SRAM Force test ride

[email hidden] wrote:

The System Six bike was nicer and faster

Quoted message said:

than the Synapse.

Pray tell. How was the bike faster?

You say it's easy to overshift in the rear, easy to accidentally
downshift in the front. And no trim in the big ring. That doesn't
sound like "A definite improvement over STI."

OK, before you say "rebuildable" it just doesn't sound quite as well
thought out or refined as STI (strictly in terms of functionality) or
Ergo.

Quoted message said:

Cannondale was loaning out bikes for test rides on a recent ride. I
borrowed a new Cannondale System Six bike with SRAM Force shifters and
both derailleurs. The System Six has carbon toptube, downtube,
headtube. And aluminum seattube, chainstays, seatstays. Carbon fork,
integrated headset. 58cm size. Sort of compact shaped frame.
Cannondale Hollowgram aluminum crankset, 53-39 rings. Cannondale house
brand dual pivot caliper brakes. Dura Ace chain. Ultegra or Dura Ace
10 speed cassette, 12-25. Mavic Ksyrium ES SC SL or something wheels.
Black with one red spoke. Michelin tires I think. FSA carbon bar,
round, not wing shaped. Cannondale house brand carbon stem. USE Alien
carbon seatpost. 31.8mm. Fizik saddle.

Ride consisted of 80 miles of hills, headwind, and heat. Bike was very
fast and very light. There may have been some new bike placebo effect
at work. It may have been I was extra strong that day. But the bike
was not a deterrent to fast riding. Bike rode no hands at speed just
fine. Steering seemed neutral enough. A very nice bike. I think the
retail price is around $5,000.

SRAM Force shifters shift very nicely to small cogs in back. SRAM uses
the STI method of shifting to small cogs in back. Push the lever, hear
the click, release the lever, chain moves to smaller cog in back.
Pretty quick and easy to do from hoods or drops. One cog at a time.
Not as quick as Ergo where you push the thumb button and the shift
occurs as you push the button, no releasing of the button necessary.
And you can shift down many cogs with one push of the button.

SRAM Force shifts to bigger cogs in back were pretty good. But there
was a bit of imprecision. Same lever is used for shifting up or down
the cogs in back. You have to push it a bit further to get the chain
to move to a bigger cog in back. So you have to sort of know how far
to push it or listen for the second click. First click when pushing
the lever is to indicate you can go to a smaller cog, second click
indicates you are moving to a bigger cog. Due to bumps in the road,
wind noise, moving of the hands/arms while riding, fatigue, effort of
pedaling, etc. its not too difficult to shift up two cogs in back when
you only want one. Sort of endemic with trying to make one lever do
too many things instead of having separate levers/buttons for each
operation, up shifts, downshifts, and braking.

SRAM Force shifting of the front derailleur was very good going from
the small ring to the big ring. Very easy to do from the drops or
hoods. Shifting from the big ring to the small ring was also easy to
do from any hand position. Problems were the lack of any trim at all
when in the big ring. And only one click of trim when in the small
ring. And when in the big ring if you wanted to push the lever to make
sure you were in the big ring, you were automatically shifted to the
small ring since when you push the lever it moves the front derailleur
to the opposite position of where it is.

SRAM Force shifter levers/hoods were comfortable. Very similar shape
to Ergo. Cables can be routed on both sides of the bar or both in
front of the bar. Just like Ergo. But with SRAM putting both cables
in front of the bar requires the cable to cut across the bar right
behind the hood and is very uncomfortable. The bike I rode had both
cables in front and I complained to the Cannondale rep when turning it
in. The mechanic said they built up bikes both ways, both cables in
front and cables on either side of the bar, before they knew having the
cables on both sides of the bars was the only way to go. The mechanic
started taking the bar tape off the bike and fixing the cables.

I was fairly impressed with the SRAM Force shifting. A definite
improvement over STI. I won't be trading in my Campagnolo for SRAM.
And if I were getting another new bike, it would have Campagnolo, not
SRAM.

The next day I test rode a Cannondale Synapse all carbon frame bike
with Shimano 105 10 speed triple. Another 80 miles of hills, headwind,
and heat. And some flat too. The System Six bike was nicer and faster
than the Synapse. SRAM Force was nicer than the Shimano 105.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The next day I test rode a Cannondale Synapse all carbon frame bike
with Shimano 105 10 speed triple. Another 80 miles of hills, headwind,
and heat. And some flat too. The System Six bike was nicer and faster
than the Synapse. SRAM Force was nicer than the Shimano 105.

Thanks for the report.

Life is Good!
Jeff

Quoted message said:

You say it's easy to overshift in the rear, easy to accidentally
downshift in the front. And no trim in the big ring. That doesn't
sound like "A definite improvement over STI."

OK, before you say "rebuildable" it just doesn't sound quite as well
thought out or refined as STI (strictly in terms of functionality) or
Ergo.

I have ridden Dan Smatz's bike(local racer) and installed a group on
one of his bikes(all Force stuff) and I agree with the teat ride. NOT
very refined shifting but first wack at it...EXPENSIVE tho-trying to
make it seem worth it with carbon, but $550 for Force levers and lots
for the RD also...we are going to have a test ride bike with it in
about a week, got a group from QBP-I think it will help sell Campag
Chorus more than anything else-cheaper, works better...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Cannondale was loaning out bikes for test rides on a recent ride. I
borrowed a new Cannondale System Six bike with SRAM Force shifters and
both derailleurs. The System Six has carbon toptube, downtube,
headtube. And aluminum seattube, chainstays, seatstays. Carbon fork,
integrated headset. 58cm size. Sort of compact shaped frame.
Cannondale Hollowgram aluminum crankset, 53-39 rings. Cannondale house
brand dual pivot caliper brakes. Dura Ace chain. Ultegra or Dura Ace
10 speed cassette, 12-25. Mavic Ksyrium ES SC SL or something wheels.
Black with one red spoke. Michelin tires I think. FSA carbon bar,
round, not wing shaped. Cannondale house brand carbon stem. USE Alien
carbon seatpost. 31.8mm. Fizik saddle.

