Road Cycling - Test rode a Trek tonight

It had a mixture of Shimano components. Ultegra rear der. and cranks, Tiagra front der, brakes and shifters. The LBS told me that if I got a bike with all "105" I wouldn't know the difference between that and Ultegra or Dura Ace. He said the difference is only really noticible if you are racing or weighing the parts. Is that true? Or is he full of crap?

btw The Trek he had me ride was too small and did not ride nearly as good as my '73 Voyageur. I went home and rode 10 miles just to feel better.

my new dura ace shifts snappier and smoother than any other product i have ever used.

but realistly, he is probably right.

g'day,

if you're not planning to race it,'105' is as good as you will ever need (probably far better actually). For the Recreational rider, the biggest difference between 105, Ultegra & DA...will be in your hip pocket!,

cheers,

Hitchy

I have seen Tiagra/105 mixes and 105/Ultegra mixes, but I have never seen a new bike with a 2 step difference in the componentry. Sounds a little fishy to me.

Agreed. 105 is an excellent value in componentry. I've got a Bianchi Volpe with full 105 and love it as both cyclist and economist.

What bike did you test ride with these components?

With Ultegra being overhauled for '05, the price of the current stuff is only slightly more than 105. Perfomance has it all on-sale right now and when you add in the 20% off coupon, it's hard to pass up.

But that probably won't help you unless you are building your own bike. I have Ultegra on 2 bikes and 105 on the other and I swear the 105 is better than one of the Ultegras and not as good as the other as far as crispness of shifting.

55/Rad

Well shifting quality is a bit subjective. Shimano 105 performs well and is pretty durable and cheaper to replace if something fails. By pretty durable, I mean that it takes about 30,000+ to wear stuff out (assuming maintenance of course) and not very many people put that kind of miles on the bike.

The major difference is the weight. DuraAce and Ultegra are lighter then 105 but the weight difference is not really enough to matter to a recreational rider or even a racer unless there is a lot of climbing on the course.

I consider 105 to be the sweet spot. 105 is pretty affordable. Above that you pay quite a bit for, what to me, is a very modest gain (mostly weight savings).

If you have the money and it is burning a hole in your pocket and you like the notion of riding "the best", by all means go with Dura Ace or even Campy Record. If none of those conditions apply, stick with 105.

Sounds like a consensus. I guess I need to go back and test ride something that is all 105. The model I rode was either a 2100 or an 1800. I looked at so many, I don't remember for sure.

Full 105 bikes are as high as my lbs goes. Then again they just started carrying non-mtb/bmx/beach cruiser stuff this spring. What the new guy(old road racer) said was shimono stuff uses trickle down, basicaly each time dura-ace gets better ultegera gets a shot of last years dura-ace, 105 gets last years ultegra tech, and so on. Thus leading one(and lots of salesmen) to conclude that sora is several year old dura ace technology, I've heard all this somewhere before.

My scope on this is that while sora may well use the basic design of old D.A. (for reduced engineering costs and a hint of marketing) but the materials, craftsmanship, and quality control are horrible relative to D.A. and thus you would be better off using NOS D.A. from 10 years ago than new Sora.

I think based on how most companies do business(not just bike related) is that between Sora and tiagra you step out of obsolete tech and gain some quality control, tiagra and 105 gains are mostly quality of construction, while the 105-ultegra step seems to be materials and some quality, and the ultegra-DA step would be mostly design and materials.

I'm going to chime in with a different opinion (as it relates to triple shifting). I notice a big difference between the shifting on a DA triple and 105 triple. The DA is much more precise, and I had no trouble with the trim in the front der. to allow wider use of the rear gears. On the 105 triple, I had a horrible time getting the trim to work, and kept shifting gears when I didn't want to. That said, I know when I test-rode the 105 that the shop guys had not taken the pains to align the der, and "tune" the rig, so my different experience may just be the difference in riding a "tuned" bike and an untuned bike.

BTW, I put my volece campy group on my commuter bike in the same league as the DA triple.

