CdCf

I didn't think I'd say this, but I'm actually looking forward to electric/electronic shifting.

At least if all its potential is unleashed.

1. Position sensing.
Some form of sensor determines where the sprocket is, and micromoves the derailer to the optimal position after every shift. Goes for both front and rear. No more rub - ever!

2. Automatic calibration.
The inner/outer limits and sprocket positions are automatically recorded and set during a setup calibration cycle that can be initiated in a setup mode. Just keep the chain moving at a minimum speed until the setup signals that it's done. Very practical if you often switch between different rear wheels.

3. Friction-like manual mode.
Not really necessary if #1 works fine, but could perhaps be useful. Small dial on the tip of the hood could let you microshift the derailers laterally, without actually doing any full shift.

4. Special!
There's also the potential for a "linear" shifting mode, where it will shift up and down through all usable gearing combinations, in sequence. No longer any need for the cyclist to keep track of specific shifting patterns - the shifting system takes care of it all for you, provided it's been told how many teeth the front and rear sprockets have. Just click UP or DOWN (or something like that) and you'll get your next harder or next easier gear. It could also be possible to program the shifting sequences manually, complete with front derailer first/second order determination.

If the battery can be made to work in really cold temps, it would mean that frozen shifter cables is a thing of the past.

I_bRAD

I, on the other hand, subscribe to the KISS theory.

CdCf

I've got just the bike for you then, I bRAD:

I_bRAD

I'd rather just ride a horse!

dvs cycles

So you still like 6sp friction shifters on the downtube of a 23lb bike?

I_bRAD

blah blah blah.

So what problem is the electronic shifting solving again? Lack of space for batteries and electronics on the current cable system?

Edit: But yes, I'd take a 6sp friction shifter setup over robo-bike.

CdCf

I could list a number of good things, but I doubt you're interested. You sound as though you've made your mind up already.

GlassWolf

I think a more feasible solution is a CVT transmission on a biclcye.

although if you want electronic shifting, look at a Trek Lime.

ianjk

I try to keep electronics and other gadgets off of my bike. More stuff to fail on a long winter ride.

Svr

Mavic tried it back in the mid '90s. It didn't catch on.

https://www.bikepro.com/products/rear...zap_rrder.html

HillRider

To date nobody has been able to design an acceptable CVT for bike use. The attempts have all been either mechanical failures or unacceptably heavy and inefficient. So it's not a "more feasible solution", at least not so far.

The pie-in-the-sky electronic shifting system proposed by the OP may indeed be possible some day but current prototype electric shifting systems by Shimano and Campy (and Mavic's two failed commercial attempts) are just electrically shifted versions of current derailleur systems. They replace the shift lever, cable and hosing with servo motors and a battery. The only advantage I can see is you can install the shift buttons anywhere and have them in more than one location.

due ruote 

Can't speak for IbRad, but I do. But then again, I also liked wooden tennis rackets.

I_bRAD

I can lift in excess of 50lbs, so 23lbs is no trouble at all!

slushlover2

A solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

CdCf

Uhm, at least my #1 exists on working prototypes today, I've read!

dvs cycles

I'm pretty sure IF electric comes out and proves itself to be good they will STILL offer cables and low tech stuff for those anti tech types. Mavic DID fail twice and both Campy and Shimano have surpassed them and SHOULD be able to make it happen.
There is a reason that there aren't any dinosaurs left.

n4zou

I built an electronic shift system using off the shelf parts from www.mouser.com. It consists of two stepper motors with gears and clutches pulling the cables. The clutches allow manual friction shifting if you allow the batteries to expire. I recently upgraded it to Bluetooth so the rider shifts it with buttons located in either the right or left glove. Bluetooth also allows someone following in a SAG to read Heart rate, Watts, speed, cadence, gear ratio, and body temp. It also allows the rider to talk to the SAG with a wireless Bluetooth headset. Electronics are here and you'll love it, eventually.

I_bRAD

Yeah, they got too complicated.

Remember when you could rebuild your carb in an afternoon, and you didn't cause $1500 worth of damage if you backed into the guy behind you? I think bikes should stay that way.

CdCf

And that's fine for YOU, I bRAD. Nothing prevents you from sticking with purely mechanical stuff. But I know I'll probably be happy once electric shifter setups get down to around current Ultegra price levels. Maybe 5-10 years in the future, but it will happen.

