bar-end shifters

On Fri, 06 Jan 2006 09:13:43 +0100, M-gineering wrote:

among all the other excellent reasons: you can shift gears without
dropping your sandwich you can shift with frozen fingers
Ergopower in rollercoaster hills gives me RSI

I don't know about RSI, but I do get mysterious soreness in my right hand
from time to time, from my STI shifters. I haven't figured out what
causes it yet. I know a couple of long-distance riders who use barends
for this reason.

Matt O.

In article , John Forrest
Tomlinson wrote:

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
On 6 Jan 2006 15:58:58 -0800, wrote:

Come to think of it, repairability is
valuable in almost anything. I suppose if a device literally never,
ever breaks down, I wouldn't care about this - but that's certainly not
true of STI.

Do you carry spare saddles on rides? I've broken them but sort of
like living on the edge.....

Sounds like you need to lose weight.

I broke one when I weighed 140 pounds (alloy rails -- mistake we
agree) and one with solid steel rails when I weighed 150-155. I think
I broke another with non-alloy rails at that weight too but am not
sure if they were solid or what.

Only broke one saddle thus far. I weighed around 165lbs and, not sure
how much this bears on the outcome, the saddle had magnesium rails. No
smoking allowed within 10 meters!

On Fri, 06 Jan 2006 18:16:43 -0500, John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:

I read this thread and am amazed at the number of riders who are in such
remote, mission critical situations with their bikes that the added
reliability of bar-ends over integrated brake/shifters is a big factor.
Wow, are you guys all doing unsupported tours across Societ Central Asia
or something?

Not all of us, but some probably are. One of my fellow riders who uses
barends is a RAAMster. I have several friends who do multi-day tours in
the desert in CA, and they all still use thumbshifters on their MTBs.

Matt O.

In article , Luke
wrote:

Only broke one saddle thus far. I weighed around 165lbs and, not sure
how much this bears on the outcome, the saddle had magnesium rails. No
smoking allowed within 10 meters!

Ooops, make that Manganese rails - smoking ok.

Luke

On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 07:27:22 -0500, John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:

Many people have only one bike, and if STI is nice for them for fun riding
or racing, they shouldn' feel it's too risky for commuting. I only had
one bike a lot of my life.

Ride what you have.

Yup. If starting from scratch with an unlimited budget, I might have a
different bike(s) than I do now. But what I have works well enough for
what I do now, and I'd make it work for anything else. I've had the same
MTB for about 10 years now.

Matt O.

On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 04:40:10 +0000, Jeff Starr wrote:

On 6 Jan 2006 17:52:22 -0800, "Ozark Bicycle"
wrote:

I am amazed at the number of riders who are brainwashed into thinking
brifters are the only way to go.

And I'm always amazed at riders that don't like brifters, thinking that
those of us who do, are misguided racer wannabes.

I think there's as much brainwashing either way, and at least as much
anti-snobbery as snobbery. Most people ride what the bike store sells
(brifters) without too much thought. It's only the real fanatics who seek
out barcons for their perfect commuter tool/statement.

You like barcons, that's fine, I like brifters, why is that so hard to
accept. They are both good choices.

Yup. And isn't it great that we have the choice?

Matt O.

Luke wrote:
In article , John Forrest
Tomlinson wrote:


John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:

On 6 Jan 2006 15:58:58 -0800, wrote:


Come to think of it, repairability is
valuable in almost anything. I suppose if a device literally never,
ever breaks down, I wouldn't care about this - but that's certainly not
true of STI.

Do you carry spare saddles on rides? I've broken them but sort of
like living on the edge.....

Sounds like you need to lose weight.

I broke one when I weighed 140 pounds (alloy rails -- mistake we
agree) and one with solid steel rails when I weighed 150-155. I think
I broke another with non-alloy rails at that weight too but am not
sure if they were solid or what.


Only broke one saddle thus far. I weighed around 165lbs and, not sure
how much this bears on the outcome, the saddle had magnesium rails. No
smoking allowed within 10 meters!

What kind of saddle had magnesium rails? Are you sure it wasn't Mn
instead of Mg?


Robin Hubert

The Wogster writes:

Tim McNamara wrote:
"bfd" writes:

Can you explain why "brifters" are less *less flexible" than
bar-ends or dt shifters?

"Brifters"

1. Indexed only, and only for one gearing configuration
(e.g., 7/8/9/10 speed depending on age). If you never have to
change wheels for any reason, probably not an issue.

2. Little tolerance for bent derailleur hanger after a crash.

3. Location makes damage to shifting mechanism more vulnerable in
a crash. I saw an Ergo lever smashed to smithereens in such a
situation, leaving the rider unable to shift or brake on that side.

4. In the case of Shimano, not serviceable.

5. As a function of indexing, not tolerant of having to replace
the derailleur with a different make (or sometimes different model)
in the event of damage.

6. As a function of indexing, vulnerable to shifting problems
related to cables getting gunked up.

So issues, 1, 2 ,5 and 6 are indexing related, rather then brifter
related, IOW these are problems any indexed shifting mechanism would
have even the old 3speed T-shift can have these issues, the trigger
shift MTB mechanisms also have these issues.

It's only a problem with an index-only shifter, which is the case for
both Ergo and STI but not for bar-end or downtube shifters. Both
bar-end and downtube shifters have a friction shifting option. Which
BTW is part of why I use bar-end shifters on my brevet bikes, so that
I have less risk of a mechanical problem affecting my ability to
finish an event. Of course, I think and have always thought that
indexing was an unneccesary invention. It's not like friction
shifting was harder to learn than index shifting.

3 speed trigger shifters would not be vulnerable to #2 and #5, of
course, and relatively safe from #3. #1 is unlikely to be a problem,
but #6 is something I saw many times at the bike shops I worked at.

The fact that Campy can make one that can be serviced, and Shimano
can't simply means that Shimano used a lousy designer and/or cheap
manufacturing process. So the only real brifter issue is that it
can be a lousy location in a crash.

No, there are basically two issues: that they are index-only and the
location causing a vulnerability. There is a third issue in the case
of Shimano, which is the cable routing interfering with being able to
use a handlebar bag, but since current trends in steering geometry
tend to make bikes handle badly with a handlebar bag this is not
likely to be a common problem.

However because the shifter and brake are together, how many
crashes, has it prevented, simply because the rider could brake or
shift without needing to move their hands, very much.

You're appealing to a question that can't be answered and therefore
can prove nothing. But it's a silly point to try to make. The
location of the brake lever is exactly the same, and it's pretty much
impossible to crash because you're in the "wrong" gear. If you need
both handson the bars for some reason, you just defer shifting for a
while.

John Forrest Tomlinson writes:

But it's also worth pointing out that with some of the problems Tim
described, it's not like the bike becomes unrideable -- it just
works a little worse. What I don't understand is how come the "I
need more reliablity" crowd can't deal with some flawed shifting for
an or so to complete their commute or whatever. It's just riding.

In most cases these problems would only be an inconvenience, I agree.
And possibly an expensive inconvenience, depending on what the remedy
might be. New cables are cheap, new brifters aren't.

In my case, because of the type of riding I do (brevets), the
reliability factor becomes more important. I am not a good test case
for the "average" rider, though. Neither is the long-distance tourist.

Of course, your question cuts both ways. "How come the non-racing
crowd can't deal with having to move their hands to shift? It's just
riding." ;-)

"Sorni" writes:

Tom Keats wrote:

I like the day/month/year format because it's in ascending order
(of size of each interval) -- it follows a pattern. Month/day/year
just seems so randomly arranged.

Commie.

Perhaps that should be "imperialist."