If Di2 and mechanical were the same price..
- Thread starter mustang1
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Smokin Joe
Squire
- Location
- Bare headed cyclist, Smoker
This is a forum comprised mainly of people well past their youth, who remember a "Golden age" when things were better, cheaper and simpler. They were not, of course. Just that we were young, fit, in our prime, and that's where our best memories are.
Change is driven by the young, to whom charging equipment is second nature because that is what they've grown up with and who don't give a rat's arse about antiquated frame materials, down tube shifters and brooks saddles.
Every innovation in bicycle has been met with fierce opposition, as anyone who was around when a sixth sprocket was added to the back wheel will tell you. Thank the lord for the innovators and the early adopters who ignore the old coffin dodgers of every generation, because without them we'd still be riding penny farthings with solid tyres.
Change is driven by the young, to whom charging equipment is second nature because that is what they've grown up with and who don't give a rat's arse about antiquated frame materials, down tube shifters and brooks saddles.
Every innovation in bicycle has been met with fierce opposition, as anyone who was around when a sixth sprocket was added to the back wheel will tell you. Thank the lord for the innovators and the early adopters who ignore the old coffin dodgers of every generation, because without them we'd still be riding penny farthings with solid tyres.
matticus
Guru
Do people still RIDE bicycles? How quaint! Have you people not heard of engines? Let alone motors!?!
Mine are all screwed to the wall (the nice ones, anyway.)
Mine are all screwed to the wall (the nice ones, anyway.)
Fredo76
Über Member
- Location
- Española, NM
As a software engineer and system administrator in a previous life, it's a matter of principle for me. Bicycles don't need software, so I won't have ANY of that CRAP on one of mine. It's ok for speedometers, and yes, I have a 'smart' phone, and appreciate modern medicine, etc.
I don't care who else uses software on their bicycles, btw. I just won't, myself, because I know a lot about........software.
I don't care who else uses software on their bicycles, btw. I just won't, myself, because I know a lot about........software.
It certainly wasn't a dig at you!
Being a failed tech bro I've always been into the joins between cycling and tech so was a relatively early adopter of electronic group sets, and yes it was Shimano Di2. Since then I've had another Di2 equipped bike (a TT bike), refitted my original Di2 groupset to another frame post-collision and now my latest bike is fitted with SRAM Red eTap AXS, so I've got an opinion for sure. For balance my old-reliable has had various mechanical Shimano groupsets fitted and I've even got a Rohloff flat-bar tourer if we want to do derailleur vs hub shoot-off.
I really had been meaning to open a thread like this for a while because, while some of the criticisms are valid, I think there's an element of groupthink across the forum that has a whiff of the old git about it. I'm lacking the time to go full Benstead on the subject so here's my TL;DR;
Gearing in general - different strokes for different folks. Different solutions work for different disciplines and budgets.
Electronic gears in general - more reliable and tougher than you think. Great indexing and shifting consistency. Shifting up to big ring easier 😜. Can customise shifting - i.e. let the software manage big ring shifts. Too expensive. Needs some standard/open protocols. Requires charging. Problems generally can't be repaired in the field. Diagnosing problems can be difficult. Obsolescence more of an issue ATM.
Mechanical derailleurs in general - not as reliable as you think (looking at you brifters!). Modern indexing is good but can be tricky to set up. Cost-effective. Some ability to repair in the field and diagnosing issues usually easier.
Shimano Di2 - first viable electronic groupset. Single battery solution gives loooong battery life but can't be charged away from bike. Great shifting performance. 4 paddles for shifts is very flexible and configurable. Wired (or partially wired) system increases damage risk and reduces reliability IMO. Typical garbage Shimano documentation. Awful software. Shimano closed protocols (see recent hammerhead integration issue).
SRAM eTap - Absolutely no wires. Double battery solution requires charging more frequently but can be done away from the bike - very neat. Had zero problems with water-ingress etc. Also great shifting (maybe slightly less good than Shimano?). Two paddle shifters are less flexible and "double tap" not for everyone. Documentation much more consumer focused and better software. Better and easier 'soft' configuration options. Potential for more open and standard hardware/software stack. Confusing product lineup and inter-generation compatibility.
Campag eps - 🤷♂️
Rohloff - "wow, you fitted a coffee grinder to your rear wheel!"
As someone who has Di2, eTap, Mechanical Force and Mechanical 105 on their fleet I agree with this. I will add that electronic shifting on a bad weather bike has been a revelation, it just works, no cables to seize up.
Didn't Campagnolo solve that issue 20 years ago with Chorus and above. Edit. Just the same in the mountain biking with XT And if you could afford it XTR. 😄
Last edited:
matticus
Guru
As a software engineer and system administrator in a previous life, it's a matter of principle for me. Bicycles don't need software, so I won't have ANY of that CRAP on one of mine. It's ok for speedometers, and yes, I have a 'smart' phone, and appreciate modern medicine, etc.
I don't care who else uses software on their bicycles, btw. I just won't, myself, because I know a lot about........software.
Having worked in IT myself, I think I'm much the same; I try to avoid it where sensible in my normal life!
But it's all about what's appropriate for a specific circumstance: electrics work well for a handlebar GPS (but paper is better for backup maps). I always knock on doors before searching around for a doorbell. Internet works well for forums, email, searching for obscure info or purchases, interactives stuffs ... but radio waves work best for music in my kitchen.
etc etc ...
