Dura ace v's Ultegra
-
mcrkennedy
- Posts: 136
- Joined: 24 Nov 2006, 18:03
- Location: Balmain
How here is a conversation starter. Given the options which one would you go for if both were in the budget?
Dura ace is much better the Ultegra, but if you're goung to spend the money on Dura ace then you can afford SRAM force. No doubt lots of people are going to chime in "what about campy". Depending on budget, if you go the SRAM path you can always mix and match, say a force groupset but with red levers and RD.
I've moved from 105 to Dura Ace so there is definitely a difference. Can't comment much on Ultegra.
However, now that my Dura Ace Drive Chain bits are close to replacement I'm looking at prices on PBK. Ultegra goes up by about 20% from 105 components, and Dura Ace is about 100% more than Dura Ace. So keeping components current can be expensive.
Just warning you.......
However, now that my Dura Ace Drive Chain bits are close to replacement I'm looking at prices on PBK. Ultegra goes up by about 20% from 105 components, and Dura Ace is about 100% more than Dura Ace. So keeping components current can be expensive.
Just warning you.......
The other angle to take is this.
If your budget is defined, then it maybe worthwhile to pick Ultegra/Ultegra SL and then divert some of the funds to better accessories eg. High end bibs/knicks and other items that one can feel the difference in. Buying DA and comparable top end gruppos is similar to upgrading to a BMW/Merc/Audi, your running costs will also go up. Is that in the plan? If you've already decided that you'll buy lower grade components when the originals are worn, then it may be wiser to go for the lower group in the first place.
If your budget is defined, then it maybe worthwhile to pick Ultegra/Ultegra SL and then divert some of the funds to better accessories eg. High end bibs/knicks and other items that one can feel the difference in. Buying DA and comparable top end gruppos is similar to upgrading to a BMW/Merc/Audi, your running costs will also go up. Is that in the plan? If you've already decided that you'll buy lower grade components when the originals are worn, then it may be wiser to go for the lower group in the first place.
I'd always take DA over ultegra. I have tried ultegra on the tandem and due to the number of shifts that i make, the levers only last about 10,000kms. I haven't yet worn out DA levers.
We have too many bikes running shimano to make the shift to campag. I was playing with the new 11sp Super Record a few days ago on a Baum Ristretto Ti and it was very nicea.
Campag levers are rebuildable where as Shimano isn't. The campag will need rebuilding a few times before the DA will wear out and the cost of the rebuilds compared to a new set of DA is about the same from what I have read.
I value just being able to grab a spare wheel though if needed and have the gears work. Our roadbikes are 10sp and the tandems are 9speed.
If your budget is limited there are ways to cut the costs of consumables. I use 105 or ultegra cassettes. I use wipperman 10sp chains as I have broken a DA chain. Once bitten.....
The brakes on my road bike are the previous years model 7700 which still work fine but were half the price. Same goes for the front and rear derailleur.
The new 7900 looks very tempting though
We have too many bikes running shimano to make the shift to campag. I was playing with the new 11sp Super Record a few days ago on a Baum Ristretto Ti and it was very nicea.
Campag levers are rebuildable where as Shimano isn't. The campag will need rebuilding a few times before the DA will wear out and the cost of the rebuilds compared to a new set of DA is about the same from what I have read.
I value just being able to grab a spare wheel though if needed and have the gears work. Our roadbikes are 10sp and the tandems are 9speed.
If your budget is limited there are ways to cut the costs of consumables. I use 105 or ultegra cassettes. I use wipperman 10sp chains as I have broken a DA chain. Once bitten.....
The brakes on my road bike are the previous years model 7700 which still work fine but were half the price. Same goes for the front and rear derailleur.
The new 7900 looks very tempting though
Dura Ace for me. Though i haven't used Ultegra, as all my bikes ended up with Dura Ace. 7900 will be good once the prices drop.
Sram does seem to have very good value for money, especially with the 2009 rival groupset, but i think i'll be staying with Shimano now the gear cables are finally being hidden away.
The only thing i don't like is the Dura-Ace chain, though i think that's been improved with 7900.
