DAC76

I have a 16 year old bike. How much has technology changed on a mid-range bike since then? Most specifically, I’m wondering about derailleurs. IE, does a 16 year old Alivio perform comparably to an Alivio manufactured today (with the old derailleur being in great condition)?

I was initially contemplating a bike upgrade, but it seems that bikes in the $500-$700 price range haven’t changed much and are even typically the same weight.

Litespud

Shifting overall has improved, number of available gears has increased, but I don't know if I would single out derailleurs as having changed much. The basic technology certainly hasn't changed As long as the derailleur is appropriate for the application and compatible with the rest of the components, a derailleur is just dumb tech - it does what the shifter tells it. As long as it does just that, there's not much it can do better.
Im using a 17-year-old drivetrain - everything's in good shape and works perfectly - no reason to change unless I want to up the gear count

veganbikes

Shifting is certainly improving but the mid to low end is still the mid to low end. If you are maintaining the bike well you will be in decent shape but if you aren't then the new Alivio will certainly be leaps and bounds better but compared to SLX or XT it will be just OK.

cxwrench

Moisture...is that you?

cyccommute 

I wouldn’t say that shifting has significantly improved in the last 16 years. There are more gears on the cluster and there have been changes in the pull ratios on the derailers but shifting from 2005 was pretty much dialed in and about what it is today.

Moisture

Yes, yes, water droplets are forming.

Id wager that derailleurs, like most things from back in the day, were built to a higher standard before 2000. Alloy bodies on the absolute low end versus plastic crap even in todays mid range. The Japanese are excellent at keeping costs low and quality high. But overall not much has changed. Keep your drivetrain clean/oiled and enjoy the ride.

My GT mountain bike has a super beaten up Alivio that has taken quite a lot of abuse over the years from its previous owner. Its a 14 year old derailleur. The cheap absolute lowest end suntour on my 40 year old road bike shifts and is in overall better condition.

how well you keep the derailleur/chain clean and oiled, condition and quality of your chain, line condition and tension, the spacing between each cog in your rear cassette, chainring/cassette tooth condition, etc will all together make a bigger difference with shift quality. Maintain even a cheap derailleur properly and it will last you a long time. More expensive stuff will definetly shift better under power and smoother.

As for increased cassette cog count, doesnt help you if the ratios are still wrong for your needs. Even worse if your cranksets chainrings are not ideal for your needs. Less gears with ideal ratios > vice versa.

HTupolev

Largely yes. The most direct comparison would be between the 2005-era Alivio RD-M410 and the current "trekking" model Alivio RD-T4000. The basic mechanical operation is nearly identical, they've just lengthened the cage and changed to smaller jockey wheels. I've actually experienced both of these models on the same bike: my gravel bike had an M410 on it, and I switched to the T4000 to get a big more chain wrap. The new part doesn't really shift any better, and I didn't expect it to.

In terms of shifting, mechanical derailleurs haven't made any notable design advancements in a really long time. An Alivio from 2005 and an Alivio today are both basically just modifications of the Dura Ace 7400 from 1984, with tweaks to the geometry and spring tensions to suit them to 8/9-speed cassettes and wide-range MTB drivetrains.
Shimano's newer "Shadow" designs are a departure from the Dura Ace 7400 groundwork, but it was a departure made primarily to protect and stabilize the derailleur, rather than to improve shifting.

If you're looking at considerations other than shifting, current higher-level parts have made some advancements. For example, you can buy drivetrains with more rear cogs than were available in 2006, and some derailleurs ("clutched" derailleurs) have dampers on the a-pivot to keep the chain from bouncing around on rough terrain.

Aluminum bodies have never been standard at the bottom-end. Before plastic knuckles became popular, the name of the game was stamped steel.

Moisture

Here's a link to my derailleur:

VeloBase.com - Component: SunTour Seven GT (version 1A)

I know Its like second from the very bottom of the lineup. But they are all good quality. Would you consider this a low end derailleur?

Koyote

Your link doesn't work. But if it's on the bike your on in some of the pics you've posted, then yes -- I'm positive that it's a low-end derailleur. A forty-year old low-end derailleur.

HTupolev

Yes, I would consider it a fairly low-end derailleur. But I'm not sure what point you're making: the upper knuckle and the cylindrical housing around the cage spring are aluminum, but pretty much everything else is steel.

The bottom-end SunTour derailleur from that same era was the Honor. It's built fairly similar to your Seven, but swaps the upper knuckle out for steel.

veganbikes

A low end deraileur is still a low end derailleur no matter what the company. I love Shimano and many of my bikes are equipped with Shimano stuff (at least all of the geared bikes) but things like Tourney and Altus are crap...yet made by the same company.

Yes older stuff can be potentially slightly better then a modern say tourney derailleur but only because it is likely to be a touch more durable due to material construction. Not for other reasons. Vintage does not always mean quality.

EngrJack

By reading what you guys say about bikes, I’m learning interesting things. I have three Trek bikes: 1981, 1999, and 2021. They are different from each other but each one fills a niche. I’m always interested in doing maintenance and repairs with skill. You guys are very good sources of information. Thanks All!

