or Connect
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Cycling Equipment › problems with ultegra 6600 STI shifter (right hand)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

problems with ultegra 6600 STI shifter (right hand) - Page 2

post #16 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by heguli View Post


Hello, i already opened my left hand triple shifter to see how spring is installed but it was so different that i didn't got the idea.

 

FWIW. I have a virgin pair of 6603 shifters (the left hand shifter is Triple-capable) ...

I don't have the time to unscrew the top shroud & take a picture at the moment ...


If you can't get the information in the next couple of weeks, then bump this thread OR send me a PM.

post #17 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by dhk2 View Post
 

alfeng, my memory is so bad I can't even remember when I declared I worked for NASA or a NASA contractor.  Can you find that reference for me please?  I'm worried if I said that, because it's not remotely true.  I've been retired 10 years now, but still think I can recall where I worked.

 

The thread in question is from several years ago (2009) ...

 


Due to your "working in the aerospace field" I mistakenly took THAT as an inference that you worked for a sub-contractor for NASA because at the time the only other options that come to MY mind would have been the Russians, Chinese, Japanese, or possibly the Hindians ... and, I did not presume that the company for whom you worked was doing work for a foreign entity, so that only left NASA.


If not ... well then, My Bad!

 

---


AND AGAIN, YES (to hopefully repeat what I indicated 4 years ago) ... before the Second Coming, you need to do yourself a favor & try a bike which has Campagnolo shifters (on your favorite, local, hilly ride) with EITHER an all Campagnolo drivetrain OR a hybrid Campagnolo-Shimano drivetrain (obviously, 'I' am presuming that either configuration will have been set up properly by the local Wrench) because "Campagnolo can (indeed) shift the chainrings under any significant load" & you need to try them again with an updated test ...

 

Again, I extended my tests to trying a pair of significantly older, un-ramped & un-pinned Chainrings (on a Shimano crankset) & did NOT have any problems shifting from the inner to outer Chainring (or back) under any normal-for-me circumstances where there had been some balking-or-worse with the drivetrain when it was an all 6500 setup ...  

 

And, the only time I was not able to shift onto a larger Cog was when-there-wasn't-one because (when I looked down-and-back) I was already on my bailout Cog crawling at a pitifully slow ~6mph ... a speed which would have certainly caused the chain to balk-or-skate momentarily-or-longer with my Shimano shifters.

 

  • as I have stated numerous times, the ramping on the Cogs probably does facilitate the rear shifting

 

My experience with Campagnolo shifters when the drivetrain is under a significant load is repeatable 99.99% of the time by anyone -- it's not an opinion, it's a repeatable fact.

 

 

 

 


.

post #18 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by alienator View Post

Alfeng, anytime you want to discuss physics, let me know.

Show me numbers that say front shifting on Campagnolo is better than that on Shimano. Numbers. Those are verifiable. Opinions, such as yours, are not verifiable. That's why they're opinions. I'm not interested in what you "think", what Leonard Zinn "thinks", or what anyone else "thinks". I want to see repeatable measurements that show that Campy front shifting is "better". We can discuss "better" once you do that. Note that just because you like the way something works on one of your Rube Goldberg bikes doesn't make your preference the universal one.

dhk2 correctly recognized that "p" is the commonly accepted variable for momentum. He also correctly pointed out that understanding formulas and their physical meanings also requires understanding those formulas when they are written differently. Read a 1950's textbook on quantum physics and then read one from the last 20 years and you'll see such notational differences. You'll note the same in optics texts, statistical mechanics texts, and texts in many other disciplines in physics, as well as other sciences in general.

Note that your use of Q.E.D failed because your "proof" is only your opinion. You didn't demonstrate in any fashion that any shifters are better than any others.

I'll note that you have failed so show a single numerical proof of anything.

Lastly, you should read about the scientific meaning of empirical proof as that is what counts because that is what I do. No numbers, no proof. I guess you'll have to accuse Wikipedia for also rewriting definitions because this is what they have to say about empirical evidence with respect to science:
Note I've never read anything in which dhk2 said he worked for NASA or a NASA contractor.

