John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 23:11:32 -0500, Brian S <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> So people doing RAAM and hour records (or other long distance / aero
>> races), and people with physical difficulties could find this very
>> usefull. That's a pretty small market. There must be a reason beyond
>> that that they're thinking of to pursue this technology. Are they just
>> trying to feed the techno geeks in us some goodies?
>
>> I know I don't feel the need for more places to be able to shift.
>
> Do you actually race bikes? Have you raced an intense and technical
> criterium? Have you ever been suffering badly while on a long climb
> with the grade constantly shifting?
>
Yes, I do race periodically (and ride with some pretty talented people),
given time restraints to training. I've never felt I needed multiple
places to shift. When I'm riding hard and I'm betting most people do,
they're hands are either in the drops or hoods. From there shifting is
pretty easy. So why then would I need another place to be able to shift
from unless your in a strange position and even then you'd probably be
using some kind of TT shifting position anyway.
The only time I'm moving my hands around a lot is when I'm riding slow
for a long, time for comfort, shifting isn't a priority then.
> RAAM? This is a bike racing group. And there is no need for shifting
> in the hour record.
>
> JT
>
I mentioned those two in reference to riding in odd positions for longer
periods of time than most people do.
Like I said earlier, I don't see the benefit of this technology at this
time given it's potential drawbacks (battery life, potential electrical
interference blocking shifting, like current cars - more things that can
go wrong vs simple mechanical devices, potential higher cost).
Whatever, this can go into a barcon vs sti/ergo shifter debate, which I
don't care to get into. I'll just wait and see what happens when the
stuff comes out.