Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling - Type of gear shifter for long distance rides?

I've ridden up to 80 miles in a single day several times, but I want to get into longer distance cycling this year, eventually targeting rides of up to 200 miles. I'm equipping a bike to use for such rides and have found a lot of good information online, but one thing I've not been able to find is advice on gear shift positions. I have firsthand experience with brifters, barcons, and downtube shifters, and generally prefer brifters a little bit over barcons, and barcons quite a bit over downtube shifters. However, most of the bikes I see pictured online that are built specifically for randonneuring have downtube shifters, with the rest divided pretty equally between barcons and brifters.

I know some of the arguments against brifters---especially that they're more complicated and can break down more easily, leaving you semi-screwed---but good brifters strike me a quite reliable these days so I'm wondering if that argument is just theoretical, or if it really happens enough to worry about. I've been 95% as happy with barcons as with brifters on shorter rides, but I can envision that over the second hundred miles the routine repositioning to shift could get burdensome. The major considerations at this point seem to be the lower cost and greater reliability of barcons versus the added convenience of brifters. I'm not considering downtube shifters, but would do so if I'm completely overlooking something that would steer me that way.

So rather than deal with my perceptions based on shorter rides, I wanted to ask those of you with actual experience at long rides: What do you see as the advantages or disadvantages of brifters vs barcons vs downtube shifters? I'd appreciate any advice you can give me. Thanks.

EDIT: So just after posting this I found the poll asking about what type of shifters you use. Color me embarrassed for not finding it earlier, but I'm going to leave this here anyway in case anyone has anything substantial to add. Most replies to the other post are short and pretty cryptic, as one would expect in response to a poll.

Some of my touring type friends tell me, definitely place your shifters on the down tube. I find it much too difficult to give up the convenience in STI.. I just always hope maintenance directly before a tour is a sufficient precaution..

To repeat my comment in the earlier thread... ;) Use what you like.

STI / brifters are very reliable, they're just a little fussier than barcons or downtube shifters, especially with triples. The only other caveat is that you may have to fuss with the cabling if you want to use a handlebar bag with STI's.

Otherwise, as long as you tune up the bike before a big event -- which really, you should do anyway -- it isn't a big deal. IMO the repair issues are more critical if you're touring.

What do you see as the advantages or disadvantages of brifters vs barcons vs downtube shifters? Clearly, the integrated brake shifters are far superior in just about any respect. (excepting weight)

I could make a good case that STI shifters are actually safer than other shifters because of the unique location of their mounting. This is especially true in conjunction with a heavily loaded bicycle.

Downtube or bar end shifters are far more reliable than any STI or Ergo. Downtube has the advantage of much less cabling getting in the way of things. I used downtube shifters from 1970 until 1998 when I got a new bike with ergoshifters on it. I will gladly return to downtube shifters when I can find and afford some for my Campy-equipped bike. You just don't need that much shifting unless you're racing with other similarly-equipped bikes. Cyclists nowadays can be heard shifting needlessly all the time, at the slightest change in the road. Tourists don't really need to do that.

In 28 years I spent with DT shifters, not one ever needed any kind of adustment or maintenance (except just finger tigthening it now and then). Cheaper brifters are a pain in the butt (rough, unpredictable operation, in my opinion), and quality ones need periodic replacing (Shimano) or rebuild (Campy). Even the rebuildable ones are not what I would consider to be field-repairable. DT shifters are a one time purchase that last a lifetime with virtually no maintenance, and you don't have all that extra cabling getting in the way of bags and what not. They also don't have cables to rub against the head tube.

Agree with Longfemur on DT shifters. I've been using DT shifters on my LD bike for 18 years. No maintenance ever needed and they still work perfectly. However on my club bike I do prefer STIs because of more frequent shifting especially in a pace line. All 3 types of shifters work well it's more of a personal preference.

I think a big part of the reason randonneuring type folks gravitate to the downtube levers is tradition and appearance. Rene Herse never built a bike for STI...

For me, downtube levers work perfectly, look good, are comparatively simple and reliable, have a friction option if something goes bad in the drivetrain, are lighter, and are less expensive.

I don't think there's anything particularly wrong with STI/Ergo -- except for the shocking price tag -- but I don't see that they offer significant advantages for the non-racer. The split-second saved by not taking a hand off the bars is inconsequential to the rest of us, and as for safety... let's just say that if you can't safely remove a hand from the bars to execute a shift, I don't want to be anywhere near you on a bike!

