Road Cycling - 105 or Ultegra?

OK, I've read through this post on 105 vs. Ultegra. It seems that there's not all that much difference between the two, so what's the bottom line here? Given the same frame, with similar quality wheels, bars, stem, seat and post, where's the break point in price? $100? $200? $400?

In other words, if you're looking at 2 basically identical bikes, how much more is the Ultegra bike "worth" over the 105 bike? Would you spend $200 more for Ultegra? $400? Or none....?

I would spend $200 pretty easily. Any more than that would be a tougher decision. I would not go up to $400 though.

I think you'll spend more than $400.00 for the same frame w/ Ultegra.

Personally, I'd scrimp for an extra month or so and do Ultegra. Just one happy punks' opinion.

Just go with ultegra,you'll be happy enough.

I vote Ultegra. My wife's bike has 105, and the shifters are significantly harder to operate, and all the parts (shifters, brake calipers, cassettes, etc) are bulkier and heavier.

Seems like you could get a ballpark idea by getting gruppo prices (minus hubs, most offer that option) from an online retailer.

Whatever the price difference, the upgrade should be less expensive as part of a new bike. If you can manage the price difference, you won't be disappointed with Ultegra.

For the quality and operation of components gained by selecting the Ultegra over the 105 groupo, I feel the money is well spent. On the other hand if you were choosing to go with Dura-Ace over Ultegra, the increase in performance is not nearly as pronounced.

Well a quick look at Performance suggests that the price differences between Ultegra and 105 components is $5-20, each. Shifters, brakes, FD, RD, crankset, BB are the major components, so a retail price difference of more than $100 constitutes profit margin by the manufacturer and the shop. A look at the weights listed for the components show weight savings of between 4 oz min and 8 oz max, probably closer to 4 oz. DuraAce is more like 16 oz lighter for the group. Doesn't seem to be a big deal. On my three road bikes all 30-52 triple CW and 12-27 cassettes, I can't tell the difference between the one with 105 and the two with Ultegra. Steve

From looking at the price of the component groups, looks like it should be less tehn a $200 price difference between teh exact same bike with 105 vs ultegra. How often you actualy see the exact same bike is pretty rare though.

I started out wanting a road bike with 105, but soon found that the difference in price versus Ultrega didn't make sense to go with the 105's. The difference is, according to everyone I have talked to and everyone who has ridden both, is marked and well worth the price.

The difference between Ultrega and Dura-Ace is mainly one of weight and a little more durability. If you plan on keeping the bike for a long time and can afford Dura-Ace, go with it. If not, get the Ultrega and when components wear out, replace them with Dura-Ace. Except the bottom bracket. When that goes, replace it with one from Phil Wood.

My Airborne has Ultegra, the wife's Lemond has 105. I told her as soon as she does 1500 miles in one season I'll get her Ultegra.:D

(so far I'm safe.....)

I have always ridden Shimano 105. From all accounts I have read, Shimano 105, performs as well as Dura Ace and Ultegra, the latter two have better polish and weigh a bit less.

I do not really believe the stuff on shifting, most reviews that I have read rate shifting and braking even on low end components as fine. But, admittedly, that can be a matter of taste.

I do hear anecdotal stuff. Many people tell me the more expensive gruppos last longer. I doubt that because I know that very, very few people ever wear out components. I wear em out, but I am a high mileage rider and I stick with the same bike for awhile.

To put matters in perspective, Scientific American had an article on Bicyling Physics about 20 years ago. They compared the top speed of their hypothetical racing cyclist on three different bikes: the basic racing machine used at the time, the state of the art bike, and the ULTIMATE BIKE - no wind resistance for the bike (rider still had wind resistance), weightless and I think no energy lost to friction of components. The top ends were and it must have been a not so hot racer: 33 mph, 34 mph and 35 mph. Thing was once you get to a certain point improving the bike will not get you much of the functional result.

I think something odd is going on here. I often see things like this debated but as I said, at Shimano 105 and better the differences are pretty small. A small weight savings is important for the pros because climbing is heavily weight influenced so even a lb can lose you a number of places on a mountain stage. But it isn't important for us recreational cyclists even if we are fast recreational cyclists.

I think people might be looking for that huge improvement. You know when you go from a near clunker bike to your first good bike. The difference is incredible. But you will never see that kind of improvement again. You already got 95% of it.

The other thing may just be a cultural obsession. People in this society like to believe in fast fixes that can be bought for money. Really, it is training, fitness, and talent that make you a faster rider not the bike. I get in groups and I can identify the strong rider. I have played a game, put the strongest rider on the worst bike in the group. Would he still be the strongest rider, assuming it fit of course? The answer is nearly always yes.

Look, I would suggest that if you even asked the question, you are convinced that Ultegra is better then 105. If you think that way, then it if probably worth it to you to get Ultegra just for the emotional satisfaction if nothing else. You will probably put lots of time on the bike and if having Ultegra makes you feel better, well do it. It is a very cheap thrill. So after saying there is not much difference between the two objectively, I am basically saying if it gives you satisfaction, which is afterall a big part of the fun, well do it. It is worth it even if it isn't logical. :D

I have always ridden Shimano 105. From all accounts I have read, Shimano 105, performs as well as Dura Ace and Ultegra, the latter two have better polish and weigh a bit less.

I do not really believe the stuff on shifting, most reviews that I have read rate shifting and braking even on low end components as fine. But, admittedly, that can be a matter of taste.

I do hear anecdotal stuff. Many people tell me the more expensive gruppos last longer. I doubt that because I know that very, very few people ever wear out components. I wear em out, but I am a high mileage rider and I stick with the same bike for awhile.

