Classic & Vintage - Barcons slower?

Converting from sti to barcons and I'm worried that they will be slower on the "club" rides. I'm posting here because the racer types in the other groups will likely comment even without any personal experience with barcons. So...Are you significantly slower with barcons as compared to STI/Ergo? Thanks!

Your style of shifters has absolutely nothing to do with how fast you go.

Shifting-wise - they are a little slower if you aren't used to them. Otherwise, it's a draw. Of course, if you normally ride with hands on the hoods, you'll have to make an extra motion to reach the shift levers.

My barcons are friction so I spend a bit of time trimming the derailleur but I don't race. I like them alot, as much as the STI shifters.

Yeah, they take getting used to, and they don't shift as quick as indexed, but it sounds like the OP is talking about the speed of his bicycle, not the speed of the shifting.

When you need to shift across 2 or 3 cogs at a time, any linear motion system, indexed or not, has a huge advantage over STI, RapidFire, etc. When you want to trim your front derailleur cage, any non-indexed front shifter has a huge advantage over any indexed system. STI's only real benefit is in single-cog shifts, although a rider familiar with his/her downtube shift system can probably execute the actual shift just as fast. I have found barcons to be a bit slower shifting than downtube levers, presumably because of cable housing compression.

In a related note, why didn't barcons become more popular than they were? I know it is forbidden to say this, but I HATE downtube shifters. What a terrible place to force me to reach while I am straining. Barcons are right where you want them. And yet they are put in the touring ghetto. Why?

jim

In a related note, why didn't barcons become more popular than they were? ...

From 1972 to 1974 or so, they enjoyed a pretty good run on Nishikis, including the Road Compe and the Semi-Pro. When commuting in traffic or riding in a crosswind, I, too, prefer not to take a hand off the bars.

Mmmmmm, bacon showers, agahahah.

In a related note, why didn't barcons become more popular than they were? I know it is forbidden to say this, but I HATE downtube shifters. What a terrible place to force me to reach while I am straining. Barcons are right where you want them. And yet they are put in the touring ghetto. Why?

jim

Can't say for sure. Campagnolo made them, but SunTour popularized them. It might have had something to do with "in the box" thinking, and it also might have had something to do with the stigma that Japanese made products had until the early eighties. Bar cons are a little less quick in operating than downtube shifters, and they weigh more. Still, once you get used to them, nothing is sweeter (IMO)

I've heard some people say they hit their knees on them, and I imagine that bar-cons would be easier for another rider to switch on you than downtubes. :o

Barcons are right where you want them. And yet they are put in the touring ghetto.

Barcons were pretty much standard equipment on Cyclocross bikes before STI/Ergo came along so they weren't limited to touring bikes.


When you need to shift across 2 or 3 cogs at a time, any linear motion system, indexed or not, has a huge advantage over STI, RapidFire, etc.

You can downshift up to four cogs in one lever sweep with both STI and Ergo shifters. Ergos (pre-07 for all models and '07 Record and Chorus) let you upshift the entire width of the cassette in one push of the release button.

STI/Ergo are clearly superior to barcons when you are standing while climbing or accelerating. You can easily reach brifters but not barcons from the hoods.

barcons set on friction let you PUT THE HAMMER DOWN. if you're as fit as your club buddies, you will drop them off the stops. like a block plus. friction lets you shift the whole cogset in one move, if you want. Great prepping for hills, and downhills as well.

I'll say it one more time: friction shifters lets you PUT THE HAMMER DOWN.

Barcons let you hold on, or palm shift, and fine tune while out on the drops too.

In a related note, why didn't barcons become more popular than they were? I know it is forbidden to say this, but I HATE downtube shifters. What a terrible place to force me to reach while I am straining. Barcons are right where you want them. And yet they are put in the touring ghetto. Why?

jim

+1 I can see where shorter cables and less housing would be advantageous for shift accuracy but at what cost? Staying hunched over most of the ride (I live in hilly country)?

Shifters need to be up on the bars, whether barcons, thumb, brifters, or even stem, imo. Look at how popular Formula 1 race car's paddle shifters on the steering wheel are becoming for regular road cars for example. Just my 2 cents.

