# Z2: DI2 + Ultegra crank?



## Lagavulin12 (Sep 3, 2009)

From what I've read thus far on the DI2 stuff, it was designed to work well with DA 7900 and does not shift as smoothly with the Ultegra crank or cassette. I've also seen a couple of comments that the DI2 levers don't work well with the Ultegra calipers. A $5k DI2 is certainly tempting but with this combination will it be purely for show and suffer worse real world performance than even an all Ultegra groupo?


----------



## Superdave3T (May 11, 2009)

Lagavulin12 said:


> From what I've read thus far on the DI2 stuff, it was designed to work well with DA 7900 and does not shift as smoothly with the Ultegra crank or cassette. I've also seen a couple of comments that the DI2 levers don't work well with the Ultegra calipers. A $5k DI2 is certainly tempting but with this combination will it be purely for show and suffer worse real world performance than even an all Ultegra groupo?


For 2010 Ultegra has been redesigend to work with 7900 and 7970. It works very well in fact, but you are right that in 2009, the 7900 and 7970 would not function well with the older Ultegra parts.

The Z2 combo works flawlessly, I've been testing this set up for some time and the only difference in performance is measured on the gram scale.

-SD


----------



## Lagavulin12 (Sep 3, 2009)

Dave, thanks for the update. Really good to know. Any thoughts on how you would compare the Z2 combo to either all Ultegra or all DA DI2?


----------



## brentster (Jul 12, 2007)

Lagavulin12 said:


> Dave, thanks for the update. Really good to know. Any thoughts on how you would compare the Z2 combo to either all Ultegra or all DA DI2?


I think Dave summed it up pretty well when he said: 

"The Z2 combo works flawlessly, I've been testing this set up for some time and *the only difference in performance is measured on the gram scale*"


----------



## Lagavulin12 (Sep 3, 2009)

brentster said:


> I think Dave summed it up pretty well when he said:
> 
> "The Z2 combo works flawlessly, I've been testing this set up for some time and *the only difference in performance is measured on the gram scale*"


You think that he's saying that for the $3,000 more this bike costs for DI derailleurs and shifters over Ultegra or $2,400 for DI over DA7900 "the only difference is measured in grams." I would hope that for $3,000 or $2,400 there's more difference than that.


----------



## brentster (Jul 12, 2007)

Go for it.


----------



## Superdave3T (May 11, 2009)

Lagavulin12 said:


> You think that he's saying that for the $3,000 more this bike costs for DI derailleurs and shifters over Ultegra or $2,400 for DI over DA7900 "the only difference is measured in grams." I would hope that for $3,000 or $2,400 there's more difference than that.


The comparison I offered was between a homogenous Dura Ace 7970 Di2 group and one mixed with a few new Ultegra bits.

Di2 shiftes vs. any mechanical system is like comparing Porsche 4 piston 13" ABS carbon/ceramic brakes to mechanical drum brakes on a 1922 model T. The two systems barely qualify to be in the same category.

-SD


----------



## Pirx (Aug 9, 2009)

SuperdaveFelt said:


> Di2 shiftes vs. any mechanical system is like comparing Porsche 4 piston 13" ABS carbon/ceramic brakes to mechanical drum brakes on a 1922 model T. The two systems barely qualify to be in the same category.


:lol: :lol: :lol: 

Really? I wonder how in the world anybody could justify the huge amount of hyperbole in these statements. I doubt even Shimano representatives would go quite as wild as that.

Fact is, there are _no_ significant advantages in functionality that Di2 has over any high-end mechanical group. According to all of the third-party reviews I have seen, Di2 does not shift any more accurate, or any faster (in some situations it will in fact be slower) than its mechanical competitors. The placement and sensitivity of the shifters is reported to be problematic by some testers, and the system does not allow multiple shifts with a single command. 

I am hard pressed to find any value at all in the electronic group over the mechanical one, let alone anything that could even remotely justify the premium in cost.


----------



## Superdave3T (May 11, 2009)

Pirx said:


> :lol: :lol: :lol:
> 
> Really? I wonder how in the world anybody could justify the huge amount of hyperbole in these statements. I doubt even Shimano representatives would go quite as wild as that.
> 
> ...



I have read the same reviews. In fact, I read the same reviews 20 years ago when integrated shifters/brake levers were introduced. They were heavier, less precise, didn't allow you to shift through all 7 (or 8) gears at once, etc...

Boy they were right. Those downtube shifters will never be rivalled in weight, function, or performance...


----------



## BikeNerd2453 (Jul 4, 2005)

Pirx said:


> :lol: :lol: :lol:
> 
> Really? I wonder how in the world anybody could justify the huge amount of hyperbole in these statements. I doubt even Shimano representatives would go quite as wild as that.
> 
> ...


Have you actually ridden Di2, or are you basing your opinion strictly on reviews you've read?


----------



## Pirx (Aug 9, 2009)

SuperdaveFelt said:


> In fact, I read the same reviews 20 years ago when integrated shifters/brake levers were introduced. They were heavier, less precise, didn't allow you to shift through all 7 (or 8) gears at once, etc...
> 
> Boy they were right. Those downtube shifters will never be rivalled in weight, function, or performance...


