Mechanical groupsets at it's pinnacle, ... or?

[Ellingferd]

I suppose there could be room for improvement in mechanical, but I can't fathom what it is. I have two bikes, one with 2009 force and one with 2011 force, both 10 speed (obviously) and both with the same jagwire cables. One group has 10k miles, the other has 4 or 5k miles. Neither have been tuned up other than a cassette change and chain change here and there (and, for that matter, I have used KMC x10 ti chains, and Im on my second on the group with 10k miles). I have literally had no issues, save the standard force shift lever breaking, but that was only a few weeks ago on the 2009 set. I know people hate these front derailleurs, but I never have a problem. Shifts up and down when I want it, trims nicely, which I don't think is even necessary as trim is only needed when cross chaining. I'm so used to this set up, I have no desire to move to anything else, perhaps red, but 10 speed red. I don't really want 11 speed, and certainly not 12.

Previously I had ultegra on my bikes and I cannot say I want to go back. I really prefer the sram levers (I don't like moving the entire brake lever for a shift), and I felt like there was more regular adjustment required with shimano. Probably just my experience, but as soon as I started with sram I was pretty blown away by the simplicity.

Im sure this will catch a lot of flak, but this setup is what works for me. Never broken a chain, never been stuck on a ride, never had a mechanical failure save the one two weeks ago, and I still got home fine by manually tensioning the derailleur to a gear that would get me home. I'd say that out of 15k collective miles, one mechanical is pretty good. So, in my opinion, mech has already been as good as it needs to be!

[Tinea Pedis]

I know this is a question that probably gets asked every generation of groupset, but how do you feel improvements could be made on mechanical Dura Ace 9000 or Super Record? They're both pretty amazing and light at the moment.

9000 and 6800 really need to stop eating cables in the shifter head. For me that's the biggest issue they face.

And funnily I have the 2010 model Super Record 11sp shifter and they've been fine - not cables munched at all. Also still going strong. As is the RD (which has hit the deck more than once). Additionally the FD shifts my Q-Rings a hell of a lot better than 9000/6800, so I can't really ask for much more than that from a groupset (given that it's also lighter than its electronic counterparts).

Can there be much more scope for improvements? Not once the cable issues are solved. Will that render them redundant? Not for a damn long time. Especially when you still have Contador, Fabian and Nibali all still closing mechanical over electronic. Whatever their basis for the choice might be, they're still an example that plenty will follow.

In short my TT bikes will always have an electronic groupset. My road bikes will always have mechanical groupsets.

In the same boat, but more to do with UCI regs around reach and the (absurd) inclusion now of the full mechanical TT shifter. Rather than measuring to the pivot point (as was previously the case).

I had no issues at all racing on mechanical on my TT rig up until that point.

[wheelsONfire]

I guess you can change a few things. If someone claims they have wires "eaten", that is one thing which could be bettered i suppose.
They can also implement another wire tension system for both rear and front derailleur.

Perhaps even further lower friction. The STI 9001 shifters are a revision from STI 9000 shifters (i have both), perhaps we can see a new wire routing and feeding system in an all new shifter system?

Those who like electronic always mention how good it is and that they have had no flaws or hick-us, which is great.
But there are reports with broken RD's and a few hick-ups.
All electric motors, circuit boards and chips can have hick-ups.

I still try to point out to you guys, that there are rows of threads concerning your beloved systems (with all right!) so can we just focus on mechanical here.

Still our frames are very mechanical in the way they're built to be stiff or flex for comfort. In a few years you might see disc brakes with ABS and all sorts of inventions. Maybe frames will evolve to, i have no idea!?

But in the meanwhile, there is a love for none electric. As it seems Campa has Record and Super Record and to me, it seems it would be like Shimano had DA 9000 and DA 9000 Deluxe. I guess Shimano would have no problem to build an outrageous mechanical system lowering weight, using better and perhaps more expensive materials and incorporating new ideas which may be less cost effective, but never the less appeal to a niche market of cyclist who adore tour de force engineering.

Revising a current groupset is one thing, but what about if they would design one from ground and up?
IMO, it would add appeal if they had a design difference between mechanical and electronic groupsets, to mark that it is two different systems.

After all, cyclist in many ways seem to react strong towards big changes and many things are under heavy influence of R&D.
This alone speaks for mechanical and rim brakes.

If you talk to people who are not really obsessive about cycling and a bike is a bike more or less.
They often start to ask two questions.

1. What is the weight (well known, right or wrong, that weight saving is high on the list)
2. Is it made of carbon (to normal people they still live in a sphere where carbon is just carbon)

Aero, disc brakes and electric groupsets are still rather new if we see it in perspective.
So maybe the light weight bikes and components aswell as highly engineered mechanical groupsets, is in a perspective, what is deemed the core
and some seem to mean, it's not the future?

I think it can be and i hope it will be.

That is what i would like you guys talk of here.

I think you mix things up when you say that asking for an evolution from mechanical is going electronic, is not really getting the subject.
Not to be rude!

Thanks for discussing guys

[Tinea Pedis]

If you're really looking for a discussion on the merits of mechanical groupsets can I suggest you:

a.) stop actually bringing electronic grouppos back in to the conversation - which seems to include your take, but precludes anyone adding anything further

Those who like electronic always mention how good it is and that they have had no flaws or hick-us, which is great.
But there are reports with broken RD's and a few hick-ups.
All electric motors, circuit boards and chips can have hick-ups.

b.) not play down the Shimano cable issue as some sort of heresay. It's an issue with a massive amount of internet discussion around it - and ways to prevent it occurring. It's also one of the only major failings of either group (9000 and 6800).

I guess you can change a few things. If someone claims they have wires "eaten", that is one thing which could be bettered i suppose.

c.) stop pretending that either groupset exists in a vacuum. It's inevitable in threads about one, the other will be mentioned. The choice and design aspects influence each other. If you think the next gen of mechanical groupsets will be designed without a single thought given to what electronic is doing you're kidding yourself.

And adding "not to be rude" after claiming your thread is being derailed is like my when my socially inappropriate grandmother leads with "I'm not looking to insult anyone but...". You're doing anything but 'not being rude'.

[Calnago]

Already mentioned by posters but just to summarize and elaborate a bit on three points mentioned so far...
1) cable tensioners combined with front dérailleur. Brilliant. Both campy and shimano's newest long arm front dérailleurs can be quite finicky to set up initially and they now supply inline cable tensioners for fine tuning. These tensioners are generally placed in the curve of the cable below the handlebars. Awful location as it actually adds friction when placed in the bend and looks hideous. I don't use them but it takes some experience (and a fourth hand tool) to be able to set it up perfectly without that adjuster.
2) mostly applies to Shimano... FIX the botch up in lever design that eats dérailleur cables. It's ridiculous how fast these things chew up cables. Campy, to a much lesser extent has this issue as well if you route the cables through the outside guides in the levers versus the inside guides, which have a much smoother bend. I always use the inside routing now regardless of where the cable grooves in the handlebars may be. Campy levers now come with the dérailleur cables routed through the smoother path. I have not seen a frayed cable using that route.
3) Cables and housing. They are pretty good these days but innovations and improvements here are always welcome. I still prefer the stainless steel cables of campy over the coated cables of Shimano. That coating comes off easily and looks a mess. And when combined with water and dust/dirt inside housing, can turn to muck. Fine when new, but doesn't age well, especially in less than ideal conditions.

[prendrefeu]

There were rumors (and insider knowledge) that Rotor was developing a hydraulic (which is still mechanical) road group.

Indications that this was (is?) the case come from both folks who work(ed) for Rotor and what Cervelo, with close ties to Rotor, have developed on their frames. Even in their manuals, Cervelo points to their cable guide system being cable for cable, electronic or hydraulic shifting systems.

Where this system is with Rotor at this time, I do not know.
Would I want it? Absolutely. It would (in theory) be lighter, it would need *no* adjustments and cables (now tubes) can be run at tighter curves.

Acros was working on a Road system.
http://www.bikerumor.com/2013/09/03/eb1 ... r1-brakes/

They already have a fully functional, while expensive, exceptional MTB system.

[dmulligan]

@predrefeu Now there is something that road groups could definitely use: competition. Having just 3 brands monopolizing the market reminds me of Canadian mobile phone service. Not that competition is driving prices down in any other part of bicycle builds.

[Grill]

I would be the first to buy an Acros road groupset...

[hobbsneti]

12 speed with kevlar 'chain'?
[SMILING FACE WITH OPEN MOUTH AND COLD SWEAT]

[beanbiken]

Not sure if this has been spoken of earlier in the thread but cars can have a CVT [constant variable transmisson] so why not bikes? I would expect that that would involve a drive belt rather than chain which in it's self adds it's own set of problems to be overcome.

[fromtrektocolnago]

I'm one who never saw the benefit of 11 vs 10 gears, but i did appreciate the superior ergonomics of the latest generation Shimano. My sole wish list is to correct the flaw that results in premature fraying of the cable to the rear derailleur. A minor request would be to lessen the need for trim which on my 6500 never seems to be an issue.

[tymon_tm]

automatic shifting in mechanical groupset? when we already have electronic? that sort of 'gearbox' would need to adjust gears on some basis, probably being plugged to a computer monitoring parameters, like cadence, heartrate, power etc, and decide what ratio to use in split seconds. so again - with electronic, definitelly. with mechanical, rather not.

[Wingnut]

12 speed with kevlar 'chain'?
[SMILING FACE WITH OPEN MOUTH AND COLD SWEAT]

Already about...it's called a Rohloff (14spd) with Gates belt drive...although a heavy one...

[Herb5998]

Maybe a way to change the cable tension system so as to eliminate the loop of housing/cable at the RD? I know MTB systems have something like that, but it could clean up the lines for sure


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wingnut]

For groupsets in general I wish a universal cassette body could be used by Shimano and Campagnolo...the same with brake pads too...