I prefer friction shifting myself for hilly country. Real nice to slip all the way into 1st/granny gear on one shift when I come upon a hill and realize that I'm gonna need to gear down more than a few notches, because it's such a monster. Plus, I can shift from first all the way to the highest gear for downhills (yes, I like pedalling downhills...speed, man, speed!)

Bar-cons are set at a more convenient spot than down-tube shifters are :D

You can downshift up to four cogs in one lever sweep with both STI and Ergo shifters. Ergos (pre-07 for all models and '07 Record and Chorus) let you upshift the entire width of the cassette in one push of the release button.

STI/Ergo are clearly superior to barcons when you are standing while climbing or accelerating. You can easily reach brifters but not barcons from the hoods.

+1

STI/Ergo has a huge advantage in shifting multiples over friction, not the other way around.

And some of us would disagree with ya, big boss man :D

Friction barcons shift FAST.

wouldn't STI/indexing not even be considered classic/vintage?

The reason that barcons never took off? Typical cable routing made the front of the bike look like a huge catfish; the shifter cables sprouting out of the bar tape under the brake levers always reminded me of an I.V. line too ...

Hmm, Campagnolo had bar shifters in the 50s. Back in the 70s, (my time) they were popular with tourists and a few racers. They require you to be on the drops; if that's where you ride, its good; if not they're awkward. They are a little fiddly, not the same feel as downtube shifters; maybe the cable lengths, maybe the throw of the shorter lever. Like anything, they an be adapted to. My stepfather's 50s bike had them and he loved them. I knew a racer in the seventies who had a fingertip (that's what we called em) for the front and a downtube for the rear and thought it was his edge because he could be shifting both at once. I've had Campagnolo on a few bikes, no problem but not my first choice, though I have to admit the racheted Suntours are probably better. But I tend to avoid Japanese stuff, as when I was getting interested in this stuff, Campagnolo was what we aspired to. The Japanese stuff works really well, it just has no romance for me!

And some of us would disagree with ya, big boss man :D

I know.... :D

But, I've spent countless hours using both systems. As was pointed out a couple of posts back, you can drop the whole 10 speeds with one push of the Ergo button. >CLICK<..... done. Top to bottom. And you don't even have to move your hands from the hoods.

How much faster can any friction shifter be?

I know.... :D

But, I've spent countless hours using both systems. As was pointed out a couple of posts back, you can drop the whole 10 speeds with one push of the Ergo button. >CLICK<..... done. Top to bottom. And you don't even have to move your hands from the hoods.

How much faster can any friction shifter be?


I'm sure that's true.

However, I've always said, this new technology shifting is a complex solution to a non-existent problem. If it was good enough for Eddy, it is good enough for me! For the top level racer, sure. For 99.9999% of the rest of the riders in the world? Come on!

I'm sure that's true.

However, I've always said, this new technology shifting is a complex solution to a non-existent problem. If it was good enough for Eddy, it is good enough for me! For the top level racer, sure. For 99.9999% of the rest of the riders in the world? Come on!

Well, it's not a solution so much as an advancement of technology. As to whether friction is "good enough" or not, that wasn't the discussion at hand. But to answer your straw-man, I'm convinced it's WAY better than friction shifting, BY FAR. And even the most casual rider benefits from it's use.

But, I was replying directly to this assertion:

"When you need to shift across 2 or 3 cogs at a time, any linear motion system, indexed or not, has a huge advantage over STI, RapidFire, etc. When you want to trim your front derailleur cage, any non-indexed front shifter has a huge advantage over any indexed system. STI's only real benefit is in single-cog shifts..... "

Having used both systems extensively, I just don't see the "huge advantage" of friction. STI/Ergo is faster, easier to use, AND more precise. In my experience.

Campy STILL makes barcons.

And you can shift barcons all the way across the cogset in one swift move, or to your sweet 'hammer' gear for the conditions, just as fast or faster than a 'click' click' 'click' or all the way.

And what if you ride the drops a lot because its more Aero than on top the hoods?

I'm biased, however. And I don't think indexed shifting with integrated brake&shift levers is in any way considered 'classic'

And what if you ride the drops a lot because its more Aero than on top the hoods?


