Why is Shimano so hated by some?

[Tim Jones]

"Chalo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Tim Jones" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > "Chalo" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Shimano parts are not intended for unusually big and strong riders, and the results of them
> > > using Shimano parts can be ugly.
> > >
> >
> > What do you class as a big person,
>
> I am 6'8" tall and I weigh about 360 lbs. at this time. When I rode and broke the most Shimano
> equipment, I weighed between 230 and 275 lbs.
>
> > and were you doing big drops to break your gear?
>
> No. I never liked jumping or riding in the muck, because those activities were hard on my body and
> my then very limited budget constraints. I put just about all my miles and parts failures on
> pavement.
>
> > I have just bought a new wheelset for my Giant Yukon 2004 as I am too
heavy
> > for all the stock wheels I've had with my bikes (bought at the
low-middle
> > cost range) - I'm 6'4" and 220lbs. I ovaled my rim doing bunny hops on bitumen.
>
> Sun Mammoth must be the best rim I have tried for those purposes. 36 spokes build a significantly
> stronger wheel than 32, too.
>
> Load carrying capacity has become my first priority for wheels, so I ususally use 48 spokes on a
> relatively normal rim. Where big hits are an issue, a sturdier rim seems to help more than a high
> spoke count does.
>
> > Is my size what you are talking about as a big rider, and what sort of riding in your experience
> > leads to breaking more core gear.
>
> If you are fit and ride hard, at your size you will break stuff. Safety comes first IMO when
> evaluating your equipment; things that won't hurt you can be replaced when they break instead of
> before they break.
>
> If you are using an ISIS crank or a Shimano "pipe spindle" crank, you are probably safe, but if
> you mess one up I'd advise upgrading to a BMX-style crank rather than trying the same again.
>
> If you are using a square-taper crank, I would strongly suggest that you switch to something
> beefier without waiting around. This is the most breakage-prone structural part of an average
> bicycle if my experience is any indication.
>
> I would stay away from really light 150g-range handlebars if I were you, too. And no carbon
> seatposts! Good luck.
>
> Chalo Colina

Thanks very much for the info Chalo! Much appreciated!

Tim

 

[Robert Strickla]

> > The fact is that Campy's top of the line is head and shoulders higher than Shimano's top of
> > the line.
>
> What does that mean? Are you talking about materials? Just because something uses "fancier"
> materials -- carbon fiber, titanium, unobtanium, whatever -- doesn't make it better.
>
> You have to measure quality in terms of performance -- stiffness, weight, preceision (for
> shifting), feel (for braking), longevity, ease of service, aerodynamics, etc.
>
> If I embed diamonds in a part that weighs the same and works the same that doesn't make it a
> better bike part. It might make it a better engagement present, sure, but not better for cycling.
>
> It's not at all clear that Record is better than Dura-Ace in actual function and certainly strong
> arguments can be made on both sides.

No, I was simply arguing from the standpoint of perceived value. That is, all of those elements
which tend to increase the value of the part which include (but aren't limited to) carbon fiber,
titanium, finish, performance, ease of service, status symbol cache, durability, bleeding edge
technology, etc. To simply arbitrarily match 5 Shimano groups with 5 Campy groups starting at the
top of the line ignores that there are elements of the Record group that would (if they were
included in the Dura-Ace group) drive up the price of the Shimano top group. Therefore, the price
differential isn't relevant. As Peter has pointed out in a different fashion, you wouldn't compare
the top VW model with the top Mercedes model and then announce that Mercedes prices are somehow out
of line. Either way, Campy wins. If you want to buy at price point X then Chorus is the equivalent
product and is a better value for money than Dura-Ace. If you want to buy for prestige then Record
outshines Shimano's top group. As A Muzi (I think) pointed out, you wouldn't arbitrarily start at
the bottom and compare Tourney with Xenon as the two groups aren't comparable in any relevant way.
Likewise, why would you arbitrarily start at the top unless you have some preconceived idea that the
5 road groups should automatically line up with each other. That's silly and needlessly restricts
the 'quality scale' to 5 slots that don't fit reality.

