# Shimano 5800 vs 6800 groupset



## daniyarm (Aug 19, 2008)

I am in the market for a new groupset and was about to pull the trigger on the Ultegra 6800, when i see Shimano announced the new 105 groupset. I currently have Rival on my 2012 Allez Evo, but I got a chance to test ride a bike with the new Ultegra and was hooked. Ultegra prices are really good now, but I can't help but wonder if I should wait another two months and go with the new 105. I am just wondering if there will be any difference between the two in feel and shifting performance.


----------



## Madone SIX (May 13, 2012)

daniyarm said:


> I am in the market for a new groupset and was about to pull the trigger on the Ultegra 6800, when i see Shimano announced the new 105 groupset. I currently have Rival on my 2012 Allez Evo, but I got a chance to test ride a bike with the new Ultegra and was hooked. Ultegra prices are really good now, but I can't help but wonder if I should wait another two months and go with the new 105. I am just wondering if there will be any difference between the two in feel and shifting performance.


Pick an industry, just about any industry, and the next thing is always right around the corner. If you want something, and are happy with the price, do not worry about what it will cost later, or what will come out next.


----------



## reptilezs (Aug 21, 2007)

with the supply issue with shimano i doubt you can get 5800 in 2 monthes


----------



## eagle_no1 (Sep 21, 2008)

Comparing to the frame and wheels, it's hard to notice the performance difference among the components. Having ridden with some none latest version 105, Ultegra, campy record, if any, whatever lightly better is the better adjusted/maintained one.

it's kind of fun to burn some money on our hobby thou.


----------



## MMsRepBike (Apr 1, 2014)

105 will be right about 525 and will available in July.

6800 is available now, is better and only about $200 extra.

I'd go 6800, well I did.

In the future though, if I have a cheaper bike that needs a groupset it will be 5800.
For now, 6800 is where it's at, it's sooo good.


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

My understanding is that while the Dura Ace and Ultegra are of the same construction except the Dura Ace weights less. This is not the case when comparing 105 vs Ultegra, the mechanisms/springs differ a little. For serious cyclists Ultegra is considered the minimum set-up. If you are not riding in the saddle that long, 105 should get the job done, but if you plan on putting on the miles and doing so regularly, I'd spend the extra money and go Ultegra, especially the 6800 which Shimano just did a great job on. Nothing to do with the extra gear, but just about everything else. And if the $$$ is an issue, if you keep the bike set up for several years, the monthly difference is trivial.


----------



## LVbob (Mar 24, 2014)

Trek_5200 said:


> My understanding is that while the Dura Ace and Ultegra are of the same construction except the Dura Ace weights less. *This is not the case when comparing 105 vs Ultegra, the mechanisms/springs differ a little.* For serious cyclists Ultegra is considered the minimum set-up. If you are not riding in the saddle that long, 105 should get the job done, but if you plan on putting on the miles and doing so regularly, I'd spend the extra money and go Ultegra, especially the 6800 which Shimano just did a great job on. Nothing to do with the extra gear, but just about everything else. And if the $$$ is an issue, if you keep the bike set up for several years, the monthly difference is trivial.


The question is will the 5800 be closer in design to the 5700 or 6800.

I'm a new cyclist and got Ultegra for the most important reason: I like the looks more.


----------



## MMsRepBike (Apr 1, 2014)

5800 will both be constructed more like and look more like 6800 than 5700, no question.

5800 is going to be steller, probably best value groupo in history


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Trek_5200 said:


> My understanding is that while the Dura Ace and Ultegra are of the same construction except the Dura Ace weights less. This is not the case when comparing 105 vs Ultegra, the mechanisms/springs differ a little. For serious cyclists Ultegra is considered the minimum set-up. If you are not riding in the saddle that long, 105 should get the job done, but if you plan on putting on the miles and doing so regularly, I'd spend the extra money and go Ultegra, especially the 6800 which Shimano just did a great job on. Nothing to do with the extra gear, but just about everything else. And if the $$$ is an issue, if you keep the bike set up for several years, the monthly difference is trivial.