Then STI is a clear advantage, because you can ride with your hands firmly in the drops and shift with your index finger, and never have to move your hands to a lever on the end of the bar or on the DT. If you don't bellieve this, it suggests to me that you have little or no experience running STI shifters, because I know for a fact that you can work the brakes and shifters on STI with both hands firmly planted, either on the hoods or in the drops. That's one of the principal advantages of the new stuff - finger tip shifting with full, two handed control of the bike.

Look, the statement was made that barcons had a "huge advantage" over STI/Ergo. What is it? What is the huge advantage?

Back to the OP's original question - barcon's or even DT friction shifters may or may not be "as fast" as the new stuff, depending on your experience and skill. Simple as that. On a fast group ride, you will probably be at a disadvantage. On a typical fun/recreational ride, I doubt you'd lose too much, if at all.

I've done both, with both technologies. And based on my experience, I gotta ask staight up to all you folks that are telling me STI/Ergo is a disadvantage/inferior - how many miles have you used it for? What is your experience with it?

I never made that assertion, only that they let you PUT THE HAMMER DOWN.

But I am asserting that indexed/integrated is NOT to be considered classic or vintage!
Barcons, however- pretty dang sure those fit the 'classic' bill for most riders.

Except the slack chainers.

*sigh*

In the immortal words of Lancelot Armstrong, "It's not about the bike"

Thanks Sam.

There are lots of factors involved - bike size, handlebar dimensions, where you position your hands, the type of riding you do, what you're used to, etc...

I think there are some indexed shifters that only let you go up-down one click at a time, and there are others that let you do multiple. If I was racing, I'd want indexed. Since I don't, I wouldn't feel significantly advantaged, or disadvantaged using bar cons, down tubes, or STI. If there was some sort of equipment failure - then I'd want them to not be STI. :D

I just like barcons, all but one of my bikes have them.

I have a seldom used bike with brifters and I still prefer the barcons. I have always liked them, especially the SunTour ones.

And some of us would disagree with ya, big boss man :D

Friction barcons shift FAST.

wouldn't STI/indexing not even be considered classic/vintage?

Bekologist, your replies are ripe with retrogrouch-ism. These threads are like winter entertainment, almost like eating Dorito's... They're too tempting to resist.

Here's a few contrapuntal remarks to ponder:

1) Fast shifting is not the same as accurate shifting. If you're on a club ride with veteran cyclists, I suspect that they'll know the ins and outs of being in the right gear for the right terrain, wind condition, drafting scenario, etc.. Sure there are a few times when you want to make multiple shifts at the same time, but I doubt that one rider's ability to go from one end of his cluster to the other in one sweep is going to make any co-rider envious of that rider's ability to PUT the HAMMER DOWN :p . Its a nice fantasy, but good riders know their own steeds whether you click through one or ten simultaneously.

2) Friction shifting can certainly be quick when you're riding solo on an open road, but when there's heavy traffic, its dark, the road is potholed, or other riders are better than you - you're keen ability to deliver perfection gets compromised. I can't tell you how many times over the years my surgically clean drivetrain with the perfect chain and fresh lube, etc... will malfunction in the real world just enough to assure that you will get dropped, or forced to miss a traffic light or ride into a ditch, etc...

3) STI has been around enough that you won't be lambasted for not being RETRO enough. I mean, this stuff has been around since the late 80's (or earlier). Shimano Downtube STI 6 and 7 speed indexed systems are VERY classic in my book. They work wonderfully, are cross compatible with a lot of contemporary and vintage componentry and they look sweet too. I mean Grant Petersen and Rivendell and some of these clones are interesting - but a lot of us have been around long enough to have our own style and our own FRESH interpretation on what it means to be older and ride classic equipment. I'm 44 years old and I've been humbled on group rides many, many times. Sometime the execution of my vintage bikes exceeds expectations, other times you're dropped out the back like yesterday's effluent... :eek: . I know, you'll say its the rider, not the equipment, and of course there is truth to that. I doesn't tell the whole story though. I mean there are some older fellas that come out for some of our group rides who will say, This (fill in the name of some tired 1980's era road bike) is just as great as the day I got it! I mean, sometimes you need to take a good look at yourself and some of your pragmatic (i.e. inflexible) notions, and move on man.

