Bicycle Mechanics - Worse invention

Attention all Bike Mechanics!

In your honest to God opinions, would you say that the worse thing to come out of japan's component giant, Shimano is their "rapid rise" derailleur (AKA Crapid rise, Rapid Demise, etc.) or their "Biopace" chain rings??

Mechanics at our shop have quarreled over this topic for eons, and now we want others to chime in!

I loved the BioPace on my old Trek 1000, so by default I will have to answer RapidRise.

There is nothing wrong with bio pace and no reason for rapid rise. Guess my answer. I personally think brifters are an even worse invention. A shifter that can't be fixed on the road is worthless. Roger

I have a Rapid Rise derailer. Don't forget, the very first derailers were low normal AKA rapid rise.

I got it because it was on sale, but I can't complain.

EDIT- I actuate it with a downtube shifter.

i have both on my miyata 1000, and i like them both. rapid rise is cool because you can shift in the same direction as your front derailleur.

I'm glad you guys hate the Rapid Rise stuff so badly... I ride an XTR low normal rear derailleur that I got from my LBS for $40 brand new in the box because they couldn't get rid of it. I think that some folks just don't like them 'cause they're different than what they're used to... but I got top of the line XTR stuff for a song and it shifts silky smooth.

Keep on hating them RR derailleurs... makes it cheaper for me! :thumb:

Biopace was nothing new when introduced that I can see. Non round chainrings date back to the 1890s or so based on photos I have seen of some antique bikes. Like women's fashions they seem to come and go only to be reintroduced again. Shimano's iteration did nothing more than change the orientation of the high area in relation to the cranks and they had two versions as I recall, the earlier with greater eccentricity than the latter.

No opinion on the derailleur as I have not tried one.

I was in the bike business from 1978 through 1984. I saw a few funny things come through then. SunTour had front derailleurs that upshifted when you reduced cable tension. They weren't terrible, but they didn't have any real advantage except that if you were new to gears on a bicycle, the directions of the shifters were less confusing.

Shimano tried some technology out on cheap bikes before the expensive bikes. They had a freewheeling bottom bracket coupled with a fixed gear cluster, so that all the freewheeling was in the crankset, not on the rear wheel. The advantage was that you could shift while coasting. It didn't catch on.

They introduced indexed shifting on super-cheap bikes long before they did so on nice bikes. We pooh-poohed the very concept, but in retrospect, we did it only because of the bikes, not the concept.

I know one mechanic who would probably still claim that the spring-loaded upper pivot bolt is a flawed idea. Shimano has always had it, as far as I know, and Campagnolo and SunTour didn't have it. I don't have an opinion.

Shimano has had some screwy ideas, for sure, and they've had some brilliant ones, too.

I think the worst thing isn't a particular design but the constant changes they make, which make repairing components difficult. I really don't believe all of this change is necessary, and it means you have to replace components when they fail. It's stuff like this that make many of us perceive Shimano as the Microsoft of the bike component business. They are the biggest company in the market, by far, and their decisions affect all the rest of the companies. Sometimes they do what's good for them in antithesis with what's good for customers.

My winter bike...

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l278/kdl2525/Bikes/WinterBuild001.jpg

bikeradar.com has an article last week about how a pro mountain bike rider is using the new "egg shaped" chainrings. Yes folks, the biopace is coming back.

I've never had occasion to work on these so-called Rapid Demise derailleurs, but now I'll look into them. Regards Biopace - I had Biopace on an old Mountain-Bike of mine. I had/have no complaints. In fact I rather liked them. One went a little further and a little faster for the same energy expenditure. This being due to their removing that dead-zone in one's pedal-stroke.

What about accushift ???

Clipless pedals.














j/k....

What about accushift ???

Wrong company.

FWIW, Sheldon Brown thought Rapid Rise was an excellent idea.

But does he still? I'll go get my Ouija Board.

Bio-pace is useless and I don't see the need for 9 or 10 rear cogs. They quietly changed the DA 10 speed rear hubs to ones with outboard bearings cause the ones with the aluminum freehub and inboard bearings was a very bad idea.

Attention all Bike Mechanics!

In your honest to God opinions, would you say that the worse thing to come out of japan's component giant, Shimano is their "rapid rise" derailleur (AKA Crapid rise, Rapid Demise, etc.) or their "Biopace" chain rings??

Mechanics at our shop have quarreled over this topic for eons, and now we want others to chime in!

Both are actually good designs that never gained mass market appeal.

To those who say that Biopace rings are akin to oval rings needs to do some studying up.

http://www.nexternal.com/icycles/images/m760sti.jpg

Worst thing out of Japan. Ever.