To put matters in perspective, Scientific American had an article on Bicyling Physics about 20 years ago. They compared the top speed of their hypothetical racing cyclist on three different bikes: the basic racing machine used at the time, the state of the art bike, and the ULTIMATE BIKE - no wind resistance for the bike (rider still had wind resistance), weightless and I think no energy lost to friction of components. The top ends were and it must have been a not so hot racer: 33 mph, 34 mph and 35 mph. Thing was once you get to a certain point improving the bike will not get you much of the functional result.

I think something odd is going on here. I often see things like this debated but as I said, at Shimano 105 and better the differences are pretty small. A small weight savings is important for the pros because climbing is heavily weight influenced so even a lb can lose you a number of places on a mountain stage. But it isn't important for us recreational cyclists even if we are fast recreational cyclists.

I think people might be looking for that huge improvement. You know when you go from a near clunker bike to your first good bike. The difference is incredible. But you will never see that kind of improvement again. You already got 95% of it.

The other thing may just be a cultural obsession. People in this society like to believe in fast fixes that can be bought for money. Really, it is training, fitness, and talent that make you a faster rider not the bike. I get in groups and I can identify the strong rider. I have played a game, put the strongest rider on the worst bike in the group. Would he still be the strongest rider, assuming it fit of course? The answer is nearly always yes.

Look, I would suggest that if you even asked the question, you are convinced that Ultegra is better then 105. If you think that way, then it if probably worth it to you to get Ultegra just for the emotional satisfaction if nothing else. You will probably put lots of time on the bike and if having Ultegra makes you feel better, well do it. It is a very cheap thrill. So after saying there is not much difference between the two objectively, I am basically saying if it gives you satisfaction, which is afterall a big part of the fun, well do it. It is worth it even if it isn't logical. :DUltegra IS better then 105.Built with slightly better parts,a bit lighter and Ultegra just sound better then 105.If i find a bike that has everything i want,fits,i'm going to buy it if it has 105.I would rather have Utegra.Now if from the start i tell myself i want at least Ultegra on my bike,i know the bike will have other things better to most likely.Oh,one more thing,i have both and the first thing i noticed was the Ultegra shifted smoother,faster.

105 might not be as good but it gets the job done and done well. I rode a friends Trek with Ultegra and couldn't tell a difference in shifting. I could tell a difference in noise. The damn left hand shifter on my 105 rattles and bugs the hell out of me. The Ultegra was silky quiet.

Oh I did just put a DuraAce chain on my bike. Boy I was amazed at how much smoother the shifts became.

Left shifter rattle? Isn't it usually the right (rear) shifter that's the problem? Is it set up so there's always *some* tension on the cable?

I think shifter rattle in general may be more a function of age than component set, i.e. there was enough hue and cry that Shimano addressed the shifter rattle issue across the 105-DA range.

I was wraping a friends bars this morning and noticed the plastic covers on his ultegra snaps into place, while my 105 covers have a small phillips screw securing the cover. I think this is where the rattle comes from. I really can't tell much difference in the function of the two myself. I think most will notice better shifting on double vs tripple in the same groupo than between say a triple ultegra and tripple 105. Just my 2 cents.

I have always ridden Shimano 105. From all accounts I have read, Shimano 105, performs as well as Dura Ace and Ultegra, the latter two have better polish and weigh a bit less.

I do not really believe the stuff on shifting, most reviews that I have read rate shifting and braking even on low end components as fine. But, admittedly, that can be a matter of taste.

[big snip]:D

This makes a lot of sense. Since 105, Ultegra, and Dura Ace are interchangeable, one shouldn't expect significant differences in performance. The differences must involve materials, weight, and finish.

i have 105, and i like it alright...it performs just fine, and i enjoy the all black components on a dark purple frame.

sometimes i notice that my FD doesn't shift as fast or as smooth as i'd like it to, but that's my fault for putting off routine maintenance, and it also might have something to do with the fact that my "big ring" is a 48T...i also could just be spinning too fast when i try to shift, or not shifting at the "right" times.

eh. i ride a track bike most of the time anyway.

i haven't had any problems with the rear shifting. aside from how the STis (in general) work (one cog at a time going harder is bad), but i'm used to it now.

if i could go back, i'd get campy chorus, just for the ergo shifters.

also, the 105 crank kinda sucks, and i hate octalink. ISIS is a much better system, IMO.

I vote Ultegra. My wife's bike has 105, and the shifters are significantly harder to operate, and all the parts (shifters, brake calipers, cassettes, etc) are bulkier and heavier.

Seems like you could get a ballpark idea by getting gruppo prices (minus hubs, most offer that option) from an online retailer.

Whatever the price difference, the upgrade should be less expensive as part of a new bike. If you can manage the price difference, you won't be disappointed with Ultegra.

The 105 and Ultegra brake calipers, the metal portion, are the same. The difference is the finish and the release arm to open the brake for wheel removal.

Ultegra shifters are better. I seriously doubt that, if you did not know what was on the back of your bike, you could tell the difference between an Ultegra or a 105 derailleur. Becasue I've tried it with racer customers and they cannot tell. The shifters are another matter.

The 105 and Ultegra brake calipers, the metal portion, are the same.
Put on the spot, I admit that I was comparing my '99 Ultegra to her '03 105.

Thanks for all the inputs everyone. I ultimately found the same bike with Ultegra for LESS than the prices I had seen before. Easy choice now and I ordered it last night. Now it's just a waiting game for the brown Santa Claus....

Good,end of thread.