Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 51 to 64 of 64
  1. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    5,618
    Quote Originally Posted by GTscoob View Post
    How is rapid-rise more intuitive than standard shifting?

    Whenever I change chainrings in the front, I use the same finger on my other hand to match gears so my cadence doesnt change. Left thumb in to shift to the big ring, right thumb in a click or two to go down 1-2 gears on the cassette for a smooth transition. Left index finger in to drop to the granny gear, right index in to move the chain to 1-2 cogs smaller out back for a smooth change in cadence.

    RR seems like this would be all backwards. Sure you would have to think 'thumbs mean i'm speeding up, index fingers mean I'm slowing down' but that seems more confusing on the bike. At least to me.
    If people like rapid rise, for whatever reason, that's fine with me, but "more intuitive" isn't a valid reason IMO.

    If you have used any shifting system for 5 rides or more, and you are still thinking about which way to shift up or down, you must have brain damage or something. Every shifitng system is equally intuitive once you get into the habit of it, I think.

  2. #52
    Curiously ambivalent
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    36
    From a practical standpoint, if I snap a shifter cable, I'd much rather ride off the mountain with a functioning low gear than be forced into the smallest cog.

    Also, RR rears are consistent with the way front shifters work. The springs favor lower gears.

  3. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    108
    I agree with the opinion above. Find the rr much more natural when suddenly faced with "steep" during a tight twisty trail ride. Easier to "pull the trigger"

  4. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    8
    And what If the rear gear cable should unsuspectingly snap while one is messing down HARD on a higher gear while riding with a RR derailleur . . . Well, we can all just imagine.

  5. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1
    listen to ATBScott, he knows what he's talking about, like him I'm a bike mechanic and I diden't understand the use of rr from the start. It looked like a good idee and the only advantage it has is that indeed you use the same fingers to go faster/slower butt there it ends! If you need a sudden stop you need to shift before you stop and with the rr you need to click several times to do this instead of just one firm push for 3 or 4 gears lower. Also for removal and assembly the rr is less practical, and if your cable is removed your derailller is open and sticking all the way out your frame: vulnerable in case of transport and so on and so on. Butt yes if you are used to the rr than it's not nice of shimano that they don't offer the choise of both systems. That sucks. And for the dual controls: they are so ugly on any bike, and also much more vulnerable, on a roadbike it's very good but on mtb??? Good they don't produce em any more.

  6. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    57
    Seems to me Sheldon Brown was a fan of Rapid Rise.

    Anyone knocking it is a snob plain and simple. For any beginner MTBer, RR is easier to learn. When you don't know yourself or your bike well enough, RR makes getting into the right gear on a hill MUCH easier.

    Suggesting it was why Shimano gave up market share to SRAM over it is pretty stoopid. They offered RR RD-Mxx0 and regular RD-Mxx1 derailleurs simultaneously.... so it isn't like you had no choice. Everyone always had a choice. Its NOW that one is being pushed over another!

    I'm pretty sure they got rid of it because it saved more chains and cassettes than Shimano wanted to sell you.

  7. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    8
    Are you saying that RR actually reduces "chain" and "cassette" wear, hence making shifting perfect?

    Do you have stats to back that statement up?

    I would think that if what you say is true, that would've been a SELLING point for them. But then the burden would been on them to provide PROOF.

  8. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    57
    Well, I never said anything about shifting being perfect.

    But... have you actually used RR? I've used both on the same course. Uphill in the wrong gear, at the wrong cadence, practically standing on the pedals because you're not in shape, ie very high driveline tension:

    With RR, you click the shifter, it releases cables tension, the bigger gear is grabbed via the cassette/chain ramps at the appropriate time as long as you don't come to a stop. The derailleur is only being mashed into the bigger gear at its own spring force.

    Without RR, you mash the shifter into a gear it doesn't want to grab. So you stretch the cable, you mash the chain against the cassette by mashing the derailleur against both. The derailleur is being mashed into the bigger gear at greater than its own spring force. The cassette teeth take a beating from all the extra force of this poorly executed shift that should have not occurred.

    And it was a selling point.... easier shifting for people new to the sport. People who know their bikes don't make those shifts on aluminum XTR gear sets to begin with. But I've watched two girlfriends and a wife do exactly what I'm describing and reproduced the results for myself.

    What needs more proof? Try it for yourself if you need proof. Act like a beginner if you aren't one.

  9. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    57
    I'll take it a step further for you....

