# force vs ultegra



## kane

I'm considering a new bike. I've never ridden a bike with force. Do you think it's worth the extra money to go with force?


----------



## AvantDale

Go test ride a Force equipped bike. Thats the only way *you* will be able to decide.


Theres no way to get the feel of the shifters over a keyboard.:lol:


----------



## Hairy Legs

Hardly a comparison. The Force will outlast, outshift and is much lighter that the Ultegra. Aslo SRAM stands behind their product. If something goes wrong with your Shimano, its like pulling teeth t get them to fix or replace it, plus the wait time if forever.

Do yourself a HUGE favor and get the SRAM bike :thumbsup:


----------



## frdfandc

Ride them back to back.

At the LBS I work for, we were selling 2 bikes - GT Series 1 aluminum bikes. One version had Ultegra, the other had Rival. Ultegra was approx $400 more - comparable to Force - but we were always asked which one was better. Shimano or Sram. Customers were always advised to ride both back to back and make the choice themselves.

Some liked the Ultegra, others preferred the Rival.


----------



## Wicked2006

I have SRAM Rival on my Super Six and love it. Ultegra is nice stuff though. I'd go with SRAM any day of the week over Shimano! The only way I'd go Shimano if they handed me a new set of Dura Ace Di2. 

Right now I'm running Rival with Force cranks! I'm really impressed with SRAM! I'm happy I went with SRAM. I had a chance at getting a Super Six with Ultegra! Rode both and just loved the feel of SRAM over Ultegra! 

Do get out there and ride both so you can have a better decision on what you want and need!


----------



## MarvinK

They definitely feel different... SRAM tends to give more shifting feedback, while Shimano is very light and soft shifting. You wouldn't want to switch to SRAM without trying it if you are already a happy Shimano user. In fact, you probably wouldn't want to upgrade to new Ultegra without trying it--since most of the improvements are SRAM-inspired (ergonomics, less light-action... well, lower-weight too! ).


----------



## Ghost234

Try it out yourself.


I used to be a long time Shimano fan, but switched to a mixture of Force/Red after trying out a friends bike. It was definitely a very different feel as far as shifting goes (it seemed very violent), but it feels so much more natural than Shimano. Unless I can go Di2, I will stick with SRAM for the next little while.


----------



## red elvis

Wicked2006 said:


> ...Do get out there and ride both so you can have a better decision on what you want and need!


best advice on this thread. i'm thinking about test riding a sram equipped bike at performance when i get a chance. right now i have shimano 105/tiagra on my bike but i heard a lot of good things about the sram.


----------



## LOUISSSSS

Hairy Legs said:


> Hardly a comparison. The Force will outlast, outshift and is much lighter that the Ultegra. Aslo SRAM stands behind their product. If something goes wrong with your Shimano, its like pulling teeth t get them to fix or replace it, plus the wait time if forever.
> 
> Do yourself a HUGE favor and get the SRAM bike :thumbsup:


BS

shimano customer service is just as good or better than sram. how do you think they've made it this far and still sell more than the cheaper/lighter/more TDF winning SRAM???? cmon man.

i ride sram (which is why i'm in this subforum more than shimano) but ultegras are great. Its really all about preference.

The only objective comparison you can compare is price and weight, and the force is lighter.


----------



## AvantDale

Shimano sells more on the lower end parts than on the high end.Go to your local Walmart and see how many bikes have the Shimano name on it.

Sram is trying to eat into the entry level Tiagra and Sora market with their Apex stuff.


----------



## XR4Ti

AvantDale said:


> Sram is trying to eat into the entry level Tiagra and Sora market with their Apex stuff.


You think so? My daughter has Tiagra/Sora on her bike and I just built up an Apex bike for my wife -- there is 0 comparison between the two. I would put the Apex market somewhere b/w 105 & Ultegra.


----------



## MarvinK

Apex is competitively priced compared to 105... It's quite a bit more expensive than Tiagra or Sora. From what bike makers are saying, they weren't getting great deals on oem Apex, either. With 10 speeds, low weight and all the features of Force and Rival... It's still the best value... It's just not priced similar to Sora or even Tiagra.


----------



## AvantDale

Initially that was supposed to be the idea of Apex...at least thats what I read before it came out.

As for the pricing and availability of Apex...it confuses me. If you go on Ebay...Apex pricing is almost the same as Rival. 50 dollars separate the two groups. If you look at the weights of the front and rear derailleurs...they are the same on both models, and use the same cassette. Rival also comes in a mid cage rear derailleur.