HTupolev

I'm not sure I'd agree with a general sentiment of low-end = crap. Some of it is crap, but the only thing definitely true about low-end is that it's low-end.

For example, aside from a weight penalty, Moisture's SunTour Seven GT derailleur works pretty much identically to SunTour's higher-end long-cage derailleurs, and it's not a particularly bad looker either. Is it low-end? Yes. Is there anything especially wrong with it that would lead me to call it "crap"? Not really.

Same with some Altus stuff. Like, the RD-M310 has a cult following for a reason: it looks a bit goofy, but it's a genuinely well-designed part that - while heavy - offers a fantastic shift on a very wide variety of drivetrain configurations, and can wrap a crapton of chain for such a compact component. It's unambiguously low-end, but also something that I would have a very hard time calling "crap."

70sSanO

I would think that front shifting is an area where things have improved over the past 16 years for lower/mid components. Even cheap cranksets have chainrings with all sorts of ramps to help with the shifting.

And since higher end components are heading towards 1x, or and some 2x, the lower end triples have benefited from the technology.

John

Darth Lefty 

Bikes at $5-700 really are pretty much the same in the drivetrain as they were for $350-500 way back in 2005. They have riveted square taper triples in the front and 7-9 speeds in the rear and they work fine. The 7 speeds still have freewheels, which ought to have died out thirty years ago. If it weren't for styling you'd have a hard time telling them apart. I can't think of a "technology" that has come to Altus or Tourney that recently, can you? It's all painted steel, injection molded plastic with no fibers, cast aluminum. They do find ways to make them cheaper sometimes, usually at the expense of maintenance and upgrades. But the assemblies are so cheap and any small parts so hard to find that it hardly matters.

subgrade

The current Altus has Shadow design (no clutch though), so there's that.

My ex-GF's bike has Alivio MC20 drivetrain (2000-2004, so no less than 16 years old), and it still works great. So if your old Alivio is in great condition I see no reason to replace it with a new Alivio, unless you fancy the Shadow design that the 2 latest Alivio generations have. The current Alivio though is visually almost undistinguishable from the current Altus, they are now also next to each other in the Shimano hierarchy (Alivio has been demoted to M3100, with Deore now taking up whole 3 steps from 4100 to 6100).

freeranger

I have an old Alivio rear der.on my mtn.bike (old, but was a replacement for an even older one). It's being used in conjunction with an 8 spd.cassette. Anyone who has ever ridden the bike remarks they have never experienced such smooth shifting--usually hear something like "it shifts like butter". It has been meticulously maintained, but strange thing is-I once "upgraded" it to an LX, the upgrade didn't work as well, so went with another Alivio. No rhyme or reason, the Alivio just plain worked better.

ClydeClydeson

Aside from wear, I doubt you would notice any difference between a brand new Alivio and a 10 year old Alivio derailleur.

Same goes for higher levels - If you went to the LBS today and bought a new XT derailleur to upgrade a brand new Alivio derailleur, you would be hard pressed to notice a difference.
If the Alivio derailleur had a season or two of regular use, however, then you would almost certainly notice a difference between a new derailleur, or even a similarly used SLX or XT derailleur.

If you have money burning a hole in your pocket and want your bike to work a bit better, spend the money on wheels - either rebuilding the hub bearings with new balls and fresh grease, or some fancy new tires with supple sidewalls, or (if you have lots of spare cash) get a whole new higher end wheelset. Because you probably have old style QR axles you might find a good deal on a NOS or lightly used set from a few years ago that are miles ahead of whatever came stock on an Alivio equipped bike.

Troul 

The most to benefit imo is the condition (plating/paint/decal) , functional response from material fatigue (spring, pivot hinge points) , weight change that may decrease durability, & ratio capability.

If none of the above is being factored & you just like "new" stuff, then burn that hole in the pocket.

veganbikes

I find it easier. I guess when dealing with it on a larger scale you get a different sense of stuff. The design idea of the larger pulley wheels does make some sense and if they could translate that into some more reliable stuff it would be great.

mstateglfr 

In the 80s, low end RDs were stamped steel and later had plastic incorporated. Your single example shouldnt be used to draw conclusions.

HTupolev

What single example?

mstateglfr 

his one example of an older derailleur.

HTupolev

It doesn't agree with the argument he's making.

SunTour's bottom-end derailleur from that era was the Honor, and it used a steel parallelogram, stamped steel knuckles, and steel plates for the pulley cage. It does use a big cylindrical piece of aluminum around the cage spring, but this isn't really a "good build quality" thing: it's a cheap casting being used in a non-structural role, and its finish almost makes it look like grey plastic.

Moisture's derailleur is one step up in the hierarchy from the Honor. It's nearly identical to an Honor, except that the upper knuckle has been replaced with an aluminum knuckle similar to what SunTour's mid-range V-series derailleurs had.
So the body of Moisture's derailleur is mostly steel, and where it isn't, it's due to the derailleur being above bottom-tier.

mstateglfr 

Just saying that a single experience shouldnt be how everything else is viewed, whether that stuff is above or below.
Someone who has only used the best shouldnt draw general conclusions from that. Someone who has only used the worst shouldnt draw conclusions from that. Thats really all I was saying.