[Closed] Di2 XTR

I hope they just use common sense and don't go smaller than an 11T on the bottom of the cassette. 11-42 is fine with a normal freeub body.

Quite happy to give electric a go though. It was awesome on the road bikes I have tried it on.

Ideal for my Mrs too, who expects digital performance from an analogue setup!

If they make Di2 hub gears my plan will be complete

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

There's a flat bar shifter for Alfine Di2, too:

[img] ?width=310&height=310[/img]

Sweet. I won't google the cost....

There's a flat bar shifter for Alfine Di2, too:

That's a truly incredible piece of engineering.

Had to check, but yes in 1992, mavic introduced the Zap. An electric derallieur system. Mongoose had a pic of it on an AMP equipped " super bike " at the time. Looked very cool - and never took off until Di2

Anyway my new dream bike would be a Shand stoater plus with alfine di2 and gates belt drive mmmm....

Why is it better than cable actuated?

Because cables get grungy and performance deteriorates.

So what happens when your battery dies?

You smack yourself in the face for being an idiot and ignoring the warning signs for the last few hundred miles and not charging the battery.

re: that Di2 Alfine: counts going up to 11 always make me feel like it's really, like, rock and roll, man 🙂

You smack yourself in the face for being an idiot and ignoring the warning signs for the last few hundred miles and not charging the battery.

What if it fails suddenly, or you're on an epic trip where there's no electricity? And wouldn't a spare cable be a tad lighter than a battery charger and lead?

It's different, not trying to compete. I reckon Shimano will stick with 2x11, slightly narrower cassette than XX1, [b]no proprietary freehub[/b] body, but go electronic. Can't see they'll compete directly with XX1.

Dont we already know about the new freehub standard, wasnt it American Classic who showed a new hub with the wider XTR11 freehub at one of the recent shows?

cybicle - Member

you're on an epic trip where there's no electricity?

Then you're a moron for not charging it first. Much the same as going on an epic trip with cable gears and not checking that it all works before you leave.

MSP - Member
Anyway my new dream bike would be a Shand stoater plus with alfine di2 and gates belt drive mmmm....

Yes, one of my dream bikes too, just have to ask him to not put the gopping shand decals on it

Northwind - Member

Then you're a moron for not charging it first. Much the same as going on an epic trip with cable gears and not checking that it all works before you leave.

Lot easier to check a battery too. Gear cables can snap/fray.

[i]you're on an epic trip where there's no electricity[/i]

I suspect that people on Epic trips where there's no electricity were not high on the list of possible users for this type of technology.

In much the same way that manufacturers of electric vehicles tend to target those markets where there's mains electricity available.

Then you're a moron for not charging it first.

I see you conveniently avoided my first question. Given the built in obsolescence of virtually everything these days, I think it's reasonable to assume that any battery would deteriorate fairly quickly over time, and become unreliable. And then be rather expensive to replace.

Lots more to go wrong with an electronic system; as people have pointed out, it's a solution to a non-existent 'problem'. A boon to professional racers at best, a neat method of fool and money separation more generally.

A bicycle for me, is a mechanical device which can give me freedom to explore. The idea of needing to be within a certain distance of a suitable charging point kind of negates that ideal.

So what happens when your battery dies?

Battery lasts aaaages, so it's less of an issue. It's probably less reliable than cables (although cables have let me down a couple of times in 20-odd years) so I don't think I'd use it on a bike that I was goingto take through the remote wilderness.

I don't often do that these days of course. I'm unlikely to ever buy Di2 purely on grounds of cost.

[i]The idea of needing to be within a certain distance of a suitable charging point kind of negates that ideal. [/i]

It may be an ideal for you. Most of us do a couple of hours of a weeknight and half a day Saturday or Sunday.

The reality is that there's a vanishingly small percentage of cyclists who are going to start a ride with a full charge on their Di2 and run the battery flat before they get back to their house/somewhere else with the charger.

"New" Enduro was being raced for years in that format in France, and on motorbikes even longer before that. It's you weird long distance types that misappropriated the term, now it's been "taken back".

jameso - Member

Just a passing comment interest, no more..