The bottom line, as usual, is that they all work just fine, as evidenced by the zillions of trouble-free miles ridden with all of them. Choose your favorite for any reason rational or not, and be hapy.

Thanks to everyone for the feedback, and for not scolding me for the redundant post. I'm going to steer clear from STI's and will choose between the bar-ends and the DT shifters. I fell in love with STI's in the mid-90's, which was the first time I had them, but after using bikes since then with STI, bar-ends, and DT shifters, I was surprised at how easily I could revert from the convenience of STI's without really missing it. I still want them for commuting in traffic when I want to keep both hands on the bars always, but given the other types of riding I do (and plan to do) methinks I'm gonna go with the greater reliability and (much) lower cost of bar-ends if they're compatible with a bag on a front rack, or DT shifters if not. Thanks again.

I can tell what gear I am in at night with bar-end or downtube shifters, not with STI-power shifters.

You don't have to use the same type front and back. I use a down-tube shifter for the front and an STI brifter for the rear. If my STI was to ever fail, I figure that I can just set up the down-tube shifter to control the rear derailleur and operate the front derailleur by getting off of the bike and doing it manually if I have to. Single brifters are not readily available except on eBay.

I've used downtube, bar-end, and STI shifters. I like different things about all three, never really had any reliability problems with any of them. But both my bikes now have bar-end shifters, which won out for several reasons. (Most of these reasons also apply to downtube shifters, but I'm not that retro :) and I prefer not to reach down so far.)

I have small hands, and the distance I had to "throw" the STI lever to shift the chainring was sometimes a challenge. (Maybe I just needed a nicer/more expensive STI system. :))

I found bar-ends easier to shift while wearing heavy gloves in the winter, or with soaking wet hands hours into a day-long downpour. :(

I have a tendency, if I'm not thinking about it, to not move my hands around enough on a long ride -- the bar-end shifters make me do it (unless the ride is dead flat.)

Both my bikes are triples, and I really like the friction-shifting for the chainring -- any hint of that annoying rubbing sound in certain gear combos, I just move the chain a hair and put it exactly where I want it. (The possible down side to this: I haven't adjusted a derailleur in years. I probably don't remember how to do it. :rolleyes:) I haven't used the friction feature on the rear, but it's nice to know it's available if I need it.

These are, of course, all rather personal/idiosyncratic reasons to prefer bar-ends. The best advice, which several other posters have already given, is use what you like best.

Bar-ends
Pros
Easier to control with gloves, and when tired.
More reliable.
More robust.
Can check gear at night by feel.
If damaged, or derailleur out of adjustment, can fallback to friction mode.

Cons
Brake hoods not as comfortable as brifters.
Have to take hand off bar to change (only really an issue in bad conditions, maybe broken road surface or wind).


Brifters
Pros
Very comfortable hoods.
Instinctive fast changes for rear.
Hands remain on bars at all times.

Cons
Shimano can break if using a double and you overshift
If damaged, or derailleur out of adjustment, no fallback to friction mode, and adjustment limited.
Awkward to fit bar bags.
Can't tell which gear you are in by feel.
Very awkward to use when wearing heavy gloves or mittens.

I just love the collective wisdom of Bike Forum members. I knew about the better reliability (at lower cost) of bar-end and downtube shifters, but had not thought of 2 downsides of STIs mentioned by others: Can't tell what gear I'm in at night, and they're hard to use with gloves. My usual night rides both have bar-end shifters, so I haven't experienced the first disadvantage but can see that it would probably matter. I did know the STIs are hard to use with gloves because I've used them with gloves, but didn't think about it in this context. It's doable, but hardly ideal.

So---I'm gonna go with bar-ends. I see an advantage or 2 with DT shifters over bar-ends, but like maxine, I just don't think I want to be reaching down that much. Bar-end shifters are closer and more conveniently placed, and I think that'll matter toward the end of a long ride. Thanks, all, for helping me work through this.

Bar-ends
Cons
Brake hoods not as comfortable as brifters.
Have to take hand off bar to change (only really an issue in bad conditions, maybe broken road surface or wind).


Depends. I say these issue are only cons if you have problems with finding a comfy lever and/or have trouble using your bar ends. I have drop bars & bar end shifters on a couple bikes (including the MTB) and find it quite easy to shift without taking my hands off the bars, especially since I tend to spend most of my time in the drops. Just slide my hand over the edge enough to nudge the shift lever. As for the levers, I think the lack of STI gives one a much better choice in the shape of lever hoods. Given that, one can find a brake lever that is most comfy, and ya, there are levers out there that feel better than the 3 choices in brifters.