BS...just my opinion of course!

105 has been long recognized as the most durable of all the Shimano groupsets, while it's not the lightest it will last longer than the lightest. You can make some slight inexpensive improvements to the 105, mostly by changing the cables to Dura Ace 9000 will make the entire driveline as smooth as Dura Ace and Ultegra. Second change if you want a slightly faster rear shifting performance is simply swap out the 105 for the Ultegra rear derailleur which will cost about $35 more, and after those two changes call it a day.

There are people that I knew who raced on 105 in California and but a lot of miles on that stuff! So this stuff is much better than the bike snobs are willing to give it. Read this for more: Shimano 105 Review: The 10,000 Mile Test | Velo Quips And the cool thing about 105, if you crash and damage a shift/brake lever, it's a lot cheaper to replace than Dura Ace or Ultegra. And if you're not racing why would you want something more expensive like Ultegra? for what a measly 220 grams or 7.7 ounces? is 7.7 ounces worth $25 an ounce more? That $25 an ounce is on sale prices, it's more per ounce when not!

Again just to repeat, it's just an opinion.


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

froze said:


> BS...just my opinion of course!
> 
> 105 has been long recognized as the most durable of all the Shimano groupsets, while it's not the lightest it will last longer than the lightest. You can make some slight inexpensive improvements to the 105, mostly by changing the cables to Dura Ace 9000 will make the entire driveline as smooth as Dura Ace and Ultegra. Second change if you want a slightly faster rear shifting performance is simply swap out the 105 for the Ultegra rear derailleur which will cost about $35 more, and after those two changes call it a day.
> 
> ...


Well if you can't tell the difference then you should get the 105. 
Choosing a Shimano road groupset. Dura Ace, Ultegra or 105? - BikeRoar


----------



## Gregon2wheels (May 7, 2013)

Not sure why everyone thinks 105 is more durable than Ultegra. I have 1999 or 2000 9 speed Ultegra on my bike (itself a 1997). It's been raced a little, crashed a little, and has more than 20,000 miles on it (lots of miles initially then tapered off until last year). I have had to glue the plastic caps back over the shifters and I replaced the chainrings 1x. Otherwise it's just been cassettes and chains every 6 months to 2 years depending on how many miles and cables about every 2 - 3 years. 

The brakes are still the original Ultegra 600 8 speed from 1997.

Obviously this is a data point and not a durability study, but I'm not sure that anyone can say Ultegra has less durability than 105.

FWIW - for my next bike (probably this winter or next spring), I will consider 105 and Ultegra 11 speed drivetrains, both. Like the OP, I have been impressed with what I have read, and I'm not sure that I "need" Ultegra at this point in my riding.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Trek_5200 said:


> Well if you can't tell the difference then you should get the 105.
> Choosing a Shimano road groupset. Dura Ace, Ultegra or 105? - BikeRoar



Even the site you quoted said this: "Within the past two years, Shimano 105 has been improved to the point of feeling very similar to Shimano Ultegra, although still weighing slightly more." And how much is slightly more? 7.7 ounces to be exact yet people are willing to pay $25 to $30 an ounce more to get the lighter Ultegra. Not saying anything is wrong with buying Ultegra or Dura Ace, just saying that 105 is the sweet spot in the Shimano line with better durability as a whole, lower cost, and only slight more weight, and that's why 105 is known as the workhorse of the Shimano groups.

So there you have it. Funny how some people complain about the 105 group but those same people said Dura Ace was the best 8 years ago yet thats exactly what 105 is today...the Dura Ace of 8 years ago. All Dura Ace stuff does is trickle down to Ultegra and then 105.