Same here, just babbling.

cybicle - Member

Given the built in obsolescence of virtually everything these days, I think it's reasonable to assume that any battery would deteriorate fairly quickly over time, and become unreliable.

You can assume anything you like, but based on no experience and no direct knowledge of the product in question it's not likely to be very useful. Lots of people out there using Di2 already, where is the epidemic of failed batteries?

Dont we already know about the new freehub standard, wasnt it American Classic who showed a new hub with the wider XTR11 freehub at one of the recent shows?

They've done a new MTB hub with 11 speed frehub body certainly, which is what my assumption was based on!

The idea of needing to be within a certain distance of a suitable charging point kind of negates that ideal.

That distance is about 5000 miles. So yes, if you're likely to be more than 5000 miles away from mains power it's not for you. If you're also an oaf who forgets to breathe periodically then you may struggle with the need to charge the battery biannually.

No one's pretending it's the best thing ever, or that it'll solve third world hunger, or that it 'solves' any problem (must it!?), the hand wringing is rather unnecessary. It's lighter, it's nice to use and has the potential to be more reliable.

See also: disc brakes, tubeless tyres, suspension forks, rear shocks, dropper posts, carbon frames etc etc etc

You can assume anything you like, but based on no experience and no direct knowledge of the product in question it's not likely to be very useful. Lots of people out there using Di2 already, where is the epidemic of failed batteries?

My comments were about posing a theoretical counter to the comment regarding gungy cables. As to the failings of the Di2 system;

have also repaired many Di2 bikes with "issues" including crash damaged components (normally rear derailleur) and firmware incompatability - normally where the customer has replaced a damaged component with a new item bought from on-line retailer and installed 'at home'

also seen torn cables, damaged shifters and battery charging issues

Real world experience such as this is sufficient to convince me (and I'd imagine many others) that Di2 is unnecessary and pointless for the kind of riding I do. As for cables; in over 25 years of riding mountain bikes, I've never had a cable fail on me. And I'm not the most fastidious when it comes to bike maintenance.

That distance is about 5000 miles. So yes, if you're likely to be more than 5000 miles away from mains power it's not for you.

You could be just 5 miles from a source of electricity. However, if that 5 miles involves very difficult terrain or adverse weather conditions, the inability to sort out the issue at the roadside could prove disastrous.

the hand wringing is rather unnecessary

Hand wringing? Where? Simply pointing out the failings of a system is hardly 'hand wringing'. Di2 offers 'benefits' (whatever they may be) to a relatively tiny number of cyclists. It's not a product that will benefit the majority. It's development and production undoubtedly involves new levels of resource exploitation which are hardly positive for the environment (the production of bicycles is already negatively exploitative in global terms). Should we not be considering such issues?

If you're also an oaf who forgets to breathe periodically then you may struggle with the need to change gears mechanically.

I believe the appropriate term here is 'FTFY'. 😉

You still have to change gears manually, just they're actuated by servos rather than cables.

I've never had a cable fail on me

Good for you, I have twice, first time it destroyed a Dura Ace STI lever, second was just a pain.

You could be just 5 miles from a source of electricity. However, if that 5 miles involves very difficult terrain or adverse weather conditions, the inability to sort out the issue at the roadside could prove disastrous.

Again though, the battery holds a charge for thousands of miles, so to have let it get to the last 5 you deserve everything you get. Seriously, that argument is on par with pneumatic tyres being a bad idea because they lose pressure during the course of a ride. Except a Di2 battery takes a lot longer to go flat.

Di2 offers 'benefits' (whatever they may be) to a relatively tiny number of cyclists.

No, it offers benefits to all, as I laid out in my last post. Whether those are offset by any disadvantages (real or perceived) is your judgement call.

It's development and production undoubtedly involves new levels of resource exploitation which are hardly positive for the environment (the production of bicycles is already negatively exploitative in global terms).

New member... are you Edukator?

Should we not be considering such issues?

As you love your assumed sweeping generalisations I'll go for one here... the "resource exploitation" derived from the development of the entire XTR Di2 groupset is probably about 1/1000000000th of what China do on a daily basis.

