Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Bicycle Mechanics Broken bottom bracket? Tacoed wheel? If you're having problems with your bicycle, or just need help fixing a flat, drop in here for the latest on bicycle mechanics & bicycle maintenance.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-25-06, 10:29 AM   #1
gregbr549
gregbr549
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Alabama
Bikes: QR, Trek
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Difference between 9 & 10 sd front derailleur

I have a 105 9 speed front derailleur. I am thinking about changing to Ultegra so my whole bike will be Ultegra. What is the difference between a 9 and 10 speed front derailleur? Can I use a 10 speed on my 9 speed bike? I now have a clamp on. Can I use the existing clamp and buy a braze on?
Thanks for all the help,
Greg
gregbr549 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-06, 12:02 PM   #2
sch
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Mountain Brook. AL
Bikes:
Posts: 3,086
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Previous posters have indicated no problems with such a change. Minor quibbles about cage width and such seem to make little practical difference to those with mid level bikes. You will gain very little out of the change, however as 10 spd offers not much more than panache or bling to the bike. Granted 9spd is so '00, it also is half the price of 10spd equipment on the retail level and is not arguably higher quality, better shifting, significantly lower in weight etc. All that aside it should be a straight forward changeover, bolt on so to speak to swap 10 for 9 spd. There is essentially no difference between 105 and Ultegra front der. 10spd gives you another single step over 9spd for those who can tell the difference in the 17-24mph range. Shimano makes a brazeon to clampon adapter.
sch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-06, 12:06 PM   #3
Sheldon Brown
Gone, but not forgotten
 
Sheldon Brown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Newtonville, Massachusetts
Bikes: See: http://sheldonbrown.org/bicycles
Posts: 2,301
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sch
Previous posters have indicated no problems with such a change. Minor quibbles about cage width and such seem to make little practical difference to those with mid level bikes. You will gain very little out of the change, however as 10 spd offers not much more than panache or bling to the bike. Granted 9spd is so '00, it also is half the price of 10spd equipment on the retail level and is not arguably higher quality, better shifting, significantly lower in weight etc. All that aside it should be a straight forward changeover, bolt on so to speak to swap 10 for 9 spd. There is essentially no difference between 105 and Ultegra front der. 10spd gives you another single step over 9spd for those who can tell the difference in the 17-24mph range. Shimano makes a brazeon to clampon adapter.
Right, assuming it's for a double crank. This would be a foolish waste of money, resulting in no improvement whatsoever.

If it's for a triple crank, the "10-speed" model is intended for a 39 tooth middle, while the "9-speed" model is optimized for a 42 tooth middle. You should choose based on the chainring sizes you use.

Sheldon "Save Your Money" Brown
Sheldon Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-06, 12:29 PM   #4
HillRider 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Bikes: '''96 Litespeed Catalyst, '05 Litespeed Firenze, '06 Litespeed Tuscany, '12 Surly Pacer, All are 3x8,9 or 10. It is hilly around here!
Posts: 29,108
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 174 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheldon Brown
If it's for a triple crank, the "10-speed" model is intended for a 39 tooth middle, while the "9-speed" model is optimized for a 42 tooth middle. You should choose based on the chainring sizes you use.

Sheldon "Save Your Money" Brown
Sheldon, given the different "optimazation" of the two crank types, does it really make any difference in practical terms how they shift?

In the past, I've seen front derailleurs designed for 52T big rings (105, RX-100) used very successfully on cranks with 46T big rings (RSX) so I wonder if the 39T vs 42T "optimazation" really means anything.
HillRider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-06, 01:01 PM   #5
Sheldon Brown
Gone, but not forgotten
 
Sheldon Brown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Newtonville, Massachusetts
Bikes: See: http://sheldonbrown.org/bicycles
Posts: 2,301
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by HillRider
Sheldon, given the different "optimazation" of the two crank types, does it really make any difference in practical terms how they shift?

In the past, I've seen front derailleurs designed for 52T big rings (105, RX-100) used very successfully on cranks with 46T big rings (RSX) so I wonder if the 39T vs 42T "optimazation" really means anything.
Using a front derailer with a big ring smaller than it is designed for doesn't usually cause shifting problems, but does generally increase the need for "trimming" the front derailer as you go back and forth in back.

The issue with triples is actually mainly based on the difference in size between the middle and big rings. My previous message was assuming the usual 52 tooth big ring, so there's a 10 tooth difference (52-42) for the "9-speed" version, and a 13 tooth difference (52-39) for the "10-speed" model.

The "10-speed" has the inner cage plate hanging down lower. This improves the shifting from the granny to the middle ring, because it is closer to the teeth of the middle ring.

If you install a "10-speed" triple front on a setup with a 52-42, you will have to mount it higher than normal to keep the inner cage plate from rubbing on the teeth of the 42. This extra height will cause deterioration in the 42 -> 52 shift.