 

Well Troll,

 

Again with the denial and the hollow mantras whereby you request numerical data which you cannot comprehend!

 

BTW.  Perhaps I was wrong about you actually do your own wrenching BECAUSE the only reason you would not believe that Campagnolo shifters were better relative to the remarks which others have made about their Shimano and/or SRAM shifters is because you have managed to mangle the setup on your all-Campagnolo bike to the point where you have managed to replicate the sometimes dodgy shifting which Shimano & SRAM users experience from time to time.

 

Can THAT be the case?

 

I think it must be.

 

Try to use some "critical thinking" and process the written word UNLESS if-this-then-that logic is too sophisticated for you, too.

post #19 of 31
You clearly don't understand the difference between qualitative and quantitative evidence. I go don't care about your "qualitative" facts, because they are subject to human bias, the thing which which generally doesn't affect measurements. What you feel when you do your "comparisons" is irrelevant. Feel free to do some reading about how human bias influences qualitative observations and how susceptible humans are to bias. Another related term you should look up is "confirmation bias."

I suspect you are unable to do perform an unbiased experiment.

That you are unable to shift Shimano drivetrains under a load is irrelevant. Many people can without issue. Perhaps if you practiced you might be able to do so one day.

It's funny that you are aren't aware of how big the aerospace industry is and that the majority of aerospace work is not related at all to NASA. Feel free to do some reading about the civilian and military aerospace industries. I can give you some helpful hints if you'd like.

What exactly are "Hindians", alfeng?
post #20 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by alfeng View Post

Well Troll,

Again with the denial and the hollow mantras whereby you request numerical data which you cannot comprehend!

BTW.  Perhaps I was wrong about you actually do your own wrenching BECAUSE the only reason you would not believe that Campagnolo shifters were better relative to the remarks which others have made about their Shimano and/or SRAM shifters is because you have managed to mangle the setup on your all-Campagnolo bike to the point where you have managed to replicate the sometimes dodgy shifting which Shimano & SRAM users experience from time to time.

Can THAT be the case?

I think it must be.

Try to use some "critical thinking" and process the written word UNLESS if-this-then-that logic is too sophisticated for you, too.

Sorry, you've yet to provide any evidence that your "if-then" statement is valid. Hell, you haven't even defined what "better" means your mind.

I notice that you can't respond on point.
post #21 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by alienator View Post

You clearly don't understand the difference between qualitative and quantitative evidence. I go don't care about your "qualitative" facts, because they are subject to human bias, the thing which which generally doesn't affect measurements. What you feel when you do your "comparisons" is irrelevant. Feel free to do some reading about how human bias influences qualitative observations and how susceptible humans are to bias. Another related term you should look up is "confirmation bias."

I suspect you are unable to do perform an unbiased experiment.

That you are unable to shift Shimano drivetrains under a load is irrelevant. Many people can without issue. Perhaps if you practiced you might be able to do so one day.

 

Oooh!  

 

Look at you!

 

Drawing your own conclusions about Shimano shifters & "dwell" without more than a parking-lot-test-ride AND YET declaring your experience to be a universal truth!

 

 

 

Let me know when you have spent REAL road time with an all-Shimano, mechanical drivetrain BECAUSE then you can be tabulated amongst the throng of riders who have experienced dodgy shifting with their all-Shimano drivetrains.

 

Flail away ...

post #22 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by alienator View Post


Sorry, you've yet to provide any evidence that your "if-then" statement is valid. Hell, you haven't even defined what "better" means your mind.

I notice that you can't respond on point.

 

I have responded, but you were not able to comprehend.

post #23 of 31
I didn't draw any conclusions. I did state that there are many folks who have no issues with shifting (be it under load or not) on Shimano systems. Practice reading, alfeng.
post #24 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by alienator View Post


Sorry, you've yet to provide any evidence that your "if-then" statement is valid. Hell, you haven't even defined what "better" means your mind.

I notice that you can't respond on point.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by alienator View Post

I didn't draw any conclusions. I did state that there are many folks who have no issues with shifting (be it under load or not) on Shimano systems. Practice reading, alfeng.

