, you can't replace just the motor you have to replace the entire derailleur.

A person who tours could never trust a electronic system; it's one thing to keep the batteries charged because solar or a hub generator could probably do that, but it's another thing to have to worry about a servo dying out in the middle of nowhere with the gears stuck in the 9th gear and you approaching a steep uphill climb with a loaded touring bike.

But again, this is just my opinion based on me personally wanting to keep things in my life relatively simple and cheap to either fix or replace due to reasons listed previously. If this sort of technology appeals to you then go get it and be happy with it. But some people, if not most, are getting it just to show off with to their fellow riders they hang around with, that's a bad reason to be buying new, expensive, and complicated technology.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

What follows is a letter that was written by a person who had a problem with his electronic system to Lennard Zinn:

Lennard,
After using it a year, I have nothing but praise for the Shimano Di2 system. This past weekend, however, I was in southern Indiana for a team training camp, and had a problem. We had some pretty serious rainstorms one day, and there were many deep water crossings we had to cross, as some of the roads were flooded. The water was about axle deep (and dang cold too!). The bike worked flawlessly.

The next day’s ride started off well, but after 20-30 miles the rear derailleur acted up. When I pressed the “Y” button (to grab a smaller tooth in the back), it actually shifted to a larger tooth. After pressing the button a few more times it would sometimes go one way and other times the opposite direction, and other times unresponsive. The “X” button was unresponsive at times too, but then all of a sudden it would work for a few shifts. I never noticed the “X” button shifting the derailleur both ways … just the “Y” button.

This whole time, the front derailleur worked perfectly. The battery was freshly charged. Anyways, after returning home to Wisconsin, and driving through high 80 degree temps with lots of wind, things must have dried out or something. When I got home, I put my bike in the stand, and it shifts perfectly again. Needless to say, I’m a little nervous about getting caught out in the rain now. Unfortunately, I don’t have the diagnostic tool Shimano makes for testing. I know the shop I bought the bike from doesn’t either. I’m guessing the tool wouldn’t find anything anyways, unless it acts up again.

Would you or someone at Shimano have an idea of what’s going on?
— Steve


Answer from the guru of electronic shifting, Shimano’s Wayne Stetina:

There is definitely water in Steve’s system somehow. I had identical symptoms recently on a bike with a minor cut in the rear harness to the rear derailleur – minor visible damage. But it was only a problem in heavy rain, including delayed shifts, then occasionally multiple shifts.

It’s also possible the plug into the rear derailleur somehow leaked. For that, use air to dry it out completely, then use some electrical conducting lubricant and re-plug it in securely.

If you can’t find visible cable damage, the first thing to check if it ever malfunctions again is whether pushing the X and Y levers both indicate battery charge. If yes, and the front derailleur works normally, everything in front of rear derailleur cable (and rear derailleur) is good. Then try to unplug the rear derailleur, dry out any water (Kleenex or air?) then re-plug it in securely and see if it works again.

If you go to a shop with a Di2 system checker, you need to spray from the front derailleur back to the rear derailleur with a high-pressure garden hose until it malfunctions to diagnose that way.
— Wayne

So can someone remind me again - how is this system an improvement on cable operated shifting?


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

I feel a poll coming on...
.


----------



## crank1979 (Sep 9, 2007)

froze said:


> Electronic shifting doesn't interest me either, something about little motors failing and costing a lot to fix, and something about batteries failing while out on a ride and being unable to shift. That kind of technology nonsense I don't need.


Got any links to reports of these issues now that Di2 has been out for 3 or so years now? I've heard the Japanese know a thing or two about little electronic gizmos. 

_edit_ Apologies, it's been covered with nothing that sways me away from an electronic system.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

froze said:


> A person who tours could never trust a electronic system; it's one thing to keep the batteries charged because solar or a hub generator could probably do that, but it's another thing to have to worry about a servo dying out in the middle of nowhere with the gears stuck in the 9th gear and you approaching a steep uphill climb with a loaded touring bike.


Evidently you missed this in Post #12:

_To me, Campagnolo made a giant leap forward when they put a decoupling mechanism in the rear derailleur. This does 2 things. If you fall on it, it decouples and reduces that chances that you'll break it. If it uncouples, you just pop it back into place. It will also allow you move it manually if you have a total electronic breakdown. It would be analogous to what some of the Drive-By-Wire cars have that is called a Limp Home Mode._

Unfortunately this is something that Shimano doesn't have. It wasn't mentioned in a recent write-up of the new 9000 series Dura-Ace Di2, so I would assume that they still don't have anything comparable. Specifically, Campagnolo calls it the Ride Back Home function. Zinn also mentioned this in his article about the EPS introduction meeting in Sicily last November. One of the journalists fell during a test ride, but the rear derailleur didn't break. The ride continued after the drive was recoupled.

I think this is a major feature and something that has significant real-world benefits. Campagnolo should really make a point of noting this in their advertising as clearly it is a distinction from Shimano.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

froze said:


> What follows is a letter that was written by a person who had a problem with his electronic system to Lennard Zinn:
> 
> Lennard,
> ====
> ...


Obviously water is a major problem. This is what discouraged Campagnolo from introducing their e-shift system back in 2005. I won't go into the details, but you can find it at Campagnolo EPS - ELECTRONIC POWER SHIFT. The guy didn't say which system he had, but I would guess that it was Dura-Ace. From what I understand, the Ultegra Di2 system is better at resisting water intrusion than the Dura-Ace version. Judging by the differences in the systems, it seems that Shimano rushed the first generation systems to market a bit too soon. The new 9000 series sounds like it has built upon the Ultegra improvements.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

gordy748 said:


> I had the Mavic Zap groupset. Actually worked really well, with 2 sets of buttons you could place anywhere you liked on the bars. In many ways it was the most ergonomic of all groupsets. But the seals on the rear derailleur (the only one in the system) were poor so failure rates were high.
> 
> *Campagnolo has had their system for several years, perhaps a decade.* They were very reticent to introduce it, though, due to their worry over the failure rate. Now that it's out, I would not be surprised if they have managed to make sure the failure rate is very low.


Make that 20 years...


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

4 of the 6 bikes I own still run 8 speed
I don't think I'll be joining the electronic revolution


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

crank1979 said:


> Got any links to reports of these issues now that Di2 has been out for 3 or so years now? I've heard the Japanese know a thing or two about little electronic gizmos.
> 
> _edit_ Apologies, it's been covered with nothing that sways me away from an electronic system.


Links? We don't need no stinking links! Seriously, the derailleurs are too new to have any complaints about failure except for water intrusion which that alone makes the systems to unreliable for touring purposes or all weather riding. And Japanese aren't building the "little electronc gizmos" China is, that worries me too. 

I'm glad your embracing the technology, but I'm not going to, just as I no longer embrace new cars and their technology. It seems I've had poor success with a lot of modern technology, and due to my track record I'm steering clear, and add in the expense of such technology and the cost to repair...I'm steering way far away. By the way, I know for a fact I'm not the only one who has had bad success with modern car technology and other technologies we use daily. So I'm not about to add another element that can make my day worse!

I have 8 road bikes from 1984 to 2007 models, all the mechanical systems work fantastic, and they work fast, their easy and simple to repair, and their extremely reliable, why would I want to make a change when I buy my new bike to electronic shifting? There is no reason other then bragging rights for me to want to that. I didn't get into cycling so I could have a toy.


----------



## DS1239622 (Mar 21, 2007)

froze said:


> Links? We don't need no stinking links! Seriously, the derailleurs are too new to have any complaints about failure except for water intrusion which that alone makes the systems to unreliable for touring purposes or all weather riding. And Japanese aren't building the "little electronc gizmos" China is, that worries me too.
> 
> I'm glad your embracing the technology, but I'm not going to, just as I no longer embrace new cars and their technology. It seems I've had poor success with a lot of modern technology, and due to my track record I'm steering clear, and add in the expense of such technology and the cost to repair...I'm steering way far away. By the way, I know for a fact I'm not the only one who has had bad success with modern car technology and other technologies we use daily. So I'm not about to add another element that can make my day worse!
> 
> I have 8 road bikes from 1984 to 2007 models, all the mechanical systems work fantastic, and they work fast, their easy and simple to repair, and their extremely reliable, why would I want to make a change when I buy my new bike to electronic shifting? There is no reason other then bragging rights for me to want to that. I didn't get into cycling so I could have a toy.