Just had to share,
so go ahead, light up the flames!
This is going to be fun. :)

^^^^I just got myself a big bowl of popcorn, I can't wait for the show!:p BTW I have barcons on one bike and Nexus 8 w/ twist grip on my other road bike. One foot in the new, one foot in the old. I don't go to fast though , I am riding to work mostly so what 's the hurry?:D

I really like my Dura Ace 9 speed (indexed rear) barcons. And I just got some Suntour (friction) ratcheting barcons for another bike, can't wait to put them on. I like barcons for their simplicity, reliability, and old school feel. But I know they're not as ergonomic as brifters for fast, low-effort shifting (but they're better than downtube shifters in that way). I'm willing to live with that for what I feel are the benefits of barcons-

I never made that assertion, only that they let you PUT THE HAMMER DOWN.


You've said that several time and I'm still not sure it means anything. What do barcons allow you to do that any other shifter location won't? I always thought "putting the hammer down" was done with your legs.

Bekologist, you replies are ripe with retrogrouch-ism....I mean, sometimes you need to take a good look at yourself and some of your pragmatic (i.e. inflexible) notions, and move on man.

He's from A&S, where you aren't allowed to disagree :fight:

hey, they work for me, but I'm more of a "race the cars" than "wear jerseys while riding in a pack of fat guys" type of rider anyways.

hey, they work for me, but I'm more of a "race the cars" than "wear jerseys while riding in a pack of fat guys" type of rider anyways.

Can I use this in my sig?:D

that'd be fine.

I am a retrogrouch. ALL my cycling shorts and jerseys are wool, all my saddles leather, all my rides are pimped with friction barcons.

Isn't this the 'classic and vintage' forum?

At the risk of drawing fire, I prefer the feel of barcons, in fricton or indexed modes to anything else, but being able to brake and downshift simutaneously for a tight turn or stop is a big advantage of STI/Ergo levers. Otherwise, friction is easier and cheaper to set up and maintain, and gives me more of a feeling of control being able to trim out any gear. Don't have to fine tune the derailleur settings as often, either. I don't believe either is faster enough to make a difference if the bike is set up properly.

It's this simple. It's fine to like what you like - I like friction downtube shifters. Having the controls right under your hands where you ride most of the time is bound to be fast, but unless one of you is Mercx and the other is Hinault it's unlikely that your chosen method of shifting is going to significantly affect your performance. I'd hate to see this forum descend into the kind of flaming that goes on in SS/FG when people disagree about track drops vs ergo drops, or whatever it might be. Let's play nicely!

that'd be fine.

I am a retrogrouch. ALL my cycling shorts and jerseys are wool, all my saddles leather, all my rides are pimped with friction barcons.

Isn't this the 'classic and vintage' forum?

You're right. This is the C & V forum, you got that right. I'm a little cranky this morning. Wish I was out riding actually.

Us classic and vintage folks are a mixed group. I love my vintage rides more than my new one. That doesn't mean the old ones work better.

I'm currently on a mission to have every vintage road bike in my stable have indexed shifting in one form or another. Its just better.

My apologies to hamr22 for sending the original querie into a ditch. Indirectly, I guess my reply to your original question would be: "Yes, bar-cons are slower than STI/Ergo".

We're all unique bundles of bias I suppose. I love down tube shift levers but prefer them to click.

I must admit I have never used bar-cons though I'm eager to try out a set of 7 speed SunTour Accushift bar-cons that I got new from ebay last year.

I ride conventional plastic shell saddles, never had the need to go Brooks. I love the Turbomatic, wish Selle Italia would bring back the Turbomatic II.

Haven't used wool shorts in years. I do have a new "retro" Canari wool blend jersey that's very comfortable.

Bekologist, you really are in the right place. Retrogrouches flourish here! As I said, I'm a little grouchy today, I'm probably the one that people should throw under the bus! :)

I like my indexed bar end shifters, but I'm not crazy about the cable routing. It looks goofy and is kind of annoying sometimes. Brifters are nice because you can brake and shift at the same time and you can shift from the hoods. I'm planning on doing some serious touring once my kids are a little older and will definitely use indexed bar ends. I'll want something indexed on the bars and I'll want something that can be used in friction mode in the event of a mechanical problem. The only thing that fits the bill is a nice set of indexed barcons.