Ride consisted of 80 miles of hills, headwind, and heat. Bike was very
fast and very light. There may have been some new bike placebo effect
at work. It may have been I was extra strong that day. But the bike
was not a deterrent to fast riding. Bike rode no hands at speed just
fine. Steering seemed neutral enough. A very nice bike. I think the
retail price is around $5,000.

SRAM Force shifters shift very nicely to small cogs in back. SRAM uses
the STI method of shifting to small cogs in back. Push the lever, hear
the click, release the lever, chain moves to smaller cog in back.
Pretty quick and easy to do from hoods or drops. One cog at a time.
Not as quick as Ergo where you push the thumb button and the shift
occurs as you push the button, no releasing of the button necessary.
And you can shift down many cogs with one push of the button.

SRAM Force shifts to bigger cogs in back were pretty good. But there
was a bit of imprecision. Same lever is used for shifting up or down
the cogs in back. You have to push it a bit further to get the chain
to move to a bigger cog in back. So you have to sort of know how far
to push it or listen for the second click. First click when pushing
the lever is to indicate you can go to a smaller cog, second click
indicates you are moving to a bigger cog. Due to bumps in the road,
wind noise, moving of the hands/arms while riding, fatigue, effort of
pedaling, etc. its not too difficult to shift up two cogs in back when
you only want one. Sort of endemic with trying to make one lever do
too many things instead of having separate levers/buttons for each
operation, up shifts, downshifts, and braking.

SRAM Force shifting of the front derailleur was very good going from
the small ring to the big ring. Very easy to do from the drops or
hoods. Shifting from the big ring to the small ring was also easy to
do from any hand position. Problems were the lack of any trim at all
when in the big ring. And only one click of trim when in the small
ring. And when in the big ring if you wanted to push the lever to make
sure you were in the big ring, you were automatically shifted to the
small ring since when you push the lever it moves the front derailleur
to the opposite position of where it is.

SRAM Force shifter levers/hoods were comfortable. Very similar shape
to Ergo. Cables can be routed on both sides of the bar or both in
front of the bar. Just like Ergo. But with SRAM putting both cables
in front of the bar requires the cable to cut across the bar right
behind the hood and is very uncomfortable. The bike I rode had both
cables in front and I complained to the Cannondale rep when turning it
in. The mechanic said they built up bikes both ways, both cables in
front and cables on either side of the bar, before they knew having the
cables on both sides of the bars was the only way to go. The mechanic
started taking the bar tape off the bike and fixing the cables.

I was fairly impressed with the SRAM Force shifting. A definite
improvement over STI. I won't be trading in my Campagnolo for SRAM.
And if I were getting another new bike, it would have Campagnolo, not
SRAM.

The next day I test rode a Cannondale Synapse all carbon frame bike
with Shimano 105 10 speed triple. Another 80 miles of hills, headwind,
and heat. And some flat too. The System Six bike was nicer and faster
than the Synapse. SRAM Force was nicer than the Shimano 105.

Quoted message said:

You say it's easy to overshift in the rear, easy to accidentally
downshift in the front. And no trim in the big ring. That doesn't
sound like "A definite improvement over STI."

Not easy to overshift in the rear, but more likely than with Ergo or
STI. Since you have one lever doing both the upshifting and
downshifting, and you have to move that lever so far to get past the
shift to a smaller cog spot, you can then push it too far to get two
shifts up in back instead of the one you wanted. Its a problem of
having the one lever do two things that are the opposite of each other,
upshift and downshift. Vast majority of the time it works fine,
particularly if you are taking your time shifting and not trying to get
up the hills fast. But sometimes I like to ride hard up the hills and
that is when you can shift up more cogs than you want, when you are
riding hard and shifting quick.

Not really easy to accidentally downshift in the front. This problem
is more of an issue with being accustomed to other levers. In both STI
and Ergo you can push on the levers and make sure you are really in the
big ring and if you are nothing happens. But with SRAM you have to
unlearn this reassuring habit since when you are in the big ring and
push on teh lever to make sure you are in the big ring, the SRAM will
shift the chain to the small ring. Just the way its mechanism works.
So if you get SRAM, just look down at the big ring instead of pushing
on the lever to reassure yourself you are in the big ring.

STI has horrible trim in both rings. So SRAM improved upon front
derailleur trim over STI by partially eliminating it. Sometimes the
fix, STI trim, is worse than the problem, chain rub. So its better to
just live with the problem than to invent a fix that is worse. SRAM
chose this method for trim on the big ring.

On day one I rode my Ergo bike. On day two I rode a bike with SRAM.
On day three I rode a bike with STI 10 speed. This is the same order
of quality shifting, comfort, etc.

Quoted message said:

OK, before you say "rebuildable" it just doesn't sound quite as well
thought out or refined as STI (strictly in terms of functionality) or
Ergo.

I think for the factory bike riders who only know STI, the SRAM will be
an eye opener. In my back to back 80 mile test rides over hilly
terrain, the SRAM was much better. It has some quirks, disadvantages,
but overall much better than STI. For the person who rides Ergo, the
SRAM will have some advantages, like the very fast shifts to smaller
cogs in back and to the small ring. Although you can only downshift
one cog at a time instead of many like Ergo. But its lack of front
derailleur trim and imprecision when shifting to a bigger cog in back
are negatives compared to Ergo. Overall Ergo is better.

As for rebuildable, Ergo is rebuildable. STI is not. Rebuilding the
levers is not done too often, so for the vast majority of people its
not a major factor in the decision.