Bar-ends
Cons
Brake hoods not as comfortable as brifters.

Brifters
Pros
Very comfortable hoods.

I used to think this too, because when I first used bar-end shifters I used the Dia-Compe brake levers, and with these the hoods are quite narrow and hard. I believe the same is true for the Shimano brake-only levers. However, I've since discovered the Cane Creek brake levers, and have found that these are at least as comfy as the Ultegra and 105 STIs. I believe that the Tektro brake levers are the same as the Cane Creek except for the branding.

If you're not using STIs then I highly recommend the Cane Creek or Tektro brake levers (Cane Creek even makes a version designed for V-brakes / linear-pull).

Go for the barends! I've been using STI's for several years and they explode on anything over 81 miles!:rolleyes:

...

So---I'm gonna go with bar-ends. I see an advantage or 2 with DT shifters over bar-ends, but like maxine, I just don't think I want to be reaching down that much. Bar-end shifters are closer and more conveniently placed, and I think that'll matter toward the end of a long ride. Thanks, all, for helping me work through this.

Well ... one other advantage of downtube shifters is that you can continue to hold the handlebars with your left hand, and easily reach down with your right hand and shift the back derailleur and then trim the front derailleur (if necessary). With bar-end shifters, you have to either let go of the bars entirely to put both hands simultaneously on the drops to shift the back and then trim the front (if needed), or keep your left hand on the top of the bars and shift the back with your right hand and hope that the front won't need trimming, but if it does then you have to drop your left hand down.

As to "reaching down that much", I don't find it to be a stretch, at all, to reach the downtube shifter. When I'm sitting in my normal position, if I let go of the bars with my right hand and let my arm swing down in an arc, then it comes right down to the DT shifter. No stretching required. I have my bars about the same height as my saddle, so the lack of need for stretching isn't because my nose is rubbing against the tire. Try it out for yourself and see if the DT shifters are really all that far from the natural arc of your hand.

I've found that with DT shifters, shifting is quicker and more precise than with the bar-ends. The long cable runs through the housing between the bars and the cable stops just adds a little resistance that makes shifting a little bit slower and more imprecise.

I say these issue are only cons if you have problems with finding a comfy lever and/or have trouble using your bar ends. Given that, one can find a brake lever that is most comfy, and ya, there are levers out there that feel better than the 3 choices in brifters.


I've since discovered the Cane Creek brake levers, and have found that these are at least as comfy as the Ultegra and 105 STIs. I believe that the Tektro brake levers are the same as the Cane Creek except for the branding.


As to "reaching down that much", I don't find it to be a stretch, at all, to reach the downtube shifter. When I'm sitting in my normal position, if I let go of the bars with my right hand and let my arm swing down in an arc, then it comes right down to the DT shifter. No stretching required. I have my bars about the same height as my saddle, so the lack of need for stretching isn't because my nose is rubbing against the tire. Try it out for yourself and see if the DT shifters are really all that far from the natural arc of your hand.

The bike I have with DT shifters I bought off ebay, so had no choice. Everything else about the bike was right, though, so DT shifters wasn't gonna kill my interest. I'd been using Ultegra STIs on my commuter and had really become spoiled, so I was already thinking about "upgrading" the shifters to STI when I got the bike. The first ride I took with it, I was surprised by 3 things:

1) The hoods were substantially more comfortable than the hoods on the Ultegra brifters I'd been using. I hadn't expected this and wasn't paying any attention to it, so the fact that I noticed it meant to me that the difference was significant. Turns out that the levers and brakes on that bike were Cane Creek SCR-5, and they're wider than the Shimano Ultegras I'd been using so they didn't (and don't) cause as much pressure in one "crease" because the contact patch between my hand and the hood is bigger. So I'm not concerned about discomfort on the hoods with a non-STI set-up.

2) I didn't mind the DT shifters. I'd expected to, but it was really no big deal to reach down to shift. I'd done it for decades before STIs so shouldn't be surprised that I didn't mind it, but like I said, I figured I'd become too spoiled. Despite not minding it, though.......

