Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 36
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    17

    Will Shimano bring back rapid fire shifters?

    I read in Mountain Bike Action that Shimano is considering rapid fire shifters back in the component line up. Anyone heard of this rumor?

  2. #2
    Live 2 Ride
    Reputation: Kona0197's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,918
    Last time I checked Shimano never dropped them. They still have low end rapid fire for 7 and 8 speed setups. I would hope they ditch DC and go back to high end Rapid Fire stuff.
    My Bike: '96 Gary Fisher Aquila
    My Blog: http://http://kona0197.wordpress.com/

  3. #3
    Nightriding rules SuperModerator
    Reputation: crisillo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    20,764

    There still is an LX level RF shifter

    Quote Originally Posted by Kona0197
    Last time I checked Shimano never dropped them. They still have low end rapid fire for 7 and 8 speed setups. I would hope they ditch DC and go back to high end Rapid Fire stuff.
    It is called
    SL-M570. So it hasn't disappeared.

    Cheers,
    Cristián

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    214
    Quote Originally Posted by KATA
    I read in Mountain Bike Action that Shimano is considering rapid fire shifters back in the component line up. Anyone heard of this rumor?
    Forgive me, but I must be missing something here. I checked the Shimano sites for 3 or 4 countries and I still see rapid fire shifters available. The North America site still includes them in several of their lines all the way up to XTR. What makes you think that they're were discontinued? Are you referring to the fact that they haven't come out with a "new" version of rapid fires in a while?

    Thanks for clarification,

    Larry

  5. #5
    Chrome Toaster
    Reputation: Hecubus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,850
    Shimano has never dropped or stopped producing rapid fire shifters. They've had to go as far as to reintroduce them with the updated graphics and colors to reassure people they are still making them. Its quite silly if you ask me but people still don't get it. The current models are 571 and 751 which are the same as 570 and 750 but with the new colors and Italic logo letters. They are also supposed to be introducing a new Saint level pod which has much shorter levers so it can be run inboard of the brake levers more comfortably.

  6. #6
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    20,203
    And not only did they never stop making the rapid fire shifters, but for 2006 they are making a rapid fire 8 speed shifter too. Retro!
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  7. #7
    Live 2 Ride
    Reputation: Kona0197's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,918
    I've got an old 1998ish 8 speed XT rapid fire shifter around here somewhere.
    My Bike: '96 Gary Fisher Aquila
    My Blog: http://http://kona0197.wordpress.com/

  8. #8
    Wolf nipple chips
    Reputation: Cabin Fever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    504

    agreed - never gone

    we just got the 2006 shimano dealer catalog, and each level still has rapidfire shifters. in fact, they've added a 10-speed trigger shifter for flat-bar road bikes! it looks pretty slick...

    CF

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    17

    oh....

    Thanks for your replies, everyone. I was just confused about the lack of innovation with trigger shifters, which mistakenly lead me to believe that Shimano discontinued the line. In addition, no updated matching graphics/colors, and no # designation that a XTR 951 shifter was now a 960 trigger shifter also confused me.

    Glad to hear that it's still around. I like the flight deck integration, and remote shifter option, which seemed better than the new dual control option. In addition, I built up my epic with all 960 components except for the shifters(952).

    However, I'm disappointed that there seems to be no innovation with trigger shifters (at least at the XT/XTR level) since the end of the 950 series.

  10. #10
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    20,203
    Quote Originally Posted by KATA
    Thanks for your replies, everyone. I was just confused about the lack of innovation with trigger shifters.
    Well, shimano invented them, and then innovated and refined them for about a decade and a half. I know they haven't done anything in the last couple years, but just because another company "invented" their own doesn't mean that shimano is behind. 15 years is an eternity of timespan in the mtb world, so they've had some time to "get it right".

