[Closed] How do Shimano do it?

My guess is lots of research and development.

They don't rush things to market and generally don't use lots of marketing crap to justify changing something. Their ethos is heavily biased towards great engineering and that shows through in their products. You've just got to look at their first ever product, a freewheel, as it was built to be the best you could get. They may be behind the curve on some things, 1x drivetrains being the most recent, but when they launch their version of it it tends to just work.

How do Shimano manage to be such a huge success at every level?

I didn't think they were ...??? Indeed I thought...

Their ethos is heavily biased towards great engineering and that shows through in their products.

and

They may be behind the curve on some things, 1x drivetrains being the most recent, but when they launch their version of it it tends to just work.

and keep on working.

Looking at various bike spec's I don't think that washes anymore for the masses who seem to want the latest and just upgrade to the new latest when it gets released.

My mate insists they design in obsolescence to force people to upgrade. He cites chanring BCDs as reasons. However, I think that they are a company of engineers, and that they have reasons for changing chainring BCD, however small and annoying.

I think there is more evidence that they AREN't designing in obsolescence. Freehubs for example stayed the same for two decades or more, and only changed when they needed to.

I agree their quility is good as is their engineering and I quite like how they can be stubborn to change their ways (cup and cone hubs, alloy chainsets and front derailleurs to name a few that come to mind) but still find it fascinating that they can do this right across the cost spectrum but some how don't diminish their brand.

After a quick Google the cheapest shimano rear derailleur is a tourney one for £8. The most expensive was a £160 xtr one.

their top end road cranks are made of cheese, i imagine if teams weren't given them for free and were spending their own money they would go else where.

Were they the first to really do the trickle down technology philosophy?

Thinking about it, it might be a key component of their ability to provide such decent products at all levels and be a key part to their success.

That Tourney derailleur will work just as well mechanically as the XTR one too and for just as long. The XTR will have a much lighter weight and better features like a clutch but in terms of shifting reliably with minimum maintenance it'll be just as good. Compare that to the crap SRAM dish out with their X3/4/5 range that are plastic and wear out quickly and you see why Shimano is pretty much standard on basic bikes: it may not be the lightest but it just works reliably with little fuss.

He cites chanring BCDs as reasons.

Shimano ran the 104 BCD chainrings for over 20 years so I doubt that holds up to scrutiny. Compared to all the different direct mount options out there they've been very sensible. The added advantage Shimano have on that front though is that they're so ubiquitous in the market that the likes of Superstar, Uberbike and the myriad of Chinese sellers have replacement rings available by the time you've work the first one out. Their switch to asymmetric was driven by the road side for sound engineering reasons, strength of a 5 bolt in a 4 bolt pattern on the power stroke, their switch to direct mount was also to allow chainrings smaller than 30t once they had ditched the granny ring.

By doing essentially the opposite of SRAM.

But then neither they nor SRAM.can make a descent set of brakes that lasts.

Crush the opposition, create an oligopoly and then reap the rewards while churning out decent quality kit at a price people will pay.

I like their stuff, I'm fascinated by elements of Japanese industry and culture but who knows where we'd be if there was a genuinely competitive market for mid to high end bike stuff.

How do Shimano manage to be such a huge success at every level?

A lack of competition really, and good deals for OEM components? They're fairly average really.

Campagnolo road components have always been superior, but recently they've cheapened and gotten left behind slightly.

SRAM is a bit flimsy and doesn't last as well in my experience.

Shimano ran the 104 BCD chainrings for over 20 years so I doubt that holds up to scrutiny. Compared to all the different direct mount options out there they’ve been very sensible.

FC-M952 was direct mount back in 1999.

Thanks for everyone's contributions. And they're all relevant to the quality and success of Shimano.

But the bit I'm really amazed at is how the Shimano brand isn't damaged by producing cheap components.

An example that comes to mind of a very protective brand is that when Campagnolo wanted to make wheels that used Shimano's freehub design they were so worried it would cheapen their brand that they created a totally different brand called Fulcrum.

The floating top pulley is the centre piece of their patents

They were behind on 1x but that seems to be over now

Is that why my rear derailleur was much worse after buying some after market anodized jockey wheels?

The BCD thing...the first change was after Suntour brought out microdrive, and they had to follow, it was obvious, bit they did their own thing for the granny.