If you want to dwell on those issues you go right ahead, I shalln't.

njee20; you seem like the sort of person for whom Di2 is ideal. But I must take issue with your claim that "it offers benefits to all", as I simply don't see how a relatively very expensive system is of any real benefit to anyone but professional racers and those with relatively high levels of disposable income. I hardly see how an expensive proprietary electronic gear shifting system would be of benefit to someone say in rural Africa or India, people who would need a bicycle for transport etc. And There are an awful lot more people like that on this planet, than 'Weekend Warriors' with loads of spare cash to splash on toys.

the "resource exploitation" derived from the development of the entire XTR Di2 groupset is probably about 1/1000000000th of what China do on a daily basis.

You have to see the bigger picture. It's still adding to consumption and exploitation of resources. Something we're constantly told is bad M'kay.

You could be just 5 miles from a source of electricity. However, if that 5 miles involves very difficult terrain or adverse weather conditions, the inability to sort out the issue at the roadside could prove disastrous.

You could also break a chain, put the rear mech into the back wheel (snapping mech and a few spokes making the wheel unrideable) or simply snap a gear cable. I don't know how many people carry a spare gear cable with them, but I know I and all of my riding mates don't.

I'm still planning on doing the Tour Divide next year and I'll be using my niner which has Di2 fitted. I'm thinking I'll take a spare battery but apart from that, it should be fine. Jameso on here has done it (and placed highly) so he's probably best positioned to comment on whether he'd use it or not.

It's not for everybody like Campag isn't for everybody, or full suspension and what not. I do believe that bikes should be as simple as possible - Mans most efficient machine - but I also like cool stuff and Di2 is cool (look at the self trimming front mech - teh awesomez). I happen to think the dual front and rear lock out lever on Fox forks and shocks is completely pointless and makes bikes overcomplicated, but some people will love it and sing its praises.

I cycled to and from work yesterday on my none Di2'd niner and had issues with shifting from a gunged up gear cable (a result of riding swinley on Sunday). Had I been on my other bike, I'd have had no such problems.

Different strokes for different folks

But I must take issue with your claim that "it offers benefits to all", as I simply don't see how a relatively very expensive system is of any real benefit to anyone but professional racers and those with relatively high levels of disposable income. I hardly see how an expensive proprietary electronic gear shifting system would be of benefit to someone say in rural Africa or India, people who would need a bicycle for transport etc. And There are an awful lot more people like that on this planet, than 'Weekend Warriors' with loads of spare cash to splash on toys.

There are benefits for everyone. It is lighter, it's nicer to use (subjective I'll concede) and it has the potential to be more reliable/durable.

I am not saying that Di2 is better than mechanical, just that there are benefits. For many people the negatives will outweigh those benefits - cost being chief among them, but that doesn't negate the fact there [i]are [/i]benefits to the system.

Call me selfish, but when I'm considering a purchase, be it bike, car, electronic, clothing, food, I'm not really thinking about the people in Africa or India, and I'm really struggling with the relevance of your point...? Should Shimano not be investing in Di2 because those on the Indian sub-continent who ride bikes won't be using it? 😕

I hardly see how an expensive proprietary electronic gear shifting system would be of benefit to someone say in rural Africa or India, people who would need a bicycle for transport etc

Do you honestly believe this is the target market?

You have to see the bigger picture. It's still adding to consumption and exploitation of resources. Something we're constantly told is bad M'kay.

How do you think the laptop/Phone your typing on is made exactly? Fairydust?

You could also break a chain, put the rear mech into the back wheel (snapping mech and a few spokes making the wheel unrideable) or simply snap a gear cable. I don't know how many people carry a spare gear cable with them, but I know I and all of my riding mates don't.

None of those issues would pose an insurmountable problem for in experienced cycle tourist with a few spare links, a chain tool and few spare spokes. But we're going round in circles now; you could carry spare batteries (which of course would add to the load,not simply replace other things), the whole electronic system could fail, a frame could snap etc. Di2 would however present more potential issues than already exist.

