Lazyass

According to the new generation, it's dangerous because you have to take your hand off the bar for a second.

_ForceD_

jefnvk

Why would I want to reach my arm way down my bike to flip a shifter on the downtube, when I can have the exact same thing on the bar end that is its functional equivalent? Or to put this another way, you frame your argument as they don't hinder you, in what way do they help you?

My Univega is 600 Tri-Color 7 speed indexed downtube shifting. My first "real" bike was a Peugeot with friction downtube. Yes, I can reach down and shift relatively quickly. I don't find it "dangerous", just annoying and inconvenient and slower than something on the handlebars. There is zero benefit to having the shifters somewhere I have to bend over and reach down to shift, over the indexed bar end position on my Mazama and Trek 520.

I'll ride old bikes with downtubes, but there is little justification in manufacturing new bikes with them there beyond aesthetics or retrogrouchyness.

texaspandj

I can only think of two advantages of DT shifters over brifters and they're not clear cut.
1. DT shifters are virtually maintenance free.
2. You get stronger on DT shifters.

Within months of having brifters I started having trouble with the brifters fortunately a little lubricant went a long way. But think about how many members have had issues with theirs? I'll say this though, the earlier generations seem to be more durable e.g. 600, rsx
When you're not able to shift as easy climbing with DT shifters you just umph more and get stronger. However it only takes a couple of rides to get used to the convenience of brifters and you realize you don't have a "Need" to go back But, you may have a desire.

Lazyass

Everyone is different. I'm different from you in that I don't find it "inconvenient". I don't even think about it when I'm riding, it's a natural reflex. And do you actually have to "bend over" to shift? The only part of your body that should have to move is your arm. The way that they "help" you, if you want to put it that way, is that they shift crisper because you don't have a long shift cable running through housing curving everywhere, so there is far less cable friction. They're easier to tune and keep in tune, especially friction shifters.

jefnvk

Yep, the position I ride in I do have to at least lower my shoulder to reach them. In any case, it is still much quicker to move my hand 4 inches to the bar end or stem over a few feet to effectively my bottle cage.

Are they really "crisper"? Having used downtubes, stem mounts, and bar ends, and numerous bar mounted click options, I'm not really buying that argument, but even if I did I doubt the market that you have to sell to would buy that that is a benefit that outweighs other drawbacks.

Kapusta

mstateglfr 

Having been labeled luddite and retrogrouch when it comes to cycling, I am finding this thread funny since I am struggling to understand why there is an argument for new bikes to have downtube shifters.

Everyone I know that rides or rode competitively uses STIs and i presume its because of ease of use and convenience.
Everyone I know that is a recrecreational cycliist with drop bars uses STIs and i presume its because of ease of use and convenience.

As with everything in cycling- to each their own. My setup doesnt work for some others and vice versa. Its just funny to see this argument for new bikes. Talk about something that would reduce interest in the sport.

Lazyass

Everyone you know uses STI's because that's what most all new bikes have been equipped with for a quarter of a century, and most frames today don't even have braze ons for them lol. That's also why everyone has clincher tires. Someday the newest generation will be lecturing the old guys why rim brakes suck. They'll say everyone they know has discs using the same reasoning you have used here. That doesn't mean one is better than the other. They all have their pros and cons.

mstateglfr 

I have had to lean a shoulder down to shift downtubes, yes. I didnt have to on my Miyata 912 I used to have(before converting to old 9sp Ultegra STI). I did have to on an '80 Schwinn road bikes, but didnt have to on an '87 Schwinn road bike. I did have to on a '70 Zebrakenko road bike.
Im guessing it had to do with where the shifters happened to be placed along with overall geometry of each frame. It wasnt tough to do, it was just like grabbing water from a cage, but it also couldnt ever be described as convenient.

Every downtube shifting bike I had shifted perfectly fine, just like every STI bike I have had. The shifting wasnt crisper either way. I move a lever and the bike shifts- thats the same for every style of shifting. My bar end shifters- crisp shifting. My STI shifters- crisp shifting. My Gevenalle shifters- crisp shifting. My downtube shifters- crisp shifting. Heck, my touring bike's bar end cables route under the tape all the way so they bend at the hooks, bend at the ramps, then route down under the bike to the derailleurs and even with all that bending- shifting is crisp.

Perhaps I am not refined enough to notice that there is a quantifiable difference in crispness, but if there is, then ignorance is bliss in this instance.

79pmooney

Yes. Since one hand is on their phone, downtube shifters require them to lean forward no-hands to shift.

Ben

Bandera

Cable operation for all controls will be the next to "go" on new production, time to stash those Jagwire kits to sell as NOS to Gen_X neo-Grouches.

-Bandera

Lazyass

This whole bending over and shoulder leaning phenomenon I'm reading in this thread is a new one to me. I've never even seen any other riders who had to go through all that just to touch a DT shifter. The whole "danger" thing is also a new one to me. I mean, unless you ride with your hands glued to the brake hoods the entire time, then you have to remove your hands from the bar to shift if you're on the tops or grabbing the tips (which is where my hands are half the time). Which takes maybe .000000000001 second less time to reach the STI than a DT shifter. And shifting from the drops is hard with a lot of STI with a longer throw, especially the left side. If I had someone time it I predict it would take me one second flat to release the bar, reach down and shift, then re-grab the bar. For people to suggest that's dangerous is bizarre. If people just don't like downtube shifters then that's cool, I can understand. The pro's of STI's are obvious. But don't try to give a ridiculous argument as to why they're bad.