4 arm, hollow chainrings on the road scene and the not 90° spider are all utter marketing shite.

Cup and cone hubs work great if you buy the properly sealed ones, and have mechanical skills.

That Tourney derailleur will work just as well mechanically as the XTR one too and for just as long

LOL, not a chance, the lowest end stuff gets more junky every year, it's close to tin can these days.

But then neither they nor SRAM.can make a descent set of brakes that lasts.

Yes they can. I had one of them.

They just can't do it consistently.

their top end road cranks are made of cheese, i imagine if teams weren’t given them for free and were spending their own money they would go else where.

Only a few WT teams are officially (fully) sponsored by Shimano. No-one really knows who outside the top couple of teams. Some WT teams DO pay for Shimano but claim to be sponsored to avoid embarrassment and claim one upmanship.

SRAM have struggled to get any team to use their groupsets and I suspect they are supplying teams for free.

The Pro's beast equipment and SRAM is not a safe bet or well liked.

I've never seen anyone eat a Shimano crank either.

My mate insists they design in obsolescence to force people to upgrade. He cites chanring BCDs as reasons. However, I think that they are a company of engineers, and that they have reasons for changing chainring BCD, however small and annoying.
I think there is more evidence that they AREN’t designing in obsolescence. Freehubs for example stayed the same for two decades or more, and only changed when they needed to.

They absolutely are designing in obsolescence now, or at the very least designing out backwards compatibility (essentially the same thing).
But being fair about it they're operating in a market where that is increasingly common, and it's perhaps more noteworthy because going further back in their history they seemed to consciously design new equipment to be backwards compatible with previous generations (if possible). more generally It's a trick that their current main competitor (in the bicycle market) is all to happy with as well as their major OEM customers.

Of course they're not all sweetness and light, without some naughty behaviour from Shimano in the late 80s/early 90s SRAM might not even exist today...

It's worth noting that while their current reputation is for being "Behind the curve" (trends) they have had a few more innovative products, some which blazed a trail, others fell by the wayside... Their road STi levers led the way, they nailed indexing earlier and added more clicks to your cassette throughout the 90's than anyone else, got reliable leccy shifting to market first, and invented a Cassette interface standard that was adequate for most types of geared bike for the last ~40 odd years. But then there were 'Airlines', Dual control MTB levers, Rapid rise Mechs, etc, etc...

From an engineering perspective the ethos generally seems to be, design in durability and reliable operation as a priority, and then worry about cutting weight and adding bling (and inflating prices), their products "Functional hierarchy" is largely intact still, from top to bottom of the range, and I would tend to trust their parts over others.

Only a few WT teams are officially (fully) sponsored by Shimano. No-one really knows who outside the top couple of teams. Some WT teams DO pay for Shimano but claim to be sponsored to avoid embarrassment and claim one upmanship.

SRAM have struggled to get any team to use their groupsets and I suspect they are supplying teams for free.

The Pro’s beast equipment and SRAM is not a safe bet or well liked.

I’ve never seen anyone eat a Shimano crank either.

Why would a team use SRAM "for free", the whole point of sponsorship is someone gives you a product and a great big cheque for using it. Pretty sure if they could any of the big 3 would quite happily sponsor the whole peloton, imagine the bragging rights of being the only supplier to the world tour?

There does seem to be a fair number of the latest glued together cranks failing. It does seem a bit unlike them when the hollow-forged ones were so reliable.

But the bit I’m really amazed at is how the Shimano brand isn’t damaged by producing cheap components.

An example that comes to mind of a very protective brand is that when Campagnolo wanted to make wheels that used Shimano’s freehub design they were so worried it would cheapen their brand that they created a totally different brand called Fulcrum.

I suppose because they have quite a clear distinction between the Deore and better stuff, and the Alivo and down stuff. The Fulcrum thing kinda makes sense for other reasons, campag wheels were only ever on campag bikes, and they don't have massive market share, Fulcrum gives them access to all those Shimano and SRAM equipped bikes.

Not much to add but thanks to tomd I've learnt a new word today

oligopoly

Did they invent the groupset?

http://bikeretrogrouch.blogspot.com/2014/07/deore-first-touring-gruppo.html?m=1

Cos they're all chilled out from da fishing. Turns out some of it shares the same name (Tiagra, Ultegra, can't find XTR) and they make fishing clothes and shoes too.