Nonsense. The step from downtube shifters to integrated levers is in a different class entirely from the change from mechanical actuation to electric actuation. This comparison is just as far off as your car brake comparison. You seem to like that kind of thing...  

There is fundamentally no change in functionality at all associated with electronic shifting, period. If you feel differently, you may provide some arguments for such feeling, but please spare us another piece of hyperbole that is as empty of content as the previous two examples.

Look, I am not criticizing Di2 at all. What I am saying, however, is that the practical benefits of electronic shifting over classical mechanical systems is small to zero. Again, if you have arguments to the contrary, why don't you present them.

P.S.: By the way, it still is true that downtube shifters are not rivalled in weight by integrated shift/brake levers.


----------



## Pirx (Aug 9, 2009)

BikeNerd2453 said:


> Have you actually ridden Di2,


I have. Next question?


----------



## Superdave3T (May 11, 2009)

Pirx said:


> Nonsense. The step from downtube shifters to integrated levers is in a different class entirely from the change from mechanical actuation to electric actuation. This comparison is just as far off as your car brake comparison. You seem to like that kind of thing...
> 
> There is fundamentally no change in functionality at all associated with electronic shifting, period. If you feel differently, you may provide some arguments for such feeling, but please spare us another piece of hyperbole that is as empty of content as the previous two examples.
> 
> ...


I won't argue with you. For riders like yourself we'll continue to develop bikes with mechanical shifters. I'm committed to bringing Di2 to as many consumers as possible however which is why you'll see Di2 equipped bikes from FELT starting under $6K. I don't think you fully grasp the implications here however. Just look at the advantage in TT shifters. Races have already been WON because of the advantages of electric shifting.

Perhaps TODAY the gap is relatively small on a road bike (I disagree as fatgue plays a role in mechanical shifting, it does not with Di2) but the ability to mount shift points anywhere remotely on a bike, the possibility of wireless systems in the future, and the speed and accuracy of the front derailleur are in a class by themselves.

Today, Felt offers both mechanical and Di2 equipped models. I think they will both sell well in 2010.


----------



## Pirx (Aug 9, 2009)

SuperdaveFelt said:


> Races have already been WON because of the advantages of electric shifting.


Oh please... See, if you could actually back up your hyperbole with any facts, then we could talk. For example, in this case, you would have to provide evidence for your statement. You can't, so this is just more hot air. But, I'm a fair guy, so I'll tell you what you need to do:

First, explain what those supposed advantages of electric shifting could be, and back your statements up with sound reasoning rather than marketing babble,
Second, explain how, precisely, those advantages were instrumental in winning a race.



SuperdaveFelt said:


> Perhaps TODAY the gap is relatively small on a road bike (I disagree as fatgue plays a role in mechanical shifting, it does not with Di2) but the ability to mount shift points anywhere remotely on a bike, the possibility of wireless systems in the future, and the speed and accuracy of the front derailleur are in a class by themselves.


Well, that's at least an attempt at some arguments. Let's see:

Role of fatigue: You would have to cite evidence of that. I contend that, at least with the current incarnation of Di2 shifters, it is easier to mis-shift, precisely because of the low forces required. While it is certainly possible that mis-shfts happen with a mechanical system for the opposite reason, I really do not know what the balance is.
Mounting shift points anywhere: yes, no doubt, that is a genuine advantage of electric shifting for certain applications. I do not think it buys you much, if anything, for a standard road bike, but TT bikes and tri-bikes are excellent candidates.
Wireless: Nice, but we're not there yet. We were discussing Di2, not future systems.
Speed and accuracy of front derailleur: Fact is, there is no difference in speed, at least none that I could find (comparing to my Campy SR, but I trust that Dura Ace will shift more or less just as nicely); I note that all objective reviews I have seen say the same. Accuracy: No idea what this could even mean; I mean, after decades of manufacturers telling people how each new generation of derailleurs shifted even more precisely than the previous one, how accurate do you think you can get? In any case, my SR derailleurs shift perfectly accurate every time (and again, I don't think Dura Ace will be any different in that respect). Oh, and I never trim my FD either, as long as I stay off the largest cog (so, if I restrict myself to the ten cogs available to Shimano groups, I don't need to trim, ever ).


----------



## Superdave3T (May 11, 2009)

Pirx said:


> Oh please... See, if you could actually back up your hyperbole with any facts, then we could talk. For example, in this case, you would have to provide evidence for your statement. You can't, so this is just more hot air. But, I'm a fair guy, so I'll tell you what you need to do:
> 
> First, explain what those supposed advantages of electric shifting could be, and back your statements up with sound reasoning rather than marketing babble,
> Second, explain how, precisely, those advantages were instrumental in winning a race.
> ...


The earliest example that I've heard cited repeatedly is when Chris Boardman won the 1997 prologue by 2 seconds. There was a short punchy climb that had riders on the base bars and even using the small chainring. Despite only 7.X km in length, his ability to shift down and back up through his cassette range whilst out of the saddle, cresting the climb and quickly returning to his 56kph speed is credited for the 2 second margin of victory as the lumbering Ullrich's cadence dipped into the low 60s and he slowly ground a huge gear back to speed. Despite Ullrich's huge motor and higher maximum speed technology and a willingness to embrace it won the day. Taking nothing away from Chris' performance of course.