3) I found myself shifting only about half as often with the DT shifters as with the STIs, and didn't feel pushed or deprived by the less frequent shifting. That told me I probably shift too much with the STIs, because it's soooooo easy to do it, and have since made a deliberate effort to shift less frequently with the STIs.

However, while I don't mind the DT shifters and do in fact like the cleaner look better than the look of bar-ends, I really find myself liking the slightly higher convenience of bar-end shifters on another bike. I can't articulate why, but they're just more convenient, probably because the excursion my hand has to take is much shorter than it is with DT shifters. On a 25 mile ride the differences between bar-end and DT shifters are small, but I was concerned that those small differences could become exacerbated over, say, 150 miles to the point where I'd want to take a hammer to non-STI shifters when I got home---the next day, of course, after I'd recovered enough strength to lift the hammer. What I'm learning is that either would do, but I'm still thinking that bar-ends have less "risk" of frustration over a long haul.

3) I found myself shifting only about half as often with the DT shifters as with the STIs, and didn't feel pushed or deprived by the less frequent shifting. That told me I probably shift too much with the STIs, because it's soooooo easy to do it, and have since made a deliberate effort to shift less frequently with the STIs.

I don't get it, how can you shift "too much"? Why would it be better to shift less often? I find that the most efficient way to ride is to pedal consistently within my preferred cadence range; that range is quite narrow for me, and so this requires frequent shifting. I don't see why anyone would be happy to shift less than they are used to. Please elaborate.

I don't get it, how can you shift "too much"? Why would it be better to shift less often? I find that the most efficient way to ride is to pedal consistently within my preferred cadence range; that range is quite narrow for me, and so this requires frequent shifting. I don't see why anyone would be happy to shift less than they are used to. Please elaborate.

Try riding a singlespeed or a fixed wheel for a while. It widens your efficient cadence range.

I don't get it, how can you shift "too much"? Why would it be better to shift less often? I find that the most efficient way to ride is to pedal consistently within my preferred cadence range; that range is quite narrow for me, and so this requires frequent shifting. I don't see why anyone would be happy to shift less than they are used to. Please elaborate.

Perhaps "too much" wasn't the best way to put it. It implies judgement, which wasn't my intent. Here's what I meant: With STIs going up a not-so-steep hill, I'd downshift to maintain my cadence, and on steeper hills would usually go through a smooth progression of gears as I get further into the hill. With DT shifters I'm less likely to shift on smaller hills, and usually shift less often (albeit with bigger jumps) when I do shift on bigger hills. I just push harder, and I get to the top much easier than I'd have predicted based on my pattern of shifting with STIs. The first time I did that with DT shifters I found myself liking the change, so I've tried to adapt my riding style with STIs to shift less often to partially emulate that experience. I enjoy the ride more when I fine-tune less.

Plus, STIs are expensive, and I don't wanna wear 'em out any sooner than necessary. :D

one of my LD bikes uses dt shifters, the other uses campy ergo.

i like the ease of the ergo, but the look feel of downtube shifters.

some talk of the extra "stretching" that goes on with DT's - i'm not really buying it - i mean are people that stiff on the bike (w/ ergo/STI) that they never move their arms? i can see the mechanics involved, but haven't noticed any benefit using DT over Ergo.

and in relation to being able to tell what gear you're in at night.. i've read that before, but haven't really felt a need for it. for me, the legs say (e.g. rpms) if i'm in the right gear or not. (as opposed to looking at it and gauging if it's right or not)

i mean i do look at the gears (even with the DT) from time to time, but at night do you really need to see them?

in the end, it's just like what kind of toothpaste do you like - e.g. nobody's answer is right.

and in relation to being able to tell what gear you're in at night.. i've read that before, but haven't really felt a need for it. for me, the legs say (e.g. rpms) if i'm in the right gear or not. (as opposed to looking at it and gauging if it's right or not)

i mean i do look at the gears (even with the DT) from time to time, but at night do you really need to see them?


I've ridden a lot of miles with people running big/big and small/small gear combinations at night. It is rare that they intend to do that.

I don't get it, how can you shift "too much"? Why would it be better to shift less often? I find that the most efficient way to ride is to pedal consistently within my preferred cadence range; that range is quite narrow for me, and so this requires frequent shifting. I don't see why anyone would be happy to shift less than they are used to. Please elaborate.

Grant Peterson once wrote something about "shifting too much". He felt that resorting to your brifters every time the road angled up or down half a degree meant that you were allowing technology to interfere with your enjoyment of the ride. Or at least that's how I remember it; he gets into the heavy philosophical stuff and my eyes sort of glaze over.