----------



## Gregon2wheels (May 7, 2013)

Chain Reaction Cycles already has 105 listed on their website at $523 with availability in October. It's $300 cheaper than Ultegra. It has fewer chainring teeth and cassette choices right now. They list 2 different bolt circle dias so chainring changes might be difficult and the crank itself might be very different from Ultegra.


In my mind the biggest difference for an average rider will be STI shifter feel after 5000 miles. Brand new even Tiagra feels decent, but it falls off a lot faster than other shifters.


----------



## Herbie (Nov 12, 2010)

I'm wondering what the minimum standard is for a serious cyclist when it comes to frames and wheel sets. 

This statement about minimum standards is ridiculous


----------



## Gregon2wheels (May 7, 2013)

Min standard is defined by the individual. I have friends who are very competitive for National Age championships & who have disposable income. Ounces and Watts do make a difference to them. 15 years ago, IMO, chasing cat upgrades there was enough of a durability/performance difference to me to warrant Ultegra. Now with improved parts, few rain rides, no racing, a kid, & other considerations, my standards have shifted. 

Or do you have Shimano Tourney on all your bikes?


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

Do we have an apples to apples comparison of the 5800 vs 6800 weight wise? By apples to apples I mean same crankset length & chainrings and same cassette. Ignoring cables, wheels, etc.


----------



## SpeedNeeder (Aug 19, 2013)

deviousalex said:


> Do we have an apples to apples comparison of the 5800 vs 6800 weight wise? By apples to apples I mean same crankset length & chainrings and same cassette. Ignoring cables, wheels, etc.


Has anyone seen weight specifics for 105?
I have a Sora 9-speed now, and I would like to have 6800 10-speed so I don't have to buy a new rear wheel too, so maybe the 5800 stuff will give me that? I really just need a right brifter, a rear derailleur, a chain and a cog?
will all the cables be under the tape?
Maybe just buying a nashbar bike with ultegra 6700 on it and swapping parts would work better?
i don't want the whole group anyway, I have a BB30. 
So for a 10 speed wannabe, maybe the best question is 5800 or 6700?
sorry for the random thoughts!


----------



## Herbie (Nov 12, 2010)

While I agree that each individual cyclist will define their minimum standard that is quite different than saying that ultegra is the minimum for all serious cyclists. I assume you can see the difference.

I don't judge a rider by what bike they ride, or what group they use. I know of one frequent contributor to this forum who is a very serious cyclist and has a bike with sora.


----------



## SpeedNeeder (Aug 19, 2013)

SpeedNeeder said:


> So for a 10 speed wannabe, maybe the best question is 5800 or 6700?


So I just read that 5800 is 11 speed also - answers that question!


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Herbie said:


> I'm wondering what the minimum standard is for a serious cyclist when it comes to frames and wheel sets.
> 
> This statement about minimum standards is ridiculous


Depends is a person who races but not professionally a serious cyclist? How about a person that puts an average of 6,000 miles a year on the bike serious enough? Minimal standard is silly because I've seen people who ride about 2,000 miles a year if their lucky and have $1,500 wheelsets and $7,000 frames, are they considered serious because they can afford it? I know others that put in 8,000 miles a year and ride bikes they got used for $400 and ride on the stock rims worth maybe $150, are they not serious because they ride low cost stuff?

So yes, the statement about minimum standards is ludicrous.


----------



## SpeedNeeder (Aug 19, 2013)

Back to the original question. 
5800 vs 6800

i havent used/tried 5800, I can only imagine very similar feel and performance, though probably 1/2lb difference between the two.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

The Ultegra will probably shift a *little* bit better under certain situations (i.e. high power, etc). I have Dura Ace 7900 on one bike and 105 5700 on the other. The one that shifts better is the one wtih the less gummed up cables honestly. Both brand new the Dura Ace is slightly better.

The real question is, do you have an extra $150 or whatever as disposable income? If so, I'd definitely buy it. I wouldn't put off paying off credit card debt, bills, etc for it. Are you planning on racing? If so, race what you can afford to replace.