 

UMmm.  Where is YOUR evidence "that there are many folks who have no issues with shifting ... on Shimano systems" ...?   

 

"Show me the numbers."

 

OR are you exempt for your own requirements for evidence?

 

BTW.  If you don't have your daughter sequestered in a "Skinner Box" then maybe you can have her read through these posts so that she can explain the discourse BECAUSE if you can't discern that something which doesn't balk is "better" than something that balks then how can you apply "reason" or apply any level of "critical thinking" to anything which you are reading-or-observing?

 

IF you think that numbers will make a presentation "on point" then you probably need to re-evaluate the so-called scientific method which YOU are hold so near-and-dear to your hear because you have (as might be inferred by your suggestion that a prior example was "political") demonstrated that you cannot discern a valid data sample from an invalid data sample (e.g., the Keeling Curve) NOR are you apparently willing to acknowledge when admittedly falsified data has been used to promulgate a hoax (i.e., so-called "Global Warming").

 

That is, numbers are only meaningful if they are not falsified, the model is not skewed, the accumulated data can be properly interpreted, etc.

 

Hey, did YOU know that people were burning things for Millennia before someone came up with the First Law of Thermodynamics?

 

How could that be?!?

 

Could that have been an if-then situation exclusive of numbers?

 

Heck, people were probably burning things BEFORE numbers were even created.

 

How could that be?!?

 

I know someone who is a white-knuckle rider because he can't wrap his mind around a two wheeled vehicle being capable of being propelled down the road without it falling over ...  

 

Do YOU know the math as to how a bike can be propelled by the rider down the road without it falling over?

 

Do YOU have the formulas?

 

Did YOU need them before your first-or-last ride?

 

Did-or-will YOU explain the math to your daughter before she goes for her first/next ride?

 

If not, then why not?

 

Besides, when you were given numbers, recently, you pooh-poohed them as not being significant ...

 

THAT could certainly be suggested to be just another example of how hollow your request for "on point (numbers)" is UNLESS the request which you made is simply made to mask another example of your screaming-in-your-own-way that you don't understand a concept! 

 

BTW2.  YOU may want to spend a few minutes looking up what an "Empirical Observation" is rather than shooting-from-the-lip & hoping no one calls you out on your ignorance.

post #25 of 31
I'm sorry, alfeng, you've not given any numbers for this, and the burden of proof lies with you. You are the one who claimed:
Quote:
Originally Posted by alfeng 
AND all models of Campagnolo shifters will function better with your Shimano drivetrain ...

So, as per the standard, the extraordinary claim is the one that bears the burden of proof. Yours is the extraordinary claim, alfeng.

Keeling curve? You really can't stay on point, can you?
post #26 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by alienator View Post

I'm sorry, alfeng, you've not given any numbers for this, and the burden of proof lies with you. You are the one who claimed:
So, as per the standard, the extraordinary claim is the one that bears the burden of proof. Yours is the extraordinary claim, alfeng.

Keeling curve? You really can't stay on point, can you?

 

Well, Troll ...  

 

There you go again!  

 

I don't know why you want numerical data when you have demonstrated that you are incapable of processing it + when you can you then dismiss it if it contradicts YOUR world view ...  

 

Regardless, obviously unless YOU perform the test, you won't believe it ...  

 

So, why the repetition of your hollow mantra?!?

   

AND, despite your self-exemption, YOU are not exempt from adhering to the same standards which you establish for others to follow ...

 

So, while you pretend that you are exempt, I say "show me the numbers" behind any of your statements!

 

My observation only seems "extraordinary" to you because you have apparently never taken more than a parking-lot-ride on an all-Shimano equipped bike.  

 

Regardless, not only do you not know the difference between an Empirical Observation & the Scientific Method ...

 

Apparently, you do not know that it is YOU-as-the-denier who has to disprove my easily replicated observations by using more than a repetition of your hollow "show me the numbers" mantras ...  