    My relatively inexpensive shimano LX shifters weigh the same as $200 sram XO shifters. I know the shimano ones last because I work on them at the bike shop. I also like the fact that the innards are percision metal parts, and that the lever throw is not very long, this is a byproduct of the 1.7:1 ratio that shimano uses and I don't want them to stop, because I like shorter lever throws. I don't know how much more refinement needs to happen to the shimano pods. Probably anything that they'd do would be a big change and met with a lot of resistance. It's not going to get lighter, it's not going to get smaller, but shimano could reposition parts and change the ergonomics. I guarentee you that they'd be met with lots of resistance if they did something like that.

    If you want to "refine" your shifting, tear out all the cables and housing and replace em This is usually the biggest improvement that one can make, and if you switch out the cables and housing at least every season you'll keep them running pretty smooth. Sometimes the biggest reason that "upgrading" makes a difference or feels better is due to this reason, not because anything was "upgraded".
    Last edited by Jayem; 01-11-2006 at 10:19 PM.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    17

    more innovation...

    I don't know how much more refinement needs to happen to the shimano pods.

    Sure there are! Just look at SRAM XO. Shimano could:

    - introduce a hydraulic disc lever/trigger shifter combo
    - multi-position clamps (even Suntour did this)
    - metal trigger shifter handle (the index finger paddle)
    - refine remote shifters (shimano didn't give that design a chance, IMHO)
    - integrate fork/suspension lock-out on shifter or lever (multi-directional paddles?)
    - better flightdeck integration on shifter pods (the sensors were kind of chunky)
    - cartridge bearings instead of ball bearings @ trigger shifter piviots points
    - how about a fully re-buildable/adjustable shifter pod?

    If you want to "refine" your shifting, tear out all the cables and housing and replace em

    Agreed, I oil my housing religiously.

  12. #12
    hands up who wants to die
    Reputation: rpet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,376
    I really hope Shimano doesn't listen to Kata on most of those "innovations."

    -r
    The server is too busy at the moment. Please try again later.
    my mtb videos: http://vimeo.com/album/6861

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    14

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by rpet
    I really hope Shimano doesn't listen to Kata on most of those "innovations."

    -r
    Hey rpet, just how does Kata deserve to get flamed for expressing his opinion? Lets keep it a discussion forum.

    However, Kata does have some good points: trigger shifter design and innovation is not dead, contrary to what Shimano wants you to think. SRAM would not have introduced trigger shifters if they thought there was nothing to "innovate". There has ALWAYS been plenty of buzz every time SRAM introduces a new trigger shifter.

    He also brings up a good point about integrating remote fork lockout. Those 3rd party thumbshifters are junk. Remote lockouts are here to stay and it would be best for Shimano, or SRAM to recognize it and offer a better design solution.

  14. #14
    hands up who wants to die
    Reputation: rpet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,376
    It really wasn't meant to be a flame. I just thought some of those ideas were either laugh-out-loud funny or else ludicrous. Adding the fact that he didn't know that RF paddles are still being produced makes it obvious to me that he's coming out of left field with his understanding of Shimano.

    How will integrating more flavor-of-the-month things into the RF make it better? To Jayem's point, the RF works pretty well.

    Should we have heartrate monitors built-in as well? What if Shimano bought Gravitydroper and integrated that into a RF/hydro combo mechanism?

    Jokes aside, I hear a lot of complaints about the new brake/ lever/shift lever integration, just like I hear a lot of complaints about the old RF paddle/V-lever combo units. Actually - the integration aspect is more or less the primary complaint heard about those products.

    Shimano makes some great products, but their proprietary integration strategies are typically some of their worst ideas, imho.

    What leads you guys to think that Shimano will intelligently integrate whatever random whiz-bang component into their shifter pods? How exactly would Shimano build a pod that integrates with RockShox, Marz, Manitou and Fox remote lockouts? Would they choose just one of these brands to support and everyone else is SOL? Or would they build their own propietary interface and then start making shoddy forks of their own? Don't try to tell me that they will design for and endorse some International Standard of Fork Remote-Lockout to Brake/Shift Lever Integration... this is a company that usually tries to go it alone.