Sheldon "It Matters" Brown
Code:
+----------------------------------------------------+
|     A little inaccuracy sometimes saves tons of    |
|    explanation.  --H.H.Munro ("Saki")(1870-1916)   |
+----------------------------------------------------+
Sheldon Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-06, 01:08 PM   #6
HillRider 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Bikes: '''96 Litespeed Catalyst, '05 Litespeed Firenze, '06 Litespeed Tuscany, '12 Surly Pacer, All are 3x8,9 or 10. It is hilly around here!
Posts: 29,108
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 174 Post(s)
Sheldon,

Thanks for the explanation. I wasn't sure if the difference was mechanical or marketing, as so much else is.
HillRider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-06, 02:27 PM   #7
gregbr549
gregbr549
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Alabama
Bikes: QR, Trek
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thanks for the help. I have a 53/39 FSA double. I don't want to go to a 10 speed, I just saw some 9 & 10 speed Ultegra derailleurs on ebay and was wondering if a 10 speed would work on mine. which reminds me of another question. It states 130mm on it. What does that mean? What is the difference between a braze on and clamp on? Will a braze on fit on the clamp I have on my 105?
thanks again for all the help,
greg
gregbr549 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-06, 03:56 PM   #8
DMF 
Elitist Troglodyte
 
DMF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Dallas
Bikes: 03 Raleigh Professional (steel)
Posts: 6,924
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
130mm refers to the BCD.

Braze-on uses a mounting tab that is already brazed to the bike frame. Clamp-on has an integral clamp to fasten it to the down tube.

Don't know. Are you using a clamp adapter?

See Sheldon's web site for a discussion of all this.
__________________
Stupidity got us into this mess - why can't it get us out?

- Will Rogers
DMF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-06, 04:59 PM   #9
oldokie
Senior Member
 
oldokie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Oklahoma
Bikes: Bianchi San Remo, Cannondale SR500
Posts: 411
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
What does BCD (bolt circle diameter) have to do with the front derailleur?
oldokie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-06, 05:27 PM   #10
Al1943
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oklahoma
Bikes: Trek 5500, Colnago C-50
Posts: 9,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think you should stay with what you've got but if you're set on buying a new FD you need to replace your clamp-on with a clamp-on having the same tube clamp size.

I would be concerned with running a 10-speed double FD on a 9-speed drivetrain because the 10-speed derailleur is narrower and might require more trimming.

As for triple derailleur incompatibility, what Sheldon says fits with problems described in previous posts from others. Triple derailleurs designed for 52 or 53-39-30 triples don't seem to work well with 42t middle rings. But Shimano 9-speed triple derailleurs designed for a 42t middle ring seem to work fairly well with 39t middles.
My comments here are based mostly on what I've read, not personal experience, except that my wife's 9-speed Ultegra triple derailleur does work well with her 49-39-28 TA rings.

Al
Al1943 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-06, 10:42 PM   #11
Sheldon Brown
Gone, but not forgotten
 
Sheldon Brown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Newtonville, Massachusetts
Bikes: See: http://sheldonbrown.org/bicycles
Posts: 2,301
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al1943
But Shimano 9-speed triple derailleurs designed for a 42t middle ring seem to work fairly well with 39t middles.
My comments here are based mostly on what I've read, not personal experience, except that my wife's 9-speed Ultegra triple derailleur does work well with her 49-39-28 TA rings.
Strictly speaking it isn't the size of the middle ring, but the difference betwixt middle and large rings. Your wife's setup has a 10 tooth difference there, exactly what the "9-speed" model was designed for.

Sheldon "Difference, Not Size" Brown
Sheldon Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-06, 01:53 PM   #12
Al1943
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oklahoma
Bikes: Trek 5500, Colnago C-50
Posts: 9,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheldon Brown
Strictly speaking it isn't the size of the middle ring, but the difference betwixt middle and large rings. Your wife's setup has a 10 tooth difference there, exactly what the "9-speed" model was designed for.

Sheldon "Difference, Not Size" Brown
Yes, thanks for shaking that loose from my foggy memory bank.
Al1943 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-06, 04:13 PM   #13
wmelton
Senior Member
 
wmelton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Elk Grove, CA
Bikes: 2007 Felt F55
Posts: 95
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
If I follow the logic correctly, then a 10-speed FD should also be used with a compact crank (50-34) on a 9-speed drive train, correct?
wmelton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-06, 10:01 PM   #14
Sheldon Brown
Gone, but not forgotten
 
Sheldon Brown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Newtonville, Massachusetts
Bikes: See: http://sheldonbrown.org/bicycles
Posts: 2,301
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by wmelton
If I follow the logic correctly, then a 10-speed FD should also be used with a compact crank (50-34) on a 9-speed drive train, correct?
No, this is a non-issue with doubles.

Sheldon "Doubles Are Easy" Brown
Sheldon Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:10 PM.