Results 1 to 41 of 41

Thread: xtr vs xt

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    195

    xtr vs xt

    is xtr really any better then xt? I am talking about the rear derailleur and dual control shifters.

  2. #2
    Probably drunk right now
    Reputation: Ken in KC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,645

    Again?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dale
    is xtr really any better then xt? I am talking about the rear derailleur and dual control shifters.

    This topic comes up from time to time. I'll save everyone some time by covering most of the comments:

    - Yes, get XTR.
    - No, XT is fine.
    - Shimano sucks and is too corporate, go SRAM.
    - SRAM sucks and is just as corporate as Shimano, go Shimano.
    - LX works just as well, don't waste money on XT or XTR.

    The bottom line is that it really boils down to personal choice and the riding application. There are a few technical differences between XT and XTR but the primary consideration between the two is weight. If you really need to save the few grams that XTR gives you, then XTR may be right for you. If weight isn't an issue then XT functions just as well as XTR for most types of riding/racing.

    Ken

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Dale
    is xtr really any better then xt? I am talking about the rear derailleur and dual control shifters.

    Built my new titus up w/ XT and my Sugar has older XT parts on it. Personally can't justify dropping the extra big bucks for XTR. If your trying to go pro and you have it to spare, sure go for it. Otherwise XT is fine. I us LX on my "beater" bike. No real problems there either.

  4. #4
    EDR
    Reputation: eatdrinkride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    9,081
    The answer is no, xtr is not "better", it is lighter and therfore may be less durable. Save the money for beer and go with XT between the two. (imo)

  5. #5
    Fashionably functional...
    Reputation: AsianPersuasion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    311
    I run XTR on my pride and joy Ti XC. XT on my hard core long travel trail stormer. And LX on my "beater" hardtail. I'm happy with all of them. All me Shimano stuff performs perfctly well. The LX does have the loud click when operating which I really like. Kinda feels/sounds like th SRAM stuff. The dual control shifters took a couple of rides to get used to but now I really like them. XTR is bling but totally not necessary. XT is still the best bang for the buck around.
    What's the joy of living if you can't feel alive???

  6. #6
    A Guy Who is Going Places
    Reputation: anthonys's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,501
    Quote Originally Posted by eatdrinkride
    The answer is no, xtr is not "better", it is lighter and therfore may be less durable. Save the money for beer and go with XT between the two. (imo)
    3 yr warranty on XTR

    2 yr warranty on XT


    I don't think XTR is less durable, overall.
    http://www.anthonysloan.com

    Isaiah 15:5

    There are many good bike companies out there, and I work for one of them.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,245
    Quote Originally Posted by Dale
    is xtr really any better then xt? I am talking about the rear derailleur and dual control shifters.
    Turn the question around......does ANYONE believe for even one second that it would make one bit of difference whether Lance rode a bike equipped with Dura-Ace versus one equipped with Ultegra?

    The component talk on these threads is extremely overblown, with people believing an incremental upgrade will turn them into a world class racer. Get out and bike, and then bike some more, and it will not matter what letters are on your components.

  8. #8
    Chrome Toaster
    Reputation: Hecubus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,850
    There's no specific rule as to what is different between XT and XTR. XTR is a XC racing oriented group and makes tradeoffs where they feel weight reduction vs strength are more important. Some XTR parts are built heavier and stronger than XT. Some of them are stronger AND lighter. Others will wear down quicker than XT. If you're really picky about choosing its best for you to understand the differences between each part instead of each group. Then decide if XTR is worth the extra double or triple the cost. For almost anything you'll find XT is just fine.

  9. #9
    banned
    Reputation: kawboy8's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    683

    From what I understand

    XTR is more for racing....serious racing, where every gram of weight makes a difference (not sure when that would be). I have XTR on my ASX and DH-9 (they both came equiped with XTR), both shift great, but no better than the XT on my Heckler or Bullit. XT works perfect for me...I see no sense in spending more, for something that really doesnt work any better.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: West Side Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by brianthebiker
    Turn the question around......does ANYONE believe for even one second that it would make one bit of difference whether Lance rode a bike equipped with Dura-Ace versus one equipped with Ultegra?