They made the first MTB groupset.

Looking at various bike spec’s I don’t think that washes anymore for the masses

I don't.

I want good solid engineering, longevity and value.

I'm now actively avoiding SRAM as they do go for the bold new thing, new greatest ever, over complex and poorly judged details....and it's totally hit and miss.

How much old SRAM kit do you see around?
How much old Shimano kit do you see around?

Rapid Rise was fantastic but just not enough adopters imo, it made a lot of sense but it went against years of established experience. We had two rapid rise bikes running in our household for over a decade.

I think they've generally done so well because they make good stuff, it tends to last, it's well finished, sensibly priced and on the whole aesthetically OK.

Shimano has been doing this for a long time and evolution not revolution has really been key IMO. They've got the advantage of being the big boy so they can watch the upstart (SRAM) make the cockups, see what they don't do as well and they can do this while still having strong enough market share on the low to mid range stuff and the ability to respond with hard cash if SRAM charges ahead to not really be taking a risk in letting SRAM move first.

To me Shimano kit is always where I start. 30+ years of riding it without any serious headaches does that to you I think. Certainly if, like me, you were raised in the kind of house where you fixed rather than replaced and you could regrease a cup and cone hub and build a bike from parts before you hit your teens it has a certain appeal and feel of dependability.

They can also afford good R&D

SRAM never inspires that confidence in my head. I have it on one bike and it works really well but it's not familiar and you won't easily undo 30+ years of good Shimano experience from someone who is more concerned about reliability than latest fancy kit. It's a bit like our house being back on having two Fords again. There's nothing super flash about them but they (and the two that came before them) have all just done their job; quietly, uncomplainingly and reliably.

I remember in the 90's when Shimano was totally dominant and the (conspiracy?) theory amongst me and my pals was that they had the next 10 years of groupsets all planned out that they would keep rolling out maintaining dominance.

Rapid Rise was fantastic but just not enough adopters imo, it made a lot of sense but it went against years of established experience. We had two rapid rise bikes running in our household for over a decade.

I've got a Rapid Rise XT mech being run with a friction shifter on my commuter/winter road bike and it's great, it really should have caught on but the mistake that made was not making back to front shifters to go with the mechs so that the shifting action remained the same from bike to bike, the users weren't adaptable enough, hence it's now seen as a failure/dead end...

good deals for OEM components?

This will be what pays the rent. The high-end stuff is really a completely different market.

I'm a big sram fan these days but still have a lot of love for Shimano.

It'd be hard to imagine biking without them on the scene.

That said it's been great to see sram evolve from making gripshifters (I loved the X Rays I had in the 90's) to where they are today.

cynic-al - I've got a Tourney mech on my commuter and it's done well over 4000 miles in 2,1/2 years with absolutely no maintenance, still on the original cable. Works exactly as well as it did when new and is as slick changing as the Deore, SLX and XT ones on my other bikes. No slack in the pivots, spring is still fine and if I cleaned it would look almost new. It's doing all that despite being an emergency replacement for a Claris mech I bent while out at the shops so it's running as an 8 speed despite being a 7 speed mech. For a £17.99 mech I'd say that's bloody good going for a piece of 'tin can'.

Molgrips

My mate insists they design in obsolescence to force people to upgrade. He cites chanring BCDs as reasons. However, I think that they are a company of engineers, and that they have reasons for changing chainring BCD, however small and annoying.

I think there is more evidence that they AREN’t designing in obsolescence. Freehubs for example stayed the same for two decades or more, and only changed when they needed to

Your mate is right the different standards in between years and levels of equipment obtain this. Its a pain how much stuff even if its both 11 speed from same brand doesn't work together or needs a bit of a bodge. Brands do this inbetween them did you know even a shimano gear cable doesn't properly fit a campagnolo shifter. And Shimano does this in between their own equipment as well and so in increasing levels.

I actually graduated on this stuff Modularity(ie being able to interchange in between brands and amongst the same brands) in the bicylce industry. Did a case study even Shimano vs Campagnolo and how they use it to keep prices up. Other subject was locking acces to certain markets. Its a cyclical process and that was showing and upwards curve ie less compatbile more restrictions in the early 2000's and recent years have only shown its massively on the up the last couple of year. Its a pain for bicycle mecanics

With 12 speed things have become more compatible for mountain bike groupsets. You can use a 12 speed shimano shifter with a sram 12 speed derailleur. You can use 12 speed shimano shifter and 12 speed shimano derailleur with 12 speed sram cassette.
Thank goodness for competition. There was a void in the marketplace from when Suntour went bust and Sram started making drive trains, especially on the mtb side of things.