None of the arguments presented here in favour of Di2 convince me that it's the 'way forward'. I am however more convinced that it's yet another product aimed at making profit from those who need their cycling to be high tech and sophisticated. Which in this regard, cycling doesn't need to be. If you need Di2 to make your biking more enjoyable, then buy it. I'll stick to my low-tech bike, and continue to enjoy riding it.

I'll stick to my low-tech bike, and continue to enjoy riding it.

I always found a dandy horse rather tiring and uncomfortable.

New member... are you Edukator?

Someone else was a naysayer against Di2 back in the day.....

Should Shimano not be investing in Di2 because those on the Indian sub-continent who ride bikes won't be using it?

I'd prefer it if they invested more in improving the environmental and social impact of the whole industry, personally. I'm all for innovation, however I'd prefer it if it want' exclusive to making cycling more accessible as a whole. See my thread on accessibility for an expansion on this theme. I don't see how making more and more expensive toys achieves this.

There are benefits for everyone

Call me selfish, but when I'm considering a purchase, be it bike, car, electronic, clothing, food, I'm not really thinking about the people in Africa or India

I'm a bit confused here. So, are you saying you'd prefer it if the cycling industry concentrated only on your personal needs?

How do you think the laptop/Phone your typing on is made exactly? Fairydust?

So, the answer is more electronic stuff?

Do you honestly believe this is the target market?

No, I'm merely expressing my own views that stuff like Di2 doesn't 'benefit' the greater cycling world in the way some might claim.

It is an interesting discussion.

Di2 is bad because starving children in Africa?

Have we stumbled upon a hither-to unsuspected truth that bike companies are in it for the money? That they try and produce stuff that people will want to buy? That they know that if a product doesn't work well enough for the price point, it won't sell and they won't make money?

It's... OMG! Capitalism!

Shit the bed.

I simply don't see how a relatively very expensive system is of any real benefit to anyone but professional racers and those with relatively high levels of disposable income

Fair point. The only people who this might benefit are professional racers and anyone who's got enough disposable income to be considering high-end groupsets.

"All of A is in A." Good work, Sherlock.

None of those issues would pose an insurmountable problem for in experienced cycle tourist with a few spare links, a chain tool and few spare spokes

Yes BUT the point is, it isn't designed for experienced (or inexperienced) cycle tourists is it.

If cost were not an issue, imagine a commuter bike with di2 alfine fitted. No cable stretch, minimal chain wear, no rear/front mech alignment issues, no adjustments needed, no jockey wheel wear, no mech to snap off. Just a bit of lube on the chain every now and again (or fit a Gates belt and do away with that) and a charge of the battery twice a year. Surely that's a benefit?

Apply those benefits to someone on a reasonably sized tour. Again, those same benefits apply no? I'm sure if needed you could rig up an exposure hub to charge not only your light and Garmin, but your Di2 battery as well.

Does it over complicate something that shouldn't be complicated? Maybe. Does it cost a lot more than a bike should cost? possibly. Is it mega awesome? Damn straight...

If cost were not an issue, imagine a commuter bike with di2 alfine fitted. No cable stretch, minimal chain wear, no rear/front mech alignment issues, no adjustments needed, no jockey wheel wear, no mech to snap off. Just a bit of lube on the chain every now and again (or fit a Gates belt and do away with that) and a charge of the battery twice a year. Surely that's a benefit?

Hear, hear! Add in a hub dynamo on the front, perhaps even one that could trickle charge the battery during daylight hours, as you point out and you've got pretty much my dream 'bike as a means of transport' bike.

Oh, and full length mudguards, obviously.

you could rig up an exposure hub to charge not only your light and Garmin, but your Di2 battery as well.

TAKE MY MONEY! God damm you!

My work here is done

*revolves on chair stroking cat*

mwahahahahaha

flange - Member

...imagine a commuter bike with di2 alfine fitted. No cable stretch, minimal chain wear, no rear/front mech alignment issues, no adjustments needed, no jockey wheel wear, no mech to snap off. Just a bit of lube on the chain every now and again (or fit a Gates belt and do away with that) and a charge of the battery twice a year.

so, exactly like a normal alfine then, only with the added faff (admittedly small) of charging a battery?

so, exactly like a normal alfine then, only with the added faff of charging a battery?