    I often disagree with Jayem.. but he has a point here. RapidFire is pretty well refined and has only suffered from the last couple strange ideas that Shimano has come up with to do to the product.

    Just my $.02.

    -r
    Last edited by rpet; 01-12-2006 at 04:28 PM.
    The server is too busy at the moment. Please try again later.
    my mtb videos: http://vimeo.com/album/6861

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    14

    innovate or die :)

    Quote Originally Posted by rpet
    It really wasn't meant to be a flame. I just thought some of those ideas were either laugh-out-loud funny or else ludicrous. Adding the fact that he didn't know that RF paddles are still being produced makes it obvious to me that he's coming out of left field with his understanding of Shimano.

    How will integrating more flavor-of-the-month things into the RF make it better? To Jayem's point, the RF works pretty well.

    Should we have heartrate monitors built-in as well? What if Shimano bought Gravitydroper and integrated that into a RF/hydro combo mechanism?

    Jokes aside, I hear a lot of complaints about the new brake/ lever/shift lever integration, just like I hear a lot of complaints about the old RF paddle/V-lever combo units. Actually - the integration aspect is more or less the primary complaint heard about those products.

    Shimano makes some great products, but their proprietary integration strategies are typically some of their worst ideas, imho.

    What leads you guys to think that Shimano will intelligently integrate whatever random whiz-bang component into their shifter pods? How exactly would Shimano build a pod that integrates with RockShox, Marz, Manitou and Fox remote lockouts? Would they choose just one of these brands to support and everyone else is SOL? Or would they build their own propietary interface and then start making shoddy forks of their own? Don't try to tell me that they will design for and endorse some International Standard of Fork Remote-Lockout to Brake/Shift Lever Integration... this is a company that usually tries to go it alone.

    I often disagree with Jayem.. but he has a point here. RapidFire is pretty well refined and has only suffered from the last couple strange ideas that Shimano has come up with to do to the product.

    Just my $.02.

    -r
    So you say your comments "wasn't meant to be a flame" but then you go on and say
    comments like " those ideas were either laugh-out-loud funny or else ludicrous. " and " makes it obvious to me that he's coming out of left field with his understanding of Shimano. "

    It clearly indicates your posts are flaming and not reinforcing of the concept of a "discussion" forum.

    No one should feel like they being laughed at.

    That's OK that you don't think there is much more to innovate in RF shifters. You could say that about the derailleur, but there still seems to be a lot of innovation despite it being more than 100 years old.

    That's nonsense, EVERY component has the potential for more innovation.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    17

    yes dear, there still is room for innovation.

    Thanks Harris, I was thinking the same thing. I'm disappointed of the elitist attitudes here. I thought Mt. Bikers were above that. I didn't realize that "so-called self appointed experts" were only allowed to post here.

    In reference to remote lock out: So its "better" to take your hands off the bars to lock out your shock? You can't get most remote lockouts anywhere near your shifter requiring you to move your hand off the grips. That doesn't seem like innovation to me.

    Besides, the engineering would be simple, every remote lockout pulls a cable. It's just a matter of standardizing the pull travel. Professional racers already mount old thumb shifters next to RF. Underbar shifting for gears, above bar shifter for shock. Thus, integrating the two doesn't really seem that far off.

    In reference to integration, Shimano has actually done an excellent job at it. Case in point,:

    STI (arguably better, you use your hands to control brakes, gears, so why not keep it at one place on your bars?)
    Octalink/and the two piece crank (better interface than square taper, stiffer, simpler)
    Centerlock (better interface, one tool for BB and rotor),
    Flightdeck (virtual cadence! And where are the controls for the computer? On the shifter! Duh!)

    I don't buy the RF shifter is already refined. The wheel is older than the derailleur, yet I STILL see loads of innovation. I see innovation and refinement with the (15 year old) road STI design and the new SRAM road shifter.

