Groupset Functionality?

RidleyRider

So a question popped into my head there.. Is there any difference in functionality between groupsets at either end of the spectrum?:rolleyes:

In my experience, all I've used is a campag/shimano mix(which was my very first bike that I never took much head of), Ultegra and now an Ultegra/Dura-ace mix. So, for those who have used one top end groupo and one lower end one, how did they compare?

Does Sora still offer smooth shifting? I mean once derailleurs are indexed they should all smoothly shift, yes?

And I know the weight of them will differ but thats not what I'm asking. If, hypothetically, you could cycle blind, do you think you'd notice the difference in shifting and braking in groupsets at other ends of the market?

Canis Lupus

I've cycled on both ends of the spectrum (me cheapo, mate is into serious bike porn). Frankly it's smoother gear changes but nothing that will rock your world as far as I'm concerned.

Having said that, if I had a pretty racer I'd be more inclined to put pretty parts on it... It's a Fred pride thing.

fat bloke

I have 105 on my winter bike and dura ace on my good bike and I honestly cannot tell the difference.

ednwireland

my commuter has a 105 front shifter, sora (7 speed) rear sora derailliurs and chainset, racer has 10 speed 105 theres a difference but not massive the main difference is the weight but considering the commuter has a heavy touring wheel on the back weight isnt really an issue !

Wibbs

Having been away from the components stuff for years and being an anal eejit I've been looking at the various options. TBH just with the campagnolo stuff. With them anyway there are some functional differences beyond weight and let's face it bling Obvious one is between 10 and "these go to eleven" speed. Not such a biggie and so long as you match 10 with 10 and 11 with eleven. The biggest diff I could find was in the shifters. In the high end chorus/record/super record you can go up and down, particularly down, more gears at once with "ultra-shift", whereas in the lower groups like Athena you get "power-shift" which doesn't allow this. Funny enough Athena 11 used to have the ultra shift thingy, but they dropped that. I suspect because more people were buying the cheaper group. Similar with bottom bracket setups. The top end retains ultra torque with powertorque(which looks like a right dog) in the lower groups. Again Athena had the better system that was dropped. It seems you can mix and match anyway. I got really lucky when a client gave me a set of super record 11 brake/shift levers in lieu of a 60 quid bill. Yep. When I got home and checked the price online...:eek:

Then you have the electronic shifting. For me and IMH it's a bad solution to a non existent problem and adds complexity for it's own sake. If they had built in different shifting programmes(sequential for example) I could see the point, but to just copy the mechanical way? Makes no sense to me anyway.

Still I'd reckon there Feck-all(tm) in it and if cycling blind you'd not notice except for the shifting. Reviews seem to back this up. One on the original Athena 11 stated that you couldn't tell the diff between it and Super record if you didn't look down.

It seems from the above folks with experience of Shimano it's much the same over there.





As an aside I'm currently rebuilding my old steel frame and updating the running gear. I got the athena 11 alloy crank and it's nice, but the quality of casting and finishing isn't close to the finish of a late 80's Campag C-record crank I have. TBH given the C-record crank itself is lighter(and around the same weight including an older SR BB) and the 11 speed rings will fit, I may just use the "old" one.

manwithaplan

I can't tell the difference between 105 and Ultegra. If you want things super smooth, go for a close ratio cassette.

RidleyRider

I agree with ye lads. For your everyday training bike you wouldn't need the likes of dura-ace. This year I saw umpteen amount of people using DA 7900 for training. It's not as though it'll make you any better of a rider.

It'll be Sora for me for my next training bike anyway, parts are cheaper and especially for training you want your bill as cheap as possible.

Lumen

I've commuted on SRAM Red for the last couple of years, at least for the shifters (the rest is mostly Force). The bike it's currently on weighs 10kg, but I still appreciate every perfect clicky upshift.

I don't know about Shimano or Campag, but there were been a number of reports of SRAM Rival shifters snapping a while back. Maybe they were defective parts, or maybe the cheaper stuff has corners cut.

DirkVoodoo

Wibbs wrote: »

Having been away from the components stuff for years and being an anal eejit I've been looking at the various options. TBH just with the campagnolo stuff. With them anyway there are some functional differences beyond weight and let's face it bling Obvious one is between 10 and "these go to eleven" speed. Not such a biggie and so long as you match 10 with 10 and 11 with eleven. The biggest diff I could find was in the shifters. In the high end chorus/record/super record you can go up and down, particularly down, more gears at once with "ultra-shift", whereas in the lower groups like Athena you get "power-shift" which doesn't allow this. Funny enough Athena 11 used to have the ultra shift thingy, but they dropped that. I suspect because more people were buying the cheaper group. Similar with bottom bracket setups. The top end retains ultra torque with powertorque(which looks like a right dog) in the lower groups. Again Athena had the better system that was dropped. It seems you can mix and match anyway. I got really lucky when a client gave me a set of super record 11 brake/shift levers in lieu of a 60 quid bill. Yep. When I got home and checked the price online...:eek:

Then you have the electronic shifting. For me and IMH it's a bad solution to a non existent problem and adds complexity for it's own sake. If they had built in different shifting programmes(sequential for example) I could see the point, but to just copy the mechanical way? Makes no sense to me anyway.

Still I'd reckon there Feck-all(tm) in it and if cycling blind you'd not notice except for the shifting. Reviews seem to back this up. One on the original Athena 11 stated that you couldn't tell the diff between it and Super record if you didn't look down.

It seems from the above folks with experience of Shimano it's much the same over there.





