ThinLine

So I have been riding my relatively new 2009 Pedal Force RS2 bike w/ the new 2010 Force group now for 1 year and 1432.6 miles. I have 3 road bikes which usually get there fair turns but I wanted to really test and ride SRAM, which I have never had. All my other bikes have been shimano ultegra/Dura-Ace components.
I like it, alot. Can't say its leaps and bounds over my Ultegra/Dura-Ace mix's but it is precise, high quality, reliable, good looking and light.
To be fair; other two bikes had Ultegra shifters (6700), DA RD, DA brakes, ultegra FD and FSA SLK crank on one, ultegra on other.
Dura-Ace brakes are the BEST out there without a doubt. Force brakes are good, DA brakes are superb. They say Rival is on par with Force although never ridden it.

For what its worth.

colombo357

So... is it better or worse than Ultegra 6700?

ptle

Better. 6700 is to be compared to Rival, which still wins.

Shifting performance is going to be the same along with durability. The only reason SRAM "wins" is because it's lighter and cheaper. If you give me a bike with 6700 and one with Rival, I'm not going to be any faster either bike. I could make an argument that I might be faster on a mountain climb using SRAM because of its lighter weight, but that's about it.

ThinLine

If Rival is to Ultegra....then are you saying Force is to Dura-Ace?? I have both and feel DuraAce is better. The shifting dynamics alone warrant this statement.
Believe me, Force is not junk...its just NOT Dura-Ace.

sqharaway

Do you have 2010 Force? I've never heard anyone say its not as good as DA. I'm not saying you're wrong, I've just never heard that review...

foresthill

No, it's not. For many of us, it's much better. The shifting feel is different. For me, shimano feels soft and too indistinct in its shifting. I want a loud, hard click so that I know that i've shifted, and how far, which is what I get with SRAM (and campy.) Others prefer the smoothness and quiet of a shimano shift. It's really not an objective thing, just what you prefer.

ptle

Yes and no. Only in terms of weight.

It's more about preference. Rival, Force, and DA all shift pretty well and pretty similar. As you get higher up in the group, you save some weight, and a couple watts from things like ceramic pulleys. Other than that, I would say shifting performance is nearly the same. There's a small step up when going to Red due to Zero-Loss.

It's the same with Shimano. 105/Ultegra/DA.

Therefore, it's hard to compare groups when shifting is spot on and reliability in both groups isn't much of an issue. The only thing to compare is weight and price. That's when Red wins. It's cheaper and lighter. However, performance-wise, that's not going to make much of a difference. I'm not going to be faster because I'm running Red instead of DA.

From their website. Adding the weight of shifters, RD, FD, crank with BB (not BB30), cassette, chain, and brakes. Red is 119g lighter than DA. DA is 69g lighter than Force.

However, when comparing Force and DA, DA is over $1000 more. With that extra money, running a Force groupset with a Red cassette would make the total weight be only 14g less than DA.

jermso

x 10

frankum

Exactly. I wish everyone would stop comparing Shimano "whatever" to SRAM "whatever", because you could say Force is like Dura-Ace AND Ultegra: Ultegra Price, Dura-Ace performance... or you could say Red is Dura-Ace price and Dura-Ace performance... just lighter. So really, it's apples to oranges considering SRAM is all around lighter and cheaper, so whatever Shimano group you're comparing to, SRAM equipment will naturally be a bit cheaper and lighter with it being argueably more or less durable than Shimano equipment.

intence

It comes down to personal preference. Shimano is typically smoother, while SRAM is more direct. I currently ride SRAM because at a given weight level it's cheaper, and their lower end groups offer far more bang for the buck than Shimano.

They're all great, and i'm not sure what i'd take between Red/Dura-Ace. The benefit with SRAM is that Rival isn't functionally different from Force (except the Cranks are different). You can build up a high performance cheap group pretty easily:

Rival (or Red if you can swing it shifters)
Red/Force crank if you want light weight, Rival if you don't mind the extra weight and want it stiff
Rival everything else

Looking at the weights, Rival weighs about the same as Force (and seeing the actual weights on certain websites, Rival is nearly identical in weight to force). With Shimano, there is definitely a difference between a 105/Ultegra/Dura Ace shifter, same with brakes etc. With SRAM there's more value at the lower end, I think that's the benefit for enthusiasts.