FYI, two of my three bikes are steel. One of them has friction shifting for the FD. My third bike has an alu frame, but is a singlespeed instead. I'm definitely not the all-carbon, highest-level tech geek you might think I am. But, to me, electric shifting seems to be a very useful and practical next level in shifting technology. It will make things simpler, faster, quieter and more predictable.

The extra weight, if any, of an electric shifter setup will probably be on the order of 100 grams or less, at least compared to the level of components I use. While the weight of the battery and electric actuators will add to the total, it will at least in part be offset by the cables and housings you no longer need, as well as the complete absence of any mechanical shifter mechanism in the brifters. A simple and light-weight electronics box would replace it all.

Compare the weight of a pair of Shimano brifters with a pair of plain brake levers (electric brifters would be close to the weight of plain brake levers), and you've got a weight reduction of 250-300 grams right there.

The weight of the cables and housings is probably around 100-120 grams, and that's instantly saved by going electric.

We're talking close to a pound saved before we start adding battery and actuators.

Not having cables and housings running along the frame and catching wind is also aerodynamically beneficial, albeit on a small scale.

Electric shifting could also easily accomodate multiple and duplicate shifter button locations. You could have one set of shifter buttons on the brifters, then another on the tops.

ScrubJ

I'm with I_bRad on this one AND I'm kind of a technofreak. Look under the seat of your car at the size of the ECM. Given the bike won't need all the processing ability of a modern automobile, there is still all the issues of sensors. Are they going to be optical (think dirt and chain lube grime) or impedance/resistance type? Think you have adjustment troubles now? Back to the battery thing. I own a laptop, battery around $100.00 to replace, runs maybe two hours max on low power settings. My last ride was six hours long. Granted one isn't shifting all the time BUT if we go back to the sensors, there is continual drain.

Admittedly, we could go electric over manual but to what end? Still need brake levers so weight savings would be minimal over brifters (and there's that battery again) AND still have the stepper motors (or whatever) connected to the deraileurs. What about weather? Battery life in the cold just plain sucks.

I could write a book on all of this but, why not just go out and buy a motorcycle. You can have all the electronics your heart desires and not have to pedal too boot.

Just my .02
Keith

ScrubJ

Typical stepper motors require a magnet and some type of conductor (usually copper) both add weight. Pick up a laptop battery, not light. Titanium and carbon fiber don't weigh a lot, what can I say?

As a mechanic, (me) why do you feel things will be more simple (ever look under the hood of your car?) or more quiet? Going to need something similar to what we have now to take up chain slack, and that seems to be where most of the noise in running gear comes from anyway.

j0e_bik3

that sounds about as easy as re-mapping your EFI, instead of just changing a carb jet,....

no thanks.

I'm also a KISS activist

HillRider

Yep, I remember how simple it was to rebuild carbs, even 4-barrel ones. BUT, I remember having to rebuild them every 30,000 miles and getting 18 mpg on a good day. My current car is significantly faster, gets 28 to 30 mpg on the highway and the fuel injection system has never been touched in 60,000 miles. I have another car in my family with fuel injection that has had zero need for FI maintenance in 175,000 miles. Complicated is sometimes simpler than simple. And simple is often just a synonym for primitive.

As to a minor accident causing $1500 in damage on a $25,000 car. True, these days it does. However, I remember when a minor accident like that only caused $300 in damage but the entire car cost $3000 so it's all relative.

All of the above notwithstanding, I don't see electric or electronic shifting on bikes as solving any real problems or making any improvements in the riding experience. Until the electronics can read your mind, you are still going to have to pick the gear you want.

CdCf

Simpler: easy and quick setup, as described in my OP.
Quieter: no rubbing ever - nothing would ever lose alignment, because the electric shifter would continually adjust itself.

ScrubJ...
Compare the weight of a pair of brifters to a pair of plain brake levers. As I stated in a previous post, you typically save 250-300 grams right there! Maybe you'd call that minimal - I don't!

Sensor could easily be piezoelectric of some kind. Very low power, and it would only have to check intermittently for a second or two right after each shift, and then only periodically after that (maybe once every 30 seconds or so). After all, it's likely to be non-changing over the short term (hours) after the shift is completed, so no need for a continuous sensor operation. Not much of a power drain there.

CdCf

Wow! I didn't realise so many of you were this backwards! I've given you a whole range of examples of how this could make things simpler and easier with no or negligible increase in weight, and you still argue that it will be more complicated, and much heavier?