I guess that doesn't answer the question but if the tenths of a second difference in the time it takes to shift barcons vs brifters is critical, the kind of riding you're talking about is way outside my level of experience.

I have them both. My Lemond has STI shifters and they are precise and convenient to use.
My Trek has friction bar end shifters and I like the simplicity and convenience of them as well. Different bikes and different uses. I like them both.

I do see a benefit in being able to keep one's hands on the bars during gear changes, but once you are used to a particular bike's geartrain, I see no real advantage whatsoever to indexing. Brifters are ergonomic when you have your hands on the brake hoods, but barcons get the edge when you are down on the drops, as I often am.

For me, the big attraction of a nonindexed system is that they are very economical, durable, and reliable, and they permit me to mix and match components in any way the spirit leads me.

....Brifters are ergonomic when you have your hands on the brake hoods, but barcons get the edge when you are down on the drops, as I often am......

I just watched a day full of crit racing last Saturday. All the riders were in the drops, and all had STI/Ergo shifters. If bar-ends had the edge in the drops, I'd expect to see those that had the most reason to get that edge, using them. They were not. In addition, my own experience tells me that STI is exceedingly convenient and easy to use in the drops, as I often am. We'll have to agree to have a gentleman's disagreement.


....For me, the big attraction of a nonindexed system is that they are very economical, durable, and reliable, and they permit me to mix and match components in any way the spirit leads me.

This is very, very true - and is, coupled with the artistry and simplicity, the big attraction for me to vintage bikes.

From my perspective bar end shifters are the economical winner. They allow you to cycle through the gears fast. They are more dependable for daily use than STI/Ergo. I recommend people continue buying barends to support the technology. I think most bikes priced under 1000$ should have barend shifters to save the consumer money and headache of upgrades. Modern index shifting is clearly superior in terms of delivery but it costs too damn much. I found that running Shimano Barcons in friction mode was much easier than the index. Keep pedalling and listen to the chain, with a tiny little twitches you will be able to find the sweet spot and have a pretty quiet drive train. You might be able to sprint better with the modern style shifter but if you use your gears properly you won't need to shift like a baby to maintain your cadence. Your pals on the ride still will not be able to ride like Eddy Merckx regardless of frame and shifters. Remember lots of racers used bar end shifters/downtube shifters/fixed gears back in the day. Keep your bike simple and it will reward you.

....I think most bikes priced under 1000$ should have barend shifters to save the consumer money and headache of upgrades.....

Then dealers would have a floor full of bikes that won't sell.

Barcons are all that you suggest - inexpensive, functional, uncomplicated, reliable. But they are a niche market, relatively speaking. STI/Ergo is more complicated and more expensive - but it is very efficient, easy to use, and very reliable, too.

I like my vintage bikes, and have three very nice ones with friction shifting. But for every day riding and especially long distances, the new stuff almost always gets the nod. It's too much better not to.

From my perspective bar end shifters are the economical winner.

Sure, so are manual transmissions in automobiles. That doesn't keep the public from buying automatics almost universally. "Economical" isn't the controlling factor in most purchases.


Remember lots of racers used bar end shifters/downtube shifters/fixed gears back in the day. Keep your bike simple and it will reward you.

Of course they did, there was nothing else available. Eddy Merckx used downtube shifters and so did all of his competitors as they had no alternative. You can be certain that if he were racing today, he'd use the absolute latest technology available. Today even amateur racers use STI/Ergo and they have to pay for their own equipment.

OK, my vintage bikes all have friction downtube shifters and my modern steel bike has sti. I had barcons on my 70s supersport until it went fixed. My bonafides stated, I'd like to make one point.

The one great advantage I find to STI is that I don't have to remove a hand from the bar while riding in a pack. hitting a pothole that you didn't see with one hand on the bars surrounded by a pack is a rare, but scary occurrence.

Does it make me faster? Not much, especially if we're outside of the city, but it does make me a little safer in the pack.

Paul