    The component talk on these threads is extremely overblown, with people believing an incremental upgrade will turn them into a world class racer. Get out and bike, and then bike some more, and it will not matter what letters are on your components.
    I agree with this. As long as the components do what they are supposed to, at the end of the day it's all the same. I think higher end ones are more of a psychological thing a lot of the time and are for showing off.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    16
    xtr is complete bling i agree. however...it is so shiny and pretty and my magpie like instincts gravitate towards it whenever spotted. carbon fibre does the same. my bike lights up my life daily and my favourite bits are all the most unnessessary. my selle itallia slr (135g) saddle was cuddled in bed when it arrived (i don't live with my gfriend!).

    having said that it's not neccessary; it is in my opinion just as durable as xt, it is certainly lighter, and i haven't yet riden a bike with crisper shifting than mine. the shifers are actually only deore but cables and housing should never be treated as unimportant and are xtr aswell as chain, mechs and cassette.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by West Side Rider
    I agree with this. As long as the components do what they are supposed to, at the end of the day it's all the same. I think higher end ones are more of a psychological thing a lot of the time and are for showing off.

    exactly. but as long as you're mostly thinking about, and loving the riding there's nothing wrong with a bit of bike candy!

  13. #13
    Unshaven Yak
    Reputation: Stinky Wiz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    503
    Only XTR parts on my rigs are the rear derailers. I use XT everywhere else and even a Deore (gasp) front derailer on my most free-ride oriented bike. XTR derailers last and even when something catastrauphic goes wrong, I've been able to pilfer bits from old busted units to piece her back together. Can't say that for XT as I've bent a couple of those (paralellagram). LX bits break a bit early for my taste. My old XTR 8sp derailer is still going strong on my HT. Good thing is, if you do have a broken XT, it's parts carry over directly to XTR for the most part. My old bent XT's are shells that have been stripped of virtually every usable piece of hardware.

  14. #14
    6'4"-6'9" with the afro
    Reputation: Fletch F. Fletch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by brianthebiker
    Turn the question around......does ANYONE believe for even one second that it would make one bit of difference whether Lance rode a bike equipped with Dura-Ace versus one equipped with Ultegra?

    The component talk on these threads is extremely overblown, with people believing an incremental upgrade will turn them into a world class racer. Get out and bike, and then bike some more, and it will not matter what letters are on your components.
    YES, I do believe that there would be a difference if Lance were to ride an Ultegra-equipped bike. At that level of competition and that many miles, grams count.

    Now when it comes to recreational mountain biking a couple times a week... That's another conversation. But that Lance argument just don't hold water. Sorry.

  15. #15
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    23,693
    My favorite XTR part is the chain. The XTR/Dura Ace chain is the strongest I've used, very durable and corrosion resistant, and has the special mushroom shaped pins that keep the links from sliding off during extreme amounts of torque. Old shimano chains were kind of trash, Sachs chains that were rebadged as "sram" were an improvement, but the new shimano chains are even better.

    Other than that, I don't have much use for XTR. XTR deraileurs are expensive and XTs serve me just fine. LX shifters work as good as XT, which doesn't seem to be any worse than XTR, so two steps down for me on that one. The XT crankset is actually much stiffer than the XTR, so while it's 60g heavier, it's better IMO for that reason.

    The new XTR hubs are real nice, easy to work on, and light. I don't know if I'd ever buy em, but they were good.

    I'ved worked on every XTR component out there, and they all work very well. In many cases though I can never justify the cost for the miniscule performance increase or slightly lighter weight, and in some cases those don't exist at all.
    "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.

  16. #16
    Time is not a road.
    Reputation: chad1433's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    4,145
    The real question is: Which one would you rather slam into a rock and have to replace?

    I just replaced an X.9 with an X.7 after a crash...I can't tell any difference in shifting and there was only a 40g difference in weight. If it holds up, I'd say it was a smart choice. If I have to replace it because it falls apart, I'll wish I had the X.9. But THANK GOD I never got that X.0! I would have cried destroying that thing on some rocks!

  17. #17
    crumblin' erbs
    Reputation: brulew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    100
    I have an XTR derailluer (circa late 90's).Best derailluer I have owned to date period.It has been in service on two different bikes And has been on my Cove Stiffee for the past 3 years. The thing reminds me of the old Timex commercials.(Takes a likin' and keeps on ticken')
    I had countless LX & XT's.They all ended life as spare parts.
    .

  18. #18
    Yummy
    Reputation: K'Endo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,264
    Quote Originally Posted by chad1433
    The real question is: Which one would you rather slam into a rock and have to replace?

    I just replaced an X.9 with an X.7 after a crash...I can't tell any difference in shifting and there was only a 40g difference in weight. If it holds up, I'd say it was a smart choice. If I have to replace it because it falls apart, I'll wish I had the X.9. But THANK GOD I never got that X.0! I would have cried destroying that thing on some rocks!
    Of course, the difference with X.0 is that every individual part is replaceable, so if you break one or two bits you don't have to get a whole new rear der! Provided, of course, your LBS actually *stocks* the parts ...