Rob Strickland

 

[Jay Beattie]

"Robert Strickland" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > > The fact is that Campy's top of the line is head and shoulders higher than Shimano's top of
> > > the line.
> >
> > What does that mean? Are you talking about materials? Just
because
> > something uses "fancier" materials -- carbon fiber, titanium, unobtanium, whatever -- doesn't
> > make it better.
> >
> > You have to measure quality in terms of performance --
stiffness,
> > weight, preceision (for shifting), feel (for braking),
longevity, ease
> > of service, aerodynamics, etc.
> >
> > If I embed diamonds in a part that weighs the same and works
the same
> > that doesn't make it a better bike part. It might make it a
better
> > engagement present, sure, but not better for cycling.
> >
> > It's not at all clear that Record is better than Dura-Ace in
actual
> > function and certainly strong arguments can be made on both
sides.
>
> No, I was simply arguing from the standpoint of perceived
value. That is,
> all of those elements which tend to increase the value of the
part which
> include (but aren't limited to) carbon fiber, titanium, finish,
performance,
> ease of service, status symbol cache, durability, bleeding edge
technology,
> etc. To simply arbitrarily match 5 Shimano groups with 5 Campy
groups
> starting at the top of the line ignores that there are elements
of the
> Record group that would (if they were included in the Dura-Ace
group) drive
> up the price of the Shimano top group. Therefore, the price
differential
> isn't relevant. As Peter has pointed out in a different
fashion, you
> wouldn't compare the top VW model with the top Mercedes model
and then
> announce that Mercedes prices are somehow out of line. Either
way, Campy
> wins. If you want to buy at price point X then Chorus is the
equivalent
> product and is a better value for money than Dura-Ace. If you
want to buy
> for prestige then Record outshines Shimano's top group. As A
Muzi (I think)
> pointed out, you wouldn't arbitrarily start at the bottom and
compare
> Tourney with Xenon as the two groups aren't comparable in any
relevant way.
> Likewise, why would you arbitrarily start at the top unless you
have some
> preconceived idea that the 5 road groups should automatically
line up with
> each other. That's silly and needlessly restricts the 'quality
scale' to 5
> slots that don't fit reality.

It also begs the question of what constitutes a relevant difference -- or what justifies the
disparity in price between Campagnolo and Shimano, or between the various model lines made by each.
"Bleeding edge technology" is usually something that I do not want, and I am too old for "status
symbol cache." That belongs to the guys who do not race but shave their legs anyway. -- Jay Beattie.

 

[Robert Strickla]

> It also begs the question of what constitutes a relevant difference -- or what justifies the
> disparity in price between Campagnolo and Shimano, or between the various model lines made by
> each. "Bleeding edge technology" is usually something that I do not want, and I am too old for
> "status symbol cache." That belongs to the guys who do not race but shave their legs anyway. --
> Jay Beattie.

Personally, I agree, but then you and I aren't the guys that carbon and titanium Record cranks are
being marketed to. Nonetheless, there are many who will pay a premium for such things and, at least
insofar as perceived value is the measure, they contribute some amount of what constitutes a
relevant difference. I find that Centaur offers a nice combination of practical value (durability,
performance, reasonable aesthetics, and price) and would probably never be tempted to go any higher
on the 'food chain'. Looking at Shimano's offerings, Ultegra seems to be roughly the equivalent but
Centaur is roughly 10% cheaper. As I see it, then, claims that Campy is more expensive are not
supportable, at least not in my area (Germany). Perhaps pricing structures are different in the
states or the weakness of the dollar would reduce the savings.

Rob Strickland

 

[David]

In article <[email protected]>, Jay Beattie <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Robert Strickland" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > > > The fact is that Campy's top of the line is head and shoulders higher than Shimano's top of
> > > > the line.
> > >

The fact of the matter is that most of the component sales generated by the 2 companies are in the
lower to mid range groups, quality between the two makers are head and shoulders equal.