jermso

a great combo with everything sram has to offer like full zero-loss front & rear and carbon crank stiffness would be:

red shifters
force cranks
apex everything else

this 2163g combo will set u back a nice 1.1k on pbk

daytonian

"So I have been riding my relatively new 2009 Pedal Force RS2 bike w/ the new 2010 Force group now for 1 year and 1432.6 miles. I have 3 road bikes which usually get there fair turns but I wanted to really test and ride SRAM, which I have never had. All my other bikes have been shimano ultegra/Dura-Ace components.
I like it, alot. Can't say its leaps and bounds over my Ultegra/Dura-Ace mix's but it is precise, high quality, reliable, good looking and light.
To be fair; other two bikes had Ultegra shifters (6700), DA RD, DA brakes, ultegra FD and FSA SLK crank on one, ultegra on other.
Dura-Ace brakes are the BEST out there without a doubt. Force brakes are good, DA brakes are superb. They say Rival is on par with Force although never ridden it."

Cateye

2010 SRAM Force is more bang for the buck vs Dura Ace or Ultegra. I have DA 7800 and Ultegra 6700 and SRAM Force beats them both in terms of price and quality. There is not a lot of difference between DA 7800 and 7900 (having road 7900 a lot) other than the breaks. DA 7900 breaks are the best out there.

Chef151

It's brakes, not breaks. Sorry, pet peeve of mine

Cateye

My bad......it my bad typing.

gus6464

Gotta love the people that say Rival is comparable to Ultegra. Rival will never shift as smooth as 6700 no matter how hard you try. Hell not even Force will. When did BF turn into weight weenies forum? I like sram as much as the next guy but the rampant fanboyism for it around here is starting to reach caad9 levels.

Rival might be lighter than Ultegra but in everything else it is not comparable to 6700. Front shifting alone runs circles around Rival. The new Force while being a lot smoother than Rival it is still not on par with 6700 and DA in that aspect. Force is a fantastic group that is very light and performs great but the best bang for the buck in groups right now is 6700.

intence

You have no idea what you're talking about. How does Force shift any differently than Rival?!? They're functionally the same (Magnesium paddle shifter, unidirectional CF, and graphics on Force are the only differences on the shifter), Cassetes are the same (1070), RD isn't functionally different (magnesium and CF bits), FD adds a titanium bolt. I fail to see how one would shift different than the other.

On both systems, you hit the button/paddle/whatever and it shifts. Shimano does so smoothly, SRAM clunks into place, both work. Mixing/matching is easier with SRAM, so for less money than 6700, you get a group that performs well and costs less.

umd

For people who prefer the front shifting of ultegra (or DA), you can always put a Shimano FD on. They are compatible cable pulls.

gus6464

Rival clacks into place when shifting in the rear and while Force still does that it sure as hell doesn't feel as harsh.

umd

That may just be a function of how the bikes that you tried were setup. There really is no mechanical difference, only the materials used in some of the exterior parts like the shift and brake levers, and derailer cages.

learnmedia

Except that my experience with the awesome front shifting of Ultegra 6700 lies in the shifters themselves, since I run these with an otherwise all Ultegra SL group. All other aspects remaining the same, the change to 6700 shifters resulted in remarkably better front shifting. I've read reviews of others having the same experience.

Edit: Let me add that the whole Campy, Shimano, SRAM debate seems as similarly preferential as saddles--whatever feels best to the rider. While I only have experience with Shimano at this point, it seems that they all work excellently, just differently for different folks based on their preference. Sounds like some like the loud, clangy, and precise SRAM. Others like the quiet, smooth, buttery softness of Shimano. And just like saddles and butts, the ergonomics of the hoods of each along with reach make for a better fit for different hands.

umd

The shifter moves the derailer, the shifting happens by the derailer. The FD and the chainrings are going to matter far more than the shifter. As long as the cable moves the same amount, the shifter is largely irrelevant. For the rear it will make more of a difference.

ptle

This is true. For what it's worth, I'm running a 6600 Ultegra FD and it works very nicely with my Rival shifts.

learnmedia

Makes sense. However my experience having gone from the 6600 to 6700 shifters says that the shifter matters. And matters to rear shifts as well since, interestingly, the rear shifts almost, but not quite, as good (smooth) with the 6700 shifters. Unfortunately I cannot explain why. The difference in front shifts is markedly superior though. Are you saying it's solely an adjustment issue?

umd

It could be mostly an adjustment issue. People often set up their shifters, especially their front, with too much cable tension to set the low limit (or high limit for the rear) instead of the limit screws. SRAM may be more sensitive to that. I know I've screwed it up and had very difficult shifts, then readjusted it properly and the shifting was fine.