I must have missed that this was a car discussion website. Apples and oranges. As I said in my last post there are plenty of cheap electronics that fail often out there. Imo electronic groupsets are not one of them. The quality control is there. Will there be exceptions? Of course, but its not the norm and mechanical components can fail and have manufacturing defects as well. Most electronics are manufactured in China these days. They are quite experienced at it.

As people have been saying the electronic groupsets have been around for a while. Long enough for people with them to ride tens of thousands of miles in all kinds of conditions. There are reasons to switch to electronic groupsets. It has its advantages and disadvantages. 

If you dont like technology and want to keep riding the mechanical groupsets, thats great. I ride mechanical Ultegra and love it. When it comes down in price a bit and Im in the market for a new bike Ill consider my finances and what is important to me at the time then make a decision as to what bike with what groupset I get. But I can tell you I wont be concerned about the reliability of the electronic groups and I will be tempted by the advantages they have.

Unless you have evidence, or first hand experience, it is not constructive to keep posting about how unnecessary and unreliable electronic groupsets are because you have had difficulties with electronics in other industries in the past. Apples and oranges.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

DS1239622 said:


> Unless you have evidence, or first hand experience, it is not constructive to keep posting about how unnecessary and unreliable electronic groupsets are because you have had difficulties with electronics in other industries in the past. Apples and oranges.


Second that. Plus he evidently didn't see what I wrote in Post #31. The reality is that one system uses servo motors and the other uses stepper motors (can't remember which company uses which technology). However, both technologies have been around for better than 50 years. These days, those motor drive technologies are the heart of industrial automation. They are very well known and proven technologies. Battery technology has really jumped in the last 10 years or so. We know this because we see what's happened with cell phones, hybrid and electric cars, etc. Waterproofing electronics has been going on for a long time.

So, these various technologies have all come together in the bicycle business. The only problem is that it wasn't part of the past expertise of Campagnolo and Shimano, as far as I know. Campagnolo hired a Swiss firm with electronic drive system expertise. I don't know what Shimano did. I think Campagnolo was pretty smart in doing this. Realizing that it wasn't a specialty for them and that they are a fairly small company (~$150 Million a year compared to Shimano's ~$2 Billion a year for the bicycle division), this was a good way forward. Most people don't realize how small a company Campagnolo is, relatively speaking. They know that dropping schlock in the marketplace has the potential to put them out of business. For their yearly turnover, it is MUCH harder for them to ride out a financial storm. What all this means is that they wouldn't put something into the marketplace that won't stand by itself. Granted, I only rode the system for 45 minutes and in good weather. However, when they say that they accidently discovered a water intrusion problem in 2005 and put a lot of work into fixing it, I believe them.


----------



## DS1239622 (Mar 21, 2007)

flatlander_48 said:


> Second that. Plus he evidently didn't see what I wrote in Post #31. The reality is that one system uses servo motors and the other uses stepper motors (can't remember which company uses which technology). However, both technologies have been around for better than 50 years. These days, those motor drive technologies are the heart of industrial automation. They are very well known and proven technologies. Battery technology has really jumped in the last 10 years or so. We know this because we see what's happened with cell phones, hybrid and electric cars, etc. Waterproofing electronics has been going on for a long time.


Good point. Im an electrical engineer and design semi-conductor manufacturing equipment that uses stepper motors. Each product uses at least two high quality stepper motors in a much more demanding application (from a motor standpoint) and during the seven years Ive been here we have had exactly zero stepper motor failures. A coworker who has been here 15 years cant remember a stepper motor failure either. The motors see tens of millions of cycles (start/stop/quick accelerations and directional changes) and it is always the mechanical parts they are turning that wear out and fail. Not the motors. Well designed motors are extremely robust and reliable.


----------



## crank1979 (Sep 9, 2007)

froze said:


> Links? We don't need no stinking links! Seriously, the derailleurs are too new to have any complaints about failure except for water intrusion which that alone makes the systems to unreliable for touring purposes or all weather riding. And Japanese aren't building the "little electronc gizmos" China is, that worries me too.


I'm pretty sure Shimano Di2 is made in Japan and has been out since 2009. Plenty of time to find faults.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

DS1239622 said:


> Good point. Im an electrical engineer and design semi-conductor manufacturing equipment that uses stepper motors. Each product uses at least two high quality stepper motors in a much more demanding application (from a motor standpoint) and during the seven years Ive been here we have had exactly zero stepper motor failures. A coworker who has been here 15 years cant remember a stepper motor failure either. The motors see tens of millions of cycles (start/stop/quick accelerations and directional changes) and it is always the mechanical parts they are turning that wear out and fail. Not the motors. Well designed motors are extremely robust and reliable.


Mechanical engineer here celebrating my 40th year in the business. In my experience, motors usually fail because they have been misapplied or and ancilliary component fails (controller hardware failure, mechanical overload, etc.). I can understand resistance to new hardware, but I think folks are hanging on the wrong reasons. Plus, I think the Campagnolo Ride Back Home feature is a big deal. It addresses a lot of the concerns that people frequently mention. Lots of selective hearing, I guess...


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

I think one great thing about electronic shifting is that it can lead to more 3rd parties making shifters. This will eventually send the price down.


----------



## Fixed (May 12, 2005)

atpjunkie said:


> 4 of the 6 bikes I own still run 8 speed
> I don't think I'll be joining the electronic revolution


3 of the 12 I have are fixed... never missed a shift! ;-)


----------



## config (Aug 16, 2002)

bike981 said:


> Since the FD shifts are fast and crisp (from what most of you are saying; never tried it myself), do any of these systems provide a shifting mode in which you always shift to the next higher or lower *gear ratio*, even if that requires both a front and rear shift to select the proper cog+chainring?
> 
> That would be a pretty useful feature in my opinion. Maybe I'm just lazy, but I have no idea except in coarse terms how the gear ratios from my outer chainring interlace with those from my inner chainring. Also, I consider a FD shift to be a bit of a hassle since it typically requires a RD shift as well, so I often find myself avoiding a FD shift even if it would be the better gear at the moment.


That would be 'intelligent' shifting for me, and they would also have to add some solar or dyno charger for the battery. Perhaps then, I'd consider electronic shifting. It's sort of silly (to me) to have to charge your bicycle before you go ride.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

config said:


> That would be 'intelligent' shifting for me, and they would also have to add some solar or dyno charger for the battery. Perhaps then, I'd consider electronic shifting. It's sort of silly (to me) to have to charge your bicycle before you go ride.


By the same token, we didn't need batteries in order to make phone calls until cell phones came along...


----------



## AlexCad5 (Jan 2, 2005)

Erion929 said:


> A person I know charged his battery, but forgot to take the battery with him when he loaded up his car.....


I know a guy who forgot his shoes when he loaded up his car. This is not an argument.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

AlexCad5 said:


> I know a guy who forgot his shoes when he loaded up his car. This is not an argument.


I think it's an argument, howbeit a weak one but stronger then the shoes. There's plenty of times I forgot to take the cell phone I left on the charger, and now battery for a bicycle will be the next high potential of forgotten items. Ideally to prevent that sort of thing from happening and to always have a charged battery, is to carry a spare battery in your seat bag ready to be used, then if you forget the battery or it dies on a ride you simply slap in the spare. But some weight weenies may cringe at the thought of having to haul around a spare battery.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

What would be nice is if mechanical shifting and e-shifting co-existed for a long time to come... in the same way that automatic- and manual-transmission cars have co-existed for decades.