I won't get into the whos of today, but the riders I've spoken with feel as though it is a huge advantage on team time trial stages as well. Vaughters just about insists upon it and would accept our TT bikes we provide the Garmin team to be Di2 compatible only if it can be done to further optimize the bikes.

I won't argue there is no question there is room in the market for mechanical shifters, That is why we developed ~100 models with standard shifters and 4 with Dura Ace Di2. I just think the future will be electric. Your arguments on shifter buttom placement and the fact wireless isn't available today will be solved in the near future I suspect, just as it has with the ability to change channels on a television, talk on a phone from just about anywhere on earth, and record our movements with GPS.

You mentioned your bike doesn't need to be trimmed "as long as you don't use the largest cog." Shimano knows how to keep the front derailleur lined up so it will ALWAYS be able to use the largest cog. Further, because the shift points are programmed, it could be possible to program your Di2 to move through SR 11 speed cassettes, MTB 9 speed cassettes. The system is in its infancy and the potential seemingly far greater than current mechanical systems. I won't deny I have the benefit of seeing, testing and learning about advancements before consumers investigate and validate them, and the fear of Di2 is similar to when hydraullic brakes became a mainstay on modern MTB before consumers and some dealers were ready to let go of mechanical systems.

-SD


----------



## Pirx (Aug 9, 2009)

SuperdaveFelt said:


> his ability to shift down and back up through his cassette range whilst out of the saddle, cresting the climb and quickly returning to his 56kph speed is credited for the 2 second margin of victory


Sorry, but that's just guesswork. There's really no real evidence here of the contribution of Di2 to his victory. Another question to ask would be, what percentage of riders in teams riding Shimano groups use Di2 by now? Let's say, in the various stages of the TdF? If there was such a clear advantage as you postulate, the answer would have to be all of them. I don't know what the percentage is, but I believe it's far less than 100%. Why do you think that is?



SuperdaveFelt said:


> You mentioned your bike doesn't need to be trimmed "as long as you don't use the largest cog." Shimano knows how to keep the front derailleur lined up so it will ALWAYS be able to use the largest cog.


Oh, I am _able_ to use all of my cogs just fine, of course, and fully cross-chained if I want to. I just need to trim the FD one click if I'm in my largest cog, and only if I insist on my drivetrain remaining silent. So, if I was in a race, and couldn't be bothered trimming the FD at a particular point in time, I could hammer on just fine without any trim.

Overall, though, I'm not here to deny that electric shifting can have advantages over mechanical systems. Heck, once Campy starts selling their electric system, I might even give it a try. However, it is clear to me that, at this point in time, the benefits of electric shifting are really incremental, certainly for non-professional riders. Integrated brake-shift levers, on the other hand, had immediate and clear benefits (the ability to keep your hands on the bars) to every rider, and were in that sense much more revolutionary. In the long run, as systems improve and prices come down, it may well be that electric shifting will become the norm, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.


----------



## Lagavulin12 (Sep 3, 2009)

Pirx said:


> Oh please...


Can't disagree with what Dave's saying.

Yesterday I got to do 12 miles with DI2 on a Madone 6.9. If I was still racing seriously I would certainly strongly consider it. Not being able to do cog dumps is an issue, but otherwise it's definitely smoother, quicker, and more accurate than DA7900. Then again, when it comes to a real cog dump downtube still rules and is on the 11 with my hands back on the bars while others are still shifting their STI's.

For the fast club rides and occasional cat 3 races I'm now doing I don't know that it's worth the current cost diff (though I did tell my Felt LBS that I would pay a bit extra for a Z2 to give him, Felt, and DI2 some pub if he can give me a smokin hot deal on it).


----------



## Lagavulin12 (Sep 3, 2009)

Pirx said:


> Sorry, but that's just guesswork. There's really no real evidence here of the contribution of Di2 to his victory. Another question to ask would be, what percentage of riders in teams riding Shimano groups use Di2 by now? Let's say, in the various stages of the TdF? If there was such a clear advantage as you postulate, the answer would have to be all of them. I don't know what the percentage is, but I believe it's far less than 100%. Why do you think that is?


This is the type of technology that many riders want to see proven over time to make sure that it's not going to go haywire in the middle of a race. This is a much higher risk change in technology than moving shifters up to the bars. They have to know that it's bulletproof - and that will take a few years. Even club riders are nervous about using it on 25mi Wed night rides until they see it time proven.


----------



## Pirx (Aug 9, 2009)

Lagavulin12 said:


> Then again, when it comes to a real cog dump downtube still rules and is on the 11 with my hands back on the bars while others are still shifting their STI's.


Well, yeah, if they're using a Shimano product. I they rode a Campy group, they could do full cog dumps with their Ergo levers...


----------



## elmar schrauth (Feb 19, 2007)

http://www.rouesartisanales.com/article-53428804.html#more-53428804


----------