Sram does seem to have very good value for money, especially with the 2009 rival groupset, but i think i'll be staying with Shimano now the gear cables are finally being hidden away.
The only thing i don't like is the Dura-Ace chain, though i think that's been improved with 7900.
One more point about SRAM, the 2009 Force group set now has trim for the big ring. Before you had to get the red levers to get this. I was also reading somewhere that the cranks let them down, I have truvativ (which is what the SRAM cranks are) cranks on two of my bikes and haven't had any problems. The same article said that SRAM cassettes and chains weren't any good, again I use them and have had no problems.
Should we let LA and AC know about this before they start their 2009 season on SRAM gruppo?I was also reading somewhere that the cranks let them down... The same article said that SRAM cassettes and chains weren't any good, again I use them and have had no problems.
2009 SRAM Rival also got the same improvements as force from what i recall. I think the cranks were only really a let down in terms of weight. As for the cassettes and chains, i've heard the Sram cassettes are a bit noisier especially red, and i noticed this when using one on the weekend (not a red cassette, just a rival/force) but it did work well enough.
Considering that the top 3 Campy Options (Super Record, Record and Chorus) are all 11 speed. The top 3 Shimano Options (Dura-Ace, Ultegra, and 105) are all 10 speed, and (I think) all SRAM are 10 speed. I kinda feel that the main difference between them within their own brands, is mainly weight.
I have heard that Ultegra is pretty much just a heavier version of Dura-Ace, I know that I wouldn't buy anything above Chorus in Campy (unless I had way more money that sense), because I feel that Chorus is "good enough" for the level of cycling that I do.
If your budget can stretch to a higher level, then sure, but I think that it would be worthwhile to just buy the cheaper option and use that.
Geoff - you said that you went from 105 to Dura-Ace, was that within the same year of release? A later years model is always likely to be better, but if you changed from 2009 105 to 2009 Dura-Ace is there the same difference? Also, you were probably changing from a worn cassette/chain to a new chain/cassette, that in itself makes a pretty big difference.
The other thing to consider is how you feel about the different shifting options, I have no big issues with the way you change gears on Shimano, but I prefer the Campy way, I haven't used SRAM so I can't comment on their shifting style. I also know that I prefered the size of the Campy levers having come from downtube shifters. At the end of the day, this isn't a deal breaker, but it is something to consider when looking at options, especially if everything else is equal.
James
I have heard that Ultegra is pretty much just a heavier version of Dura-Ace, I know that I wouldn't buy anything above Chorus in Campy (unless I had way more money that sense), because I feel that Chorus is "good enough" for the level of cycling that I do.
If your budget can stretch to a higher level, then sure, but I think that it would be worthwhile to just buy the cheaper option and use that.
Geoff - you said that you went from 105 to Dura-Ace, was that within the same year of release? A later years model is always likely to be better, but if you changed from 2009 105 to 2009 Dura-Ace is there the same difference? Also, you were probably changing from a worn cassette/chain to a new chain/cassette, that in itself makes a pretty big difference.
The other thing to consider is how you feel about the different shifting options, I have no big issues with the way you change gears on Shimano, but I prefer the Campy way, I haven't used SRAM so I can't comment on their shifting style. I also know that I prefered the size of the Campy levers having come from downtube shifters. At the end of the day, this isn't a deal breaker, but it is something to consider when looking at options, especially if everything else is equal.
James
Check this summary. Though a little dated by a year or two, but the basic relationship is still there.
I am surprised that Ultegra is less durable than DA. My understanding has been that DA and Record are both just weight reduced versions of Ultegra and Chorus respectively ie. Ti and CF parts.
I am surprised that Ultegra is less durable than DA. My understanding has been that DA and Record are both just weight reduced versions of Ultegra and Chorus respectively ie. Ti and CF parts.
Well there's an interesting, but rather deceptive chart.