Do you use magic to change gears on that then? Ever had an alfine cable unadjust itself and slip on you?

The battery fails and you are stuck in one gear. Some people madly choose to ride this way anyway. It's hardly the end of your biking tour like you are making out.

The idea is for racers and to give them an edge. XTR is not the best groupset to be using for going on long distance tours where you are 5000km away from a plug anyway.

Everyone can benefit in that it will provide an improvement at certain things for everyone. If you think that's worth it or not is up to you. I imagine a starving child in Africa is more bothered about getting food than having any sort of gears on his bike, electric or otherwise.

I'm excited to see it and happy that technology is being pushed, but I don't think it'll be for me - mainly because of the cost of replacement should I crash. I'd love to get ride of cables as well. I think alternatives will always exist because it is such a specialist market, so I'm not worried about it as some people strangely seem to be.

flange - Member

Do you use magic to change gears on that then?

er, no. i use the shifter...?

Ever had an alfine cable unadjust itself and slip on you?

no, not it 2 years - i know how to use a spanner you see 😉

(i've never even had to adjust for cable stretch)

er, no. i use the shifter...?

Which is connected to the hub by what? Swans tears?

no, not it 2 years - i know how to use a spanner you se

Ahh, well done you. Sadly it was more my sense of not being able to predict the future rather than my inability to wield a spanner that saw the 'boys in the barracks/stem interface' issue..

(i've never even had to adjust for cable stretch)

You're not shifting gears with enough anger. Try hitting it like its trying to kill your first born whilst shouting 'get in ya bastard'...

flange - Member

Which is connected to the hub by what? Swans tears?

no, a cable.

which has been completely problem-free for 2 years.

You're not shifting gears with enough anger. Try hitting it like its trying to kill your first born whilst shouting 'get in ya bastard'...

i AM blessed/cursed with a super-human degree of mechanical sympathy.

(alfine tip: stop pedalling when you change gear)

In a smiles per mile per pound graph , which would come out best?

I never smile...

Fair point. The only people who this might benefit are professional racers and anyone who's got enough disposable income to be considering high-end groupsets.

But njee20 claims:

There are benefits for everyone

So which is it?

If cost were not an issue, imagine a commuter bike with di2 alfine fitted. No cable stretch, minimal chain wear, no rear/front mech alignment issues, no adjustments needed, no jockey wheel wear, no mech to snap off. Just a bit of lube on the chain every now and again (or fit a Gates belt and do away with that) and a charge of the battery twice a year. Surely that's a benefit?

Great. But what about the wear in the mechanical parts of the system?

Does it over complicate something that shouldn't be complicated? Maybe. Does it cost a lot more than a bike should cost? possibly. Is it mega awesome? Damn straight...

I wouldn't say it was mega awesome; it's simply a different way of achieving the same end result, yet with added complications, and more limited appeal.

Now, if Shimano (or indeed anyone) were to develop and produce a multi-speed hub gear system with the reliability of a SA 3-speed system, but lighter than a current derailleur system, THEN I'd be impressed.

Great. But what about the wear in the mechanical parts of the system?

Man alive what do you want? The moon on a stick? OK, make them out of supertitaniumgoldplatinum then, so they never wear out. And stick an engine on it, and make it never run out of fuel...

Now, if Shimano (or indeed anyone) were to develop and produce a multi-speed hub gear system with the reliability of a SA 3-speed system, but lighter than a current derailleur system, THEN I'd be impressed.

Now you ARE talking out of your arse. A reliable SA 3-speed? Have you ever ridden one?

Man alive what do you want? The moon on a stick?

No, just something that works reliably and isn't unnecessarily overcomplicated.

A reliable SA 3-speed? Have you ever ridden one?

Owned several. Have one that, apart from a strip and clean a few years ago, has been running faultlessly since the 1970s.

Software upgrade anyone? 😉

"Sorry sir, but your derailleur version 1.1 is no longer supported, you'll have to [s]upgrade to version 2.2[/s] buy a whole new bike."