XR4Ti said:


> I would put the Apex market somewhere b/w 105 & Ultegra.


Wouldn't Rival be between 105 and Ultegra?


----------



## jtimmer1

In my opinion, Force is on par with Dura Ace (with the exception of the brakes), but that's just from my riding. Go with SRAM.


----------



## paul l

I have Dura Aca and Rival equipped bikes and I can't say the latter is superior. Rival does not shift as sweet as my Dura Ace. Dura Ace hoods are not as comfortable as my Rival hoods (personal and subjective preference) nor does my Dura Ace brake anywhere near as well as my Rival.

However, what I really wan't to know and can't find on the web is how does Force improve on Rival and how does Red improve on Force? I don't mean the weights or specs. I mean do you get higher quality shifting as you do when going from 105 to Ultegra or Ultegra to Dura Ace.


----------



## frdfandc

Apex is aimed at Tiagra/105. Its priced closer to Tiagra, with weight being similar to 105.

Rival - 105/Ultegra - cheaper than Ultegra, lighter than 105

Force - Ultegra/DA - cheaper than DA, lighter than 105

Red -DA - cheaper and lighter than DA.


----------



## MarvinK

Actually, Force is lighter than Dura Ace and Rival is lighter than Ultegra. Quality and price-wise, your comparisons are more accurate.

http://www.totalcycling.com/index.php/component-weights.html

Red is really the only group that has improved shifting over any of the other SRAM groups--and only the rear shifting. The difference is it requires slightly less lever throw to shift and isn't a real big deal. If you haven't used Red, you won't ever notice. Unfortunately, that means Force will shift nearly identical to your Rival stuff. All SRAM shifting is stiff and responsive... not 'light' like Shimano.


----------



## paul l

Marvin,thanks that is really useful info. So the part that still puzzles me is that Rival is plenty light enough so why does Force get takers if the performance is identical, is it made better and will last longer?

Is it simply marketing and positioning, if so it would seem foolish. With Shimano you always felt the improvement of buying Ultegra or DA if you could justify the pricing to yourself. No you didn't really need it but that's a different matter altogether.


----------



## Svooterz

paul l said:


> Marvin,thanks that is really useful info. So the part that still puzzles me is that Rival is plenty light enough so why does Force get takers if the performance is identical, is it made better and will last longer?
> 
> Is it simply marketing and positioning, if so it would seem foolish. With Shimano you always felt the improvement of buying Ultegra or DA if you could justify the pricing to yourself. No you didn't really need it but that's a different matter altogether.


The shifter's internal components and the derailleur's mechanism (both front and rear) are actually the same between Rival and Force. Apex has the same shifter internals too and the derailleurs seem similar, if somewhat heavier. Basically, using the same gear ratios, Rival and Force will have identical shifting performance... and Apex should be damn close.

Reasons to upgrade to Force? 
1) The BB30 option saves a lot of weight, if your frame takes it
2) The new brakes (2010) are slightly better than Rival's, but Rival brakes are already superb IMHO.
...Other reasons would that that it's prettier, it has carbon and it is lighter. It's not made better and given that it uses lighter materials to shave weight, I doubt it would be more durable.

I would liken the choice between Force and Rival to the choice Shimano users had to make between Ultegra and Ultegra SL, before the 6700 series came out... If you want the aesthetics and weight shaving, fork the cash!


----------



## XR4Ti

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Rival brake calipers are the only ones in the line-up (Apex-Red) that don't have the centering adjustment screw, if that matters to you.


----------



## motoricker

Just for another data point:
I have a DA 7800 bike, I have previously had numerous Ultegra 6600 components, and my newer bike is SRAM Force 2010. 

It is quite obvious that Shimano is still king of precision shifting. It is a light, smooth, precise click. 
FORCE is like shifting a John Deer tractor: a heavy, loud, audible "clunk". There is no way you can make a secret tactical shift on Force. Everyone will always know immediately when you are shifting. 
Having said that, the Force is reliable and does the job adequately well. The trade-off is weight and cost. I also like the single-lever idea of SRAM better than the pivoting brake lever of Shimano. I do wish the shifts required less force and were a little more "refined".


----------



## qwalls

This is one of those questions that has a different answer depending on the person. I currently have two bikes also, one with 2010 SRAM Force (replaced 1st gen SRAM Rival) and one with 2011 Shimano Ultegra 6700. I previously also had Ultegra 6600.

I agree with motoricker that Shimano is light and smooth, but I actually find the Force rear shifting to be more precise. Front shifting, Shimano no contest, but the Force is still pretty good. I think the Ultegra 6600 shifted better in the rear than the 6700 does.