I'd suggest all factory bike riders to take a very lengthy test ride on
SRAM before buying another factory bike. Compare it to your current
STI factory bike. I think SRAM will be on factory bikes starting in
the fall. And if by some miracle a bike shop or club rider in your
area has a frame built up with Ergo, give it a lengthy test ride too.
By lengthy test ride I mean more than 50 miles of a hilly route. A
whole day of riding in various terrain. Not just a ride raround the
parking lot or even a few miles on a local bike trail or up the one
hill around the corner. Test ride the bike for hours.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Cannondale was loaning out bikes for test rides on a recent ride. I
borrowed a new Cannondale System Six bike with SRAM Force shifters and
both derailleurs. The System Six has carbon toptube, downtube,
headtube. And aluminum seattube, chainstays, seatstays. Carbon fork,
integrated headset. 58cm size. Sort of compact shaped frame.
Cannondale Hollowgram aluminum crankset, 53-39 rings. Cannondale house
brand dual pivot caliper brakes. Dura Ace chain. Ultegra or Dura Ace
10 speed cassette, 12-25. Mavic Ksyrium ES SC SL or something wheels.
Black with one red spoke. Michelin tires I think. FSA carbon bar,
round, not wing shaped. Cannondale house brand carbon stem. USE Alien
carbon seatpost. 31.8mm. Fizik saddle.

Ride consisted of 80 miles of hills, headwind, and heat. Bike was very
fast and very light. There may have been some new bike placebo effect
at work. It may have been I was extra strong that day. But the bike
was not a deterrent to fast riding. Bike rode no hands at speed just
fine. Steering seemed neutral enough. A very nice bike. I think the
retail price is around $5,000.

SRAM Force shifters shift very nicely to small cogs in back. SRAM uses
the STI method of shifting to small cogs in back. Push the lever, hear
the click, release the lever, chain moves to smaller cog in back.
Pretty quick and easy to do from hoods or drops. One cog at a time.
Not as quick as Ergo where you push the thumb button and the shift
occurs as you push the button, no releasing of the button necessary.
And you can shift down many cogs with one push of the button.

SRAM Force shifts to bigger cogs in back were pretty good. But there
was a bit of imprecision. Same lever is used for shifting up or down
the cogs in back. You have to push it a bit further to get the chain
to move to a bigger cog in back. So you have to sort of know how far
to push it or listen for the second click. First click when pushing
the lever is to indicate you can go to a smaller cog, second click
indicates you are moving to a bigger cog. Due to bumps in the road,
wind noise, moving of the hands/arms while riding, fatigue, effort of
pedaling, etc. its not too difficult to shift up two cogs in back when
you only want one. Sort of endemic with trying to make one lever do
too many things instead of having separate levers/buttons for each
operation, up shifts, downshifts, and braking.

SRAM Force shifting of the front derailleur was very good going from
the small ring to the big ring. Very easy to do from the drops or
hoods. Shifting from the big ring to the small ring was also easy to
do from any hand position. Problems were the lack of any trim at all
when in the big ring. And only one click of trim when in the small
ring. And when in the big ring if you wanted to push the lever to make
sure you were in the big ring, you were automatically shifted to the
small ring since when you push the lever it moves the front derailleur
to the opposite position of where it is.

SRAM Force shifter levers/hoods were comfortable. Very similar shape
to Ergo. Cables can be routed on both sides of the bar or both in
front of the bar. Just like Ergo. But with SRAM putting both cables
in front of the bar requires the cable to cut across the bar right
behind the hood and is very uncomfortable. The bike I rode had both
cables in front and I complained to the Cannondale rep when turning it
in. The mechanic said they built up bikes both ways, both cables in
front and cables on either side of the bar, before they knew having the
cables on both sides of the bars was the only way to go. The mechanic
started taking the bar tape off the bike and fixing the cables.

I was fairly impressed with the SRAM Force shifting. A definite
improvement over STI. I won't be trading in my Campagnolo for SRAM.
And if I were getting another new bike, it would have Campagnolo, not
SRAM.

The next day I test rode a Cannondale Synapse all carbon frame bike
with Shimano 105 10 speed triple. Another 80 miles of hills, headwind,
and heat. And some flat too. The System Six bike was nicer and faster
than the Synapse. SRAM Force was nicer than the Shimano 105.

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:

The System Six bike was nicer and faster

Quoted message said:

than the Synapse.

Pray tell. How was the bike faster?

I covered roughly the same distance faster on the System Six than on
the Synapse. And the terrain was more difficult on the System Six day
than on the Synapse day. And the temperature was hotter on the System
Six day than on the Synapse day. And the headwind was stronger on the
System Six day than on the Synapse day.

[email hidden] a écrit :

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:

The System Six bike was nicer and faster

Quoted message said:

than the Synapse.

Pray tell. How was the bike faster?

I covered roughly the same distance faster on the System Six than on
the Synapse. And the terrain was more difficult on the System Six day
than on the Synapse day. And the temperature was hotter on the System
Six day than on the Synapse day. And the headwind was stronger on the
System Six day than on the Synapse day.

Aha ! It was faster. Funny. I thought you wrote that in the OP.
I guess that means the other was slower. No, I have the idea. Thanks.

--

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR
-
Les faits relatés ici ne sont que pure fiction, et ne sauraient être
utilisés ou rapprochés d'une situation réelle existant ou ayant
existée

Cool, I appreciate the details. I will say I have owned and spent lots
of time on bikes with Shimano 9, Shimano 10, and Campy 10. In sheer
terms of functionality I find all these systems great and have no
strong preference for either. And while the Campy front derailleur
system is definitely better than Shimano's, I've also never experienced
any problems with trim on a properly adjusted Shimano bike. Front STI
is just very sensitive to proper adjustment, and a lot of riders and
shops don't seem to set them up accurately. Once it's dialed in it
works very well.