Then everyone's happy. Well, except for whichever zealots exist on each side.
.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

froze said:


> I think it's an argument, howbeit a weak one but stronger then the shoes. There's plenty of times I forgot to take the cell phone I left on the charger, and now battery for a bicycle will be the next high potential of forgotten items. Ideally to prevent that sort of thing from happening and to always have a charged battery, is to carry a spare battery in your seat bag ready to be used, then if you forget the battery or it dies on a ride you simply slap in the spare. But some weight weenies may cringe at the thought of having to haul around a spare battery.


If you leave without the battery for Campagnolo EPS or Shimano Dura Ace 9000 Di2, it would mean that you *Forgot Your Bike*. You *Do NOT* detach the battery for those to charge. Removing the battery is only true for Gen 1 Dura Ace Di2 and Ultegra Di2.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

SystemShock said:


> What would be nice is if mechanical shifting and e-shifting co-existed for a long time to come... in the same way that automatic- and manual-transmission cars have co-existed for decades.
> 
> Then everyone's happy. Well, except for whichever zealots exist on each side.
> .


Note that the number of cars and trucks available with a manual transmission has been in decline for the last 30 years. I know because I have never owned a vehicle with an automatic. Presently I am driving my 8th vehicle (7 cars, 1 truck). All, except 1, were purchased new.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

flatlander_48 said:


> Note that the number of cars and trucks available with a manual transmission has been in decline for the last 30 years. I know because I have never owned a vehicle with an automatic. Presently I am driving my 8th vehicle (7 cars, 1 truck). All, except 1, were purchased new.



Yep, but 30 years is a long time. And you can still get plenty of cars even today with manual tranny (though sure, not every car).

Mechanical shifting on new bikes still being around in 2042 is fine by me.
.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

SystemShock said:


> Yep, but 30 years is a long time. And *you can still get plenty of cars even today with manual tranny* (though sure, not every car).
> 
> Mechanical shifting on new bikes still being around in 2042 is fine by me.
> .


No, actually not. I took a quick look at the Ford range. Manuals are standard on the Fiesta and the Focus. For the Fusion, a manual is *ONLY* available with the 175hp I-4, but* NOT* the 240hp or 263hp V-6's. There is a manual available for the Mustang with all engine choices. *NO* manuals are available for the Taurus. However, I was surprised by the trucks. *NONE* of the crossovers and SUV are available with a manual. The *ONLY* truck you can get with a manual is the Ranger. For Toyota, you can get manuals with the Yaris, Corolla and Matrix, but *NOT* Camry, Avalon or Sienna. *YES* for the Tacoma, but *NO* for the Tundra. The *ONLY* crossover/SUV with a manual is the FJ Cruiser, but it appears to be *ONLY* available with the full time 4WD.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

flatlander_48 said:


> No, actually not. I took a quick look at the Ford range. Manuals are standard on the Fiesta and the Focus. For the Fusion, a manual is *ONLY* available with the 175hp I-4, but* NOT* the 240hp or 263hp V-6's. There is a manual available for the Mustang with all engine choices. *NO* manuals are available for the Taurus. However, I was surprised by the trucks. *NONE* of the crossovers and SUV are available with a manual. The *ONLY* truck you can get with a manual is the Ranger. For Toyota, you can get manuals with the Yaris, Corolla and Matrix, but *NOT* Camry, Avalon or Sienna. *YES* for the Tacoma, but *NO* for the Tundra. The *ONLY* crossover/SUV with a manual is the FJ Cruiser, but it appears to be *ONLY* available with the full time 4WD.


You're overthinking it. Basically, manual tranny is still popular on small cars and on sports cars. It's never been popular on SUVs or trucks. But this isn't the '90s anymore, SUVs don't dominate the industry as they once did. In fact, with gas prices being so high, small cars have experienced a resurgence in recent years.

Also, what of a maker like VW? Seems like you can get nearly all of their popular cars with manual... Golf, Jetta, GTI, Beetle, Passat, CC. Heck, even their Tiguan SUV.

Translation: You can still get manual tranny on plenty of cars, just not all of 'em.

Which is pretty much what I said.
.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

SystemShock said:


> What would be nice is if mechanical shifting and e-shifting co-existed for a long time to come... in the same way that automatic- and manual-transmission cars have co-existed for decades.
> 
> Then everyone's happy. Well, except for whichever zealots exist on each side.
> .


Right...by the way have you priced how much the newer 6 and 7 speed transmissions cost to rebuild? Do some internet searching on the cost of doing such a repair. These ideas are great until something breaks. Back in the early days of autos 3 speed and even slightly newer 4 speeds are relatively inexpensive to rebuild, but the newer 5 and 6 speed autos will run anywhere from $3,000 to $5,000 to rebuild, for a simple 3 speed will cost just under $1,000 and a lot less for Turbo 350's. And the newer transmissions do not hold up as long as the older 3 speed units.

Personally if I was forced to buy a new car I would get a manual tranny...if it was available for the vehicle I was considering.

So not everyone is happy with newer 5, 6, and 7 speed transmissions.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

SystemShock said:


> You're overthinking it. Basically, manual tranny is still popular on small cars and on sports cars. It's never been popular on SUVs or trucks. But this isn't the '90s anymore, SUVs don't dominate the industry as they once did. In fact, with gas prices being so high, small cars have experienced a resurgence in recent years.
> 
> Also, what of a maker like VW? Seems like you can get nearly all of their popular cars with manual... Golf, Jetta, GTI, Beetle, Passat, CC. Heck, even their Tiguan SUV.
> 
> ...


Actually you should never use the word NEVER, because back before the late 70's it was difficult to find a automatic pickup truck if at all! 

But you are right that not all cars have manual trans available.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

froze said:


> Actually you should never use the word NEVER, because back before the late 70's it was difficult to find a automatic pickup truck if at all!


True. Though we were more discussing the past 30 years.

But I agree that 'never' wasn't the right word to use. I was focusing overly much on SUVs.
.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

froze said:


> So not everyone is happy with newer 5, 6, and 7 speed transmissions.


Oh heck, I think Daimler-Benz even has 8-speed transmissions on some of its cars now. Probably Lexus too, and other companies are announcing such.

Btw, here's an interesting link for Flatlander (though it is from late '06):

*Nearly 80% Of Passenger Cars Are Sold With Manual Transmission In Europe | PRLog*
.


----------



## maxxevv (Jan 18, 2009)

SystemShock said:


> Oh heck, I think Daimler-Benz even has 8-speed transmissions on some of its cars now. Probably Lexus too, and other companies are announcing such.
> 
> Btw, here's an interesting link for Flatlander (though it is from late '06):
> 
> ...


That's an almost 6 year old article. Its not valid anymore for consumer pattern reviews ...


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

maxxevv said:


> That's an almost 6 year old article. Its not valid anymore for consumer pattern reviews ...


What part of "(though it is from late '06)" wasn't clear? I told you right up front.

That said, you're not thinking it through... there are reasons *why* Europe is into manual tranny more than we are, and those reasons haven't really changed in the past few years.

So...  yerself. 
.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

SystemShock said:


> Oh heck, I think Daimler-Benz even has 8-speed transmissions on some of its cars now. Probably Lexus too, and other companies are announcing such.
> 
> Btw, here's an interesting link for Flatlander (though it is from late '06):
> 
> ...


The difference is that more people there are interested in DRIVING. In the US, we tend not to be. The idea of the front seat of your car being an extension of their living rooms is a relatively new concept in Europe. Here the prevailing thought process by Detroit is that manuals are reserved for econoboxes or performance cars, but I suspect it is continuing to lose ground in both categories. My personal chronology is this:

1972 Honda 600 Coupe - 4sp
1970 Lotus Elan +2S - 5sp
1975 Fiat 131 Sedan - 5sp
1980 Chevrolet Citation - 4sp
1984 VW Quantum - 5sp
1990 Nissan Maxima SE - 5sp
1994 Isuzu Trooper LS - 5sp
2009 MINI John Cooper Works Clubman - 6sp

Basiscally sports sedans, sports cars and a 4WD.

In a few cases, we can make direct comparisons to current times. The VW Quantum is now known as the Passat. At the time, my Quantum had the top of the line Audi I-5. Currently you cannot get an manual in the top of the line V-6.