Kerching.

surely the 'it won't benefit everyone' argument could be made against 99% of the cycling products out there.

I don't need a carbon frame
I don't need XX1
I certainly don't really need a 180 quid seatpost on my roadbike
I probably don't even need more than 5 gears

I'd say the same could be said for 99.9% of the worlds population.So are they all pointless?

surely the 'it won't benefit everyone' argument could be made against 99% of the cycling products out there.

Certain innovations have proven essential, such as pneumatic tyres, brakes, freewheels etc. Over time, certain 'innovations' become less revolutionary, as the design of the human powered bicycle has reached a stage of near-perfection. So each new 'innovation' appears to offer less actual 'benefit', to a point where the actual benefit is more perceived than real (Kashima coating, anyone?). But in order to continue to generate profits, manufacturers must continue to sell the myth of improvement. Which is pretty much where we are now. Innovation offers diminishing returns. And some of those 'innovations' aren't really; they're just trying to reinvent the wheel.

Thing is, it's already been invented.

Good solid, argument prolonging tatics, here. Nice work.

The old ones are the best, aren't they? "shift-the-argument" "cut-n-paste-n-ignore-the-bit-that-anwers the-question"...

Someone's done this before.

In the context of the use mentioned -

he's probably best positioned to comment on whether he'd use it or not.

But that's not saying it's not suitable for long-distance racing, just that I can't get excited about leccy gears myself, don't see any need/want for my own uses. For BP stuff I use a simple system of 1 or 2 x6 and on the TD 1x6 may have cost me places at the end. But I did get through without any outside or shop-bought assistance with my bike which was one of my personal aims. Would that happen with DI2, who knows. A broken rim would have been equally disastrous and more likely.

jameso, can I ask why only 6? Are you using a freehub to allow a stronger rear wheel build with less dish? Or less deflection and less wear on the chain?

I'd have thought going as low as 8 would get you all the extra chain beef you'd be able to get?

Edit - or weight...

If cost were not an issue, imagine a commuter bike with di2 alfine fitted. No cable stretch, minimal chain wear, no rear/front mech alignment issues, no adjustments needed, no jockey wheel wear, no mech to snap off. Just a bit of lube on the chain every now and again (or fit a Gates belt and do away with that) and a charge of the battery twice a year. Surely that's a benefit?

Hear, hear! Add in a hub dynamo on the front, perhaps even one that could trickle charge the battery during daylight hours, as you point out and you've got pretty much my dream 'bike as a means of transport' bike.

Oh, and full length mudguards, obviously.

Are you using a freehub to allow a stronger rear wheel build with less dish? Or less deflection and less wear on the chain?

Very interesting, cheers, I didn't know there was that much room on a hope SS hub.

Friction thumbies as well?

'k off : ) no.

Barenders on Paul mounts so they do have a friction option - more about bar / bag space, grip range etc tho.

Jameso - do you have a picture of your TD bike

Fair point. The only people who this might benefit are professional racers and anyone who's got enough disposable income to be considering high-end groupsets.

But njee20 claims:

There are benefits for everyone

So which is it?

Woah woah woah woah!

I said (as you quote) "There are benefits for everyone". That is not "It will benefit everyone", it's an entirely different statement.

Mugging someone has benefits - you end up with their money and phone. We don't do it for various reasons; moral compass, jail time etc etc, but that doesn't detract from the fact that commiting the robbery has benefits, just that the negatives (in this example far) outweigh the benefits.

So yes, Di2 has benefits for everyone. It is not beneficial to everyone. Subtle but important difference there.

No, just something that works reliably and isn't unnecessarily overcomplicated.

Sounds like you need Di2, far simpler than anything mechanical - you ever looked inside an STI lever?

So yes, Di2 has benefits for everyone. It is not beneficial to everyone. Subtle but important difference there.

😆

You should get a job in marketing. You're a natural. Those power balance band folk would love you.

you ever looked inside an STI lever?

Yes. You ever looked inside a downtube shifter? 😉

So you never bothered with indexed shifting because they are unnecessarily complicated and a solution to a problem that doesn't exist?