But I kind of think know what he meant. I do see people like you who have become so dependent upon having exactly the right gear for every little change in conditions that they are just constantly clicking away; really relying upon the technology. Many/most of those folks seem perfectly content, and it's sure none of my business, but I do see the comparative attraction of the fixed/ss. Maybe it's better to leave all the gadgets at home once in a while, and let your legs do the work instead of your fingers. Or not!

Oh, and LWab kind of touched on the idea that maybe your range is so narrow because your brifters have allowed and/or encouraged it. I've wondered if that isn't true for many STI/Ergo users, and I've wondered if that's entirely a good thing.

Grant Peterson once wrote something about "shifting too much". He felt that resorting to your brifters every time the road angled up or down half a degree meant that you were allowing technology to interfere with your enjoyment of the ride. Or at least that's how I remember it; he gets into the heavy philosophical stuff and my eyes sort of glaze over.

But I kind of think know what he meant. I do see people like you who have become so dependent upon having exactly the right gear for every little change in conditions that they are just constantly clicking away; really relying upon the technology. Many/most of those folks seem perfectly content, and it's sure none of my business, but I do see the comparative attraction of the fixed/ss. Maybe it's better to leave all the gadgets at home once in a while, and let your legs do the work instead of your fingers. Or not!

Is this what you mean?

I still feel that variable gears are only for people over forty-five. Isn't it better to triumph by the strength of your muscles than by the artifice of a derailleur? We are getting soft...As for me, give me a fixed gear!"

As for me, I'll side with Velocio. I don't think shifting when I want to interferes with my enjoyment of the ride. On the contrary, I think being in the wrong gear interferes with my enjoyment of the ride. I can pedal anywhere from 60 rpm up to 130 rpm or so, but I prefer 90-100 rpm. So why should I go outside of that range if I don't have to? Just because someone else thinks I'm shifting "too often"? Hey, it's my bike, I'll shift as often as I like. :)

I dunno, maybe I'd shift 'too much' if I had brifters. I've only ever used downtube and bar-con shifters. I know there have been times on my old bike when I didn't shift enough because of half-step gearing with bar-cons. Every other shift was a double shift, which required two hand movements. So I often just shifted the rear and lived with too big of a step. That did interfere with my enjoyment at times. With brifters I would have happily done both shifts and gotten the right gear. But half-step gearing stopped being needed when more than 6 speed freewheels came out, which was before brifters. So I doubt there have been many bikes set up with both.

I've never understood the attraction of SS/fixed. I'd suspect it's a symptom of testosterone poisoning, but I read about a fair number of women who ride them as well. People talk about fixies as if riding one was some sort of Zen-like experience. If I want a Zen-like experience, I'll pull out my zafu and zabuton and assume the lotus position someplace where I can concentrate on mu without having to worry about potholes or pickup trucks. I get enough jinba ittai (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jinba_ittai) with my Miyata 610 (21 speeds) and my Miata 10AE (6 speeds). :)

I turn 46 in two months, so I guess at that time it'll be a moot point for me, anyway. Even Henri would agree that I should be allowed to use a derailleur.

I can pedal anywhere from 60 rpm up to 130 rpm or so, but I prefer 90-100 rpm. So why should I go outside of that range if I don't have to?


I've done PBP on 14, 2 and 30 gears, with little difference in perceived effort (ignoring weather). I find shifting less often encourages me to get out of the saddle occasionally and to change position more often than otherwise would be the case. This means I am 'automatically' changing positions, reducing the possibility of overuse injuries (sore neck or hands, etc), rather than waiting until I am in discomfort to remind me or having to think about changing position regularly. YMMV.



I've never understood the attraction of SS/fixed.


Explaining the fun of riding fixed wheel is kind of like explaining the punchline to a joke, a waste of time for both people. Please enjoy riding long distances any way you want to.

Explaining the fun of riding fixed wheel is kind of like explaining the punchline to a joke, a waste of time for both people. Please enjoy riding long distances any way you want to.Best explanation I've read. I started riding fixed gear because back in the day it was said to be good for you somehow. Mostly I've commuted on fixed gear, but I haven't ridden one in years. I'm not strong enough right now. I'm impressed by people my age that can do it, or even ride distances on single speed, that's for sure. The attraction of a lighter, more responsive bike is always there once you've experienced it.