    Kn.
    I used to be with it. Then, they changed what "it" is, and now what I'm with is no longer "it". And whatever "it" is, is strange and confusing.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    16

    xtr

    i just mangled an xtr rear mech and - swallow and clutch for wallet - replaced it with another xtr. ever as a poor university student i couldn't downgrade. my previous xtr had lasted 6 years of abuse and still gave lovely crisp shifting. many of the smaller bits had been easily replaced after less significant crashes! xt mechs are an absolute pig to work on and lots of parts aren't replaceable. you pays your money...

    BUT, and i really hope someone can tell me, why do the xtr rear mechs use a spring in the opposite direction to the rest of the shimano range. i don't mean, why in that direction. i mean why don't the other mechs use this system? shifting is better in both directions and a lot quicker when you need a nice easy gear - and that tends to be more hurried than downshifting!

  20. #20
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    23,693
    Quote Originally Posted by fstrthnu
    i just mangled an xtr rear mech and - swallow and clutch for wallet - replaced it with another xtr. ever as a poor university student i couldn't downgrade. my previous xtr had lasted 6 years of abuse and still gave lovely crisp shifting. many of the smaller bits had been easily replaced after less significant crashes! xt mechs are an absolute pig to work on and lots of parts aren't replaceable. you pays your money...

    BUT, and i really hope someone can tell me, why do the xtr rear mechs use a spring in the opposite direction to the rest of the shimano range. i don't mean, why in that direction. i mean why don't the other mechs use this system? shifting is better in both directions and a lot quicker when you need a nice easy gear - and that tends to be more hurried than downshifting!
    Um, are you talking about rapid rise, aka "low normal"??

    XT, LX and XTR all use this right now.
    "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.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    16

    my mistake...

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    Um, are you talking about rapid rise, aka "low normal"??

    XT, LX and XTR all use this right now.

    i stopped working in a bike shop just before i came to uni. i've just looked at some bike sites and can't belive how much gear has moved on; or has filtered down to cheaper components. 18 months makes a big difference! i'm about to buy some reba forks (i've been commuting only for too long so time to upgrade and get back in the 'scene') and while researching my upgrade i couldn't believe how much technology has moved on! poplock for eg on £300 forks.

  22. #22
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,161
    Quote Originally Posted by anthonys
    3 yr warranty on XTR

    2 yr warranty on XT


    I don't think XTR is less durable, overall.
    Shimano warranties?

    Oh, I once got them to warranty a pair of sandals. I was shocked.

  23. #23
    In exile
    Reputation: loco-gringo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    542
    XTR pods rule XT. XTR all shifts more crisply, but if you worry about the cost, I guess XT is fine. I don't think weight is the biggest consideration. I agree with the warranty part though.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: phatr32's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    180
    xtr makes my penis feel this much bigger |-------------|

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cyber45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5
    wow you better buy 2 xtr see if that will do the trick.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: drunkmonckey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    67
    Quote Originally Posted by fstrthnu
    i just mangled an xtr rear mech and - swallow and clutch for wallet - replaced it with another xtr. ever as a poor university student i couldn't downgrade. my previous xtr had lasted 6 years of abuse and still gave lovely crisp shifting. many of the smaller bits had been easily replaced after less significant crashes! xt mechs are an absolute pig to work on and lots of parts aren't replaceable. you pays your money...

    BUT, and i really hope someone can tell me, why do the xtr rear mechs use a spring in the opposite direction to the rest of the shimano range. i don't mean, why in that direction. i mean why don't the other mechs use this system? shifting is better in both directions and a lot quicker when you need a nice easy gear - and that tends to be more hurried than downshifting!
    Not to further bring up an old post, but since searching for xt vs xtr pulls this baby up, thought i'd throw in my 2 cents. The xtr of 6 yrs ago that you had are inferior to the xt of now as the xt of now is trickled down xtr from a few years ago. Same can be said of x.9 vs x.0. On my current ride, lx dialed in correctly works great, and will be putting xt cranks and then torn between x.0 or xt for the rear drivetrain, but will probably just grab the xt as the trigger shifters can be had for a lot cheaper.

  27. #27
    thecentralscrutinizer
    Reputation: mopartodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    2,755
    There is most definitely a difference between 2008 XTR and XT.....it mainly involving how much more empty your wallet is after purchasing the XTR.
    2015 Kona JTS
    2014 Scott Scale 710
    2014 Giant Anthem 27.5
    2013 DeVinci Leo SL

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: therealfroboi93's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    44
    Quote Originally Posted by anthonys
    3 yr warranty on XTR

    2 yr warranty on XT


    I don't think XTR is less durable, overall.
    I wish sram had that warranty. Sram actually has a list of out-of-warranty parts, which contains 20+ parts

  29. #29
    Team Captain
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,326
    old thread is old.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: therealfroboi93's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    44
    Quote Originally Posted by chad1433
    The real question is: Which one would you rather slam into a rock and have to replace?

