catlike said:
Well, if i am not as old as you are and have't had same super druper expirience with cycling bits, then i can't make any coments on your mystical conclusions about some weird ethic? I just don't see how rebuildable stuff that needs to be serviced (obviously, oterwise why make it rebuildable) is somehow more ethical compared to non rebuildable stuff that does't brakes.
And you failed to explain that, despite your magnificent expirience with cycling equipment.
Let me ask you- is it ethical to buy all those new and shiny toys when you still can repair and use old ones ( "I've used Record, Dura Ace, Ultegra, RSX, and before all that, Shimano 600 (Ultegra's predecessor)")?
You missed the points, as well as your Basic English class: who says that Shimano stuff doesn't break? How did you figure that. That could only be true if you could show that
S=kLn(ω)=0, which is impossible to do since k doesn't equal zero and the natural log of something can never equal zero. Physics,1; Catlike,0.
Do searches at Weight Weenies, Roadbike Review, here, and other forums, and you'll find that it's been asked many times by Shimano users, "How can I rebuild my shifters?" Ask Peter, who's likely been in the bike biz longer than you've been able to say "bike", how many/how often he's seen Shimano shifters break and/or how many he's had to return to Shimano as warranty claims.
As for the groups I've used, Catlike, one was given to my wife, and the others have been sold. None have been pitched in the garbage, so your attempt to juxtapose my statement about ethic with the implication that I've sent to the garbage pail a number of groups.....well, that effort is a big fail, since I've explained that those groups were either given away or sold.
It seems you're unable to make a cogent argument. That's painfully obvious if you keeping trying to start with the Shimano-doesn't-break non-starter. FYI, Shimano brakes do brake, as that is their designed function.
What is it that makes you think Shimano doesn't break? We haven't even addressed specifically how things might break. If we did, then you'd have to explain how their products could have a failure rate of zero from non-accident causes, given the Second Law of Thermodynamics as stated above. Then you'd have to explain how it is that Shimano stuff doesn't break in crashes, be those crashes race related, technique related, or car related. Maybe Shimano stuff is made from Adamantium........
Once the idea that all stuff can fail penetrates your dense cranium, you'll be forced to realize that the only real differences between groups from different manufacturers are ergonomic, materials, and method of function.
They all can operate for the life of a rider without drama, and likewise they all can fail. Given that, the differences for a rider then are ergonomic and those related to personal preference.
Now you're welcome to try and prove that choosing something that is rebuildable over something that isn't just because you don't agree with the non-rebuildable ethic is not a personal preference, but that's impossible. You'll only end up looking like an idiot in the process.
That you can't construct a valid argument really isn't a matter of age difference between us. I don't know how old you are and don't care, and you don't know how old I am.....so good luck using that argument again.