The Maxima model was the SE, or Sport Edition. It had an uprated suspension and tires and other goodies to live up to the 4-Door Sports Car tag line that Nissan still uses. These days the only transmission available on any Maxima is the CVT.

At the time, the Trooper LS was the top of the line. In 1994, going from memory, I don't believe that S-10 Blazers or Explorers were available with manual transmissions, so this isn't a new phenomenon. Today, for Chevy (as Isuzu was related to GM) the Trooper would fall somewhere between the Traverse and the Tahoe. Neither is avalable in any configuration with a manual.

These days, even the Porsches and Ferraris of the world are trumpeting there automatic transmission technologies. Sadly, it's the way things are going. So, when it is said that there are still "plenty" of cars out there, unfortunately the vast majority don't make My List; let alone My Short List.

So, back to e-shift systems...
Given my automotive history, if anyone should be predisposed to pass on e-shift systems it would be me. However, that isn't the case. Instead, I think it will provide much more consistent shifting over the life of the hardware. There's a reason why there are so many adjustments built into derailleur systems and I think e-shift systems eliminate a lot of that.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

flatlander_48 said:


> Long personal anecdote etc etc "Okay, there's still some manual tranny cars out there, just not ones that *I'm* interested in so much"


Fixed. 

Also, and along the same lines as you put it, the US is not the world. Europeans remain quite interested in manual shift vehicles overall.



> _So, back to e-shift systems...
> Given my automotive history, if anyone should be predisposed to pass on e-shift systems it would be me. However, that isn't the case. Instead, I think it will provide much more consistent shifting over the life of the hardware. There's a reason why there are so many adjustments built into derailleur systems and I think e-shift systems eliminate a lot of that._


The funny thing is, I'm precisely the opposite of you.

I'm fine with having an automatic in my car (though if my next car is a sports car, that won't be the case), but on bikes? I'll take the mech shifting.

It's simple and elegant, the way bikes were meant to be. 

That said, I certainly don't begrudge those who want their e-shifting. I would however like there to continue to be a *choice* for the foreseeable future (as I suspect there will be). I think even a lot of e-shifting folks could agree with that. 
.


----------



## Pirx (Aug 9, 2009)

torch511 said:


> The shifts are flawless and the FD trimming is pretty sweet.


BFD. 

Flawless shifts? So are the shifts with my mechanical Campy SR11.
FD trimming? What's that for? I can use all of my cogs (yep, all 11 of them) in either chainring, without any trimming, ever.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

SystemShock said:


> Fixed.


Sort of pointless as I already stated: _"Sadly, it's the way things are going. So, when it is said that there are still "plenty" of cars out there, unfortunately the vast majority don't make My List; let alone My Short List." _However, the fact remains that the population has been greatly reduced.



SystemShock said:


> Also, and along the same lines as you put it, the US is not the world. Europeans remain quite interested in manual shift vehicles overall.


Doesn't make much difference. Euro-spec, Japan-spec and US-spec cars are usually different or we just don't get them at all. Case in point, for the last few years, a diesel powered MINI has been available in Europe. We have yet to see one. For Japan, the Nissan Skyline GT-R has been around for years. When it was recently revived a few years back, we finally got them (legally).



SystemShock said:


> The funny thing is, I'm precisely the opposite of you.
> 
> I'm fine with having an automatic in my car (though if my next car is a sports car, that won't be the case), but on bikes? I'll take the mech shifting.


My truck wasn't a sports car, however. The connection between me and the vehicle, via maximum control over the drivetrain, is an important aspect of active safety. That's just how I am and it is independent of what vehicle I have. Your milage may vary...



SystemShock said:


> It's simple and elegant, the way bikes were meant to be.
> 
> That said, I certainly don't begrudge those who want their e-shifting. I would however like there to continue to be a *choice* for the foreseeable future (as I suspect there will be). I think even a lot of e-shifting folks could agree with that.


Yes, I would guess that there will continue to be a mechanical shift option for quite some time. However, what may happen is that the choices will decrease. For a given manufacturer, 4 or 5 group levels may come down to 1 or 2.


----------



## nOOky (Mar 20, 2009)

Right now the only use I have for electric shifting would be on a TT bike. I tried a friends bike, and it has more value to me to be able to just push a button in the aero position. On my everyday bike, I am fine and so used to mechanical shifting. Perhpas down the line when the equipment is streamlined and not as butt ugly as it is now I'll bite.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

flatlander_48 said:


> Doesn't make much difference.


Certainly does to the Europeans. :wink5:



> _The connection between me and the vehicle, via maximum control over the drivetrain, is an important aspect of active safety. That's just how I am and it is independent of what vehicle I have. Your milage may vary..._


Oh, I do appreciate the advantages of manual tranny in cars. But I live in the Bay Area, i.e. stop-n-go traffic hell. The rest is obvious.




> _Yes, I would guess that there will continue to be a mechanical shift option for quite some time. However, what may happen is that the choices will decrease. For a given manufacturer, 4 or 5 group levels may come down to 1 or 2._


I actually don't see that happening, if you're saying what it sounds like you're saying.

There's no reason for group differentiation by price point to go away. Even SRAM now offers 4 different road groups... they keep adding them, not taking them away. 

The only exception I could see is Campy, if they get completely wiped out at the low-end, and start selling only Chorus and above. But even then, they'd still have 3 road groups, presumably available in both mech and e-shift in the near future.

One other thing that could happen is that, for all of the 'Big 3', the top groups go to e-shift only, while lower groups are mech-only... though that is perhaps getting ahead of ourselves, as it's certainly possible that e-shifting may not become as popular as we think it will. 
.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Eventually E shift will probably filter all the way down to lower end models, this may take 10 years but if they can get the stuff built with cheaper parts and cheap labor then every bike sold except for Walmart type of bikes will be e shift, then the upper end e shifts will become wireless. This is just natural progression...assuming no weird technological problems.


----------



## foto (Feb 7, 2005)

I tried to read this thread, and made it through two posts.

I will buy wireless electronic shifting only when I can use it to shift _other people's_ bikes. To me, that is the only way it will be worth the extra coin.


----------



## foto (Feb 7, 2005)

Pirx said:


> BFD.
> 
> Flawless shifts? So are the shifts with my mechanical Campy SR11.
> FD trimming? What's that for? I can use all of my cogs (yep, all 11 of them) in either chainring, without any trimming, ever.


Hahaha! Yeah right. You do realize to "use" your cogs requires you to actually sit on the bike and take it for a ride, right?


----------



## Pirx (Aug 9, 2009)

foto said:


> Hahaha! Yeah right. You do realize to "use" your cogs requires you to actually sit on the bike and take it for a ride, right?


What, are you telling me that one can ride these things? I thought they're just meant to sit in the garage and look pretty. How is this "riding" supposed to work anyway? Kind of precarious, isn't it, with just two wheels! Don't people fall over?

Yep, that was funny. As in "hahaha!"


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

foto said:


> I tried to read this thread, and made it through two posts.
> 
> I will buy wireless electronic shifting only when I can use it to shift _other people's_ bikes. To me, that is the only way it will be worth the extra coin.


But you see, that's the problem. You may buy the wired e-shift and think nothing of it, but come against wireless? Why? Besides wireless ghost shifting from another wireless rider won't happen since they can key the frequency with thousands of possible combinations just like garage door openers. But that would be fun to screw with someone else's bike!!


----------



## foto (Feb 7, 2005)

froze said:


> But you see, that's the problem. You may buy the wired e-shift and think nothing of it, but come against wireless? Why? Besides wireless ghost shifting from another wireless rider won't happen since they can key the frequency with thousands of possible combinations just like garage door openers. But that would be fun to screw with someone else's bike!!


Ah, thanks Froze. Insightful as always! Keep up the top notch work!


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

foto said:


> Ah, thanks Froze. Insightful as always! Keep up the top notch work!


Oh no, thank you for being such a wonderful person, your top notch too. Love ya man, keep up the great comments!