I always liked the old Suntour front d's with their high normal position... I hate brifters for the aforementioned "break them and you're screwed" sentiment, and one might add any integrated shifter and brake that Shimano has offered because you know the shifter will wear out long before the brake and as a whole... it costs so much more to replace.

Personally I feel that integrated shift/brake levers are worse than Biopace or RapidRise.

Once the shifter wears out the whole unit has to be replaced. If the brake leverage doesn't match, the fix is ugly and kludgey. The same is true for a broken brake lever. Ya gotta keep 'em separated!

Edit: Looks like Sixty and I agree. ;)

Personally I feel that integrated shift/brake levers are worse than Biopace or RapidRise.

Once the shifter wears out the whole unit has to be replaced. If the brake leverage doesn't match, the fix is ugly and kludgey. The same is true for a broken brake lever. Ya gotta keep 'em separated!

Edit: Looks like Sixty and I agree. ;)

You're right. Lets go back to bar end shifters and downtube shifters. ;)

You're right. Lets go back to bar end shifters and downtube shifters. ;)

Back ?

Personally I feel that integrated shift/brake levers are worse than Biopace or RapidRise.

Once the shifter wears out the whole unit has to be replaced. If the brake leverage doesn't match, the fix is ugly and kludgey. The same is true for a broken brake lever. Ya gotta keep 'em separated!

Edit: Looks like Sixty and I agree. ;)

And we're even right this time.

You're right. Lets go back to bar end shifters and downtube shifters. ;)

Meh, I like trigger shifters. As long as they aren't integrated with the lever, I'm fine with them.

Due to seeing how costly and how often brifters have to be replaced, I set my road bike up with barend shifters. They work beautifully. :thumb:

http://www.nexternal.com/icycles/images/m760sti.jpg

Worst thing out of Japan. Ever.

Dec. 7 1941

Recent stuff
Dual control MTB levers, Rapid rise, The new XTR Titantium/carbon middle chainring, Dura Ace 7900

Older stuff
Front Freewheel System/Positron, biopace, really a lot of things that were only produced for a year or two

What was so bad about Positron?

Was it that with the freewheel in the bottom bracket, if the chain got caught you couldn't coast and had to listen to the horrific noise your drivetrain made as it self destructed? :D

To be fair to Shimano, Sachs tried that once too.

how about that piano wire shift system that you can't obtain anymore. (referring to positron)

"Oh...you have a Positron drivetrain. Have I told you about the sale we're having on new bikes?" :D

What about the small-pitch chain/drivetrain system. Microdrive, or something? Not even sure it was Shimano anymore.

jim

What about the small-pitch chain/drivetrain system. Microdrive, or something? Not even sure it was Shimano anymore.

jim

Yep... that was Shimano but Shelbroco offered an even better and more compact system than Shimano with their patented nanodrive.

Nanodrive (http://sheldonbrown.com/nanodrive/index.html)

What about the small-pitch chain/drivetrain system. Microdrive, or something? Not even sure it was Shimano anymore.

jim
Do you mean Sheldon's Nanodrive (http://www.sheldonbrown.com/nanodrive/index.html)? :D

Microdrive wasn't such a bad idea. By downsizing the drivetrain tooth count, you retained the same gear ratioss and saved some weight, albeit at the cost of some durability. It's still around but no longer considered innovative so there's no fancy marketing term for it.

EDIT: I need to quit tuning in to Sixty's brain wavelength.

WP - There seems to be a signal delay on your end too.

I blame it on the drugs you've been taking.

I blame it on the drugs you've been taking.

No... that messes up the mechanics in Poland as sometimes at night, when I am really stoned, the signal skips and they pick it up.

Not knowing much English they get really baffled.

http://www.nexternal.com/icycles/images/m760sti.jpg


shifter/brake pods get my vote. Nazzty!

I'm riding Biopace on one of my rigs, prefer round rings, but the Bio ain't THAT bad, if you ask me.
I've had very little personal experience with rapid rise, but I can't imagine hating it more than the pods.

+ 1 to brifters

9 Speed. Oh then 10 Speed. Oh then 11 Speed. Chronological Order. Retro grouch out :)

I can't agree with the hate on brifters. My last bike had friction shifters on the bars and I frigging hated it.

I like brifters in concept, but I'm not a fan of Shimano STI. Who got the bright idea of making the break lever such that I might brake while shifting is beyond me.

If I've got the cash I'd swap out the FD/RD, brakes and the brifters for a SRAM rival in an instant.

I could never feel the difference in Biopace rings and I've had a few bikes with them. Funny thing though, they seem to work with singlespeeds and fixies. Don't know why they work, but Sheldon said they would, so I kept them when converting to one of each.