    Resistance in change in shift pods? Is that why I see more riders with SRAM trigger shifters and new bikes every couple of years? Because people don't want change? Hate to break it to you, change is healthy for the cycling industry.

  17. #17
    hands up who wants to die
    Reputation: rpet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,376
    Again I apologize for being a snob KATA.

    I don't buy your points, though I'm glad you attempted to support your case this time.

    STI - I know very few MOUNTAIN BIKE riders who use these, and I rarely see them on the trails. I also have seen many riders complaining about them and doing everything in their power to NOT spec them on their new bikes. I know STI is out there, but the jury is definitely still out on whether they are better. You keep mentioning SRAM as innovators: have you noticed that they don't make something like this? This is one of the reasons you see more riders with SRAM trigger shifters. I'm sure this has been a losing gamble for Shimano up until now, as more complete bikes are coming with SRAM.
    I don't think it makes sense for these 2 items to be integrated. I have no trouble shifting and braking when needed. On the flip side, I would be annoyed if I broke the brake lever and had to play 50% extra to replace a combo-unit. I also won't be using Shimano brand disc brakes anytime soon.
    Maybe people with very small hands have trouble shifting, I'm not sure. STI is "fixing" a problem that I don't have while simultaneously creating potential new problems. Brake levers get smashed on rocks all the time.

    2-piece crank: yes it's better than ISIS. However, the benefit to this design is related to the external bearings, which could have been acheived without making the crank arm and spindle 1 piece. In fact many XC riders complain about the combined spindle and crank arm due to limited Q factor adjustment. I will also remind you that Shimano did not invent this design.

    Centerlock rotor: I'm sorry, but what is better about this? I know it's better for Shimano's profits to attempt to force a new standard on other companies. But I've never had problems with a 6-bolt standard rotor. I know how to use grease and a torque wrench. I'd also rather carry a tiny torx or hex wrench in my camelbak than a cassette tool and ratchet wrench.

    Flightdeck: Sorry, I don't use this product. Just like my jest about GravityDroppers, this seems to be a niche item that is nowhere near universal amongst riders. Hence - why would it be integrated? Some riders like GPS units too... maybe Thomson could build a GPS into their seatposts and stems?

    I love bike components and evolution in the industry, contrary to your closing comments. I see the need for much continued R&D, especially in suspension, materials and tire design. However, I see very few examples over the last 25 years where the combination of 2 components ended up being a benefit to the rider over the longer term. Rather, the history of MTBs has many cases of discredited integrations and further "modularization" of components.

    Examples of failed or problematic component integrations: bullhorn handlebar/stems; RF/Vbrake combo units; handlebars with built-in bar-ends; suspension seatposts; suspension stems; Shimano's stupid break-off chain pins; Headshocks; Leftys; integrated headsets; oddball frame shock sizes; STI.

    Examples of continual modularization: alloy seatpost clamps instead of braize-on clamps; no more pump pegs; no more braize-on front derailleur mounts; no more fender/pannier mounts; stems with face plates; replaceable derailleur hangers; replaceable brake lever blades; standardized disc brake adapters; modular dropouts (both the SS/gearie and the 135/150 spacing variety). Many MTB frames dont even have water bottle mounts anymore!

    Sure, Shimano could do things like make maintenance easier on their RF shifters or use better internal parts... but many riders use these things for 3+ years with nearly no maintenance. They haven't failed on me yet. Also, it's not in Shimano's interest to make them last forever. (I'm not saying I agree with that.) This is funny, as RF+ and the external-BB cranks are really the only Shimano products I like/use.

    sincerely,
    rob

    PS - I'm confused as to why you listed STI as a positive innovation when your previous 2 posts seemed to be complaining about it?
    Last edited by rpet; 01-13-2006 at 08:56 AM.
    The server is too busy at the moment. Please try again later.
    my mtb videos: http://vimeo.com/album/6861

  18. #18
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    20,203
    "innovation" is a funny thing.