----------



## Kodi Crescent (Aug 3, 2011)

The problem with electronic shifting is...

How ever will you ride your bike after an EMP?


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Kodi Crescent said:


> The problem with electronic shifting is...
> 
> How ever will you ride your bike after an EMP?


Here is some great wisdom concerning that. After an EMP event I won't be worrying about whether or not I can shift electronically or mechanically, I will be more concerned about what follows within 20 minutes after that, something about a big flash, but I'll remember from years of training that before the flash to grab my ankles and tuck my head between legs and kiss my ass goodbye. After which I will be riding my bike in heaven and having a grand time with no concern how my bike shifts; hope to see you in the big velodrome in the sky!


----------



## maxxevv (Jan 18, 2009)

Kodi Crescent said:


> The problem with electronic shifting is...
> 
> How ever will you ride your bike after an EMP?


Question is ... do you realise how much power its required for a device to generate such an EMP event that has sufficient power to fry the somewhat basic and 'industrial' electronics of these shift systems ? 

Its in the scale of kiloton thermonuclear devices .... would you even survive for that matter if you're close enough for the electronics to be fried ???


----------



## foto (Feb 7, 2005)

don't know about that. but if I _did_ survive, I would want my bike to work. That's why i ride with only wooden rims with no tires.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

foto said:


> Clearly you don't need an EMP as an excuse to fellate yourself. Good try, though.


 Maybe you can explain to us how to fellate oneself is done because clearly you indicated that you have more experience then anyone else here at that practice. Perhaps show some pictures of yourself doing this.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

foto said:


> Good one! Very original! Froze, you are a poopy muffin man!
> 
> *And seven hours from now, Froze calls foto a poopy muffin man...after he takes some time to think it up*


I love ya man, your still the best at originality. Originality is best told by the stories you write here, your the best at it man, no one can beat you. I bow at your presence oh king of originality.


----------



## foto (Feb 7, 2005)

froze said:


> Maybe you can explain to us how to fellate oneself is done because clearly you indicated that you have more experience then anyone else here at that practice. Perhaps show some pictures of yourself doing this.


Good one! Very original! Froze, you are a poopy muffin man!

*And seven hours from now, Froze calls foto a poopy muffin man...after he takes some time to think it up*


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

*Moderators note*



foto said:


> Clearly you don't need an EMP as an excuse to fellate yourself. Good try, though.


Enjoy the time out


----------



## JELLIOT (Aug 7, 2003)

I am really struggling with this decision. It primarily comes down to cost for me. I am spending a lot of money on a new custom build and now I have to think about adding a significant number to it for di2. Not exactly what I prepared my spouse for.

Tell me if this is flawed logic. I buy a custom bike with Ultegra mechanical, and I do not tell the builder to build it so that I could upgrade to Di2 at a later date. The reason for this is because I expect that when I am ready to upgrade, the electronic systems will be wireless and can be installed on any frame without the need to drill new holes. Does that make any sense? It seems to me that if Shimano and others want people to upgrade to electronic they will work on wireless systems which can be installed in any frame without drilling or the need to cover wires.


----------



## __PG__ (Jan 25, 2012)

You'll still need wires from the battery to the derailleurs to provide power. The shifters would then require a separate battery. So you won't have to worry about tubes along the downtubes, but you'll still have wires around the bottom bracket and chainstays


----------



## JELLIOT (Aug 7, 2003)

__PG__ said:


> You'll still need wires from the battery to the derailleurs to provide power. The shifters would then require a separate battery. So you won't have to worry about tubes along the downtubes, but you'll still have wires around the bottom bracket and chainstays


Good point. Had not thought about the need for two batteries, which may be why they did not come out with wireless first. The weight difference may have been too high. 

I was all set to move forward, but this has thrown a wrench in things. One compelling thing is that I have read that over the life the electronic shifting causes less wear on cassettes chains. Not sure if I believe this or if the benefit really outweighs the cost.


----------



## Kodi Crescent (Aug 3, 2011)

Pop a nuke high in the atmosphere. It will generate an EMP. Life will return to the 1800's. 
You will be alive and fine, but your electronic bike won't work.

Of course you'll have other worries, returning to an agricultural existence.

Check out the book "One Second After".


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Why would you need any wires at all? I'm just thinking here, which sometimes is a strain! But if the transmitter is in the shifters and the receivers are in the derailleurs with 4 small individual battery packs, one for each derailleur and for the shifters that plug into small slots in each component instead of one larger battery for all components. These small plug in batteries you would unplug and insert into a charger that would have 4 banks one for each battery; or, a cable with 4 leads that plug into 4 connectors and then the cable plugs into a wall outlet. You could also plug it into a USB port but most people don't park their bikes next to their computers. I think the removable battery packs would be better so when the batteries age and will no longer take a charge it would be easier for the person to take the batteries to their LBS for recycle and get new ones instead of having to take apart each component to get the batteries out. If done right those 4 batteries would be smaller in total then the one big one because each battery is only doing one thing thus the size would be quite a bit smaller for each. 

Time for the laughter. Please feel free.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

froze said:


> Why would you need any wires at all? I'm just thinking here, which sometimes is a strain! But if the transmitter is in the shifters and the receivers are in the derailleurs with 4 small individual battery packs, one for each derailleur and for the shifters that plug into small slots in each component instead of one larger battery for all components. These small plug in batteries you would unplug and insert into a charger that would have 4 banks one for each battery; or, a cable with 4 leads that plug into 4 connectors and then the cable plugs into a wall outlet. You could also plug it into a USB port but most people don't park their bikes next to their computers. I think the removable battery packs would be better so when the batteries age and will no longer take a charge it would be easier for the person to take the batteries to their LBS for recycle and get new ones instead of having to take apart each component to get the batteries out. If done right those 4 batteries would be smaller in total then the one big one because each battery is only doing one thing thus the size would be quite a bit smaller for each.
> 
> Time for the laughter. Please feel free.


Every time you add components, you reduce reliability. Your proposal doesn't make a good case for increasing complexity. That's the thing. People have suggested wireless systems. That's an increase in complexity and the only benefit is not having to run wires.


----------



## JELLIOT (Aug 7, 2003)

flatlander_48 said:


> Every time you add components, you reduce reliability. Your proposal doesn't make a good case for increasing complexity. That's the thing. People have suggested wireless systems. That's an increase in complexity and the only benefit is not having to run wires.


Wouldn't another benefit be that you could adapt it to most frames with out retrofitting?


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

JELLIOT said:


> Wouldn't another benefit be that you could adapt it to most frames with out retrofitting?


Not necessarily. This is the age of aero road bikes. Internal cabling has aero benefits, so that's why it has gained in popularity. It started on the high end bikes and has trickled down towards the mid-range. Unless e-shift systems get to be really cheap, you probably won't see them on low priced frames. So I don't see that as a good trade-off for an increase in complexity and a decrease in reliability.


----------



## maxxevv (Jan 18, 2009)

JELLIOT said:


> I am really struggling with this decision. It primarily comes down to cost for me. I am spending a lot of money on a new custom build and now I have to think about adding a significant number to it for di2. Not exactly what I prepared my spouse for.
> 
> Tell me if this is flawed logic. I buy a custom bike with Ultegra mechanical, and I do not tell the builder to build it so that I could upgrade to Di2 at a later date. The reason for this is because I expect that when I am ready to upgrade, the electronic systems will be wireless and can be installed on any frame without the need to drill new holes. Does that make any sense? It seems to me that if Shimano and others want people to upgrade to electronic they will work on wireless systems which can be installed in any frame without drilling or the need to cover wires.



Check with your frame builder if he has access to dual use grommets that some frames have adapted to allow for both cabled and wired installation on frames. Case in example will be the Look 595 and some of the Specialized models. They allow both the installation of Di2 as well as mechanical system using these interchangeable 'grommet adapters'.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

flatlander_48 said:


> Every time you add components, you reduce reliability. Your proposal doesn't make a good case for increasing complexity. That's the thing. People have suggested wireless systems. That's an increase in complexity and the only benefit is not having to run wires.