And you can't beat a physical hug!!!
Ian H
Ancient randonneur
We have a non-electric door-bell.
And I'll stick at shaking hands with you, thanks.
steverob
Guru
- Location
- Buckinghamshire
If the prices were the same, I would go for electronic gearing without a doubt. At current price differentials however, I'd stay with mechanical.
I've ridden two bikes equipped with Di2, both of them loaners for the purposes of a single ride and quite enjoyed the experience, but I'm not sure where the sweet spot of value would be for me (£50 more, £100, £200?) but I'm certain there is one and it'll probably only come to light when I purchase my next bike, which is probably a few years off yet - current main bike was bought in 2014 and is still seemingly coping with everything I throw at it.
As for everyone saying that they'd rather stick with mechanical because it's easier to fix; that's all well and good for those of you who are capable in that regard, but for people like me who are inept at that sort of thing, if my gearing failed on a bleak and windy moor, I'd be having to get a lift to the nearest LBS regardless of it being mechanical or electronic!
I've ridden two bikes equipped with Di2, both of them loaners for the purposes of a single ride and quite enjoyed the experience, but I'm not sure where the sweet spot of value would be for me (£50 more, £100, £200?) but I'm certain there is one and it'll probably only come to light when I purchase my next bike, which is probably a few years off yet - current main bike was bought in 2014 and is still seemingly coping with everything I throw at it.
As for everyone saying that they'd rather stick with mechanical because it's easier to fix; that's all well and good for those of you who are capable in that regard, but for people like me who are inept at that sort of thing, if my gearing failed on a bleak and windy moor, I'd be having to get a lift to the nearest LBS regardless of it being mechanical or electronic!
Of course that's assuming your LBS has the skillset and parts to do so... which if nothing else are likely to be far more affected by supply chain issues since it's all still relatively niche and propriatory; unlike a length of cable inner for example which will fit pretty much any mech.
Nopenopenopenopenope
Indeed, although there's an important differentiation between change that's driven by genuine improvement / legitimate necessity, and the need to change for the sake of it to keep people buying..
Chislenko
Veteran
Your last line sums up my feelings on all "tech"
My Windows xp computer still works perfectly, does everything I want from a computer but basically every organisation is forcing me to buy "the latest version" by withdrawing support for said operating system.
Smokin Joe
Squire
- Location
- Bare headed cyclist, Smoker
Faster, more precise gear shifts are important to those who ride competitively, whether that's with a number on their back, in a sportive or just out for a fast ride with their mates.
You don't have to have it, mechanical will still be around long after all here have gone. Those who buy it are not doing so because they are gullible or have more money than sense, but because it suits their requirements.
Maybe the question to ask is if you are given Di2 for free would you use it?
As a software engineer and system administrator in a previous life, it's a matter of principle for me. Bicycles don't need software, so I won't have ANY of that CRAP on one of mine. It's ok for speedometers, and yes, I have a 'smart' phone, and appreciate modern medicine, etc.
I don't care who else uses software on their bicycles, btw. I just won't, myself, because I know a lot about........software.
Software is no different to any other manufactured product - ultimately there's a tension between cost, reliability and complexity. To say all software is CRAP is simplistic and misleading. Compared to almost any physical product it's certainly complex and likely to contain flaws, but those flaws (a) will often not be critical to the function and (b) can usually be corrected. If the flaws are critical to the function then that's a failure of testing, which is no different to supplying a bike with a crap seatpost clamp (Canyon) or dodgy hubs (Zipp).
The code to respond to a small set of bluetooth messages and move a pair of stepper motors isn't especially complex when compared with most software systems, although realtime "things" code has its own challenges. I'd suggest that the more likely causes of failure of an electronic system would be the hardware; in order of most to least likely to break, the battery, stepper motors and then changer switches.
So, taking my complaint earlier about brifters and using anecdote as evidence
, I have two broken example brifters in my parts bin - Ultegra and Dura Ace. The Ultegra seems to have some snapped internal plastic and the Dura-Ace I think has lost a spring. I also have a "repaired" Ultegra where a return spring had popped out but I was able to reseat after a good deal of swearing. Bear in mind these are regarded as not repairable by Shimano. I'd recommend looking inside a brifter if you get the chance. Alongside some mechanical complexity, a lot of the plastic is no better than decent toy grade. Even at the top end, they're built to a price. They might be more reliable than a pair of microswitches, but then again they might not.So the answer to that is to drop the indexing and go back to downtube shifters, which is just fine and no one is stopping you. You'll be making a choice to swap convenience (indexing) and I'd argue safety (keeping both hands on the bars while shifting) for simplicity and probably cost. Or go fixed. Even cheaper, more reliable and less complexity, but possibly less functionality, especially if you've got "built to a price" knees like mine.
My long-winded argument here is that electronic groupsets aren't a standalone cycling revolution/threat to humanity, but are just another point on the cost vs function spectrum of cycling. I think they get criticised unfairly and without evidence on reliability, where mechanical groupsets get a free pass in comparison. I think they have functional benefits over mechanical systems. I completely accept that they're expensive and the benefits may not justify the price to many people.