The price per gram information in the right hand corner is wrong. It does not cost $4.16 per gram to buy a campy groupset. If this were the case, Centaur would cost more than Record. The slope of all the curves are downward, so there should be a minus sign in front of those three slope gradients. You could then use the table to estimate the price required to pay to save a gram of weight. For Shimano, you must pay $1.43 to save a gram. For Campag, it's $4.16 to save a gram of weight, etc.
Still pretty meaningless, because it assumes a linear relationship.
By extrapolating from this graph, you could also determine that it would cost $4,270 to buy a Shimano groupset with zero mass, but a Campag groupset with zero mass would cost $10,100.
Similarly, you could determine that a Shimano groupset would be free if it weighed more than 3 kg, and a Campag groupset would be free if it weighed more than 2.4 kg.
See what I mean?
The best use of this graph is to see which groupsets offer the best value for money. The ones closest to the bottom left corner do this. It's s shame that the graph doesn't provide the axes as a frame of reference, but what is apparent is that Force is better value than Chorus, which is better value than Dura Ace. Centaur is better value than Rival. You can't determine if Red is better value than Record or Dura Ace...
(All on the assumption that the only difference you are comparing is weight, not features, etc.)
The price per gram information in the right hand corner is wrong. It does not cost $4.16 per gram to buy a campy groupset. If this were the case, Centaur would cost more than Record. The slope of all the curves are downward, so there should be a minus sign in front of those three slope gradients. You could then use the table to estimate the price required to pay to save a gram of weight. For Shimano, you must pay $1.43 to save a gram. For Campag, it's $4.16 to save a gram of weight, etc.
Still pretty meaningless, because it assumes a linear relationship.
By extrapolating from this graph, you could also determine that it would cost $4,270 to buy a Shimano groupset with zero mass, but a Campag groupset with zero mass would cost $10,100.
Similarly, you could determine that a Shimano groupset would be free if it weighed more than 3 kg, and a Campag groupset would be free if it weighed more than 2.4 kg.
See what I mean?
The best use of this graph is to see which groupsets offer the best value for money. The ones closest to the bottom left corner do this. It's s shame that the graph doesn't provide the axes as a frame of reference, but what is apparent is that Force is better value than Chorus, which is better value than Dura Ace. Centaur is better value than Rival. You can't determine if Red is better value than Record or Dura Ace...
(All on the assumption that the only difference you are comparing is weight, not features, etc.)
It's just a quick chart made by some forumite out there and is only useful for gaining a general feel of the price/weight relationship of the various gruppos out there. Also take note that the prices are a little out of date and is from just one online retailer.
-
mikesbytes
- Posts: 6991
- Joined: 13 Nov 2006, 13:48
- Location: Tempe
- Contact:
While its an interesting chart, how heavy the group set is, is only one of the factors.
At the same time, how much overall performance difference is there b/n Record, Red and DA?While its an interesting chart, how heavy the group set is, is only one of the factors.
Oh wait, Super Record has 11 speeds... Ok, Campagnolo beats all competition hands down.
-
mikesbytes
- Posts: 6991
- Joined: 13 Nov 2006, 13:48
- Location: Tempe
- Contact:
Must admit that I'd probably go for Centaur if I was building a new bike. Though Shimano cassettes are considerably cheaper to replace.At the same time, how much overall performance difference is there b/n Record, Red and DA?
Oh wait, Super Record has 11 speeds... Ok, Campagnolo beats all competition hands down.
I think that's really the crunch. One can always find cheap Shimano spares on the net whereas cheap Campag and SRAM parts are harder to source. Upfront cost really is only just one part of the overall equation.Must admit that I'd probably go for Centaur if I was building a new bike. Though Shimano cassettes are considerably cheaper to replace.
Does anyone really need 11 cogs on the back? One of SRAMs good points is that the cassettes are the same as Shimano (spline and spacing), so there is no problem with wheels or cassettes, you can mix and match. Now that the force groupset has trim I'll be going with that on my next bike. Which may be soon.
I guess this can be argued in many ways as it'll be a similar argument as to whether 10 is needed in comparison to 9 cogs.Does anyone really need 11 cogs on the back?
From an efficiency point of view, zero loss continuous variable gearing (ie. Infinite steps) would be the holy grail.