This is very true, but that is the direction that technology takes us, just look at our cars. It will happen to our bikes, not to any of mine because I won't buy into it, but plenty of others will jump on board excited like little school kids going to Disney Land. Wired computers went wireless and people buy them all the time and for what? for the same problems you mentioned, increased complexity brought about reduced reliability, but nobody cares, and nobody is going to care about wireless shifting problems and or cost either.


----------



## maxxevv (Jan 18, 2009)

froze said:


> This is very true, but that is the direction that technology takes us, just look at our cars. It will happen to our bikes, not to any of mine because I won't buy into it, but plenty of others will jump on board excited like little school kids going to Disney Land. Wired computers went wireless and people buy them all the time and for what? for the same problems you mentioned, increased complexity brought about reduced reliability, but nobody cares, and nobody is going to care about wireless shifting problems and or cost either.


There is a big difference between the 2 cases you're comparing here. 

Its called SAFETY IMPLICATIONS. 

Its alright for a wireless speedometer to go wonky in the middle of a ride. But its downright dangerous if the gear shifting in a bike does so too due to some high powered cables running under the road you cycle on. 

Like I mentioned earlier, its with good reason that 'drive-by-wire' systems utilized in indirect controls of vehicles, vessels and aircraft still utilize 'wires'. The safety implications for even a momentary lapse in control are too much to be risked.


----------



## maxxevv (Jan 18, 2009)

Kodi Crescent said:


> Pop a nuke high in the atmosphere. It will generate an EMP. Life will return to the 1800's.
> You will be alive and fine, but your electronic bike won't work.
> 
> Of course you'll have other worries, returning to an agricultural existence.
> ...


The range of the EMP event generated by a nuke is actually shorter than that of the nuclear blast. 

I wouldn't be too worried about my electronics if the EMP is from the nuclear blast if I were you ....


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

flatlander_48 said:


> Every time you add components, you reduce reliability.


Wouldn't that be an argument against e-shifting in general?
.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

froze said:


> This is very true, but that is the direction that technology takes us, just look at our cars. It will happen to our bikes, not to any of mine because I won't buy into it, but plenty of others will jump on board excited like little school kids going to Disney Land. Wired computers went wireless and people buy them all the time and for what? for the same problems you mentioned, increased complexity brought about reduced reliability, but nobody cares, and nobody is going to care about wireless shifting problems and or cost either.


I'm not against adding that technology, but it does seem unneeded to me in this case. You mentioned computers and I assume that you mean cycling computers. My current computer is wireless. As it does all of the usual motion things, in addition to cadence and heart monitoring, the wiring would be all over the place. It would also be a lot more difficult to integrate the heart rate information. So, in this case, wireless has some real benefits.

For e-shift applications, the isolation from interference would have to be nearly flawless to insure (as much as possible) there wouldn't be phantom shifting. If that happened to the computer, all you would have would be some corrupted or inaccurate data.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

SystemShock said:


> Wouldn't that be an argument against e-shifting in general?
> .


Not necessarily. E-shift systems have positive implications for shift performance. I can't think of any benefits to wireless e-shift systems other than eliminating wiring.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

flatlander_48 said:


> Not necessarily. E-shift systems have positive implications for shift performance.


Nonetheless, they do add a certain amount of components/complexity, which as you yourself state is a negative in terms of reliability.

I don't truly have a dog in this fight, but I did think it an interesting point that you raised while discussing a somewhat different issue (wireless).
.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

flatlander_48 said:


> I'm not against adding that technology, but it does seem unneeded to me in this case. You mentioned computers and I assume that you mean cycling computers..


That's what I meant. Problem with wireless computers is they don't last anywhere near as long as wired. I've had 3 wireless computer and not one lasted more then 4 years, I went back to wired. 

There is no benefit with wireless computers either other then no wires, but take in the higher cost, less features per cost and reliability and wireless has nothing to offer. In my opinion this can directly relate to E-systems...they offer no benefits over mechanical.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

SystemShock said:


> Nonetheless, they do add a certain amount of components/complexity, which as you yourself state is a negative in terms of reliability.
> 
> I don't truly have a dog in this fight, but I did think it an interesting point that you raised while discussing a somewhat different issue (wireless).
> .


Same issue, different result. Imagine an modern jet aircraft. It is an almost incomprehensibly complicated beast. Yet, it flies, can fly itself, it can figure out where it should go, adjust itself for maximum fuel economy, etc. However, it takes A LOT of design, analysis and testing work to insure of VERY high level of reliability. It has to be this way because we don't want to crash with humans on board, fall on houses or crash into buildings. There are very strict policies about maintenance frequencies and service lives.

The way I look at e-shift systems, what happens is that you trade SOME of the mechanical complexity for the addition of of complexity associated with the e-shift devices. You take away the mechanical complexity of the levers on the shifters, the ratcheting and the spring drives in the derailleurs and add the mechanical complexity of the motor and gearing arrangements and the electrical/electronic complexity of the power and control units.

So, to this point, Campagnolo and Shimano have developed e-shift systems that are pretty reliable and in the future will only become more reliable. The things that can upset the performance of the units are pretty straightforward. To a large extent, this is water intrusion. ALL of the motor and drive technologies in use existed before. What Campagnolo and Shimano did was adapt them to bicycles. There were all kinds of small stepping or servo motors in existance before the bicycle application came along.

If you add wireless, it creates another layer of complexity over what we already have. To this point, much effort has been expended by Campagnolo and Shimano to develop their systems. The question is would the benefit of having wireless capability outweigh the increase in complexity and possibly weight? The thing about wireless is what things do you defend against and to what level? I'm a mechanical engineer, not an electrical. I don't what all the threats would be, but I would think that there are all sorts of frequencies and fields that could cause problems.

My guess it that there would also be weight implications. Each shifter would need its own sender and somehow you would need to distinguish upshifts from downshifts. Each shifter would need its own power source because we have no wires. I assume that you would still have a control unit as otherwise intelligence would have to built into the derailleurs. The control unit needs a power source. The control unit recieves the signal from the shifters and sends control signals to the appropriate derailleur. Receivers would be needed in each derailleur, as well as power sources. I suspect that the derailleurs would also need sending units because feedback and/or diagnostic information needs to get back to the control unit. This makes for a total of 5 small batteries, 5 senders and 3 receivers. Granted, wireless technology is pre-existing, but this just seems like jumping through a lot of hoops to me.

If wireless capability is added, the trade is wiring plus a larger battery for small batteries, senders and receivers. I think this happens with a net gain in weight. The benefits are no wiring to install and easier sealing since there are no wires to enter and exit housings. The benefits don't seem to outweigh the step change in complexity.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

froze said:


> That's what I meant. Problem with wireless computers is they don't last anywhere near as long as wired. I've had 3 wireless computer and not one lasted more then 4 years, I went back to wired.
> 
> There is no benefit with wireless computers either other then no wires, but take in the higher cost, less features per cost and reliability and wireless has nothing to offer. *In my opinion this can directly relate to E-systems...they offer no benefits over mechanical*.


For my opinion, I don't think that is true. E-shift systems should be much more consistent in how they perform. Mechanical systems have a lot of frictional losses from the shifter to the cable to the derailleur mechanism. All of these change over time and the system behaves differently over its life. It's just how mechanical systems are. Most of that goes away with e-shift systems.

So, I would say that e-shift systems do have performance benefits. However, we all have to determine what our own cost to benefit ratio is. The thing that bothers me a bit is to read people's opinions that are based on either misunderstanding or misinformation. An opinion is a subjective thing, but many times misunderstandings and misinformation lead us to left field conclusions. For example, in the beginning there was a lot of discussion about battery life. It turns out that unless you are riding distance vitually ever day, battery life is measured in the months. If you are reasonably adept at keeping your cell phone charged, a bike battery shouldn't be a problem. In theory, we should all have a brief look-over before we ride. Checking battery condition would be just another item. And, in particular, Campagnolo has a way to deal with complete battery and electronic failures with their systems. You can decouple the rear derailleur drive and move the mechanism by hand. Also helps to prevent damage if you fall on it.