    Lets not forget who invented the rapid-fire shifters, shimano. Lets not forget that there were rapid fire units over 10 years ago. These have been HIGHLY refined over the years. Ok, maybe they didn't get refined over the last 2 years, but at this point I don't think you're going to see any big changes, just smaller and smaller stuff with a product that has been so highly refined over time.

    On the other hand, we have "sram". Sram invented their own thumbie shifters now, but other than that, most of "srams" stuff was relabled Sachs products. Sachs invented the neos and quart derailers, the same basic design which is used by Sram today. Sachs invented the chains that Sram has been selling for the last 5 or more years. Sachs invented the 2nd and 3rd generation of twist-shifters, saving the Sram company from certain death when all they were putting out was the "SRT" and "X-ray" stuff. Sachs invented their first front derailer, and so on. The company that heralds "innovation" as their motto is the most guilty of taking another company's products and relableing them. Sram rightly bought Sachs, and there's nothing wrong with that, but Sram sure as hell didn't "innovate" most of their products.

    Shimano on the other hand, has completely changed the way that their derailers work, they've made them wider and stiffer too, introduced new front derailers that work better than the last generation, and so on. Hollow arm cranks. Hollow spindle cranks now with external bearings. Their own disc brakes that perform damn well, and the new XTs are available in centerlock OR standard ISO. Wheels that have been greatly improved. Hubs have seen a huge overhaul, and I had the pleasure of working on some new XTR hubs a couple days ago. These now weight less than CK hubs, and one of the things that helps with that is the centerlock interface. The new shimano pedals are greatly improved with much better mud clearance. Shimano has also introduced component lines dedicated to trail riding and freeride. You may or may not like some of these innovations, but these are true innovations, and you can bet usually that they'll work flawelessly as intended due to how much R and D money shimano spends. IMO, Sram's "innovation" isn't even a drop in the bucket.
    Last edited by Jayem; 01-13-2006 at 12:18 PM.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  19. #19
    Chrome Toaster
    Reputation: Hecubus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,850
    Quote Originally Posted by KATA
    I don't know how much more refinement needs to happen to the shimano pods.

    Sure there are! Just look at SRAM XO. Shimano could:

    - introduce a hydraulic disc lever/trigger shifter combo
    - multi-position clamps (even Suntour did this)
    - metal trigger shifter handle (the index finger paddle)
    - refine remote shifters (shimano didn't give that design a chance, IMHO)
    - integrate fork/suspension lock-out on shifter or lever (multi-directional paddles?)
    - better flightdeck integration on shifter pods (the sensors were kind of chunky)
    - cartridge bearings instead of ball bearings @ trigger shifter piviots points
    - how about a fully re-buildable/adjustable shifter pod?

    If you want to "refine" your shifting, tear out all the cables and housing and replace em

    Agreed, I oil my housing religiously.
    All of these ideas have been tried in some way or another and all have failed in one way or another.

    The trigger and brake lever combo are out for v-brakes and it's a very low interest item. Disc brake versions would not generate much better interest. It actually creates a big problem because it wouldn't allow for lever to shifter angle adjuster. In the case of STI its a [/b]necessary[/b] for both items to be integrated and there is no need to individually align the shifter and brake lever since they are the same, totally different story.

    Metal index levers would be nice but this would hardly be an upgrade. It would add some extra weight on a part thats really not affected by being plastic. It would be nice but has no tangible advantage other than cost.

    Remote shifters simply did not interest that many riders. The almost total demise of the use of barends, specifically one long enough to use remote shifters makes this a pretty useless idea at this point. STI shifters can be operated from bar end BTW.

    The amount of people who want remote lockout doodads on their bike is actually very small. Everyone thinks remote stuff is brilliant but when the moment of truth comes no one wants all that extra cabling and junk. The lack of any sort of standardized lockout levers makes this totally impracticle.

    Flight deck integration was a total flop on mountain bike groups.