MY STI's shift crisp. My DT shifters shift a little crisper. That's just my personal experience. Even if someone doesn't like DT shifters they have to admit that far less cable friction is good.

jefnvk

In all fairness, I do actually argue in favor of simple, move a lever to index shift the back and friction shift the front system. I just argue for them to be on the bars, rather on the downtubes. Trigger shifters are fine for me on flat bars, I just never felt like I got anything out of STIs over barends on drops. Especially with a triple crank, I feel the barends do have one significant advantage over STIs in the front, unlimited trim.

That said, if I raced, I doubt I'd use barends.

TrojanHorse

Anything less than mind-controlled shifting is unsafe and should be avoided at all costs.

Good lord, the angst.

And you can keep DT shifters, no thanks.

79pmooney

I guess I am just a throwback who loves DT shifters (always used friction or racheting). My last road bike purchased new, I spec'd braze-ons for DT shifters (and will probably never use the headtube cable guides).

Features I love: reliability, cost (esp when upgrading to the next cassette standard!) and the knowledge they will always work after any crash, bike fall-over, etc. Also the bike looks clean. Allows me to use the brake hoods (and derailleurs) I really want, not just the selection available for that cassette standard.

Riding DT shifters is like driving a standard. They require some skill. They require some attention and pre-planning. Some of us consider that good.

Ben

rydabent

Down tube shifters make for a clean bike, and have very little friction. They stay in adjustment for a very long time.

mstateglfr 

Some advancements in cycling technology are beneficial. Some advancements in cycling technology are a lateral move. Some advancements in cycling technology seem to just be change for the sake of marketing/trends/revenue.

I have agreed that one isnt better than the other when it comes to shifting by saying "As with everything in cycling- to each their own. My setup doesnt work for some others and vice versa."
I do struggle to see the pros of downtube shifting, since nothing mentioned so far is a benefit to me. Crisp shifting is cited, but that happens with every drivetrain I have worked on and owned, even that SunTour Alpha Accushift stuff once its been adjusted. Simple design is cited, and while thats true...it just doesnt affect me or most others at all. STIs simply dont fail often enough to make reliability an issue in my mind.
But sure- they all have their pros and cons.


As for everyone I know riding bikes with STIs so thats why they ride STIs...hardly. I understand that line of thinking, but a lot of people I ride with grew up on downtube shifting and could have any setup they want. They choose STI(even electronic for a couple). Every drop bar bike I have built for my wife has had STIs because she has ridden downtube bikes and has 0 interest in shifting that way. I built up a frame for my oldest kid and used STIs because...she looked at me confused when I asked if she wanted to keep the downtube shifters on the bike.

STIs are simply more convenient for many people. That doesnt mean downtubes are wrong, but it does show that downtubes have a very limited field of interest.

jefnvk

Speaking as a manual transmission driver, I would characterize both situations a bit differently: outside of some very particular corner cases that fall outside of the vast majority of the populations use, they are both mostly there to scream "look at me, I am different"

Hence, why it won't be long before you can't get manuals anymore, either. Heck, even the next GT500 is rumored to be automatic only.

79pmooney

Actually, they have quite a lot of friction. (Well, most of the non-index ones anyway.) "Friction shifting" isn't just words!

Lazyass

Over the years on this forum I've seen many people new to vintage bikes posting about how much they found that they love DT's. If someone doesn't like them I understand. But what annoys me is when people start exaggerating to give their opinion more credit. Awww I got to bend over, ohh they're so dangerous, sooo inconvenient, ohh I have to take my hand off the bar for a second, ect, ect. I mean it takes one freaking second to reach down and shift then grab the bar again. Literally one second.

mstateglfr 

For what its worth, I have never found riding 1 handed to be dangerous so I agree(at least for me) with your comment about it not being dangerous. If it feels dangerous, then practice will help fairly quickly.
I spend much of my riding miles each year helping teens train to ride RAGBRAI. Its interesting to see how many wont drink water from bottles while moving. I mention this because they are effectively beginner road riders and this is a market that bike brands need to spec bikes for in order to grow the sport.
At the same time, when riding gravel I sometimes wont take a drink of water at a certain time because I want both hands on the bars for control. But thats gravel and not paved roads.

livedarklions

Exactly! I never liked them even though I became fairly good at using them back when I rode with the Flintstones. There's no way HAVING TO take my hands off of the bars is a feature and not a bug. I take my hands off the bars a lot when I want to, it doesn't mean having to reach down when I don't want to isn't a drawback. And I can easily click up 3 gears in the second it would take me to move my hand down to the DT, so I totally don't believe my upshifting would be faster if I went back to friction/DT and my downshifting would definitely be slower.

I got no problem with some people saying they prefer it--I just don't think there's enough of them to believe that a DT revival is in the offing. They died in the first place because virtually no one was asking for them

mstateglfr 

Related note- my oldest daughter's road bike that I built up has older version 10sp Tiagra STIs. SRiding it, she is the quintessential kid where they will try to power thru everything regardless of the gears available to help them. This is different from her other two bikes as the mountain bike has 9sp trigger shifting and her older pavement bike has 2x7 grip shift.
We talked about shifting many times and it finally took some time on the trainer for her to understand shifting STIs.

She pointed out that trigger and grip are easy to understand as you go one direction(or tab) to shift one way and the other direction(or tap) to shift the other way. Pretty intuitive/straight forward and similar to what you mention above.
STIs are a whole other deal compared to trigger and grip shifting to a kid, and I would imagine its the same thing for many new riders. Gearing is already a difficult concept for many beginners to understand, so adding complex shifting to that certainly doesnt make anything simpler.

texaspandj

I guess only real, talented, MEN like Eddie Merckx, Bernard Hinault, Greg Lemond ARE capable of riding with DT shifters... oh and lazy ass.