In my country, the top 2 Campy groups sold are Mirage and Veloce followed by Centaur and Chorus
while Sora and Tiagra for Shimano followed by 105 and Ultegra. The Record and Dura-Aces are reserved
only for the obscenely rich, who can afford to collect Trek Madone or Seven Axiom in their living
room as mantle pieces. This is a true story as I know a guy of asian descent in our club, who would
buy expensive bikes to add to his collection of many other expensive bikes he already have owned.
The point is, the number of people owning Record or Dura-Ace groups are not broadly based, so it is
pointless to even compare top of the line groups of each maker when most of the component usage are
on lower groups.

Let's pick the lower groups. I know that both Shimano and Campagnolo shared the same kind of
workmanship fault. In my own experience, I had a Campy veloce bottom bracket (1998 genre) failed on
me less than 1000km and the Campy only bike shop that sold me refused to deal with the warranty
issue because I did not buy a complete bike off him. He claimed that I probably cycled more than
1000km! I also got a defective crank (Veloce 1998) where the laser etched engraving "Veloce" peeled
off by itself in less than 2 months of use. Dealer again refused to warranty it and claimed that I
probably did a couple of centuries with it. Basically, a wear and tear issue. I eventually got these
2 items replaced at the Campagnolo booth at Interbike 1999 (I was working for a Shimano only bike
shop at the time) and they were nice to replace them with no questions asked. Campagnolo also gave
me a cycle cap, Campy water bottle (nice cage) and those nice Campagnolo fan pins for all my
trouble. At the same time, I brought along with me a 1997 LX free hub that was dead from my Giant
ATX-780 mountain bike, in which I didn't abuse in any way. I also indicated that I have a similar
STX-RC hub of the same year and it still works till this day. I brought it to the Shimano booth and
spoke nicely with the rep there. About an hour later, he gave me a sample LX hub (I think) again no
question asked..

Did I whine and ***** like people here about quality problems with Campagnolo and Shimano? Ofcourse
not.. Why should I? I got replacements from both companies because I presented my case to them
sincerely and in a professional manner. Whining and criticizing products isn't going to get your
case heard and that's probably why people vent their frustration about Shimano products here.

A word of advise to many of you that you actually have more rights than you think when it comes to
customer satisfaction. But the key to getting that service is to be polite and curteous to the
people that want to help you.

Suffice to say, I am extremely happy with all my gear and that includes Shimano, Sachs, SRAM,
Campagnolo and SR Suntour.

 

[Mike Latondress]

David <[email protected]> wrote in
news:051220031049551666%[email protected]:

> I had a Campy veloce bottom bracket (1998 genre) failed on me less than 1000km and the Campy only
> bike shop that sold me refused to deal with the warranty issue

> I also got a defective crank (Veloce 1998) where the laser etched engraving "Veloce" peeled off by
> itself in less than 2 months of use. Dealer again refused to warranty it

Your problem is that you have the wrong bike shop.

 

[Robert Strickla]

> The fact of the matter is that most of the component sales generated by the 2 companies are in the
> lower to mid range groups, quality between the two makers are head and shoulders equal.
>
> In my country, the top 2 Campy groups sold are Mirage and Veloce followed by Centaur and Chorus
> while Sora and Tiagra for Shimano followed by 105 and Ultegra. The Record and Dura-Aces are
> reserved only for the obscenely rich, who can afford to collect Trek Madone or Seven Axiom in
> their living room as mantle pieces. This is a true story as I know a guy of asian descent in our
> club, who would buy expensive bikes to add to his collection of many other expensive bikes he
> already have owned. The point is, the number of people owning Record or Dura-Ace groups are not
> broadly based, so it is pointless to even compare top of the line groups of each maker when most
> of the component usage are on lower groups.

In what way does the volume of component sales have anything to do with how one should compare the
relative quality of the various groups? Those are two separate and unrelated issues. And what do the
buying practices (and ethnicity) of your fellow club members have to do with the matter?