----------



## MMsRepBike (Apr 1, 2014)

SpeedNeeder said:


> Back to the original question.
> 5800 vs 6800
> 
> i havent used/tried 5800, I can only imagine very similar feel and performance, though probably 1/2lb difference between the two.


Nobody has tried 5800, it's not even released yet.


----------



## mannymerc (Nov 19, 2013)

froze said:


> Depends is a person who races but not professionally a serious cyclist? How about a person that puts an average of 6,000 miles a year on the bike serious enough? Minimal standard is silly because I've seen people who ride about 2,000 miles a year if their lucky and have $1,500 wheelsets and $7,000 frames, are they considered serious because they can afford it? I know others that put in 8,000 miles a year and ride bikes they got used for $400 and ride on the stock rims worth maybe $150, are they not serious because they ride low cost stuff?
> 
> So yes, the statement about minimum standards is ludicrous.



I agree with this guy, now days people consider other people pro when they ride expensive bikes/ wheels etc, is funny seen the reactions of people when I show up on my crit bike with a rival build, they look at me like I just dont belong in the group at all, the next group ride I show up on my fancy carbon 8000 dollar bike and they somehow think Im an awesome rider, and they all want to talk to me then, this bothers me to the point that I sometimes prefer to ride solo, is like people are forgetting the real reason why we ride...


----------



## mannymerc (Nov 19, 2013)

going back to the topic, I just pretty much buy the groupset that I think is a good price, 5800 wont be available for a few month, 6800 is here now, If I was going to get or build a bike now, I would prob. get what I can buy now, but again thats just me, if you decide to wait, 5800 Im sure will be a very good groupset.


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

How much is this bike worth? If' we're talking about a bike worth a few thousand which is not unusual when entry level Cannondales and Treks go fover $2k and more, then why scrimp on $200 to get a cheaper component group which if it only detracts a little from the riding experience is not worth it. At least with Ultegra to Dura Ace the price gap is significantly larger.


----------



## Herbie (Nov 12, 2010)

First of all the discussion of minimum standards is on topic since it related to an opinion on which group the op should get.

Trek, I'm glad you came back to further explain you comment that started this part of the discussion. 

I still think it ridiculous to define a "serious" rider by the level of equipment they choose to ride, or can afford. 

There are a lot of serious riders who do not use ultegra level or better.

As to the question or challenge to me, if all my bikes are tourney, the answer is no. Are they all ultegra or above, the answer is no. 

Am I a serious rider. You decide. I have several bikes. I have ridden almost 43,000 miles since I ietired July 2008. I have completed several endurance events. I may not be fast by the standards of this group, but I keep up with the faster riders in both clubs that I am a member of. I do at least one supported tour each year, and I have done several unsupported tours. 

I hope this clarifies my earlier statement, and I admit my first statement was sarcastic, and snarky for which I apologize.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

mannymerc said:


> I agree with this guy, now days people consider other people pro when they ride expensive bikes/ wheels etc, is funny seen the reactions of people when I show up on my crit bike with a rival build, they look at me like I just dont belong in the group at all, the next group ride I show up on my fancy carbon 8000 dollar bike and they somehow think Im an awesome rider, and they all want to talk to me then, this bothers me to the point that I sometimes prefer to ride solo, is like people are forgetting the real reason why we ride...


Hahahha so true. I've experienced the same thing depending on the wheelset I ride. If I roll up to race reg on my shallow alloy training wheels I don't even get a look but the other day I rolled up on my 56/65mm carbon tubulars and got tons of second looks.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

mannymerc said:


> I agree with this guy, now days people consider other people pro when they ride expensive bikes/ wheels etc, is funny seen the reactions of people when I show up on my crit bike with a rival build, they look at me like I just dont belong in the group at all, the next group ride I show up on my fancy carbon 8000 dollar bike and they somehow think Im an awesome rider, and they all want to talk to me then, this bothers me to the point that I sometimes prefer to ride solo, is like people are forgetting the real reason why we ride...