-
mikesbytes
- Posts: 6991
- Joined: 13 Nov 2006, 13:48
- Location: Tempe
- Contact:
The benefit in 11 cogs would be a bit less swapping between rings
Jobst's argument was based on the difficulties of producing a highly efficient CVT in practice. The case above was to examplify the argument through a hypothetical high efficiency CVT, one that can perfectly match the optimal cadence of a rider.Jobst Brant on the subject here.
To take advantage of having 11 gears, you need to use that extra gear. That means more shifting. Infinite gears, implied by a CVT, means infinite gear changes. Personally, I would prefer to recognise that I can operate quite effectively over a range of cadences, and not be concerned with jamming more and more gears into holes that don't exist.Jobst's argument was based on the difficulties of producing a highly efficient CVT in practice. The case above was to examplify the argument through a hypothetical high efficiency CVT, one that can perfectly match the optimal cadence of a rider.
Anyway, as I've said before, if you put just one more ring upfront, you add lots more gears. Why try to squeeze one more into the back, when you can accomodate one more up front quite comfortably? Don't get me wrong... I'm still Campag through and through, but I don't see any benefits in either CVTs or drivetrains with any more than 8-speeds.
-
mikesbytes
- Posts: 6991
- Joined: 13 Nov 2006, 13:48
- Location: Tempe
- Contact:
Because changing gears on the rear is easier than changing rings
Agreed, but my point is that more gears simply means more shifting. Changing gears on the rear is not easier than simply not changing gears.Because changing gears on the rear is easier than changing rings
What evidence is there for this statement?The benefit in 11 cogs would be a bit less swapping between rings
-
mikesbytes
- Posts: 6991
- Joined: 13 Nov 2006, 13:48
- Location: Tempe
- Contact:
If you have one more cog on the end, then you can go one more gear before you need to swap rings.
For example, if you had 25 - 12 10 speed, you could keep the same gears and add an 11 or a 27.
For example, if you had 25 - 12 10 speed, you could keep the same gears and add an 11 or a 27.
This isn't evidence.
If you wanted a 25-11 or a 27-12 you would already be running one wouldn't you? So going to 11 speed simply means that you give yourself an extra gear within the limits you choose, not beyond them.
Even if you did add an outside cog (let's say you ad an 11 onto a 25-12), when are you going to use the 42*12 or the 42*11? Probably never.
I'd therefore be inclined to suggest that an 11 speed cassette simply increases the number of shifts on the rear derailleur, and makes no difference to how often you shift the front derailleur. Of course, without any evidence one way or the other, I am also speculating, but to me it makes no sense to say that you will shift between front rings any less with more gears on the back, since all more gears does is encourage more shifting full stop!
If you wanted a 25-11 or a 27-12 you would already be running one wouldn't you? So going to 11 speed simply means that you give yourself an extra gear within the limits you choose, not beyond them.
Even if you did add an outside cog (let's say you ad an 11 onto a 25-12), when are you going to use the 42*12 or the 42*11? Probably never.
I'd therefore be inclined to suggest that an 11 speed cassette simply increases the number of shifts on the rear derailleur, and makes no difference to how often you shift the front derailleur. Of course, without any evidence one way or the other, I am also speculating, but to me it makes no sense to say that you will shift between front rings any less with more gears on the back, since all more gears does is encourage more shifting full stop!
-
mikesbytes
- Posts: 6991
- Joined: 13 Nov 2006, 13:48
- Location: Tempe
- Contact:
We'll see what the judge saysThis isn't evidence
I think that we all wish that, but the fact of the matter is, peak efficiency of our pedaling legs is limited within a narrow cadence band.Personally, I would prefer to recognise that I can operate quite effectively over a range of cadences, and not be concerned with jamming more and more gears into holes that don't exist.
So depending how one chooses his/her cassette, 11 gears may benefit in,
1) Close those gaps in the gears.
2) Increase the spread of the gear range for any chainring choice.
As I said, the argument is no different to the jump from 9 to 10.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 51 guests