You should get a job in marketing. You're a natural.

I made an important distinction, you ignored it.

You ever looked inside a downtube shifter?

Point is that STIs function better than downtube shifters, they're more complex, but the overwhelming majority of folk would always choose STIs because of the benefits (there it is again, try and keep up). If you use downtube shifters then I'm starting to understand, although I assume your pursuit of relentless simplicity has lead you to singlespeed.

although I assume your pursuit of relentless simplicity has lead you to [s]singlespeed[/s] walking.

FTFY

There are benefits for everyone

So which is it?

Looking forward to Di2 XT for my bestest bike, workhorse bikes will be using gear cables for a while longer i think

overwhelming majority of folk would always choose STIs because of the benefits

That's such a developed-world-road-bike-enthusiasts' viewpoint njee, you should be ashamed.

What about the baby african robins's faces? Mmmm?

dp

So you never bothered with indexed shifting because they are unnecessarily complicated and a solution to a problem that doesn't exist?

Your application of Occam's Razor could have led you to Wackoak's suggestion, had you taken it to it's conclusion. 🙄

Indexed shifiting offers a genuine and obvious improvement over non-indexed. As do V/disc brake systems over calipers/cantis. So, it's common sense to 'upgrade' if you ant to enjoy the benefits.

As to Di2; I'm sure there are those who enjoy the benefits of that system over a mechanical one, although my own and others' experience of it suggests an 'benefits' are both negligible and not worth the added expense and complexity. Your personal experience may differ. Great. Buy it.

I made an important distinction, you ignored it.

Ok, so enlighten me as to exactly what it was you meant.

Point is that STIs function better than downtube shifters, they're more complex, but the overwhelming majority of folk would always choose STIs because of the benefits

'Better' is a subjective term. I'd argue that due to their increased reliability over time, downtube shifters could be seen as 'better', depending on your own personal perspective. My own road bike uses bar end shifters (10+ years old and still as good as new). As someone said earlier; horses for courses.

I assume your pursuit of relentless simplicity has lead you to singlespeed.

My commuter bike is singlespeed; no derailleurs, shifters, extra cables, batteries or electronics to worry about.

Notice how Shimano haven't bothered with an electronic braking system? I wonder why that is? After all, cables get gungy and snap, etc. 😉

As to Di2; I'm sure there are those who enjoy the benefits of that system over a mechanical one, although my own and others' experience

What experience of Di2 do [b]you [/b]have? In the real world? Becuase everything you've said about it screams ill informed.

Ok, so enlighten me as to exactly what it was you meant.

I've already said three times now and it's getting painful - there are benefits: it weighs less, it is easier to use and more reliable. Those things are likely more than offset by the disadvantages for most people, but it doesn't stop those things being benefits.

My own road bike uses bar end shifters (10+ years old and still as good as new).

As is the STI on my road bike which didn't die in the cable failing incident. It's much nicer to use than a bar end shifter too. What's your point caller?

Notice how Shimano haven't bothered with an electronic braking system? I wonder why that is? After all, cables get gungy and snap, etc

You're kidding, right? Digital signals don't translate all that well to brakes. Hydraulic however... if you'd looked around of late you'd see that both SRAM and Shimano are doing hydraulic road brakes.

Personally for me I'm not fussed, but I can see there are benefits.

I don't ride bikes THAT much, don't race, don't have that much spare cash.
But if electronic gears meant that during the winter I didn't have to tinker with the brakes to stop them going 'per-ting per-ting per-ting graunch clunk' then I'd have them (ahem, if they did them in a budget 'slx' type range).

Issues such as wires breaking would be dead easy to solve (run the wire through a cable outer?) and I thought with Di2 rear mechs (from the little I have seen) if there is some kind of mechanical that wrecks the mech, then it is designed to shear off and save the electronic gubbins from a horrible death?
The battery charging being an issue thing is a joke. As I understand it, you get hundreds of miles from a low battery warning to actual battery death.

Notice how Shimano haven't bothered with an electronic braking system? I wonder why that is? After all, cables get gungy and snap, etc.