The sad thing is, this attitude has been going on for at least, and probably a lot longer, than I've been riding bikes for the last 40 years! My first venturing into the racing world was riding a Trek 412 with mid grade Suntour VxGT series stuff...I was the junkyard dog coming to the race. The funny thing was that bike did very well and I had virtually no problems with the driveline while others with their top of the line Campy stuff had all sorts of issues. I knew quite a few racers in Bakersfield CA too, and a lot of those guys back then rode 105 and not the higher end stuff, why? no sponsors was part of the problem, the other part of the equation was that in lower level racing there are a lot of crashes which means the rider doesn't want to be forking out a lot of money to get stuff fixed, so 105 answers both of those problems. There are also a lot of starting out racers who do use Tiagra (and aluminum frames) because they can't afford to go all out and crash replacement is very low.


----------



## SNS1938 (Aug 9, 2013)

deviousalex said:


> The Ultegra will probably shift a *little* bit better ... The real question is, do you have an extra $150 or whatever as disposable income? If so, I'd definitely buy it. I wouldn't put off paying off credit card debt, bills, etc for it...


Agreed. If the $200 difference is not an issue to you, then get 6800.


----------



## dd123 (Sep 14, 2012)

SNS1938 said:


> Agreed. If the $200 difference is not an issue to you, then get 6800.



Guys,

I am also debating my choices.
Here I am:

2014 Felt z5 ==> 5700
2013 Felt Z3 ==> 6700 +$650 more than 2014 Felt Z5
2014 Felt z3 ==> 6800 +$1150 more than 2014 Felt Z5.

Wondering if Felt 2014 Felt Z3 is a really worth $1150 more than Z5 with no frame/wheels upgrade but just the brifters + derailleurs..


I am a casual rider and leaning towards 5700 or wait few mos for new 5800...

Don't feel like plunking $3000 for Ultegra 6800 bike ... although tempted.

I ride 40-50 miles/week 

Thanks


----------



## SNS1938 (Aug 9, 2013)

dd123 said:


> Guys,
> 
> I am also debating my choices.
> Here I am:
> ...


I see 11 speed becoming the default group that my friends will all ride, and 10 going the way 9 did. Although I don't often swap wheels or use friend's spares, it does happen. I would not buy another 10 speed shimano bike now. Shimano went 10 speed in about 2003 with Dura-ace, and went 11 speed in 2013 ... so if you go 11 speed now, you should be 'current' for ten years ... 

Additionally, wheels that can only do 8/9/10 will surely be worth a lot less if you go to upgrade later and sell the old wheels, where as the 11 speed wheels do 8/9/10/11 (right? I'm sure they do, but haven't checked).

Lastly, the 5800 and 6800 group have the new 'standard' PCD for chain rings, which allows you to swap between compact and traditional without buying whole new cranks. Sure the rings are expensive, but I'd be that over the next year or two, you could get some from ebay with few miles on them and have a few options for riding in different terrain.

I'm on DA7800 right now, and will probably go 11 speed within the next 12-24 months. I'm only thinking of upgrading to 11, as it keeps me current, gives me the front ring options, and allows me to do it for a smaller cash outlay, as I get good money for my DA7800 now.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

First off from owning vintage bikes I can tell you right now that 8/9/10 speed wheels will not depreciate anymore then they would normally, why you scream at me? Because a lot of people have 8/9/10 speed bikes! In fact millions of people have these bikes, and they are not going down by the masses and dumping their bikes into the junk yards of this world. Also the same is true with ring gears. 