All Shimano have to do is create a product that is equal to or better than Sram. Let’s face it that isn’t difficult.

ISIS bottom brackets, the case for the prosecution rests.

Their square taper ones are really good, probably too good as they rarely wear out.

ISIS bottom brackets, the case for the prosecution rests.

Shimano did Octalink which was OK.  ISIS was a FSA/Race Face thing.

mattoutandabout

I don’t.

I want good solid engineering, longevity and value.

I’m now actively avoiding SRAM as they do go for the bold new thing, new greatest ever, over complex and poorly judged details….and it’s totally hit and miss.

Me too... but that's not what I'm seeing on new bikes.

I think there is more evidence that they AREN’t designing in obsolescence. Freehubs for example stayed the same for two decades or more, and only changed when they needed to

iSpec ...

What's all the hate on ispec? Wasn't it just a brake gear lever mount? I think one of my bikes had it (might be ispec 2) and don't remember it being a problem.

Wasn't it just a copy of the sram ones?

What’s all the hate on ispec? Wasn’t it just a brake gear lever mount? I think one of my bikes had it (might be ispec 2) and don’t remember it being a problem.

I don't think ispec was the problem, the fact they felt the need to re-design it between every product cycle kinda made it useless on anything other than a new bike/groupset though. SRAM matchmaker on the other hand works right back to Avid brakes. And I think the latest i-spec is actually compatible with it, you just need to cannibalize bits from both the shifter than the matchmaker.

Reluctantjumper 4000 miles isn't much out of any rear mech.

My fishing tackle is made up mostly of Shimano.
All my reels bar my dad's old centre pin are Shimano.

Shimano Baitrunner reels were amazing when they came out.

Their rods are top notch. I think my carp rod is Shimano.

I think they're good because they're Japanese. Meticulous engineers and not marketeers.

Oh, and they've got Tiagra reels and SLX rods...

iSpec …

What's the problem with ispec? You can still get band stuff, and you can get adapters too...

If they wanted to force us to buy new stuff they could easily have redesigned stuff like SPD cleats, mech hangers (ok so direct mount but they made it so you can use a simple adapter *which they give you free in the box*), brake pull ratios, centerlock rotors, brake mount specs and so on many many times over the years, but they didn't. They just change them occasionally when they think there's a need. The fact that consumers disagree about the need doesn't make it a cynical ploy, it might just be a mistake and a misjudging of markets.

I have a 2007 brake lever attached to a 2015 caliper. It works perfectly. In fact I have a mix of 2007 M970 XTR and modern stuff on several bikes.

Reluctantjumper 4000 miles isn’t much out of any rear mech.

It would be verging on miraculous for a SRAM Eagle mech...

Shimano did Octalink which was OK. ISIS was a FSA/Race Face thing.

All were shite!!

But how?

Many production engineering companies reference good Japanese management culture as a reason or method for success. It's lead from the top and the bottom equally.

I haven't dealt with many Japanese companies but in Germany, another company with a good rep for engineering, I have found that techies actually get respected and treated as the 'talent'; instead of the bothersome nerds who always complain, which seems to be the prevailing sentiment in the UK. I suspect this is the case in Japan and probably within Shimano too.

Sram R&D is in Schweinfurt, Germany. Although I've heard there are lots of septics working there and management is American led.

As they say on Germany, der Fisch stinkt vom Kopf.

https://enduro-mtb.com/en/sram-factory-visit/

I've hated SRAM ever since I smacked my nads off the stem of my new SRAM equipped Foxy in 2010, because I needed to change down a few gears on an uphill and naturally used my thumb to push the closest lever. Like I'd been doing on Shimano for 15 or 16 years. Bike stopped dead, because I had actually changed up. Because SRAM.
Bought a set of XT shifters and an XT rear mech and never had that trouble again. I hate SRAM.

SRAM matchmaker on the other hand works right back to Avid brakes.

Thing is, it's not very good (for me at least). Just two fixed positions neither of which allow me to run the shifters far enough inward from the brakes. I-spec offers a wider and very adjustable range of positions.