 

  • if you really do not already know what a drivetrain under a load is, then try down shifting to a larger Cog with an all-Shimano on a 10º +/- incline at a speed under 10mph without unweighting the drivetrain just as a starting point because you will surely want to try the test with steeper-and-shallower inclines & using other speeds ...
    • ​try the same incline(s) with either Campagnolo or SRAM shifters with the same technique where you don't unweight the drivetrain ...
      • both the Campagnolo & SRAM shifters should be able to handle the downshift without balking unless the rider deliberately chooses to abort the shift halfway through the motion of the shift paddle or the SRAM rider does something ham-fisted with the Double-Tap mechanism ...
      • the same cannot be said for an all-Shimano mechanical Road drivetrain
    • capability is BETTER than inability for 99.99% of the World ...    ​

 

  • ​​if YOU persist in thinking that the inefficient shifting which is the consequence of "dwell" is better than clean shifts, then you are living in a World without logic, reason, or critical thinking.

 

FYI.  Again, YOU have to perform the tests which disprove what MY observation which you apparently feel is an "extraordinary claim."

 

AGAIN, the proof is the ability of Campagnolo shifters to execute a shift under circumstances where "dwell" causes Shimano shifters to balk ...   

 

Again, capability is BETTER than inability for 99.99% of the World ...

 

BTW.  My mentioning the Keeling Curve IS relevant ...  

 

It is apparently only irrelevant to you because it illustrates the potential flaw in collected data which you seem to embrace despite your apparent inability to comprehend data when it is presented to you and/or your dismissal of it when you deem it to contradict something you have stated.

 

Of course, for those "useful idiots" who insist on "man made Global Warming" hoax I guess deflection & denial are easier than facing reality because the falsified data LOOKS GOOD until it is revealed to have been falsified.

 

If you were capable of reasoning & critical thinking then you might realize that it is actually you who needs to LEARN TO READ & comprehend what analogies are + to LEARN TO DIFFERENTIATE between a basis for comparison & the comparison being made.

 
 
 
post #27 of 31
Actually, the extraordinary claim is yours. Your lack of understanding of science and the method is astounding. Surely, someone such as yourself would have no issue at all setting up a simple, repeatable experiment that produces real data, not the subjective crap you've given so far. Bring data, alfeng. Your subjective observations are not data. I'll wait while you calm down and collect data.
post #28 of 31
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAMPYBOB View Post

Keep offering your opinion, Alf. It is appreciated.

OP, I found no pictures of the 6600 10-speed guts that showed the spring clearly.

It`s hard to believe that` nobody doesn`t have pictures from inside of shifter..
post #29 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by heguli View Post

It`s hard to believe that` nobody doesn`t have pictures from inside of shifter..

It's likely because Shimano doesn't really offer any repair options for their shifters. They don't sell replacement parts for the shifter's innards, so that means that there's no real reason for repair videos or pictures of the inside of the shifters. If there are any pictures out there, I suspect you'll have to search for a very long time.
post #30 of 31

Parts for shimano components can be found by code on their website. Once you locate the code of the part you can order it from your LBS. Availability is an issue though. I have a couple of Shimano 2300 shifters. When I managed to brake the lever on the point where it pulls the wire I had to replace the whole shifter because Shimano doesnt offer a replacement lever for their 2300 line of shifters. They do for Ultegra but not for 2300.

 

If you need a specific part I found this shop in Germany that sells parts:

 

http://bicikli.de/shop/SHIMANO-spare-parts

 

Yes this is a link to a shop. Not spamming, just posting it to check...

When I searched for a repair for my 2300 shifter, there was only one part available that could fix the problem and it was "the front assembly" part, which basically was the whole front part of the shifter, basically everything except the clamp that attaches it to the handlebar. Cant remember the part code. It costed 40 euros. Plus another 10 to ship from Germany. I finally just replaced the whole shifter plus a couple of cables at the LBS for 55euro. 

 

I am so definitely getting an SRAM Apex group once I get to replace the 2300 group...    


Edited by Volnix - 9/30/13 at 5:19am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Cycling Equipment
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Cycling Equipment › problems with ultegra 6600 STI shifter (right hand)