If you follow the above advice and start chasing down new technology as soon as it comes out for fear of your bike becoming obsolete then you will be cycling into the world of the money pit, because just as the 8/9/10 became "obsolete (it really isn't) then so will 11 speed when the 12 comes out or CVT's come out, and as soon as something new comes out you have to sell your bike and get the newest thing and keep up with the Jones's of your city's biking club.

My oldest bike is 30 years old, I can still get ring gears, gear clusters, cables, rims, tires, spokes, bottom brackets, brake pads, saddles, seat post, pedals, chains, stems, and handlebars; the only thing I can't get from an LBS is the Suntour Superbe components but I can find those on e-bay and other places a lot of time brand new unused after all those years! And if that was true, which it isn't of course, I would have stopped riding that bike, and others I have, years ago and would have had to buy a new bike every 8 to 10 years.

The cycling industry since the mass failures of bike companies and LBS's in the 80's changed the way they sold bikes, and that was to keep changing stuff so people would feel like they have to buy a new bike or component to keep up with the times thus keeping a revolving financial door open for bike companies and LBS's which is why they now have the highest level of profits in the history of the cycling industry. I have a 10 speed bike I bought last year and I'm not the least bit concerned about the components fading into the sunset never to be found again by the end of next year...or even the next 30 years. I see nos stuff on E-bay where someone found a warehouse full of stuff that was made in the 60's and 70's!

That 8/9/10 speed stuff will continued to be made brand spanking new for years to come because there are millions of bikes with that stuff and the industry wants to make money off of selling replacement parts for those millions of bikes as those parts fail.

Don't let fear tactics rule your decision. IF you want an 11 speed then get an 11 speed, but if you like another bike that has the 10 speed stuff on it better and the price is better then get it.


----------



## Trek_5200 (Apr 21, 2013)

froze said:


> First off from owning vintage bikes I can tell you right now that 8/9/10 speed wheels will not depreciate anymore then they would normally, why you scream at me? Because a lot of people have 8/9/10 speed bikes! In fact millions of people have these bikes, and they are not going down by the masses and dumping their bikes into the junk yards of this world. Also the same is true with ring gears.
> 
> If you follow the above advice and start chasing down new technology as soon as it comes out for fear of your bike becoming obsolete then you will be cycling into the world of the money pit, because just as the 8/9/10 became "obsolete (it really isn't) then so will 11 speed when the 12 comes out or CVT's come out, and as soon as something new comes out you have to sell your bike and get the newest thing and keep up with the Jones's of your city's biking club.
> 
> ...


Yep, If the 8 or 9 speed works or you keep it. The quest for more gears seems like a page out of Spinal Tap. If you are buying a new bike, you get what's offered, but the extra gear is not in itself a strong reason to upgrade.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Trek_5200 said:


> Yep, If the 8 or 9 speed works or you keep it. The quest for more gears seems like a page out of Spinal Tap. If you are buying a new bike, you get what's offered, but the extra gear is not in itself a strong reason to upgrade.


Exactly; and people need to keep in mind that at least since my first 10 speed bike which had a 5 speed rear cluster the first and last gear are still to this day of even 11 speed cluster have the same number of teeth! (of course you can get different higher or lower gears with more or less teeth depending on your fitness level, but it was like that back in the 5 speed cluster days too). So you gain nothing on the high or on the low end, all you gain is more gears in between. In fact back in the day of 5, 6, and 7 speed clusters they did the same thing that an 10 or 11 speed accomplishes today with what was known as a corncob cluster, but you had to be in really good shape especially if climbing mountain grades because first gear was more equal to 3rd gear. Here is what a 7 speed corncob gearing looked like: https://martin.dare-connect.org/images/corncob.JPG Effectively this accomplishes the same thing that the 11 speed does today, then to counter the fact that first gear was so small they used a smaller inside chainring gear. So all this stuff about maintaining cadence better didn't fall on deaf ears in the late 70's into the 80's either, it's just today they do it better...but is it better? the old wider chains lasted at least 3 times longer as did the gears then they do today.


----------