    I just replaced an X.9 with an X.7 after a crash...I can't tell any difference in shifting and there was only a 40g difference in weight. If it holds up, I'd say it was a smart choice. If I have to replace it because it falls apart, I'll wish I had the X.9. But THANK GOD I never got that X.0! I would have cried destroying that thing on some rocks!
    "Your are just not that good..."
    -Steve Wilson

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    147
    If lance rode ultegra instead of Dura ace he would be like 9 secs slower for ever 5km of 8% climb(analytic cycling).That would make him like 2-3 mins slower at some Tour courses.Given this is true,he would lose if he wore ultegra or maybe he would finish the tour exhausted due to the effort to offset the heft of ultegra.Maybe that's just an oversimplification along with some awful arithmetic working but weight does matter.It definitely doesn't matter as much as most people are leaded to believe but it does make a small difference.For a moderate level cyclist it may even urge him top push himself to very limits so it would be good(pros supposedly already get close enough to their limits),maybe not.Do you ride for that difference or to improve as a rider?That is eventually what you have to choose.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    147
    Indeed the comparison was about 2007 XTR and XT but,on my defense,I talked about weight regardless of those specific groupsets.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    98
    [QUOTE=eatdrinkride]The answer is no, xtr is not "better", it is lighter and therfore may be less durable. Save the money for beer and go with XT between the two. (imo)[/QWhen the beer buzz is gone and you wake up with a hangover you will realize the waste

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    3
    Good info, Thanks! I've been having the same dilemma as the OP and this helps.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: limba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,939
    I agree that the lighter more expensive stuff (XTR, DA) isn't any less durable. I used a XTR rear derailleur on my cross bike for almost 10 years.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    336
    Guys - thread is old but points my question.

    What is weight difference between 2011 2x10 XT and XTR groupset (incl crankset, casette, brakes, f+r dera, chain,shifters) - saying all group.
    As i tried to sum up each item (from web) it appeared around 400g difference - can You confirm ?

    I'm standing in front of spending more $450 on XTR and can't decide. What i've read the difference in work is't that big so is the weight also so small ?

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,366
    Quote Originally Posted by phatr32 View Post
    xtr makes my penis feel this much bigger |-------------|
    Good point -- this will get my wife onboard with the expenditure

    Oops, I overlooked the word "feel"

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    315
    Hell yeah brother! I just bought the cheapest bike I could (while still retaining quality) and am using the money I saved on stuff that will allow me to spend all day on the mountain.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    290
    I'll just add that my 26er is full XTR and shifts like a dream. It's extremely smooth !! My new 29er is full XT and I'm not fully satisfied with the shifting. I don't know where I need to make a change, but I would really love it to shift like my 26er. Suggestions welcomed.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    366

    xtr vs xt

    I would agree with most that I feel no difference between XTR and XT. I do have one very specific instance where I like XTR over XT and it is actually a design fault, in my opinion, by Shimano. I like the brake calipers on xtr better than xt. The bleed hole for the xtr is on the bottom while the xt is on the top. I don't understand why shimano did this. I find it easier to get a super bleed on xtr due to a better, streamlined path to get out the bubbles. In addition, I like the grub screw shimano provides with xtr calipers to insert in the bleed hole after a bleed. I always seem to have another bubble trapped in the bleed port screw (that black screw with the rubber cover). Once I remove that and insert the grub screw, I always seem to have a harder 'hit' on my brakes. This is all personal preference of course. I like my brakes to hit very hard and I want that hit to happen the moment I touch the brakes. I'll modulate with my fingers. In this regard, I can get a harder hit with xtr calipers over xt. If shimano would adapt the xt design to the way xtr is, this would be another instance like the rest for me. Xt and xtr would be equal in performance.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    745
    Quote Originally Posted by brianthebiker View Post
    Turn the question around......does ANYONE believe for even one second that it would make one bit of difference whether Lance rode a bike equipped with Dura-Ace versus one equipped with Ultegra?
    No, not really - it was all about the drugs!

    Back on topic, I'm still using M900 XTR derailleurs bought in 1992, plus the hubs, brakes and shifters. All are still going. I never had the cranks as I liked Ritchey Logic better as lower Q and available in 172.5mm. These are still going too.

    With the current XTR there are differences other than weight, for instance better bearings in the shifters, improved bushings in the derailleurs, etc. The only XTR part likely to be less durable is the cassette since the Ti large cogs are softer than the steel ones found on XT. The weight difference is much less significant than the price difference, so IMHO XT cassettes make more sense.

Posting Permissions

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