    Rebuildable parts are always nice and to some extent they are rebuildable. It would require a total and major redesign on the internals for something that tends to last several years with no problems. Shimano trigger pods rarely fail internally. Most "worn" shifters are just dirty and gummed up internally. Cleaning them is all the maintenance required.

    There certainly is some room to improve. Adjustable paddles would be a nice touch for example. There's still a strong market for shifter pods precidely because people like the way they currently are. Sram made a few changes to their design but there are people who simply don't like their ergonomics, the dual thumb action or paddle shapes and longer lever throw.

  20. #20
    Chrome Toaster
    Reputation: Hecubus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,850
    Quote Originally Posted by rpet

    2-piece crank: yes it's better than ISIS. However, the benefit to this design is related to the external bearings, which could have been acheived without making the crank arm and spindle 1 piece. In fact many XC riders complain about the combined spindle and crank arm due to limited Q factor adjustment. I will also remind you that Shimano did not invent this design.
    Sure there are many way of doing this without integrating the crank arm and spindle. But is there any real advantage to doing it differently? The current design is possibly one of the mechanically simplest and lightest approaches to the design.

    Centerlock rotor: I'm sorry, but what is better about this? I know it's better for Shimano's profits to attempt to force a new standard on other companies. But I've never had problems with a 6-bolt standard rotor. I know how to use grease and a torque wrench. I'd also rather carry a tiny torx or hex wrench in my camelbak than a cassette tool and ratchet wrench.
    Its better because its a pretthy genius simplification of design. Its not a must have item. You don't need to change your hubs to center lock if you already have 6 bolt. There certainly is no performance benefit but if I were to be in the market for new hubs you bet I would get centerlock if I had the option. They are lighter and mounting or removing a rotor is quite literally a 5 second job per wheel. No torque wrench really necessary, no need to grease and thread 12 bolts, no fussing around with bolts that may have become seized after extended use, no stripped heads to deal with. Need to remove the rotor to more easily service your hub? Just another easy 5 second process. I think its one of those designs that really deserves to become the standard.

    Flightdeck: Sorry, I don't use this product.
    Flight deck has been very succesful on road bikes but a total bust in the MTB market. Shimano has almost entirely dropped its flight deck support in the MTB market.

    Shimano's stupid break-off chain pins
    Another pretty clever solution to an irritating problem of chain joint popping off. That stupid break-off pin gives you the strongest joint possble when reataching a chain. Its the closest to a factory pressed link the chain joint gets. Powerlinks are more convenient for inexperience users to replaceme chains but they provide nowhere near the same joint security.

  21. #21
    Chrome Toaster
    Reputation: Hecubus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,850
    http://bike.shimano.com/catalog/cycl...=1137185350851

    This is the new Saint trigger pod. Notice the stubby paddles and trigger which make it possible to comfortably run the brake lever inboard for optimized on finger braking.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  22. #22
    hands up who wants to die
    Reputation: rpet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,376
    Hecubus:
    Now that is the refinement I have been waiting for!

    I'm going to buy them immediately if they are not too $$$. My long fingers make it very tough to 1-finger brake at the end of the lever.

    Now - what if they built a garage door opener into it too??

    EDIT: Are those available to purchase yet? I'm waiting for the dual-ring Hone cranks with the steel pedal thread insert too.

    EDIT2: I wish they'd just left those dumb indicator things off in the first place.

    -rob
    Last edited by rpet; 01-13-2006 at 03:10 PM.
    The server is too busy at the moment. Please try again later.
    my mtb videos: http://vimeo.com/album/6861

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MikeDee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,106
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    I don't know how much more refinement needs to happen to the shimano pods. Probably anything that they'd do would be a big change and met with a lot of resistance. It's not going to get lighter, it's not going to get smaller, but shimano could reposition parts and change the ergonomics. I guarentee you that they'd be met with lots of resistance if they did something like that.
    Unfortunately a lot of refinements are in how to make the product cheaper, not work better or longer. Case in point, I had some 8 speed Dura Ace STI shifters on my road bike. They had lots of metal in their construction. Later models had more plastic and were less reliable.

