Page 57 of 75

Re: Dura Ace 9000 - ETA late 2012/early 2013

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 9:49 am
by Guerdi
Thanks Hubert, that's exactly what I wanted to know.

Re: Dura Ace 9000 - ETA late 2012/early 2013

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 11:24 am
by motd2k
Some photos on the scales of my new 9070 parts.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/63137071@N00/sets/72157632761178825/

Question: No BC-9000 brake cables included with the shifters, and I can't find them in the UK at all. What would you recommend to use for the initial build (and would it be worth switching once the 9000 cables are available)?

Re: Dura Ace 9000 - ETA late 2012/early 2013

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:10 pm
by BdaGhisallo
Yokozuna cables are a very worthy substitute. I haven't used the new Shimano cables yet, but I found the Yokozunas to be superior to any other brake or shifter cables that I have ever tried.

Re: Dura Ace 9000 - ETA late 2012/early 2013

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 3:15 pm
by NWSAlpine
Yokozuna are good but can be extra work to install depending on your config. The brake housing can be too big and needs some trimming. The length has to be perfect for some brakes too. Should be less sensitive with Dura-ace calipers though.

Re: Dura Ace 9000 - ETA late 2012/early 2013

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:27 pm
by BdaGhisallo
I was thinking mostly of the cable itself and not the housing. I have never tried Yokozuna's fancy housing (Revolution, iirc). Their regular jet-lubed housing along with their stainless steel cables are magic. They were the only thing that made my 7900 shifting acceptable, back before I went with DI2.

Re: Dura Ace 9000 - ETA late 2012/early 2013

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:49 pm
by asv
Here are two vids of 9070 shifting I took last night

Rear:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gK_3o-LTQpI

Front:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hSJQuNhCVc

I also posted a bunch of screens on the firmware update process here:

http://alexvalentine.org/?p=6496

Re: Dura Ace 9000 - ETA late 2012/early 2013

Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 7:31 am
by SpeshK
SpeshK wrote:
dha wrote:
aaric wrote:
dha wrote:My DA C50 clinchers arrived today. Look great, just holding out for better weather before I run them on the bike.


Can you stick them on a scale and post results?


Haven't got a scale unfortunately.


Mine have arrived too and I do have some scales. I'll post the results later.

828g for the front, 1003g for the rear out of the box. So 1831g for the set. Shimano stated weight for the set is 1672g so these are 9.5% over.

This set is gonna have to go back though. When rotating the front wheel, I can hear loose material rattling around the inside of the front rim. I managed to shake some out from the valve holes but can't get all of it.

Re: Dura Ace 9000 - ETA late 2012/early 2013

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:54 am
by mann2
Here are my WH-9000-C50 CLs

Image

note that i removed the stock rim tape and replaced them with a single layer of stan's yellow tape. Original weight is what's pictured + 10 grams per wheel.

Tried the yellow tape as a longshot experiment, worked out great!

(1 layer stan's tape = 5 grams per wheel ; Orig Shimano Tape = 15 grams each)

Re: Dura Ace 9000 - ETA late 2012/early 2013

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:20 pm
by aaric
so stock weights of 1740-1831g vs 1672g advertised.

Thanks, appreciate the weights. I was hoping they'd come out closer to advertised.

Re: Dura Ace 9000 - ETA late 2012/early 2013

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:38 pm
by boots2000
Anyone install a 9000 crankset with a King bb? Do I need the thin spacers that king provides? It seems to have play in it.

Re: Dura Ace 9000 - ETA late 2012/early 2013

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:59 pm
by petal666
boots2000 wrote:Anyone install a 9000 crankset with a King bb? Do I need the thin spacers that king provides? It seems to have play in it.

It shouldn't.

Re: Dura Ace 9000 - ETA late 2012/early 2013

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:50 am
by ave
aaric wrote:so stock weights of 1740-1831g vs 1672g advertised.


That's more like 1710g. Shimano advertises weight for the wheels sans tape. Yep, still overweight.

Re: Dura Ace 9000 - ETA late 2012/early 2013

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:18 am
by mann2
at 1710, definitely not featherweights. but you do get an alloy brake track if it's any consolation.

(i find the 'disappearing spokes' cool too) :wink:

Image

Re: Dura Ace 9000 - ETA late 2012/early 2013

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2013 2:01 pm
by BobDopolina
ave wrote:
aaric wrote:so stock weights of 1740-1831g vs 1672g advertised.


That's more like 1710g. Shimano advertises weight for the wheels sans tape. Yep, still overweight.


Once again Shimano demonstrates its inability to work carbon.

Re: Dura Ace 9000 - ETA late 2012/early 2013

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2013 2:57 pm
by HillRPete
BobDopolina wrote:Once again Shimano demonstrates its inability to work carbon.

Either that, or their commitment to put out rock solid products with ample safety margin, targeted at average Joe, who's not very interesting in weighing things.