Presumably an electronic braking system would require a lot more power, so wouldn't be viable/sensible.

I'd have a go. Maybe XT or SLX level.
What about trimming the cables to suit your bike? Easy to do?

My niner had to have the loom extended to fit the longer niner frame (road bikes tend to be shorter and mine is a Di2 conversion, not XTR). It was a bit of a faff but once done its posed no problems

What experience of Di2 do you have? In the real world? Becuase everything you've said about it screams ill informed.

Limited to testing a D12 equipped bike for a day. Limited I know, but sufficient for me to make my own judgments based on my own particular needs. Although front-ring upshifts are awesome I have to say.

I've already said three times now and it's getting painful

It will if you don't explain yourself clearly. 😉

Ok; for example, v brakes offer vastly superior braking performance to cantis or caliper systems. V brakes are relatively cheap to develop and produce (the original XT ones were bloody expensive if I remember right though). Ergo, their development 'benefits' a great many cyclists. Di2 on the other hand, is a technology which is very unlikely to ever be all that cheap, therefore it won't benefit anywhere near the same number of cyclists. So your claim that there are 'benefits for all' is somewhat disingenuous. Personally I'm more interested in developments and innovations that benefit cyclists universally, you appear more concerned with your own needs. Everyone's different.

What's your point caller?

My own personal set up means that STI's won't work very well as I can't position them where they'd be comfortable and effective in use. That's all.

You seem to have me down as some sort of luddite, simply because I questioned the 'benefits' (for most cyclists) of Di2. I'm not. Interesting that you seem to want me to be though.

I'd be interested in seeing weights and prices for Di2 v mechanical groupsets.

Presumably an electronic braking system would require a lot more power, so wouldn't be viable/sensible.

Interesting. So, imagining a hybrid electronic/hydraulic system, would a braking system require a lot more power?

Haven't we been here before?

You seem to have me down as some sort of luddite, simply because I questioned the 'benefits' (for most cyclists) of Di2. I'm not. Interesting that you seem to want me to be though.

**looks down list of names**

Nope, luddite isn't on there. You preach about benefits to the 3rd world and simplicity and what not, which I suppose could be misconstrued as being a luddite. No one's used that term though. You yourself said cycling is all about having a bike that's as simple as possible or words to that effect.

So your claim that there are 'benefits for all' is somewhat disingenuous

You still don't get what I'm saying do you? I'll try once more, I'll use a different example again. Mr X drives a Fiesta. He looks at a Ferrari. There are benefits with the Ferrari, we'll keep it really simple, and say that the only one is that it's faster. Mr X will not be buying the Ferrari because it is ludicrously expensive, but that does not stop it being faster. That is still a (potential) benefit. Do you see? It doesn't save the faces of African baby robins, but it has a benefit.

You seem to be looking at the benefits to the world, which whilst somewhat noble, also seems rather misguided when talking about something like the cutting edge of mountain bike development.

You still don't get what I'm saying do you?

I think you lost sight of whatever it was yourself, some time ago. Coming up with guff like 'Digital signals don't translate all that well to brakes' convinced me you're simply spouting whatever it is you want to believe. Rather than continue what has now become a pointless argument, I'm going to leave it there, but thanks for your input all the same.

I'd still however be interested in comparative weights and prices of Di2 and mechanical systems.

Haven't we been here before?

What, two people arguing in [i]tandem[/i]? Yes, we have.

Coming up with guff like 'Digital signals don't translate all that well to brakes' convinced me you're simply spouting whatever it is you want to believe.

You think that an 'on/off' switch would be good for brakes!? Agree you could have something that works on pressure switches and what not, but hydraulic makes a lot more sense.

What, two people arguing in tandem? Yes, we have.

Haha, dammit I got drawn in! Should know better than the feed the trolls.

I'd still however be interested in comparative weights and prices of Di2 and mechanical systems.

Can (obviously) only offer you road stuff: [url= http://www.bikerumor.com/2013/03/12/unboxed-shimano-di2-9070-actual-weights/ ]here[/url].

What, two people arguing in tandem? Yes, we have