The only component that I have noticed a difference on is the front dearailluer. Have a Bianchi Giro with full 105...added a Trek with Ultegra and noticed a big difference in the front shift. Changed the Giro F/D to Ultegra and in my view "is" a noticeable difference.

I was very unimpressed with the shifting of the Tiagra front der. The Ultegra rear was smooth most of the time, but I think the shifters (Tiagra) weren't doing a great job. When I was in a gear, it was solid, no "in-betweens".

i didn't really get to pay attention to the 105 component set, but between tiagra and ultegra, i noticed a big difference. the ultegra shifted much smoother...as for quickness, i wasn't paying attention :|

melloboy

[QUOTE=kerk]It had a mixture of Shimano components. Ultegra rear der. and cranks, Tiagra front der, brakes and shifters. The LBS told me that if I got a bike with all "105" I wouldn't know the difference between that and Ultegra or Dura Ace. He said the difference is only really noticible if you are racing or weighing the parts. Is that true? Or is he full of crap?

btw The Trek he had me ride was too small and did not ride nearly as good as my '73 Voyageur. I went home and rode 10 miles just to feel better.[/QUOTE

The whole conversation on this thread went into a totally different direction than what the poster wanted to know. There are more serious issues here than "105 or Dura Ace" comparisons. Regardless to what group he chooses, he may never feel comfortable on a traditional racer coming from an older steel bike.

If he's looking for the comfort and upright position of a 73 Voyageur, he won't get if from Trek that's for sure. (maybe the Trek Touring bike) I think he's looking for a touring bike and not a racer which may not be a bad idea. It may also be the LBS is trying to unload a smaller bike on a newbe.

I think he should put the spec sheet aside and start test riding touring bikes.

[QUOTE=kerk]It had a mixture of Shimano components. Ultegra rear der. and cranks, Tiagra front der, brakes and shifters. The LBS told me that if I got a bike with all "105" I wouldn't know the difference between that and Ultegra or Dura Ace. He said the difference is only really noticible if you are racing or weighing the parts. Is that true? Or is he full of crap?

btw The Trek he had me ride was too small and did not ride nearly as good as my '73 Voyageur. I went home and rode 10 miles just to feel better.[/QUOTE

snippage

If he's looking for the comfort and upright position of a 73 Voyageur, he won't get if from Trek that's for sure. (maybe the Trek Touring bike) I think he's looking for a touring bike and not a racer which may not be a bad idea. It may also be the LBS is trying to unload a smaller bike on a newbe.

I think he should put the spec sheet aside and start test riding touring bikes.

Or maybe take a look at a Specialized Sequoia

I'm going to chime in with a different opinion (as it relates to triple shifting). I notice a big difference between the shifting on a DA triple and 105 triple. The DA is much more precise, and I had no trouble with the trim in the front der. to allow wider use of the rear gears. On the 105 triple, I had a horrible time getting the trim to work, and kept shifting gears when I didn't want to. That said, I know when I test-rode the 105 that the shop guys had not taken the pains to align the der, and "tune" the rig, so my different experience may just be the difference in riding a "tuned" bike and an untuned bike.

BTW, I put my volece campy group on my commuter bike in the same league as the DA triple.

The Mirage Triple on my Orbea is smooth...although I can't get used to having a "granny" ring since I use it only on the very steepest stuff...I can see myself spending $500 to go back to a double soon...but the Campy Mirage triple does quite well, IMHO.

The component mix you describe sounds like what Trek puts on the 1500. A friend of mine has a 1500 and loves it. It might be worth your while to test ride one that fits you.

I'll go back and give them another shot for sure. They have Sequoias there also. I'll give one a try.


BUT....Tonight I went to another LBS and tested a K2 Mach 2.0. Much nicer than the Trek. The Mach 3.0 is all 105 so I am going to think about that one. He said he would make me a deal. (Like I never heard that one before!) I told him that I was going to go to several places and test several brands, but boy that K2 rode nice.

Trek 2100 has that component mix. I like that frame. It has 105 shifters, Tiagra fd, Ultegra rd. What should a bike shop charge to swap out the Tiagra fd for an 105 or Ultegra fd on a new purchase? Should I ask this in the wrench forum?