Anyway, does all this completly eliminate any problems due to battery failure? No, but it does show that people have been thinking about it and have addressed it. There is a degree of risk, but much less than people originally thought.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

I understand what your saying in terms of performance, but so far the reports have been neutral from actual users and not testers. My thing again comes down to long term reliability-not performance. 

I would find a Campy rear derailleur failure solution a tad inconvenient, one would have to stop the bike each time a shift was needed?! That's a great feature.

And as great as the decoupling idea is in case of an accident, will it work in all situations? Of course not. 

And I think for those that don't travel far from home the E-shift will be fine as far as battery life is concerned. But your always going to have that greater potential for failure the more complexity you add into it. You can't compare this with jet fighters either, jet fighters are over engineered and still have problems, but they also have redundant systems as well in case of in flight problems, and their gone over with a fine tooth comb upon landing, and they still have an abundance of problems. Sometimes those problems result in crashes, mostly their fixed upon landing.

Americans are really into technology, they also prefer automatic cars, so E-shift combines those two American favorite characteristics on a bicycle...what's not to love?


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

froze said:


> I understand what your saying in terms of performance, but so far the reports have been neutral from actual users and not testers. My thing again comes down to long term reliability-not performance.


My opinion is based on my experience: http://forums.roadbikereview.com/campagnolo/i-rode-eps-267503.html



froze said:


> I would find a Campy rear derailleur failure solution a tad inconvenient, one would have to stop the bike each time a shift was needed?! That's a great feature.
> 
> And as great as the decoupling idea is in case of an accident, will it work in all situations? Of course not.


Note that Shimano has NOT addressed this issue at all. And, if you fall on your mechanical rear derailleur, what's the probability that it will be damaged? It would probably be difficult to do with a cable system, but decoupling would be a good feature to have.



froze said:


> And I think for those that don't travel far from home the E-shift will be fine as far as battery life is concerned. But your always going to have that greater potential for failure the more complexity you add into it. You can't compare this with jet fighters either, jet fighters are over engineered and still have problems, but they also have redundant systems as well in case of in flight problems, and their gone over with a fine tooth comb upon landing, and they still have an abundance of problems. Sometimes those problems result in crashes, mostly their fixed upon landing.


No, it's a metaphor. My point was that you can make complex system reliable, but it takes work.



froze said:


> Americans are really into technology, they also prefer automatic cars, so E-shift combines those two American favorite characteristics on a bicycle...what's not to love?


Watch your generalizations. I've never owned a vehicle with an automatic transmission (7 cars and 1 truck). And, e-shift systems were developed in France, Italy and Japan. What does that have to do with the US? The US only accounts for 17% of Campagnolo's yearly turnover. It wasn't purposefully developed for US consumption.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

flatlander_48 said:


> My opinion is based on my experience: http://forums.roadbikereview.com/campagnolo/i-rode-eps-267503.html
> 
> Note that Shimano has NOT addressed this issue at all. And, if you fall on your mechanical rear derailleur, what's the probability that it will be damaged? It would probably be difficult to do with a cable system, but decoupling would be a good feature to have.


But your experience has not gone on for even 5 years yet, that's the life expectancy of the battery. Your experience is one and half years...that's nothing. All your saying with that experience is that nothing has broke, well I hope not for the amount of money you spent. I have bikes with the same group set on since the mid 80's, in fact one my bikes I had built in 84 uses all Suntour Superbe components has over 160,000 miles on the components. That's crazy long experience, I'm not suggesting you need to do that, but you need at least 8 years before you can judge reliability, and even then that depends on how many miles you put on it. If your only averaging 2,000 miles a year then 8 years is nothing, but if your averaging 5,000 miles then that means a great deal more.

If I fall on my mechanical derailleur I can simply bend it back, which may, or may not take a greater effort on the shifter to move the cable enough to make it shift but I won't be stopping to shift. And if the damage is greater then what I can do by bending it back well guess what? The same crash with E system will destroy it too! So in that respect you and I are in the same boat, except to replace my mechanical derailleur will be far less then to replace the E derailleur. I've never damaged a derailleur in a crash, so that would be a rare event for most people.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

froze said:


> *But your experience has not gone on for even 5 years yet, that's the life expectancy of the battery. Your experience is one and half years...that's nothing. All your saying with that experience is that nothing has broke, well I hope not for the amount of money you spent.* I have bikes with the same group set on since the mid 80's, in fact one my bikes I had built in 84 uses all Suntour Superbe components has over 160,000 miles on the components. That's crazy long experience, I'm not suggesting you need to do that, but you need at least 8 years before you can judge reliability, and even then that depends on how many miles you put on it. If your only averaging 2,000 miles a year then 8 years is nothing, but if your averaging 5,000 miles then that means a great deal more.


There's been a misunderstanding. I don't own a Campagnolo EPS set up. The Campagnolo people let me ride a Super Record EPS equipped Pinarello Dogma a few days after their Taiwan introduction last November. I wish I did own one, but I don't. My BreakAway is equipped with a Chorus 11 system.



froze said:


> If I fall on my mechanical derailleur I can simply bend it back, which may, or may not take a greater effort on the shifter to move the cable enough to make it shift but I won't be stopping to shift. And if the damage is greater then what I can do by bending it back well guess what? The same crash with E system will destroy it too! So in that respect you and I are in the same boat, except to replace my mechanical derailleur will be far less then to replace the E derailleur. I've never damaged a derailleur in a crash, so that would be a rare event for most people.


If you have very old parts made of steel, yes, you can roughly bend them back to shape. However, in more recent times, derailleur parts are aluminum die castings. I think they would be more likely to break rather than bend. And, if it did bend, I doubt that you could bend it back to shape with out breaking it.

In Zinn's article in Velo News about the EPS introduction in Sicily, he mentioned that one of the journalists did fall. The derailleur decoupled just like it was supposed to. He recoupled and continued riding.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

flatlander_48 said:


> There's been a misunderstanding. I don't own a Campagnolo EPS set up. The Campagnolo people let me ride a Super Record EPS equipped Pinarello Dogma a few days after their Taiwan introduction last November. I wish I did own one, but I don't. My BreakAway is equipped with a Chorus 11 system.
> 
> If you have very old parts made of steel, yes, you can roughly bend them back to shape. However, in more recent times, derailleur parts are aluminum die castings. I think they would be more likely to break rather than bend. And, if it did bend, I doubt that you could bend it back to shape with out breaking it.
> 
> In Zinn's article in Velo News about the EPS introduction in Sicily, he mentioned that one of the journalists did fall. The derailleur decoupled just like it was supposed to. He recoupled and continued riding.


Oh, I thought you owned the EPS, so you have far less experience then I thought you did, making you an even worse candidate for knowing how reliable the system will be. There really isn't any need for further comment then is there? Not trying to piss you off, but I assumed you had spent some time with the system the way the review read. I can't stand reviews that were only testing and not living with the item being tested. I guess testing reviews have a purpose, but finding out about reliability/longevity is not something that will be gleamed from such a review, just functionality, and for a short test almost anything will function the way it was intended.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

If you had READ what I wrote, I said that I rode the bike for 45 minutes. The system was NOT on the market at that point. I doubt that even journalists had access for more than 1 day last year. EPS has been on sale to the public since around February or so. No one has any long term experience unless you work for Campagnolo or ride for one of their teams. Where you got a year and a half I have no idea.Like it or not, makes no difference to me. However, manufacturing reasons not to like something just gets sort of silly...


----------



## JELLIOT (Aug 7, 2003)

I think others were wondering about 11 speed di2, and whether the current d12 system will be upgradeable to 11 speed. It will be through a firmware update, however, you would also need to change your hubs or get wheels with hubs that accept 11 speed cassettes. Apparently not all wheel builders provide these types of hubs. So there is a cost if you buy di2 now and want to upgrade to 11 speed, but it comes in the form of new hubs. That point may have been obvious to most people, but it was not to me.