I'm also a big "double check I'm in the big ring while coasting down a
fast descent," so I'd have a real problem unlearning that habit. And
you mention it works better if you "take your time shifting," which
doesn't sound like a good thing in a thoroughbred racing group like
this.

I'm excited SRAM is offering an alternative, but I'm getting the sense
that beyond the boutique appeal there may need to be refinement before
this stuff is at the level of the high-end S and C stuff.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You say it's easy to overshift in the rear, easy to accidentally
downshift in the front. And no trim in the big ring. That doesn't
sound like "A definite improvement over STI."

Not easy to overshift in the rear, but more likely than with Ergo or
STI. Since you have one lever doing both the upshifting and
downshifting, and you have to move that lever so far to get past the
shift to a smaller cog spot, you can then push it too far to get two
shifts up in back instead of the one you wanted. Its a problem of
having the one lever do two things that are the opposite of each other,
upshift and downshift. Vast majority of the time it works fine,
particularly if you are taking your time shifting and not trying to get
up the hills fast. But sometimes I like to ride hard up the hills and
that is when you can shift up more cogs than you want, when you are
riding hard and shifting quick.

Not really easy to accidentally downshift in the front. This problem
is more of an issue with being accustomed to other levers. In both STI
and Ergo you can push on the levers and make sure you are really in the
big ring and if you are nothing happens. But with SRAM you have to
unlearn this reassuring habit since when you are in the big ring and
push on teh lever to make sure you are in the big ring, the SRAM will
shift the chain to the small ring. Just the way its mechanism works.
So if you get SRAM, just look down at the big ring instead of pushing
on the lever to reassure yourself you are in the big ring.

STI has horrible trim in both rings. So SRAM improved upon front
derailleur trim over STI by partially eliminating it. Sometimes the
fix, STI trim, is worse than the problem, chain rub. So its better to
just live with the problem than to invent a fix that is worse. SRAM
chose this method for trim on the big ring.

On day one I rode my Ergo bike. On day two I rode a bike with SRAM.
On day three I rode a bike with STI 10 speed. This is the same order
of quality shifting, comfort, etc.

Quoted message said:

OK, before you say "rebuildable" it just doesn't sound quite as well
thought out or refined as STI (strictly in terms of functionality) or
Ergo.

I think for the factory bike riders who only know STI, the SRAM will be
an eye opener. In my back to back 80 mile test rides over hilly
terrain, the SRAM was much better. It has some quirks, disadvantages,
but overall much better than STI. For the person who rides Ergo, the
SRAM will have some advantages, like the very fast shifts to smaller
cogs in back and to the small ring. Although you can only downshift
one cog at a time instead of many like Ergo. But its lack of front
derailleur trim and imprecision when shifting to a bigger cog in back
are negatives compared to Ergo. Overall Ergo is better.

As for rebuildable, Ergo is rebuildable. STI is not. Rebuilding the
levers is not done too often, so for the vast majority of people its
not a major factor in the decision.

I'd suggest all factory bike riders to take a very lengthy test ride on
SRAM before buying another factory bike. Compare it to your current
STI factory bike. I think SRAM will be on factory bikes starting in
the fall. And if by some miracle a bike shop or club rider in your
area has a frame built up with Ergo, give it a lengthy test ride too.
By lengthy test ride I mean more than 50 miles of a hilly route. A
whole day of riding in various terrain. Not just a ride raround the
parking lot or even a few miles on a local bike trail or up the one
hill around the corner. Test ride the bike for hours.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Cannondale was loaning out bikes for test rides on a recent ride. I
borrowed a new Cannondale System Six bike with SRAM Force shifters and
both derailleurs. The System Six has carbon toptube, downtube,
headtube. And aluminum seattube, chainstays, seatstays. Carbon fork,
integrated headset. 58cm size. Sort of compact shaped frame.
Cannondale Hollowgram aluminum crankset, 53-39 rings. Cannondale house
brand dual pivot caliper brakes. Dura Ace chain. Ultegra or Dura Ace
10 speed cassette, 12-25. Mavic Ksyrium ES SC SL or something wheels.
Black with one red spoke. Michelin tires I think. FSA carbon bar,
round, not wing shaped. Cannondale house brand carbon stem. USE Alien
carbon seatpost. 31.8mm. Fizik saddle.

Ride consisted of 80 miles of hills, headwind, and heat. Bike was very
fast and very light. There may have been some new bike placebo effect
at work. It may have been I was extra strong that day. But the bike
was not a deterrent to fast riding. Bike rode no hands at speed just
fine. Steering seemed neutral enough. A very nice bike. I think the
retail price is around $5,000.

SRAM Force shifters shift very nicely to small cogs in back. SRAM uses
the STI method of shifting to small cogs in back. Push the lever, hear
the click, release the lever, chain moves to smaller cog in back.
Pretty quick and easy to do from hoods or drops. One cog at a time.
Not as quick as Ergo where you push the thumb button and the shift
occurs as you push the button, no releasing of the button necessary.
And you can shift down many cogs with one push of the button.

SRAM Force shifts to bigger cogs in back were pretty good. But there
was a bit of imprecision. Same lever is used for shifting up or down
the cogs in back. You have to push it a bit further to get the chain
to move to a bigger cog in back. So you have to sort of know how far
to push it or listen for the second click. First click when pushing
the lever is to indicate you can go to a smaller cog, second click
indicates you are moving to a bigger cog. Due to bumps in the road,
wind noise, moving of the hands/arms while riding, fatigue, effort of
pedaling, etc. its not too difficult to shift up two cogs in back when
you only want one. Sort of endemic with trying to make one lever do
too many things instead of having separate levers/buttons for each
operation, up shifts, downshifts, and braking.

SRAM Force shifting of the front derailleur was very good going from
the small ring to the big ring. Very easy to do from the drops or
hoods. Shifting from the big ring to the small ring was also easy to
do from any hand position. Problems were the lack of any trim at all
when in the big ring. And only one click of trim when in the small
ring. And when in the big ring if you wanted to push the lever to make
sure you were in the big ring, you were automatically shifted to the
small ring since when you push the lever it moves the front derailleur
to the opposite position of where it is.

SRAM Force shifter levers/hoods were comfortable. Very similar shape
to Ergo. Cables can be routed on both sides of the bar or both in
front of the bar. Just like Ergo. But with SRAM putting both cables
in front of the bar requires the cable to cut across the bar right
behind the hood and is very uncomfortable. The bike I rode had both
cables in front and I complained to the Cannondale rep when turning it
in. The mechanic said they built up bikes both ways, both cables in
front and cables on either side of the bar, before they knew having the
cables on both sides of the bars was the only way to go. The mechanic
started taking the bar tape off the bike and fixing the cables.

I was fairly impressed with the SRAM Force shifting. A definite
improvement over STI. I won't be trading in my Campagnolo for SRAM.
And if I were getting another new bike, it would have Campagnolo, not
SRAM.

The next day I test rode a Cannondale Synapse all carbon frame bike
with Shimano 105 10 speed triple. Another 80 miles of hills, headwind,
and heat. And some flat too. The System Six bike was nicer and faster
than the Synapse. SRAM Force was nicer than the Shimano 105.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:

The System Six bike was nicer and faster

Quoted message said:

than the Synapse.

Pray tell. How was the bike faster?

I covered roughly the same distance faster on the System Six than on
the Synapse. And the terrain was more difficult on the System Six day
than on the Synapse day. And the temperature was hotter on the System
Six day than on the Synapse day. And the headwind was stronger on the
System Six day than on the Synapse day.

I see. So you were faster not the bike.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:

The System Six bike was nicer and faster

Quoted message said:

than the Synapse.

Pray tell. How was the bike faster?

I covered roughly the same distance faster on the System Six than on
the Synapse. And the terrain was more difficult on the System Six day
than on the Synapse day. And the temperature was hotter on the System
Six day than on the Synapse day. And the headwind was stronger on the
System Six day than on the Synapse day.

Dear Russell,

At first, you wrote:

"Ride consisted of 80 miles of hills, headwind, and heat. Bike was
very fast and very light. There may have been some new bike placebo
effect at work. It may have been I was extra strong that day."

People are questioning your later conclusion about one bike being
faster because they see no specific times and distances and because
ordinary variation is usually much greater than any tiny advantage that
one bicycle enjoys over a roughly similar bicycle.

To illustrate ordinary variation . . .

time dist avg mph mph mph avg
hh:ss miles mph temp #1hill #2hill #3hill hills date
51:54 15.152 17.52 72f 41.1 41.8 34.1 39.0 07-08-2006
48:46 15.191 18.69 69f 40.2 37.6 35.3 37.7 avg for 205
rides in 2006
44:19 15.154 20.52 81f 42.4 39.3 36.6 39.4 07-20-2006

Same bike, same loop, same rider, same tuck. No slowing for any
traffic.

The average is lower because it includes colder temperature rides from
January onward.

The slow ride was probably just the wind (which doesn't show up well in
downhill maximum speeds) and the engine performing less impressively
than usual.

The fast ride 12 days later was nice, but probably still just the wind
and the engine having a slightly better than average day.

Anyone looking at the slow ride and the fast ride might mistakenly
think that a marvelous new bicycle had made a huge difference,
increasing my speed by 3.0 mph.

But most speed improvements due to the slight differences between
roughly similar bicycles can't be seen by comparing two rides.

The differences due to the wind, the road, the temperature, the
humidity, and what the rider ate for breakfast will swamp the slight
improvements due to tires, spoke count, frame weight, and so forth.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:

The System Six bike was nicer and faster
> than the Synapse.

Pray tell. How was the bike faster?

I covered roughly the same distance faster on the System Six than on
the Synapse. And the terrain was more difficult on the System Six day
than on the Synapse day. And the temperature was hotter on the System
Six day than on the Synapse day. And the headwind was stronger on the
System Six day than on the Synapse day.

I see. So you were faster not the bike.

Me and the bike finished together. Me and whichever bike I was riding
that day had the same pace that day. Me and the System Six went at a
faster pace than me and the Synapse. Whether you think the faster pace
was due to the bike or me is your choice.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You say it's easy to overshift in the rear, easy to accidentally
downshift in the front. And no trim in the big ring. That doesn't
sound like "A definite improvement over STI."

Not easy to overshift in the rear, but more likely than with Ergo or
STI. Since you have one lever doing both the upshifting and
downshifting, and you have to move that lever so far to get past the
shift to a smaller cog spot, you can then push it too far to get two
shifts up in back instead of the one you wanted. Its a problem of
having the one lever do two things that are the opposite of each other,
upshift and downshift. Vast majority of the time it works fine,
particularly if you are taking your time shifting and not trying to get
up the hills fast. But sometimes I like to ride hard up the hills and
that is when you can shift up more cogs than you want, when you are
riding hard and shifting quick.

Not really easy to accidentally downshift in the front. This problem
is more of an issue with being accustomed to other levers. In both STI
and Ergo you can push on the levers and make sure you are really in the
big ring and if you are nothing happens. But with SRAM you have to
unlearn this reassuring habit since when you are in the big ring and
push on teh lever to make sure you are in the big ring, the SRAM will
shift the chain to the small ring. Just the way its mechanism works.
So if you get SRAM, just look down at the big ring instead of pushing
on the lever to reassure yourself you are in the big ring.

STI has horrible trim in both rings. So SRAM improved upon front
derailleur trim over STI by partially eliminating it. Sometimes the
fix, STI trim, is worse than the problem, chain rub. So its better to
just live with the problem than to invent a fix that is worse. SRAM
chose this method for trim on the big ring.

On day one I rode my Ergo bike. On day two I rode a bike with SRAM.
On day three I rode a bike with STI 10 speed. This is the same order
of quality shifting, comfort, etc.

Quoted message said:

OK, before you say "rebuildable" it just doesn't sound quite as well
thought out or refined as STI (strictly in terms of functionality) or
Ergo.

I think for the factory bike riders who only know STI, the SRAM will be
an eye opener. In my back to back 80 mile test rides over hilly
terrain, the SRAM was much better. It has some quirks, disadvantages,
but overall much better than STI. For the person who rides Ergo, the
SRAM will have some advantages, like the very fast shifts to smaller
cogs in back and to the small ring. Although you can only downshift
one cog at a time instead of many like Ergo. But its lack of front
derailleur trim and imprecision when shifting to a bigger cog in back
are negatives compared to Ergo. Overall Ergo is better.

As for rebuildable, Ergo is rebuildable. STI is not. Rebuilding the
levers is not done too often, so for the vast majority of people its
not a major factor in the decision.

Dude at Sram said the levers are rebuildable..gotta take the brake
lever off, with a non reuseable pin, to get access to the
innards...we'll see. Rebuildable w/o parts = not rebuildable.

Quoted message said:

I'd suggest all factory bike riders to take a very lengthy test ride on
SRAM before buying another factory bike. Compare it to your current
STI factory bike. I think SRAM will be on factory bikes starting in
the fall. And if by some miracle a bike shop or club rider in your
area has a frame built up with Ergo, give it a lengthy test ride too.
By lengthy test ride I mean more than 50 miles of a hilly route. A
whole day of riding in various terrain. Not just a ride raround the
parking lot or even a few miles on a local bike trail or up the one
hill around the corner. Test ride the bike for hours.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Cannondale was loaning out bikes for test rides on a recent ride. I
borrowed a new Cannondale System Six bike with SRAM Force shifters and
both derailleurs. The System Six has carbon toptube, downtube,
headtube. And aluminum seattube, chainstays, seatstays. Carbon fork,
integrated headset. 58cm size. Sort of compact shaped frame.
Cannondale Hollowgram aluminum crankset, 53-39 rings. Cannondale house
brand dual pivot caliper brakes. Dura Ace chain. Ultegra or Dura Ace
10 speed cassette, 12-25. Mavic Ksyrium ES SC SL or something wheels.
Black with one red spoke. Michelin tires I think. FSA carbon bar,
round, not wing shaped. Cannondale house brand carbon stem. USE Alien
carbon seatpost. 31.8mm. Fizik saddle.

Ride consisted of 80 miles of hills, headwind, and heat. Bike was very
fast and very light. There may have been some new bike placebo effect
at work. It may have been I was extra strong that day. But the bike
was not a deterrent to fast riding. Bike rode no hands at speed just
fine. Steering seemed neutral enough. A very nice bike. I think the
retail price is around $5,000.

SRAM Force shifters shift very nicely to small cogs in back. SRAM uses
the STI method of shifting to small cogs in back. Push the lever, hear
the click, release the lever, chain moves to smaller cog in back.
Pretty quick and easy to do from hoods or drops. One cog at a time.
Not as quick as Ergo where you push the thumb button and the shift
occurs as you push the button, no releasing of the button necessary.
And you can shift down many cogs with one push of the button.

SRAM Force shifts to bigger cogs in back were pretty good. But there
was a bit of imprecision. Same lever is used for shifting up or down
the cogs in back. You have to push it a bit further to get the chain
to move to a bigger cog in back. So you have to sort of know how far
to push it or listen for the second click. First click when pushing
the lever is to indicate you can go to a smaller cog, second click
indicates you are moving to a bigger cog. Due to bumps in the road,
wind noise, moving of the hands/arms while riding, fatigue, effort of
pedaling, etc. its not too difficult to shift up two cogs in back when
you only want one. Sort of endemic with trying to make one lever do
too many things instead of having separate levers/buttons for each
operation, up shifts, downshifts, and braking.

SRAM Force shifting of the front derailleur was very good going from
the small ring to the big ring. Very easy to do from the drops or
hoods. Shifting from the big ring to the small ring was also easy to
do from any hand position. Problems were the lack of any trim at all
when in the big ring. And only one click of trim when in the small
ring. And when in the big ring if you wanted to push the lever to make
sure you were in the big ring, you were automatically shifted to the
small ring since when you push the lever it moves the front derailleur
to the opposite position of where it is.

SRAM Force shifter levers/hoods were comfortable. Very similar shape
to Ergo. Cables can be routed on both sides of the bar or both in
front of the bar. Just like Ergo. But with SRAM putting both cables
in front of the bar requires the cable to cut across the bar right
behind the hood and is very uncomfortable. The bike I rode had both
cables in front and I complained to the Cannondale rep when turning it
in. The mechanic said they built up bikes both ways, both cables in
front and cables on either side of the bar, before they knew having the
cables on both sides of the bars was the only way to go. The mechanic
started taking the bar tape off the bike and fixing the cables.

I was fairly impressed with the SRAM Force shifting. A definite
improvement over STI. I won't be trading in my Campagnolo for SRAM.
And if I were getting another new bike, it would have Campagnolo, not
SRAM.

The next day I test rode a Cannondale Synapse all carbon frame bike
with Shimano 105 10 speed triple. Another 80 miles of hills, headwind,
and heat. And some flat too. The System Six bike was nicer and faster
than the Synapse. SRAM Force was nicer than the Shimano 105.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You say it's easy to overshift in the rear, easy to accidentally
downshift in the front. And no trim in the big ring. That doesn't
sound like "A definite improvement over STI."

Not easy to overshift in the rear, but more likely than with Ergo or
STI. Since you have one lever doing both the upshifting and
downshifting, and you have to move that lever so far to get past the
shift to a smaller cog spot, you can then push it too far to get two
shifts up in back instead of the one you wanted. Its a problem of
having the one lever do two things that are the opposite of each
other, upshift and downshift. Vast majority of the time it works
fine, particularly if you are taking your time shifting and not
trying to get up the hills fast. But sometimes I like to ride hard
up the hills and that is when you can shift up more cogs than you
want, when you are riding hard and shifting quick.

Not really easy to accidentally downshift in the front. This problem
is more of an issue with being accustomed to other levers. In both
STI and Ergo you can push on the levers and make sure you are really
in the big ring and if you are nothing happens. But with SRAM you
have to unlearn this reassuring habit since when you are in the big
ring and push on teh lever to make sure you are in the big ring, the
SRAM will shift the chain to the small ring. Just the way its
mechanism works. So if you get SRAM, just look down at the big ring
instead of pushing on the lever to reassure yourself you are in the
big ring.

STI has horrible trim in both rings. So SRAM improved upon front
derailleur trim over STI by partially eliminating it. Sometimes the
fix, STI trim, is worse than the problem, chain rub. So its better to
just live with the problem than to invent a fix that is worse. SRAM
chose this method for trim on the big ring.

On day one I rode my Ergo bike. On day two I rode a bike with SRAM.
On day three I rode a bike with STI 10 speed. This is the same order
of quality shifting, comfort, etc.

Quoted message said:

OK, before you say "rebuildable" it just doesn't sound quite as well
thought out or refined as STI (strictly in terms of functionality) or
Ergo.

I think for the factory bike riders who only know STI, the SRAM will
be an eye opener. In my back to back 80 mile test rides over hilly
terrain, the SRAM was much better. It has some quirks, disadvantages,
but overall much better than STI. For the person who rides Ergo, the
SRAM will have some advantages, like the very fast shifts to smaller
cogs in back and to the small ring. Although you can only downshift
one cog at a time instead of many like Ergo. But its lack of front
derailleur trim and imprecision when shifting to a bigger cog in back
are negatives compared to Ergo. Overall Ergo is better.

I don't get it. If you can shift all 9 gears (minus the one you're starting
in) in one fell swoop on Ergo, how can SRAM shifting be any faster?

BTW, I find Ergo FD trim a necessity, with short chainstays and 39-53t front
chainrings. Even though you're not supposed to, it's nice to be able to get
the full range on the rear cogset. I'm using a 105 double FD though...
--
Phil Lee, Squid

Quoted message said:

On day one I rode my Ergo bike. On day two I rode a bike with SRAM.
On day three I rode a bike with STI 10 speed. This is the same order
of quality shifting, comfort, etc.

Russell (if that's your name),

If you can ride three days in a row for 80 miles or so with hills and
headwind, then I'll take your word for it. Thanks for the report.

Josh

Phil Lee said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You say it's easy to overshift in the rear, easy to accidentally
downshift in the front. And no trim in the big ring. That doesn't
sound like "A definite improvement over STI."

Not easy to overshift in the rear, but more likely than with Ergo or
STI. Since you have one lever doing both the upshifting and
downshifting, and you have to move that lever so far to get past the
shift to a smaller cog spot, you can then push it too far to get two
shifts up in back instead of the one you wanted. Its a problem of
having the one lever do two things that are the opposite of each
other, upshift and downshift. Vast majority of the time it works
fine, particularly if you are taking your time shifting and not
trying to get up the hills fast. But sometimes I like to ride hard
up the hills and that is when you can shift up more cogs than you
want, when you are riding hard and shifting quick.

Not really easy to accidentally downshift in the front. This problem
is more of an issue with being accustomed to other levers. In both
STI and Ergo you can push on the levers and make sure you are really
in the big ring and if you are nothing happens. But with SRAM you
have to unlearn this reassuring habit since when you are in the big
ring and push on teh lever to make sure you are in the big ring, the
SRAM will shift the chain to the small ring. Just the way its
mechanism works. So if you get SRAM, just look down at the big ring
instead of pushing on the lever to reassure yourself you are in the
big ring.

STI has horrible trim in both rings. So SRAM improved upon front
derailleur trim over STI by partially eliminating it. Sometimes the
fix, STI trim, is worse than the problem, chain rub. So its better to
just live with the problem than to invent a fix that is worse. SRAM
chose this method for trim on the big ring.

On day one I rode my Ergo bike. On day two I rode a bike with SRAM.
On day three I rode a bike with STI 10 speed. This is the same order
of quality shifting, comfort, etc.

Quoted message said:

OK, before you say "rebuildable" it just doesn't sound quite as well
thought out or refined as STI (strictly in terms of functionality) or
Ergo.

I think for the factory bike riders who only know STI, the SRAM will
be an eye opener. In my back to back 80 mile test rides over hilly
terrain, the SRAM was much better. It has some quirks, disadvantages,
but overall much better than STI. For the person who rides Ergo, the
SRAM will have some advantages, like the very fast shifts to smaller
cogs in back and to the small ring. Although you can only downshift
one cog at a time instead of many like Ergo. But its lack of front
derailleur trim and imprecision when shifting to a bigger cog in back
are negatives compared to Ergo. Overall Ergo is better.

I don't get it. If you can shift all 9 gears (minus the one you're starting
in) in one fell swoop on Ergo, how can SRAM shifting be any faster?

With SRAM the shift to the smaller cog, one at a time, occurs by moving
the lever behind the brake lever. With Ergo the thumb button does
this. When riding in the drops or on the hoods, the lever behind the
brake lever is actually being touched at all times by your pointer
finger or is very, very close to your pointer finger. But the thumb
button for Ergo is not underneath your thumb at any time unless you are
actually shifting. You always have to move your thumb to get it on top
of the button. And it requires more force to push down on the Ergo
thumb button than to flick the SRAM finger lever. Therefore, when
shifting one cog down in back, its faster to get to the SRAM lever with
your pointer finger than to the Ergo thumb button. And requires less
force. Less force being relative since it does not require much force
to push the thumb button down.