As an aside I'm currently rebuilding my old steel frame and updating the running gear. I got the athena 11 alloy crank and it's nice, but the quality of casting and finishing isn't close to the finish of a late 80's Campag C-record crank I have. TBH given the C-record crank itself is lighter(and around the same weight including an older SR BB) and the 11 speed rings will fit, I may just use the "old" one.

I have powershift and ultrashift.

To be honest, it makes no difference. I never much liked the multiple upshifts anyway, I'd nearly always go too far over where I wanted to be.

The big difference is in the chainset. Lots of luck getting a power torque crankset off! Shimano still win there in terms of user serviceability.

For me, the most important things on a winter or everyday bike are:

• Simplicity
• Ease of maintenance
• Cheap parts

Sure, Sora is a bit rough around the edges, but when you're just out getting the miles over winter, you don't really care if the shifter feels a little plastic or the shifting isn't super smooth. If you crash on an icy bend, a shifter won't cost hundreds to replace and when you have to replace a cassette it won't be at 11 speed prices.

I think *most* people buying stuff at the higher end will be serious enough to have a second, "winter bike", such that they won't care about differences between higher and lower end. And anyone who is working their way up the range is more than likely doing so over a generation or two of groupsets, so of course the higher end groupset will be nicer regardless, if only for the improvement in technology in those intervening years.

Hungrycol

I find old Ultegra 6600 shifts better than new 105 5700. I put it down to the re-routing cables under the bar tape. Aesthetics over function I reckon.

I also find the biggest difference in braking is down to the pads.

doozerie

From looking at the differences in spec between current Campag Chorus and Record a couple of years back, I recall that Record had some mechanical advantages such as bearings in the calipers to provide smoother movement. I think there were some mechanical/physical differences in the mechs and ergo levers too, but I don't recall the details. There was certainly a lot of emphasis on weight savings, and possibly stiffness benefits too, from using carbon instead of metal in places, but whether that translates to a perceivable difference in performance is another matter. Super Record had even more subtle differences/advantages over Record, and I don't think there was anything in there that would have convinced me to pay the extra for Super Record.

As to whether the advantages of Record over Chorus were significant, that's entirely subjective I think. Personally I would have been happy with Chorus, but due to circumstances I ended up with Record. Initially I was highly impressed with my new 11-speed Record, over my 12yr old (but lightly used) 9-speed Chorus. A couple of years on though, and having rebuilt my Chorus ergolevers with new springs, and the differences are less pronounced. The Record brakes are lighter/better (which I put down to a combination of lever shape, bearings in the calipers, and different brake pads), but the gear change on the Chorus is slightly lighter which I prefer. The carbon Record crankset I perceive to be noticeably stiffer than my alloy Chorus crankset, but them being on different frames makes it a hard comparison to make accurately. I do like the fact that my Chorus ergolevers are alloy so perhaps might survice a crash better, as might the alloy crankset.

For me, my old Chorus groupset is more than good enough to meet my needs in use, and if I'd never experienced some of the marginal (to my mind) benefits of Record I'd not be looking for them. Potentially fragile carbon bits aside though, the design of my Record parts might make them easier to maintain, and more consistent in performance, over time. But perhaps it'll be another 10 years before I start to notice a difference between them in that respect.

furiousox

Hungrycol wrote: »

I find old Ultegra 6600 shifts better than new 105 5700. I put it down to the re-routing cables under the bar tape. Aesthetics over function I reckon.
I also find the biggest difference in braking is down to the pads.

+1
6600 shifts better than 6700 too.

CaoimH_in

I bought a SRAM Force (it's new, but an 09 edition) and from the lowest end of the scale (I own an eight speed Shimano 2300) to a fairly good mid-ranger (by other people's standards), I can honestly say there is a fairly notable difference. It was worth me buying it from that perspective. But I don't think I'll need another full groupset. I'm pretty sure I'm going to stick to Force/Red parts for the next 5/7 years.

When people speak about upgrades from fully functional Shimano 105s (or other mid-rangers) to Whatever-your-having-yourselves, I just don't believe it stands up to logic. They really don't make that much of a remarkable difference, aside from weight considerations. So it's really about how much of a wage you have, how competitive you are (honestly), and your goals.

Brian?

All of the above is rendered obsolete by Di2. I want Di2 because it is way way cooler than anything else. Dura-Ace Di2 preferrably because everyone knows it costs more than Ultegra.

Seaneh

I was fluting about on a new trek 1.2 a few weeks ago and to be honest, the new Sora is bloody lovely kit, feels exactly like Tiagra ergo wise and shifting is a lot smoother than with my older sora, I think it's cracking value for money. And IT's really nice on the eyes now in all black. It looks the part imho.

Right now I am about to buy a new bike and looking at the CAAD8 and I honestly cannot see why I'd pay the extra €440 for the 105 speced rather than just €875 for the Sora when it comes with the same wheels, finishing kit, etc and the only difference is the groupset which in real terms only means an extra gear! So the plan is to buy the CAAD8 Sora now and if I want to upgrade in a few years, swith to Sram, because I prefer the double tap shifters.

Wibbs

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

The big difference is in the chainset. Lots of luck getting a power torque crankset off! Shimano still win there in terms of user serviceability.

Yea Power torque is such a daft engineering solution. Ultra torque is a doddle to service. It's why when I got my athena crank I bought an older NOS one with the better system. Me being a bit of a ponce means I just can't get my aesthetic around the Shimano non drive crank with the bolts on the outside. Ugh. Told ya, I'm a ponce.