I also don't find the Force to be loud or clunky. It CAN be up front if there is too much cable tension, and in the rear if it isn't adjusted correctly.

In order of hood comfort for me from best to worst, SRAM, 6700, 6600. I also prefer the pivot point of the SRAM vs. 6700. Makes it easier to modulate/brake from the hoods.

And doubletap is definitely a better way of shifting (my opinion). If I can get a good deal on a SRAM Force group like I did last year end of season, I may replace the Ultegra with Force on my 2nd bike.

I know this thread is a few months old, but I had to chime in too.


----------



## clipz

can anyone explain what the BB30 option is about? im looking to go from sora/tiagra to force and keep seeing gxp cranks i think and bb30. i dont understand what to buy. how do you know if your frame can use the bb30 as previously posted?


----------



## paul l

I think the short answer is that if your frame has a BB30 option it will be marketed loud and clear.

The longer answer is that it is another alternative on the bottom bracket theme requiring specific bottom brackets which differ from those found in current bikes. Plenty of information out there on the web about its origin and 'benefits'.

My understanding is that if you buy a BB30 framed bike you can use a spacer enabling you to use your current Shimano/SRAM chainset and bottom bracket if you don't want to fork out for a BB30 chainset straight away.

However, the article which caught my eye was this one from October 2009 (As ever, who knows their motivation and whether they are correct or if someone countered them)

http://pugetpower.blogspot.com/2009/10/velonews-calls-bike-industrys-bb30.html

extract below in case the link disappears:
"_And every once in a while there is a worthwhile article such as this month's article on whether or not BB30 is actually a better technology (sandwiched, of course, between an article on "Lance's Entourage" (I kid you not) and a-pay-to-play cross bike shootout).

After about 100 (edit: actually ~50) years of reliance on the square taper bottom bracket, the last 20 years of cycling tech are littered with obsolete bottom bracket standards that have come and gone as new "better" technology is developed. First we had Octalink splined internal bottom brackets, followed by ISIS splined internal bottom brackets, followed by the external bottom brackets introduced by Shimano with Dura-Ace 7800 in 2003 which have been adopted throughout the industry and remained the standard since their introduction. Indeed, Shimano continues to use their external BB standard in the 2009-released DA7900 so it appears they are sticking with their guns for at least this generation of components. I'm not a true cycling historian so I'm sure there were some steps in between and other technologies before Octalink of which I am not aware, but the fact of the matter is that the bike industry loves to come out with "game changing" technology every few years to make sure you really do need that new bike or gruppo you've been lusting after. Can you say designed obsolescence?

BB30 has been gaining steam ever since its introduction by Cannondale several years ago. It's now gone mainstream and many bike companies are making BB30 frames and SRAM, FSA, Zipp, and many other companies are making BB30 cranks to fit these frames. The basic idea is that you take the bearings, make them a little bigger and put them inside the frame. You also make the spindle larger (30mm) and aluminum. By making these changes you supposedly arrive at a lighter, stiffer, and narrower crank/bottom bracket setup.

Unlike so many other grandiose component claims, Velonews actually put these claims to the test by comparing the weight, stiffness, and width of FSA K-Force Mega-Exo/BB30 and SRAM Red GXP/BB30 cranks, some of the only cranks that are available in both versions. The results:

Weight
FSA: BB30 30g lighter
SRAM: BB30 20g lighter

Stiffness
FSA: BB30 0.5% stiffer
SRAM: BB30 0.7% stiffer

Q-Factor
FSA: 149 vs. 146mm
SRAM: 145 vs 144mm

So, for these cranks, BB30 is slightly lighter but virtually no different when it comes to stiffness or Q-factor. Hooray for VeloNews! Given how sycophantic this publication and the cycling media in general usually are towards equipment "reviews" we finally have someone taking an objective look at this "great" new technology and calling it out for what it is: a gimmick.

It is really striking, however, how these companies have taken this technology with some amount of potential and done nothing with it except hype it up. They brought it to market for the sole purpose of making you buy something new. The cynic in me looks at BB30 cranks, 1-1/2" fork crowns, and integrated seat posts and sees cheap gimmicks designed to move units and kill the secondary market. I would love to be proved wrong, but it looks like the industry has at least in this case failed once again to produce substantive change._"

The only thing I know is that my SRAM Rival and Ultegra 6600 SL chainsets and my bikes have more stiffness than I have power and that I don't need to look into BB30 any further, lots of laughs!


----------



## clipz

wow that helped thank you!


----------



## dadicroce

thanks


----------