  24. #24
    Live 2 Ride
    Reputation: Kona0197's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,918
    >>>>In reference to integration, Shimano has actually done an excellent job at it. Case in point,:

    STI (arguably better, you use your hands to control brakes, gears, so why not keep it at one place on your bars?) <<<<

    Dual Control is evil. Very evil.
    My Bike: '96 Gary Fisher Aquila
    My Blog: http://http://kona0197.wordpress.com/

  25. #25
    JmZ
    JmZ is offline
    Reformed Lurker
    Reputation: JmZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,017

    Rapid fire love and hate...

    I remember the first rapid fire type shifter. Two buttons of evil. Bleh. I remember being happy going back to the thumbshifters. Then was the time in between - the XTR 900 series and beyond, well until the Shimano XTR 950 series.

    The feel of the shifters was great, but I remember seeing several sets with stripped out cable covers. The cable hatches on the 950 series shifters were a joke. I traded out all my 950, and 740 series shifters for earlier versions where it was acutally feasable to change cables. Very happy to do so too.

    Shimano and SRAM both have innovated, but they've both cheated too. The V-Brake was not a Shimano design, nor was their newest idea for cranks. Sram bought out designs, Shimano waited for patents to expire. Pot, Kettle, Black.

    Both have put out duds as well. The first SRAM triggers were not very good, but Shimano's had some bad pedals, they were the innovators behind Bio-Pace. They are still the king of intergrated units that only play with their own stuff.

    Heck even the newly heralded cranks have had bearing issues (I know, I know, growing pains and will be sorted out in the next generation), and they already are getting the magazine editors talking about making the rear spacing of bikes wider because of these new shimano cranks. (MBA article on the Intense 6.6) There is only one spindle width. Makes it great that you know you got the right size... heck there is only one size. There is a reason for different BB sizes. Unless Shimano gets to dictate that to all the different companies.

    JmZ

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    "innovation" is a funny thing.

    Lets not forget who invented the rapid-fire shifters, shimano. Lets not forget that there were rapid fire units over 10 years ago. These have been HIGHLY refined over the years. Ok, maybe they didn't get refined over the last 2 years, but at this point I don't think you're going to see any big changes, just smaller and smaller stuff with a product that has been so highly refined over time.

    On the other hand, we have "sram". Sram invented their own thumbie shifters now, but other than that, most of "srams" stuff was relabled Sachs products. Sachs invented the neos and quart derailers, the same basic design which is used by Sram today. Sachs invented the chains that Sram has been selling for the last 5 or more years. Sachs invented the 2nd and 3rd generation of twist-shifters, saving the Sram company from certain death when all they were putting out was the "SRT" and "X-ray" stuff. Sachs invented their first front derailer, and so on. The company that heralds "innovation" as their motto is the most guilty of taking another company's products and relableing them. Sram rightly bought Sachs, and there's nothing wrong with that, but Sram sure as hell didn't "innovate" most of their products.

    Shimano on the other hand, has completely changed the way that their derailers work, they've made them wider and stiffer too, introduced new front derailers that work better than the last generation, and so on. Hollow arm cranks. Hollow spindle cranks now with external bearings. Their own disc brakes that perform damn well, and the new XTs are available in centerlock OR standard ISO. Wheels that have been greatly improved. Hubs have seen a huge overhaul, and I had the pleasure of working on some new XTR hubs a couple days ago. These now weight less than CK hubs, and one of the things that helps with that is the centerlock interface. The new shimano pedals are greatly improved with much better mud clearance. Shimano has also introduced component lines dedicated to trail riding and freeride. You may or may not like some of these innovations, but these are true innovations, and you can bet usually that they'll work flawelessly as intended due to how much R and D money shimano spends. IMO, Sram's "innovation" isn't even a drop in the bucket.
    JmZ

    From one flat land to another.

    Advocate as if your ride depends on it...

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •