Originally Posted by seypat

With 1 tooth changes, I can't tell at times.

Originally Posted by mschwett

ignoring the old-timey nostalgia for mechanical stuff...

1. comparing like to like, they don't seem to be. for both ultegra and di2, mechanical appears to be 120-150g heavier. i'm sure there are cases where it goes the other way, but it's hardly clear cut.
2. "hard to know if you've changed gear" !?! what!? i have never experienced this, gloves or not. electronic shifting isn't totally silent, and there's the button itself, and the fact of it getting harder/easier to pedal.
3. true. not sure that'll hold over time, depends if the same forces that generally make electric things cheaper than mechanical ones will apply here
4. the "problem" is that the batteries last a long time? all things require maintenance of some sort, the electronic drivetrain requires a plug-in/charge at some interval, which is likely far less than some other things like chain cleaning, air in the tires, etc. are those also huge problems?
5. i'm a lousy mechanic, and i can't/won't replace drivetrain cable or re-index/adjust a derailleur. had to take it in to do so many times on my GRX bikes. never had to on Di2. so, a bit of maintenance vs... NONE. i get that it's nice for things to be "easy" to maintain, but eliminating that maintenance (no cable to wear out) is better.

2 out of our four bikes are mechanical derailleurs. i will not buy another bike with mechanical shifting.

Originally Posted by Polaris OBark

So together they increase a 20 lb bike's weight by 2 to 3 lbs?

I hear 87.6% of statistical claims on bike forums are just made up.

Originally Posted by tomato coupe

You want the cycling industry to produce electronic shifting for 3x setups and 120 mm rear spacing, and he wants to know if he can get a 17 lb. bike with disc brakes and electronic shifting for $5k. How are those two situations even remotely related?

Originally Posted by seypat

We both have bikes defined by the industry as obsolete. It doesn't matter what the spacing is. As for the systems for different DOs, cable pull is what made them different. Electronic eliminates that. The current system should work on any spacing up to the current one. It would depend on how the shifters/derailleurs are programmed. Same spacing on the cassette cogs but different amount of cogs for the different DO spacings. The system possibly could be hacked, be that still would be expensive starting out. If electronic is truly the future, then it will magically trickle down into the lower tiers. Even into the bikes at the box stores with 7/8 speed rears. It'll take a few years, but it eventually get to where the C & V can use it.

Originally Posted by vespasianus

The move to electronic shifters is a great business move. I would assume the margins are higher and this is the logical extension of the move from repairable components to replaceable components.

The difference between a metal wire, an electronic wire or a wireless signal is meaningless. All systems have strengths and weaknesses, the consumer can make the decision what works for them.

Companies are not looking to help you create the best cycling experience, but rather to make money. People can be convinced of anything and with enough marketing, will do exactly as they are told.

Originally Posted by seypat

I am, as are a lot of the C & V crowd. We do whatever we can to keep those older frames going. Realize that older frames could mean something from 2-3 years ago. With nothing being backwards compatible, whatever is current becomes old/obsolete with each new system. So, whatever you're riding now will suffer the same fate in 3-5 years.

Originally Posted by mschwett

with enough volume to spread out the development and tooling costs electronic things are generally cheaper than a capable mechanical equivalent. not sure if bike stuff reaches that scale.

it would definitely cost less to make one difference engine than one simple electronic computer. but if you had to make 10,000,000....

the same things goes for electric cars. 100 times less moving parts in the engine.

Originally Posted by Redbullet

A bike of 6.5-7kg in 2016 with rim brakes and mechanical set weights now around 7.5-8 kg with disk brakes and electronic group set of the same tier. That's why I estimated 10-15% heavier.
20lb means more than 9 kg - a much heavier bike, from another league. If it has rim brakes and mechanical group set at the level of Ultegra 2x11 or Sram Force 2x11, I would expect it to weight close to 9.9 kg with disks and electronic. The same increase, but in the lower 10% because we start from a much heavier bike.

Originally Posted by Redbullet

A bike of 6.5-7kg in 2016 with rim brakes and mechanical set weights now around 7.5-8 kg with disk brakes and electronic group set of the same tier. That's why I estimated 10-15% heavier.
20lb means more than 9 kg - a much heavier bike, from another league. If it has rim brakes and mechanical group set at the level of Ultegra 2x11 or Sram Force 2x11, I would expect it to weight close to 9.9 kg with disks and electronic. The same increase, but in the lower 10% because we start from a much heavier bike.

Originally Posted by Kimmo

Electronic shifting adds no appreciable weight. My Di2 rim brake bike is 6.14kg.

It's the disc brakes which really mess with the purity; frameset and front wheel need to be beefier.

Originally Posted by rsbob

IMO, As electronic shifting becomes ubiquitous on new mid and high range bikes the technology prices may moderate. The technology will filter down to lesser expensive models and prices will reflect that as well. Friction gave way to indexed. Indexed gave way to brifters and brifters will give way to electronic if there is a buck to be made. Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Originally Posted by PeteHski

So you really think there's a commercial case for producing 3x electronic drivetrains for old frames. If you are correct then it will surely happen. I'm also pretty sure none of my current bikes will suffer the same fate in the next 3-5 years.

Originally Posted by datlas

I can also argue that my stick-shift transmission (1998 Saturn SL) is superior to an automatic transmission, but market forces have made a stickshift nearly impossible to find on a new car too.

Originally Posted by merlinextraligh

problem is you’d lose that argument. Modern dual clutch “automatic” transmission is vastly superior to a manual transmission by any objective measure. It’s more fuel efficient; shifts faster than is humanly possible for a manual; improves performance; increases longevity, and allows driver assists like auto hold, and adaptive cruise control.

Originally Posted by PeteHski

What if companies create the best cycling experience and make money? Is that okay? Or would we prefer to be still riding Penny Farthings in 2023?

Originally Posted by georges1

Best experience ,depends of what you call best experience in terms over the long run reliability and servicability,I am not talking about professional roadbike racers. What if the battery is dead and that you are stuck ina steep hill or far away from home? Well you are on your own. I also read that you could program di2 with a computer for better shifting, but definitely not for me.

Originally Posted by Redbullet

A bike of 6.5-7kg in 2016 with rim brakes and mechanical set weights now around 7.5-8 kg with disk brakes and electronic group set of the same tier. That's why I estimated 10-15% heavier.
20lb means more than 9 kg - a much heavier bike, from another league. If it has rim brakes and mechanical group set at the level of Ultegra 2x11 or Sram Force 2x11, I would expect it to weight close to 9.9 kg with disks and electronic. The same increase, but in the lower 10% because we start from a much heavier bike.