    My kid had a Giant STP 125 we did single track with. 1x7 with a normal derailleur. Twist shifters.

    Again, uphill, not enough experience to know what gear to have in advance, sweaty from the heat and riding hard:

    He did not have the grip strength to turn and hold the shifter to grab an easier gear. The cable tension was greater and the derailleur didn't want to mash into the bigger gears on top of it. With sweaty palms he literally had to stop his bike and then shift gears.

    I had to tie a rag to his handlebar so he could wipe his hand before shifting. I scuffed up the rubber to give him more traction. And yet, there were times where he was tired after riding for an hour plus where I had to shift for him. Did I mention I purchased Giro gloves in his size?

    You guys call that BETTER? Seriously? Cause with an RR derailleur he'd have just kept on riding. How is that better in any way whatsoever?

    Even after his second season when he learned how to judge gears on a hill in advance... no one always gets it right... it was still a grip strength issue. Please explain how a normal derailleur served him better.......

    Normal derailleurs are for in-shape racer types and there are clear benefits in those circumstances. RR should have been for everyone else. Personally, Shimano won't get me to upgrade my drivetrain past 9spd without reintroducing RR.

  10. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    1

    RR is the way to go.

    Quote Originally Posted by hadique View Post
    Well, I never said anything about shifting being perfect.

    But... have you actually used RR? I've used both on the same course. Uphill in the wrong gear, at the wrong cadence, practically standing on the pedals because you're not in shape, ie very high driveline tension:

    With RR, you click the shifter, it releases cables tension, the bigger gear is grabbed via the cassette/chain ramps at the appropriate time as long as you don't come to a stop. The derailleur is only being mashed into the bigger gear at its own spring force.

    Without RR, you mash the shifter into a gear it doesn't want to grab. So you stretch the cable, you mash the chain against the cassette by mashing the derailleur against both. The derailleur is being mashed into the bigger gear at greater than its own spring force. The cassette teeth take a beating from all the extra force of this poorly executed shift that should have not occurred.

    And it was a selling point.... easier shifting for people new to the sport. People who know their bikes don't make those shifts on aluminum XTR gear sets to begin with. But I've watched two girlfriends and a wife do exactly what I'm describing and reproduced the results for myself.

    What needs more proof? Try it for yourself if you need proof. Act like a beginner if you aren't one.
    I run all my bikes on the RR derailers, why it is not the predominant system for derailer makers is beyond me. For many years, customizing bikes and making small parts, I was using the regular rear derailers until I started using the RR on one of my bikes, that has been more than 10 years ago. Shifting is way smoother and natural for the derailer function.

  11. #61
    change is good
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,642

    Where did the low-normal/rapid-rise derailleur go?!

    I don't know what I hate most - rapid rise or avid brakes


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  12. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    834
    Well all you rapid rise fans will be happy about the new xtrs electronic shifting. No more complaining about how hard it is to shift

    Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

  13. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    834
    Quote Originally Posted by cpfitness View Post
    Well all you rapid rise fans will be happy about the new xtrs electronic shifting. No more complaining about how hard it is to shift

    Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
    All I was trying to say is that most of you who say you love rapid rise love it because of the easy you can make the downshifts. if you have an electronic system, you are just tapping a little button. it doesn't get any easier than that. no need for rapid rise.

    As for the need for electronic shifting, of course we don't NEED it but realistically if we think about technology, we don't need power windows and door locks on our cars either and while they have been around for a long time, for a good long time you could still get crank windows and push locks. I would say it's only been about the last 10 years that they have completely gone away as an option. at some point, electronic shifting will be so refined and so inexpensive it will just be the norm.
    Last edited by rockcrusher; 03-11-2014 at 10:23 AM.

  14. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    57
    I think maybe you got negative rep because even the edit of your post is condescending.... it doesn't get any easier to shift than pushing a button.... agreed.... however not only is there no longer a need for rapid rise, there is no longer a need for the opposite either. So framing it as a solution to rapid rise is where your bias shines through.

    Had you said, electronic shifting will provide the rapid rise ease of grabbing a slower gear with the normal rise speed of grabbing a faster gear, you'd have likely gotten positive rep.

    That said, part of the appeal of bicycles for many people is the low carbon footprint of it. Adding batteries to my bike is so unappealing to me I can't begin to describe it. From so many angles. If the derailleur could be powered by a dynamo hub, that would be different, maybe.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Posting Permissions

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