> Let's pick the lower groups. I know that both Shimano and Campagnolo shared the same kind of
> workmanship fault. In my own experience, I had a Campy veloce bottom bracket (1998 genre) failed
> on me less than 1000km and the Campy only bike shop that sold me refused to deal with the warranty
> issue because I did not buy a complete bike off him. He claimed that I probably cycled more than
> 1000km! I also got a defective crank (Veloce 1998) where the laser etched engraving "Veloce"
> peeled off by itself in less than 2 months of use. Dealer again refused to warranty it and claimed
> that I probably did a couple of centuries with it. Basically, a wear and tear issue. I eventually
> got these 2 items replaced at the Campagnolo booth at Interbike 1999 (I was working for a Shimano
> only bike shop at the time) and they were nice to replace them with no questions asked. Campagnolo
> also gave me a cycle cap, Campy water bottle (nice cage) and those nice Campagnolo fan pins for
> all my trouble. At the same time, I brought along with me a 1997 LX free hub that was dead from my
> Giant ATX-780 mountain bike, in which I didn't abuse in any way. I also indicated that I have a
> similar STX-RC hub of the same year and it still works till this day. I brought it to the Shimano
> booth and spoke nicely with the rep there. About an hour later, he gave me a sample LX hub (I
> think) again no question asked..

Why are you continuing to bring up irrelevancies? In what way do a failed Veloce bottom bracket,
a peeling engraving (how is that even possible?), and a dead LX hub exhibit "the same kind of
workmanship fault"? The fact that these three parts failed is not enough to show that any of
them did so because of a workmanship fault much less that they all failed due to the same
workmanship fault.

> Did I whine and ***** like people here about quality problems with Campagnolo and Shimano?
> Ofcourse not.. Why should I? I got replacements from both companies because I presented my case to
> them sincerely and in a professional manner. Whining and criticizing products isn't going to get
> your case heard and that's probably why people vent their frustration about Shimano products here.

Nobody is whining about quality problems. Rather, some have claimed that Shimano's quality leaves
something to be desired. Just because you don't mind having to replace parts after only 1000 km
doesn't mean that the rest of the world should accept that as reasonable. Furthermore, having to go
to Interbike in order to obtain a replacement for said parts is ridiculous and unacceptable.

> A word of advise to many of you that you actually have more rights than you think when it comes to
> customer satisfaction. But the key to getting that service is to be polite and curteous to the
> people that want to help you.

Obviously this strategy worked wonders with your LBS as you ended up having to go directly to the
manufacturer at Interbike to get customer satisfaction.

Rob Strickland

 

[John Forrest To]

On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 19:44:52 +0100, "Robert Strickland" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Personally, I agree, but then you and I aren't the guys that carbon and titanium Record cranks are
>being marketed to.

Hearing people say "Campy's top of the line is head and shoulders higher than Shimano's top of the
line" sure helps that marketing effort, don't you think?

JT
*******************************************
NB: reply-to address is munged

Visit http://www.jt10000.com
*******************************************

 

[David]

In article <[email protected]>, Mike Latondresse <mikelat@no_spamshaw.ca> wrote:

> David <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:051220031049551666%[email protected]:
>
> > I had a Campy veloce bottom bracket (1998 genre) failed on me less than 1000km and the Campy
> > only bike shop that sold me refused to deal with the warranty issue
>
> > I also got a defective crank (Veloce 1998) where the laser etched engraving "Veloce" peeled off
> > by itself in less than 2 months of use. Dealer again refused to warranty it
>
> Your problem is that you have the wrong bike shop.

The Campy bike shop owner's arguement was that, if the bottom bracket was installed by his mechanic,
then he could persue the warranty issue on my behalf since he knows his people touched it. My
problem was, I bought it from him to have my mechanic at the bike store I worked at install it for
me. He claimed that maybe it wasn't installed properly and that it needed a special tool to put it
on the bike. At that time, only bottom brackets above Veloce use the same tool as the one to remove
the lock ring on the cassette. He suspected my mechanic broke it during the installation. Ofcourse
at the Campy booth, their experts deemed that there was actually something wrong with the BB and
apologized for the inconveniences. I told the head of Campy where I bought the parts from and he
assured me that this incident will not happen again.. After that incident however, the Campy shop
didn't seem too eager to do business with me anymore. Suffice to say, I took my business elsewhere..

 

[Tim McNamara]

Mike Latondresse <mikelat@no_spamshaw.ca> writes:

> David <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:051220031049551666%[email protected]:
>
>> I had a Campy veloce bottom bracket (1998 genre) failed on me less than 1000km and the Campy only
>> bike shop that sold me refused to deal with the warranty issue
>
>> I also got a defective crank (Veloce 1998) where the laser etched engraving "Veloce" peeled off
>> by itself in less than 2 months of use. Dealer again refused to warranty it
>
> Your problem is that you have the wrong bike shop.

And should deal with Campy directly if necessary.

 

[Tim McNamara]

[email protected] (John Forrest Tomlinson) writes:

> On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 19:44:52 +0100, "Robert Strickland" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Personally, I agree, but then you and I aren't the guys that carbon and titanium Record cranks are
>>being marketed to.
>
> Hearing people say "Campy's top of the line is head and shoulders higher than Shimano's top of the
> line" sure helps that marketing effort, don't you think?

Or is a measure of the success of that marketing strategy.

 

[Robert Strickla]

> >Personally, I agree, but then you and I aren't the guys that carbon and titanium Record cranks
> >are being marketed to.
>
> Hearing people say "Campy's top of the line is head and shoulders higher than Shimano's top of the
> line" sure helps that marketing effort, don't you think?
>
> JT

So. I don't have anything against their marketing. I'm just not personally interested in it.

Rob Strickland

 

[Chalo]

[email protected] (Jonesy) wrote:

> [email protected] (Chalo) wrote:
>
> > Shimano are not unique in their intentional decision not to serve all consumers-- they must be
> > of the same philosophy as the folks who design most airplane and movie theater seating, or those
> > who build basements with 6-1/2-foot ceilings. But I feel justified in calling all those people
> > incompetent, inconsiderate, and irresponsible.
>
> No, it is you who are those things for expecting me to pay twice as much for airline or movie
> tickets such that things are designed to the
> 99.5th percentile. The fact that YOU don't fit in them does not imply that everyone else is of the
> wrong size or shape.

Man, you little goblins sure are grumpy. I guess you must be mad at God for not giving you more
dignified proportions.

Chalo Colina

 

[Mikemcdermid]

Sorry I was pretty ****** off when I wrote this

However the comments stand as valid if you were top dog at shimano would you choose another way of
putting your product at the top (i dont think you would unless yo were areally nice guy ,and then i
think a lot of the other key decision makers would regard you as the black sheep of the company)

Like I stated shimano's buisness ideology is to get the biggest market share its only an anti
capitalist attitude that would deride this stance you could try and compare them to microsoft and in
a way I suppose, and to a large extent this would be true but can you suggest a way to break the
shimano strangle hold

I cant, and for whatever reason this may be you cannot dispute that over the years shimano has
proved they can come up with good and bad ideas(depending on weather you love or hate both
technology and shimano)and muscle them in to the market place

I for one am the kind of person who openly embraces ideas or technology for whatever merits or
pitfalls it has. I come from a design background which is why now I can be an elitist bigot, Ive
earned the right by working for many companies which either break the mold or fail miserably for
whatever reason be it my fault or not (and i started in a bike shop as a mechanic before moving up
the chain)can differentiate between the pros and cons without having to resort to a favoured
manufacturer. Therfore I pick shimano everytime it may be mass produced **** but it doesnt cost the
earth unless its the top and does what it should for its intended life span be it a day or 10 years
the problem with guys that spend 100 bucks on a rear mech is that they think it will last forever

what this boils down to is consumer preference .The consumer chooses which product to buy and if
shimano has the biggest market share then even to a fool like me, as you make me out to be can tell
you that this is what the consumer is buying,hence a bigger market share for a range of reasons be
it price image or technology .

they are doing something right

mike

[email protected] (Qui si parla Campagnolo) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> mike-<< WELL IVE NEVER READ SUCH A LOAD OF **** IN ALL MY LIFE
>
> 1) Shimano abuse their position as market leader to displace other
> > options from the marketplace, particularly the market for new complete bikes.
>
>
> IN Buisness this is what happens its not a share and share alike world otherwise ther would be no
> variety shimano has made themselves a market leader through good buisness ideology if you dont
> like it get out of the rat race you cannot dispute what they have done
> >><BR><BR>
>
> Ya need to buy a keyboard with caps button and buttons for puncuation....
>
>
>
> Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St. Boulder, CO, 80302
> (303)440-3535 http://www.vecchios.com "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

 

[Tim McNamara]

[email protected] (mikemcdermid) writes:

> Sorry I was pretty ****** off when I wrote this

Unfortunately you're not much more coherent when you're calm. Try using consistent capitalization
and pnctuation, it'll make your point much easier to grasp and you'll find yourself being more
effective. Not top posting would help too.

> However the comments stand as valid if you were top dog at shimano would you choose another way of
> putting your product at the top (i dont think you would unless yo were areally nice guy ,and then
> i think a lot of the other key decision makers would regard you as the black sheep of the company)

This makes no sense at all.

> Like I stated shimano's buisness ideology is to get the biggest market share its only an anti
> capitalist attitude that would deride this stance you could try and compare them to microsoft and
> in a way I suppose, and to a large extent this would be true but can you suggest a way to break
> the shimano strangle hold

ROTFL! "It's only an anti-capitalist stance..." yadda yadda yadda. No, it's an anti-trust stance.
Part of why Shimano is "hated" by some is that they are perceived as using unfair competitive
practices by those people. I don't know if they are, not working within the bike industry, and I
don' tknow if they aren't. If they are engaging in anti-competitive practices then that will
eventually be taken care of.

> I cant, and for whatever reason this may be you cannot dispute that over the years shimano has
> proved they can come up with good and bad ideas(depending on weather you love or hate both
> technology and shimano)and muscle them in to the market place

Shimano has in fact come up with excellent products- their cassette hubs are the best design
available, for example; their headsets are well designed as has been discussed in a concurrent
thread on headsets. Their designs like V-brakes, cartridge bottom brackets, riveted-together
cassettes, etc. are designed with the OEM market in mind, not the consumer market. STI, on the other
hand, was aimed at consumers. Bad designs? Well, those Dura Ace AX cranks with the huge pedal eyes
spring to mind.

Shimano also targets market segments that the Other Component Maker disdains. This is better for the
pastime of cycling as a whole than the Italian company's elitist attitude. If you want to break
Shimano's market dominance, come up with a better set of product lines than they have at a better
price. That's not hard to figure out (but very hard to do).

> I for one am the kind of person who openly embraces ideas or technology for whatever merits or
> pitfalls it has. I come from a design background which is why now I can be an elitist bigot, Ive
> earned the right by working for many companies which either break the mold or fail miserably for
> whatever reason be it my fault or not (and i started in a bike shop as a mechanic before moving up
> the chain)can differentiate between the pros and cons without having to resort to a favoured
> manufacturer.

This does not exactly amount to a ringing endorsement of your competence nor the judgement of
the personnel office at your employers. I hope you design technology better than you design
your thoughts.

> Therfore I pick shimano everytime it may be mass produced **** but it doesnt cost the earth unless
> its the top and does what it should for its intended life span be it a day or 10 years the problem
> with guys that spend 100 bucks on a rear mech is that they think it will last forever

I'm still riding bikes with 20+ year old rear derailleurs. One of my bikes has a 40 or more year old
Bendix coaster brake hub.

> what this boils down to is consumer preference .The consumer chooses which product to buy and if
> shimano has the biggest market share then even to a fool like me, as you make me out to be can
> tell you that this is what the consumer is buying,hence a bigger market share for a range of
> reasons be it price image or technology .

Well, no, Shimano has a bigger market share because that's the stuff that comes with the bikes they
buy. Shimano has wisely courted the OEM market rather than the consumer snob market, unlike
Campagnolo's strategy of many years's standing.

> they are doing something right

So you've just contradicted your other post almost entirely.

 

[David]

on lower groups.
>
> In what way does the volume of component sales have anything to do with how one should compare the
> relative quality of the various groups? Those are two separate and unrelated issues. And what do
> the buying practices (and ethnicity) of your fellow club members have to do with the matter?
>

Like any big corporation, quality always follows with price. Most people always shop for price
rather than pure quality. That is why, companies like SR Suntour, Tektro, KMC, YST and SRAM offer
alternatives to cheaper Shimano offerings. We know that mass bikes are sold with a mix bag of
Shimano and other makers' parts to keep the cost down. They are sold in boat loads every year, so
therefore, if you want to criticize quality control problems, you would investigate complaints from
people who own these bikes. The fact that, few people complain means the acceptable 1% return rate
would have been met. In my opinion, quality parts like Ultegra and Dura-Aces from Shimano and Chorus
to Record from Campagnolo employ quality parts and design in some of their components to facilitate
smoother operation. The finish are also nice. Certainly, I can't compare Dura-Ace cranks to my
Shimano Altus 42-32-22 crankset. But I am certain that under extreme loading, my Altus crankset
still performs well and for $10, I have it on my touring bike and it had outlasted the expensive
Blackspire rings that I had replaced on my previous RSX crankset. Keep in mind that the Altus
crankset are the ones stamped and offer no user replaceable chain rings. I get them for $10 or even
$5 because I can buy them off bike stores that were take offs from bikes because kids decide that
XTR or XT cranks are better. These are the same people you see in parks that would not hesitate to
stop in front of you and flash the infamous XTR or XT logo. I know better..

The buying practices of people usually mirrors the complain level. Why? That's because, after you
paid major dough on a bike, it hurts to have to replace components in such short notice. But keep in
mind that these parts, while light, were not meant to last forever. I mean, how do you expect
aluminum cogs or titanium cogs to outlast a set of steel cogs on a cassette under extreme loading?
And then to complain that Shimano makes poor quality parts because of this is just poor education.

> Nobody is whining about quality problems. Rather, some have claimed that Shimano's quality leaves
> something to be desired. Just because you don't mind having to replace parts after only 1000 km
> doesn't mean that the rest of the world should accept that as reasonable. Furthermore, having to
> go to Interbike in order to obtain a replacement for said parts is ridiculous and unacceptable.

I am seeing that Shimano is now making ever lighter parts. It's hard for me to get durable thick
steel chain rings and cassettes. I mean, I am going the opposite of Shimano because I know by
experience that heavier parts are more durable. My experience with the Shimano LX hub failing could
probably be an isolated case and Shimano wanted me to ship the hub for inspection. And since I was
on my way attending the 1999 Interbike show on company business, I thought I would just bring it
along and save on shipping.

 

[Jonesy]

[email protected] (Chalo) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> [email protected] (Jonesy) wrote:
>
> > [email protected] (Chalo) wrote:
> >
> > > Shimano are not unique in their intentional decision not to serve all consumers-- they must be
> > > of the same philosophy as the folks who design most airplane and movie theater seating, or
> > > those who build basements with 6-1/2-foot ceilings. But I feel justified in calling all those
> > > people incompetent, inconsiderate, and irresponsible.
> >
> > No, it is you who are those things for expecting me to pay twice as much for airline or movie
> > tickets such that things are designed to the
> > 99.5th percentile. The fact that YOU don't fit in them does not imply that everyone else is of
> > the wrong size or shape.
>
> Man, you little goblins sure are grumpy.

LOL. You Goliaths sure know about irony.

> I guess you must be mad at God for not giving you more dignified proportions.

Like 6' 7", 350lbs? That's dignified? Uhhh, no.

Newsflash: you're a statistical outlier. Sorry to be the one to break it to you.

But I do like the whine - both the original and the response. No substance, just a whine.
--
Jonesy

 

[Gwhite]

Robert Strickland wrote:
>
> > > The fact is that Campy's top of the line is head and shoulders higher than Shimano's top of
> > > the line.

> > It's not at all clear that Record is better than Dura-Ace...
>
> No, I was simply arguing from the standpoint of perceived value.

Then you are wrong. Shimano sells a lot more Dura-Ace than Campy sells Record. Many buyers, such as
myself, don't *perceive* the value of Record is "there" (for the price?) -- so we buy Dura-Ace.
There is no reason to discount the perceived value of Dura-Ace buyers and embellish the perception
of Record buyers. It is an individual perception -- how do you know that some individual would
choose Record over DA even if the price were equal (I would not)?

Publish the total number of Dura-Ace sold versus Record. Publish the total dollars spent on Dura-Ace
versus that spent on Record. IOW, pull your philosophical ideas from the ether and give them
absolute physical metrics. *Make a measurable definition for perception of value, and supply the
data to back it up.* This is Wreck.bike.Tech, not Wreck.bike.philo.

 

[Chalo]

[email protected] (Jonesy) wrote:

> [email protected] (Chalo) wrote:
>
> > [email protected] (Jonesy) wrote:
> >
> > > [email protected] (Chalo) wrote:
> > >
> > > > Shimano are not unique in their intentional decision not to serve all consumers-- they must
> > > > be of the same philosophy as the folks who design most airplane and movie theater seating,
> > > > or those who build basements with 6-1/2-foot ceilings. But I feel justified in calling all
> > > > those people incompetent, inconsiderate, and irresponsible.
> > >
> > > No, it is you who are those things for expecting me to pay twice as much for airline or movie
> > > tickets such that things are designed to the
> > > 99.5th percentile. The fact that YOU don't fit in them does not imply that everyone else is of
> > > the wrong size or shape.
> >
> > Man, you little goblins sure are grumpy.
>
> Newsflash: you're a statistical outlier. Sorry to be the one to break it to you.

People who can't walk are statistical outliers too, but they must be publically accomodated for the
good of everyone.

Big/tall folks are not (yet) a protected group, and bike components are not officially a "public
accomodation", but to me the comparison is clear. If Shimano want to own the whole market for
bike components, they should make some provisions for the small ends of the bell curve, at least
WRT safety.

Chalo Colina

 

[Robert Strickla]

>> No, I was simply arguing from the standpoint of perceived value.
>
> Then you are wrong. Shimano sells a lot more Dura-Ace than Campy sells Record. Many buyers, such
> as myself, don't *perceive* the value of Record is "there" (for the price?) -- so we buy Dura-Ace.
> There is no reason to discount the perceived value of Dura-Ace buyers and embellish the perception
> of Record buyers. It is an individual perception -- how do you know that some individual would
> choose Record over DA even if the price were equal (I would not)?
>
> Publish the total number of Dura-Ace sold versus Record. Publish the total dollars spent on
> Dura-Ace versus that spent on Record. IOW, pull your philosophical ideas from the ether and give
> them absolute physical metrics. *Make a measurable definition for perception of value, and supply
> the data to back it up.* This is Wreck.bike.Tech, not Wreck.bike.philo.

As usual, gh, you've missed the point. The question wasn't which sells in greater volume, or even
whether you or buyers like you percieve any particular value in Record but rather whether the top of
the line groups are equivalent. If sales were all that mattered, then surely 105 or Ultegra win
hands down. My point was that, when looking for those features that tend distinguish top-of-the-line
from middle or bottom-of-the-line, Record has more gee-gaws (carbon, titanium, lighter, etc) than
Dura-Ace (although DA2004 closes the gap a bit). I don't care whether you value those things (I
don't) but in general people who know bike components tend to associate those things with top shelf
components. The issue, therefore, is whether the two (DA/Record)should be judged as equivalent (and
therefore have directly comparable price structures) or whether it isn't more suitable to see Record
as a step up from DA. Your personal choice is irrelevant. You may prefer a VW Golf (and it's sales
are definitely higher) but a Lexus is still a step up.

Rob Strickland