Minimum parts to upgrade to 10 spd?

[Tom]

Remember that the cogset won't fit on the Ultegra wheels. Moreover,
Shimano 10-speed hubs are different from the 9-speed and the freehub
body can't be switched (I believe).

The real way to go about this in my opnion would be to install a 12-27
9-speed cogset on the Shmano 8-speed wheels. To get the Veloce 9-speed
Ergo Shifters and the Veloce rear derailleur. It would also pay to use
a Veloce front derailleur since the leverages are a little different
and although Ergo works with the Shimano it is a little flaky in my
experience.

What do you get from a 10-speed? A less reliable bike.

In My Opinion:

6 and 7-speed cassettes and chains would wear forever. 8-Speed stuff
was ultra-reliable. 9-speed wears fast but it was nice that you only
needed one cassette for everything.

10-speed is noisy. wears fast and the chain isn't really reliable. The
Campy 10-speed is a lot better than the Shimano 10-speed which doesn't
seem to adjust to shift smoothly both up and down.

Shimano 10-speed chainrings are mondo-ugly.

Compact is the only way to go unless you race.

 

[Drew Eckhardt]

In article <[email protected]>,
Andrew F Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
>If, for some reason you just want more gears, then yeah - 10sp Veloce
>is a great deal. A lot has changed in ~10 years though, and I would
>imagine that the gain from going to a full 2005 model bike vs. just
>adding 2 more gears to a 1996 bike would be a substancial jump in
>performance. $1000 for a full 2005 Ultegra 10sp bike - or $315 for
>just shifters/cassette. I would guess that the extra 700 would be well
>worth it.

Nothing significant has happend to road bikes in the last 10 years except cog
and price increases. We have the same brifters, dual pivot brakes, and
aerodynamic options. It's easier to get wide+tight gear spacing now that
everyone sells "compact" road cranksets although that was still possible
with triples or custom chain rings. Threadless headsets don't work
any better than threaded and are less adjustable. Non-square taper cranks
don't work any better than square ones. And a decent bike of that era
doesn't weigh any more than what you can get for $1000 or more today.

In 1995 or 1996 I had a shop combine the frame and components of my
choice.

When I wore out my last 13-21 8 speed cogset, I spent a bit over $200
replacing the right ergo cog, G and thumb lever springs, freehub body,
chain, cassette, and jockey pulleys, or over $2500 less than something
similar new.

When I wear out my last 13-23 9 speed cogset, I'll spend $400 replacing
the ergo levers, chain, and cassette, or over $2600 less than something
similar new (gotta love inflation).

My road bike will continue to fit as well as it ever did, suit my tastes
perfectly, and weigh under 20 pounds with pedals and frame pump (I use heavy
all-steel cogsets that wear better and a comfy but not light Selle Italia
Turbomatic saddle).

>There are so many cases of people sinking WAY too much money into an
>antiquated bike. Sometimes, it's just better to start over.

It's not like we had friction shifted six-speeds with single pull brakes in
1996...

--
<a href="http://www.poohsticks.org/drew/">Home Page</a>
In 1913 the inflation adjusted (in 2003 dollars) exemption for single people
was $54,567, married couples' exemption $72,756, the next $363,783 was taxed
at 1%, and earnings over $9,094,578 were taxed at the top rate of 7%.

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On 27 Sep 2005 14:19:02 -0700, "Tom" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Remember that the cogset won't fit on the Ultegra wheels.

????? No.
Moreover,
>Shimano 10-speed hubs are different from the 9-speed and the freehub
>body can't be switched (I believe).

Only Dura Ace 10 is different.
>
>
>In My Opinion:
>
>6 and 7-speed cassettes and chains would wear forever. 8-Speed stuff
>was ultra-reliable. 9-speed wears fast but it was nice that you only
>needed one cassette for everything.

Where do you get this information about chain and cassette wear from?
Why should a 9-speed chain or cassette wear any faster than an 8 or a
7?

JT


****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

 

[Andrew F Martin]

I worked in a shop in the summer of '96. Getting a bike sub 20lbs was
a big deal. Steel was still the predominant material and only the rich
could afford carbon/Ti. Al was still way too harsh (Cannondale 2.8)
and components were lacking. I still have a groupset from that era
that I use on my rain bike. I love it - it's heavy, durable, and
shifts pretty well. Perfect for rain - but I'd never think of racing
it.

Today's bikes are EASILY below 17lbs and with "improvements"
(debatable) in wheelsets, frame materials, and components - I'd say
that the $1k bike of today (like those I mentioned at bikesdirect.com)
far outpaces anything from '96. A guy I race with finally upgraded his
'00 OCLV frame to a new Bianchi. Night and day.

Your comment on the non-square taper cranks...you gotta try outboard
bearings before saying that. I think right there you have the best
technology update in the past 10 years. They feel SO much stiffer than
anything of my other bikes or my 9sp stuff.

 

[[email protected]]

Andrew F Martin wrote:
> I worked in a shop in the summer of '96. Getting a bike sub 20lbs was
> a big deal. Steel was still the predominant material and only the rich
> could afford carbon/Ti. Al was still way too harsh (Cannondale 2.8)
> and components were lacking. I still have a groupset from that era
> that I use on my rain bike. I love it - it's heavy, durable, and
> shifts pretty well. Perfect for rain - but I'd never think of racing
> it.

Generalizations will get you in trouble. I have a Vitus nearly 20 years
old that is easily 19lbs and is not harsh by any atretch of the
imagination. (Nor would most people find its flexibility an issue.)

> Today's bikes are EASILY below 17lbs and with "improvements"
> (debatable) in wheelsets, frame materials, and components - I'd say
> that the $1k bike of today (like those I mentioned at bikesdirect.com)
> far outpaces anything from '96. A guy I race with finally upgraded his
> '00 OCLV frame to a new Bianchi. Night and day.

I frankly don't believe that the $1000 bikes on that website are under
17lbs. I'd guess closer to 20. From what I've seen, you need to make a
big investment in carbon at >$4000 to get a fully equipped bike down to
16lbs. And I would have to see them on the scales to be convinced that
a contemporary "Mercier" alloy frame on a $995 bike is lighter than a
good alloy frame from 10 years ago.

 

[damyth]

[email protected] wrote:
> I guess you missed the rumor here of Campy 12s. Also SRAM road brake
> lever shifters.

Gah!! Is Campagnolo going back to 6 speed, one freehub & derailleur on
each side of the bike?

Just when I thought it was safe to upgrade they come out with more
speeds. Seriously, where are they going to come up with the space to
put the 2 additional cogs?

Any in my own case, I think I'd go to a triple instead of going 12 in
the back, but that's just me.