Middleburn slick sh...
 

  You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more

[Closed] Middleburn slick shift not so slick?

12 Posts
11 Users
0 Reactions
127 Views
 FOG
Posts: 2974
Full Member
Topic starter
 

I have bought a couple of Middleburn slickshift 32 and 36 rings lately, one for a middle in a triple set up and one for the outer on a double, both Shimano cranks. Neither seem to want to shift, mainly in the upward change from granny to middle/outer. They will change eventually but with a lot of grinding and clanking. Down changes are fine. Do I need to adjust derailleurs or whatever or is this just a fact of Middleburn ownership?
The triple worked fine with a shimano ring, the double is new with a new derailleur.


 
Posted : 27/04/2014 11:43 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Never had a problem here with similar set up.


 
Posted : 27/04/2014 11:52 am
Posts: 39449
Free Member
 

I found middleburn to middleburn shifts to be good

When i tried to mix match it all got a bit shitty.

So i went to all shimanos as they shifted better and lasted just a out as long - significantly cheaper to


 
Posted : 27/04/2014 11:53 am
Posts: 507
Free Member
 

Without all of the ramps etc. of Shimano rings, they'll never shift as well, but will shift acceptably well if you learn to shift without pressuring the cranks, and at the correct point of the crank's revolution. Think we've all been spoilt by Mr Shimano 🙂


 
Posted : 27/04/2014 12:03 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Think we've all been spoilt by Mr Shimano

which is funny because Shimano used to be sh1t compared to Middleburn 🙂

Both my Duo setups are OK but not as slick as my older Middleburns used to be.


 
Posted : 27/04/2014 12:13 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

they don't seem to shift very well but seem to be lasting longer than shimano rings so far here


 
Posted : 27/04/2014 12:52 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I think it is the weight savings they went for in the newer rings, my older rings (non slick-shift) were bigger and shifted better and outlasted shimano rings massively.

Now i just regard the front rings as giving me two different ranges of the rear gears, rather than shifting the front so much - although the front shifting is still OK.


 
Posted : 27/04/2014 12:58 pm
Posts: 34376
Full Member
 

[i]or is this just a fact of Middleburn ownership?[/i]

This, never have been, never will be as good as rings with ramps and pins. End.


 
Posted : 27/04/2014 1:00 pm
Posts: 65918
Free Member
 

Basically, middleburn used to be one of the good options. Then everyone else got better, middleburn didn't, now they're pretty poor by comparison to the main manufacturers. But a lot of people still recommend them because of that history

So you're basically getting a nice window into what shifting used to be like.


 
Posted : 27/04/2014 1:01 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

This, never have been, never will be as good as rings with ramps and pins. End.

so how come Shimano had ramps and pins years ago but Middleburn shifted far better and lasted far better.


 
Posted : 27/04/2014 8:12 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 


 
Posted : 28/04/2014 6:27 am
Posts: 14595
Free Member
 

Personally I never had issues with shifting (slick shift/hard coat) but didn't feel they lasted any longer than Shimano Deore, and so weren't worth double the cost.


 
Posted : 28/04/2014 6:33 am
Posts: 21461
Full Member
 

I bought a full set of slick shift hardcoat rings a couple of years back. Fitted them with new cassette, chain, cables and shifters. Just could not get a half decent shift out of them. Massive chainsuck right from the off.

Demonstrated this to the place I'd bought them from and they could do no better so refunded the rings. Fitted Shimano and never looked back. I've used blackspire and raceface in the past which worked well enough but middleburn are the worst rings I've ever used by some considerable margin.


 
Posted : 28/04/2014 6:42 am

6 DAYS LEFT
We are currently at 95% of our target!