If you're shifting down 3-4 cogs at once, then Ergo is faster than
SRAM. But 99+% of my shifts to a smaller cog are one at a time, not
3-4 at a time. Do you shift across the entire cassette frequently?

Quoted message said:

BTW, I find Ergo FD trim a necessity, with short chainstays and 39-53t front
chainrings. Even though you're not supposed to, it's nice to be able to get
the full range on the rear cogset. I'm using a 105 double FD though...

I love my Ergo trim too. The SRAM front derailleur either was set up
very well or maybe it was extra wide between the cages. But it did not
need too much trimming. Just the last cog or maybe last two when in
the big ring. The SRAM does allow trimming of a sort when in the small
ring.

Quoted message said:

--
Phil Lee, Squid

jlee said:

Quoted message said:

On day one I rode my Ergo bike. On day two I rode a bike with SRAM.
On day three I rode a bike with STI 10 speed. This is the same order
of quality shifting, comfort, etc.

Russell (if that's your name),

If you can ride three days in a row for 80 miles or so with hills and
headwind, then I'll take your word for it. Thanks for the report.

Josh

Day 1 with my own Ergo shifted bike was only 55 miles. Day 2 was 80
miles of hills and headwinds on the Cannondale System Six with SRAM
Force. Day 3 was 80 miles of hills, and flats, and headwinds on the
Cannondale Synapse with Shimano 105 10 speed triple. Then back to my
Ergo bike for the remainder of the ride. Day 4 was 70 miles.
Headwinds again but not too many hills.

I encourage everyone to test ride the SRAM equipped bikes when they get
a chance. I had an ideal opportunity because I was on a large ride and
Cannondale, Giant, Trek, and Specialized all had a few(Giant) or
lots(Cannondale) of test bikes available for day long test rides.
Unfortunately I didn't notice the Giant, Trek, Specialized test bikes
until mid way through the ride and never got around to test riding
them. Another ride a few years ago had Litespeed bikes, courtesy of
REI, for day long test rides and I took out one of the aluminum
Litespeeds with carbon seatstays.

Quoted message said:

Phil Lee said:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] wrote:
> You say it's easy to overshift in the rear, easy to accidentally
> downshift in the front. And no trim in the big ring. That doesn't
> sound like "A definite improvement over STI."

Not easy to overshift in the rear, but more likely than with Ergo or
STI. Since you have one lever doing both the upshifting and
downshifting, and you have to move that lever so far to get past the
shift to a smaller cog spot, you can then push it too far to get two
shifts up in back instead of the one you wanted. Its a problem of
having the one lever do two things that are the opposite of each
other, upshift and downshift. Vast majority of the time it works
fine, particularly if you are taking your time shifting and not
trying to get up the hills fast. But sometimes I like to ride hard
up the hills and that is when you can shift up more cogs than you
want, when you are riding hard and shifting quick.

Not really easy to accidentally downshift in the front. This
problem is more of an issue with being accustomed to other levers.
In both STI and Ergo you can push on the levers and make sure you
are really in the big ring and if you are nothing happens. But
with SRAM you have to unlearn this reassuring habit since when you
are in the big ring and push on teh lever to make sure you are in
the big ring, the SRAM will shift the chain to the small ring.
Just the way its mechanism works. So if you get SRAM, just look
down at the big ring instead of pushing on the lever to reassure
yourself you are in the big ring.

STI has horrible trim in both rings. So SRAM improved upon front
derailleur trim over STI by partially eliminating it. Sometimes the
fix, STI trim, is worse than the problem, chain rub. So its better
to just live with the problem than to invent a fix that is worse.
SRAM chose this method for trim on the big ring.

On day one I rode my Ergo bike. On day two I rode a bike with SRAM.
On day three I rode a bike with STI 10 speed. This is the same
order of quality shifting, comfort, etc.

>
> OK, before you say "rebuildable" it just doesn't sound quite as
> well thought out or refined as STI (strictly in terms of
> functionality) or Ergo.

I think for the factory bike riders who only know STI, the SRAM will
be an eye opener. In my back to back 80 mile test rides over hilly
terrain, the SRAM was much better. It has some quirks,
disadvantages, but overall much better than STI. For the person
who rides Ergo, the SRAM will have some advantages, like the very
fast shifts to smaller cogs in back and to the small ring.
Although you can only downshift one cog at a time instead of many
like Ergo. But its lack of front derailleur trim and imprecision
when shifting to a bigger cog in back are negatives compared to
Ergo. Overall Ergo is better.

I don't get it. If you can shift all 9 gears (minus the one you're
starting in) in one fell swoop on Ergo, how can SRAM shifting be any
faster?

With SRAM the shift to the smaller cog, one at a time, occurs by
moving the lever behind the brake lever. With Ergo the thumb button
does this. When riding in the drops or on the hoods, the lever
behind the brake lever is actually being touched at all times by your
pointer finger or is very, very close to your pointer finger. But
the thumb button for Ergo is not underneath your thumb at any time
unless you are actually shifting. You always have to move your thumb
to get it on top of the button. And it requires more force to push
down on the Ergo thumb button than to flick the SRAM finger lever.
Therefore, when shifting one cog down in back, its faster to get to
the SRAM lever with your pointer finger than to the Ergo thumb
button. And requires less force. Less force being relative since it
does not require much force to push the thumb button down.

I see what you mean now. Sorta like decreasing braking reaction time by
keeping the hands on the brake levers.

Quoted message said:

If you're shifting down 3-4 cogs at once, then Ergo is faster than
SRAM. But 99+% of my shifts to a smaller cog are one at a time, not
3-4 at a time. Do you shift across the entire cassette frequently?

Now that you mention it, I do on the MTB, but yeah... the road bike pretty
much never.

--
Phil Lee, Squid