I am not too fussed and have decided to go with di2 10 speed. But I don't think I will rush out next year to convert to 11 speed just so I can say "these go to 11".


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

flatlander_48 said:


> If you had READ what I wrote, I said that I rode the bike for 45 minutes. The system was NOT on the market at that point. I doubt that even journalists had access for more than 1 day last year. EPS has been on sale to the public since around February or so. No one has any long term experience unless you work for Campagnolo or ride for one of their teams. Where you got a year and a half I have no idea.Like it or not, makes no difference to me. However, manufacturing reasons not to like something just gets sort of silly...


I apologize, I saw the review but since I wasn't interested in either testing or buying the components or a bike with it already on, I didn't read it till today for fun and for your benefit, not so much mine since I have no desire to buy the system.

Even you said the group is just so so, or in your words: "I liked it, but I wasn’t blown away by it." Then you go on to say: "Would I buy one? Hard to say as it depends upon how the pricing turns out." I think that may be true with a lot people, right now to spend an additional $1,000 for the Shiman Dura Ace and the DI2 (I can't use a Campy example since pricing isn't out) is out the question or trying to justify spending that for something that can be done mechanically thus amounts to little more then toy!

But I still maintain that until someone has put 5 to 8 years and around 40,000 miles in that period then we'll have a better understanding of it's long term issues. That's going to be awhile before that occurs. 

You did a good job with the review considering how long you were able to test it. So hats off to you for a job well done with what you had.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

froze said:


> I apologize, I saw the review but since I wasn't interested in either testing or buying the components or a bike with it already on, I didn't read it till today for fun and for your benefit, not so much mine since I have no desire to buy the system.
> 
> Even you said the group is just so so, or in your words: "I liked it, but I wasn’t blown away by it." Then you go on to say: "Would I buy one? Hard to say as it depends upon how the pricing turns out." I think that may be true with a lot people, right now to spend an additional $1,000 for the Shiman Dura Ace and the DI2 (I can't use a Campy example since pricing isn't out) is out the question or trying to justify spending that for something that can be done mechanically thus amounts to little more then toy!
> 
> ...


No problem.

The reason that I wasn't bown away had more to do with expectations. I think I expected to really know that the EPS system was there and working, but that's not how it is. It's very unobtrusive. With a little background noise, you wouldn't know that it was working. I'm a mechanical engineer and I am often around industrial robots. The servomotors and drivetrains make distinctive sounds. I guess I was expecting something more like that. But, basically it just does what it is supposed to do. When I think about it, that's entirely appropriate...


----------



## castofone (Dec 24, 2010)

Not so sure that that will happen. The old Mektronic was wireless and was troubled by interference. I don't know if there is any way around that.


----------



## castofone (Dec 24, 2010)

Actually the change from friction shifting to indexed sis shifting was a much bigger functional improvement than mechanical to electric.


----------



## Urb (Jul 19, 2010)

castofone said:


> Not so sure that that will happen. The old Mektronic was wireless and was troubled by interference. I don't know if there is any way around that.


Wireless signal transmission standards have vastly improved. From radio to encrypted bluetooth. Personally I don't like the idea of wireless shifting but when it comes around I'll be open minded and give it a fair evaluation.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

castofone said:


> Not so sure that that will happen. The old Mektronic was wireless and was troubled by interference. I don't know if there is any way around that.


The first wireless cycling computers were having the same issues, as far as I have ever experienced from the 3 that I owned that problem was ironed out.

I should add, what wasn't ironed out in the 3 wireless computers that I had was overall reliability. The sending units were the weak link and would only last a max of 4 years, with one only lasting 20 months. And that would also probably be the weak link in wireless drivetrain, but reliability issues with wireless computers have not prevented cyclists from purchasing these computers...nor will it prevent them from purchasing wireless drivetrain, because just like computers wireless looks neater.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

Urb said:


> Wireless signal transmission standards have vastly improved. From radio to encrypted bluetooth. Personally I don't like the idea of wireless shifting but when it comes around I'll be open minded and give it a fair evaluation.


I think folks will get it to work, but it seems like an unnecessary complication. And, consider the price delta that comes along with it...


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

flatlander_48 said:


> I think folks will get it to work, but it seems like an unnecessary complication. And, consider the price delta that comes along with it...


People are already gung ho about spending the extra $1000 for the E systems, if their willing to spend that much more for a wired E system, what makes you think they won't want to spend an additional $250 to $500 to have it wireless? I think your wrong, not saying you will be wrong, but based on what the history has been with wired vs wireless computers I think people will be willing to fork over the cash. There are people all over this globe who buy the latest greatest bicycle technology just to go a wee bit faster, but probably give the appearance they can go faster but just not today! Anyway, they buy this stuff without the ability to use the product for it's maximum value like in racing, they buy it because they want the best of the best in the latest toy, and I think buyers will be lining up to get their hands on a wireless E system. People are already complaining about all the wires these systems have, so the next logical jump will be wireless.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

froze said:


> *People are already gung ho about spending the extra $1000 for the E systems, if their willing to spend that much more for a wired E system, what makes you think they won't want to spend an additional $250 to $500 to have it wireless?* I think your wrong, not saying you will be wrong, but based on what the history has been with wired vs wireless computers I think people will be willing to fork over the cash. There are people all over this globe who buy the latest greatest bicycle technology just to go a wee bit faster, but probably give the appearance they can go faster but just not today! Anyway, they buy this stuff without the ability to use the product for it's maximum value like in racing, they buy it because they want the best of the best in the latest toy, and I think buyers will be lining up to get their hands on a wireless E system. People are already complaining about all the wires these systems have, so the next logical jump will be wireless.


The complication is what I wrote previously, but something else just occurred to me. When you convert a computer system, there is a sender reading the wheel rotations, another for cadence and maybe one for heart rate. Unlike drivetrain applications, I would assume that there is no information flowing in the other direction. Also, remember that there are 2 things going on: control AND power. If you make the control portion wireless, then how do you power the derailleurs? You can't do that with button cells. The power requirement is too high. The wireless control part is easy, but you might have issues with spinning those gearboxes...



flatlander_48 said:


> My guess it that there would also be weight implications. Each shifter would need its own sender and somehow you would need to distinguish upshifts from downshifts. Each shifter would need its own power source because we have no wires. I assume that you would still have a control unit as otherwise intelligence would have to built into the derailleurs. The control unit needs a power source. The control unit recieves the signal from the shifters and sends control signals to the appropriate derailleur. Receivers would be needed in each derailleur, as well as power sources. I suspect that the derailleurs would also need sending units because feedback and/or diagnostic information needs to get back to the control unit. This makes for a total of 5 small batteries, 5 senders and 3 receivers. Granted, wireless technology is pre-existing, but this just seems like jumping through a lot of hoops to me.
> 
> If wireless capability is added, the trade is wiring plus a larger battery for small batteries, senders and receivers. I think this happens with a net gain in weight. The benefits are no wiring to install and easier sealing since there are no wires to enter and exit housings. The benefits don't seem to outweigh the step change in complexity.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

flatlander_48 said:


> Also, remember that there are 2 things going on: control AND power. If you make the control portion wireless, then how do you power the derailleurs? You can't do that with button cells. The power requirement is too high. The wireless control part is easy, but you might have issues with spinning those gearboxes...


The battery for theDI2 has very little amp hour rating, it's only rated at 0.53, just a tad over half an amp hour. If you had small little removable wafer batteries, like those in cell phones, that fitted into a slot built into each derailleur, and even smaller batteries that also fitted into slots on each briftor (since the briftor is just sending information the power demand is lower then the derailleurs needing motors to power); then when the time comes close to recharging you just remove the bats and plug them into a 4 bay charger dock...OR, little ports on each component so you just plug in 4 cables that lead to one cable that leads to a charger. The only potential problem with the cable to charger set up would be the companies making the batteries non user friendly to replace.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

I don't think you can do that with those cells. The big battery may have a low current draw rating, but you can draw that current MANY times. Small cells would have no life. Still, I view it as an unnecessary complication and won't do anything for shift performance.


----------

