basso91

Perhaps I saw the brief camera close up wrongly, it looked liked Lance had downtube shifters on his
climbing bike in one of the early stages. Did anyone else notice?

khuon

He's traditionally run a left-hand downtube shifter to save weight on the bigger mountain stages.

Laggard

This is the second most asked Lance question.

allgoo19

Off topic:

Lance's bulging legs make Ivan's legs look like 12 year old.

genec

Read somewhere (I think it was on the mechanical forum) else that he likes the downtube shifter for the chainrings for some reason.

allgoo19

On topic:

Will the down tube front derailer shifter become the coolest thing in the cycling world?

Answer:
Not unless Shimano gives it a new name, gives it a cosmetical change, and(most importantly) price it higher than current top of the line shifter, then there will be a lot of "me too" buyers.

jbhowat

I've actually considered building my next bike with one on the left side. Lance isn't the first to do this. It has nothing to do with weight - its cause STI's suck at trimming. How much do you shift between 53/39? Not that often, or at least i don't. Once i drop down to 39, its cause I'm on a climb - I'm gonna be there for a while. The left STI has very little advantage. I like it, but not cause Lance does it. I think Basso does too, i think Pantani even did it.

pseudobrit

Yup.

https://www.campyonly.com/marcobike.html

It especially makes sense from a KIS,S standpoint. Brifters occasionally dump chains onto BBs or crankarms.

khuon

Yeah... especially STI. With a downtube shifter, you can ease the chain onto the small ring if the chain is heavily deflected. With STI, you pop the release and the chain will just fling itself and possibly skate across or overshoot the inner ring only to end up sitting on the BB while you slam yourself into the toptube. Not a fun experience by any measure and certainly not something you'd want to risk in a climbing stage of the TdF.

jbhowat

So here's the question. You have to have a frame with a hole for DT shifters, right? You can't put one on with some kind of adapter or anything? That sucks.

gsteinb

the first I recall doing it was andy hampsten...and you save like 100 grams doing it, as I recall. It most certainly is a weight oriented decision.

Aus_MTB

Im pretty sure you will find that just about all their bikes are already at the race limit. The overwhelming answer to this question generally seems to be the increased ability to trim the chains position

gsteinb

ummm at but not under, right? therefore the 70-100 grams he saves from using a downtube shifter must have some use, no?

collegeskier

Almost all bike companies can, do or have made a bike that is not race legal. In last years Alp D'Huez stage there was a little stir over Lance Mountain TT bike since it was orginally underweight (read PR Stunt). So saving weight is not as important as we make it out to be.

jbhowat

All of those bikes could be well under weight with both STIs, it isn't a weight saving thing - for the millionth time.

msparks

I feel the DT and bar end shifters are better for the chainring becuase of the trimming. If you don't have the hold for DT shifters you can easily add a bar end shifter for the left side. This is my plan when I upgrade bikes. Which will be sometime next year.

Again there is somewhat of a weight savings, but overall I believe it's the ability to fully adjust that front derailer so you get no rubs at all. I only have a double on the front and have trouble a lot of the time. It's a fricken PITA.

toomanybikes

I long ago converted the front derailleur on my CX bike to a bar-end friction shift.

STI shifters are just flat out terrible for Front D's.

The friction shift bar end is a thing of wonder.

collegeskier

You don't even have to go as far as DT now cause you get a friction shifter up near the brake levers, with Kelly Take Offs https://www.kellybike.com/2nd_xtra_takeoff.html.

gmason

But ... can one safely assume that it is an indexed downtube shifter? With a double, trimming should not be a big issue, should it?

collegeskier

Trimming is a bigger issue with a double then with a double as there is a much bigger gap between rings.

jbhowat

it probably isn't indexed. I honestly don't know why anyone would run an indexed DT shifter on the front. Do you really need index for 2 gears? Seriously. Just shift until its on the ring. I'm sure its adjusted so that it can't shift the chain off on either side, but other than that - infinitely variable so he gets no grrrrr, grrrrr, grrrr sound when he's running a high chain cross.

msparks

If you've ever ridden a tri bike they have bar end shifters, anyhow the chainring is not indexed. It's friction. Only the back has the "clicks" for gears.

As far as trimming on the front, I've never ridden a triple, but on my double, you have to micro adjust the front if you are changing gears alot. If you are in the easier gears, say 20-25 it's fully out, but as you go to the harder gears, say 19-12 you have to click the front over just a bit to keep from rubbing. This is on the small chainring only. On the large chainring(53) I never go above gear 21 (I have a 12-25 in the back) So those top 2 I never use in the big chain ring. If I'm in the smallest chainring, I'll use all but the 12 tooth. Hope this helps.

gsteinb

I think you're wrong

collegeskier

Why do you think? Have the points not been made clearly for the non-weight arguement and that weight is not an issue on those bikes anymore.

gsteinb

oh. i know andy hampsten did it for weight....but i couldn't really care less. it's just fun seeing you guys get worked up over such an innane issue.

what fabric is his socks made out of?