Sticking to the topic: between the two, Biopace rings are the greater offender. While the underlying concept appeared valid (evening out the power stroke), the rings were simply not designed to work with a variety of different body geometries; applying the same standardised eccentricity to a 6'2" vs. a 5'0" rider does not make sense. In order for the concept to work, the chainring's eccentricity would have to be customised to the individual cyclist's length of femur, tibia, etc. Some cyclists still like them, but the rings do not encourage learning a good spin that is required for efficient general cycling. Biopace probably hurt more knees than it claimed to save. Thank ye gawds it's not being made any more. My 2 cents.

Oh, easily the early eight-speed hubs. They had high drag, needed tools to disconnect and had bizarre 22%-16%-14%-18%-22%-16%-14% gear steps. These issues weren't problems for the owners for very long, though, since the hubs commited hari-kiri by injesting water and dirt.

Shimano has released eleven different versions of eight speed hubs during the product's not-so-long life and has fixed or at least improved everything but the funky gear ratios.

tcs

Attention all Bike Mechanics!

In your honest to God opinions, would you say that the worse thing to come out of japan's component giant, Shimano is their "rapid rise" derailleur (AKA Crapid rise, Rapid Demise, etc.) or their "Biopace" chain rings??

Mechanics at our shop have quarreled over this topic for eons, and now we want others to chime in!

While Rapid Fail is bad and Biopace was goofy, nothing holds a candle to u-brakes. Dumber than either. Dumber than a box of hammers. Dumber than my cousin LeRoy:rolleyes: Who in their right mind would take a brake and mount it down were all of the slop of the world collects? Dumb. Dumb. Dumb.

http://images.google.com/url?source=imgres&ct=img&q=http://www.firstflightbikes.com/specs/wicked87ubrk.jpg&usg=AFQjCNHk_W2wyHIMYt0hFeEdGVnpRBoZSQ

My winter bike...

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l278/kdl2525/Bikes/WinterBuild001.jpg

Slow winter rides with no pedals?
: )

I was in the bike business from 1978 through 1984. I saw a few funny things come through then. SunTour had front derailleurs that upshifted when you reduced cable tension. They weren't terrible, but they didn't have any real advantage except that if you were new to gears on a bicycle, the directions of the shifters were less confusing.


The SunTour high normal front derailer was actually a pretty good idea. In lots of mountain bike situations, you end up needing to shift into a low gear in a high torque situation. If the return spring on a low normal (regular) front derailer is weak...and many of them were very weak back in the dark ages:rolleyes:...the FD can't force the derailer cage over far enough to derail the chain on to the lowest front chain ring. You don't make the shift, the chain just makes a lot of clattering noises and you usually ended up bogged down at the bottom of a hill.

Shifting from low gears to high gears, however, is seldom a high torque situation. A very light spring can move the derailer and chain up to the high gears with ease. Think of how easy it is to shift the rear derailer to higher gears and you'll see what I mean. Even shifting the front isn't that hard.

The SunTour high normal derailer allowed you use the cable, which develops much more force, to drag the chain into low gears...just like the rear derailer does. It worked quite well and allowed for forced low gear bailouts. That's one of the reasons that I think that Rapid Rise is stupid. You've traded the advantage of using the cable force for the hard shifts to depending on the return spring. You don't need the cable to drag the chain off the cogs in the cassette to higher gears...those shifts are easy.

...nothing holds a candle to u-brakes.

That gets my vote. Argh! The inevitable mud compaction. Perhaps the product was Shimano's way of telling us not to use our rear brake too much.

They quietly changed the DA 10 speed rear hubs to ones with outboard bearings cause the ones with the aluminum freehub and inboard bearings was a very bad idea.
Campy still uses that construction for their hubs. Probably because Shimano had design patents on their method of bolting on the freehub body and using outboard bearings. Campy also uses an aluminum freehub body.

Yep... that was Shimano but Shelbroco offered an even better and more compact system than Shimano with their patented nanodrive.

Nanodrive (http://sheldonbrown.com/nanodrive/index.html)

Nope. Microdrive was Suntour. And it didn't involve anything more then making the bolt circle diameter of the crank set smaller. Not even that small by today's standards for mountain bikes - 110/74mm vs 104/64mm. And it allowed you to use a 20 tooth inner ring instead of a 24 as was standard at that point.

Chains, chainrings and cassettes still used the same pitch as all derailered bikes.

That gets my vote. Argh! The inevitable mud compaction. Perhaps the product was Shimano's way of telling us not to use our rear brake too much.

GT mounted them on the seat stays and they worked a lot better than chainstay mounting. A brake booster solves any flex problems. They are kind of a pain to set up though.

I like Biopace but have never tried Rapid Rise.