djb

I put this up in touring where I usually post, but realize that I would most likely get more responses here as many of you would have been riding 9 going back and have had years of riding with 10 now.

When I think of the next bike I will buy or build up, I do wonder if any of you have noticed a diff in drivetrain life from 9 to 10. I wonder because more and more 10 spd stuff if pretty standard (Tiagra has been 10 for a few years now) and my feeling is that given the same riding and maintenance by me, 10 is probably not really diff than 9, and I like the idea of getting an extra useful cog in the deal.

It also seems that prices of 10 spd stuff is fairly reasonable also, so if any of you have experience with 10, how has it been compared to 9?

Over the last 25 years or so, I've ridden 7spd, still ride a 8sp and 9sp, and it seems to me that even when comparing 7 to 9, I still get about the same life out of chains, easily 5000km or more.

I realize drivetrain maintenance is the kicker here, and I don't think I'd go 10 for a far flung trip, but even then I wonder about that because mtn bikes come with 10 a lot now so the parts are out there (middle of nowhere Ubekistan would be diff than major cities in N America, Europe or even some of Latin America).

I'm curious to hear how your experiences have been with 10, thanks

Drew Eckhardt 

I run Campagnolo chains, and end up replacing them as they're reaching 1/32" of stretch due to side-plate wear with degraded shifting.

Switched to 10 cogs in 2012 after wearing out a discontinued spring in my shifter. Replaced the last 10 speed chain at 4587 miles. The last 9 speed chain made it to 4866 miles. Both chains spent their entire lives in California with no snow or sand and minimal rain. Cogs seem to last through about 4 chains.

While 10 speed might be shorter lived than 9, it's not enough to matter for me.

gregf83 

There isn't a big difference between 9 and 10 spd. Chains a little narrower and the right shifter has an extra gear. I ride campy but haven't noticed a difference between 9 and 10 spd durability. Availability of 10 is better.

D1andonlyDman

Well, if one is building up an older frame, 9-speed parts are MUCH less expensive on the aftermarket. IMHO, if I were building a bike with a triple, I'd definitely go 9-speed for the difference in parts cost, and the pretty negligible difference in functionality - in particular, good 9-speed triple cranks can be gotten for a steal nowadays (I got a used Campy Record that is being tripleized with new rings (51-39-29), for under $80, and I could have gotten a Shimano Tiagra triple for under $60, or an FSA Tempo triple for under $35. For a double up front, the difference is less dramatic. 9-speed shifters, cassettes, and chains are also noticeably less expensive. Good sealed cartridge square taper bottom brackets are easy to find for under $15, whereas most 10-speed cranks use newer, much more costly BBs.

It's just my anecdotal opinion, but I also think that wider chains front shift more reliably on triples than 10-speed chains do.

In terms of clean used parts, and NOS parts at clearance-level prices, I'd say availability of 9-speed parts are better. I estimate that building a 3x9 bike is costing me $200-300 less than building a 3x10 would have on the same frame with similar quality level parts, with about half of that savings coming from the crank and bottom bracket.

Also, while 9-speed longevity might only be slightly greater than 10-speed, the replacement costs each time for the chain and cassette as well as chainrings, are noticeably lower for 9 than 10 speed. Now that might change once 11 speed fully dominates, but today, it's definitely the case.

Bike Gremlin

For a touring triple I'd go with 3x8. More durable, robust, and cheaper.

D1andonlyDman

Certainly in the U.S., 3x9 is just as cheap, if not cheaper now, as 8-speed parts are getting scarce in the aftermarket, and there's a glut of 9-speed parts. As I said, you can get decent 9-speed triple cranks for great prices presently. Plus, you can run 8-speed chains on 9-speed rigs and it works really well, and gives even more durability than 9 speed chains do. I'm pretty close to this right now, as I am in the process of a 3x9 build on a really nice but inexpensive Schwinn Paramount Series 7 frame I picked up last month, and I recently did the market survey before deciding which way to go with it.

Bike Gremlin

At the same price, I'd still go for 8 speed, over more speeds. More space between sprockets, so less problems in case of bad/dirty cables and housing. Also, 8 speed is easier to shift without index (friction shifters), while 9 and 10 speed is a challenge because of less gap between gears.

gsa103

Shimano 10-speed mountain components are not compatible with 10-speed road components.

djb

Yes I'm aware of the issues, but thanks. Important point though.

Silvercivic27

i use a 10 sp XT mountain cassette on one of my road bikes and it works fine

djb

I have toured with 6, 7,8 and 9. The more cogs the merrier for me, when riding a70lb bike, big jumps between shifts are a right pain in the keester--been there done that, and have embraced happily going up one each time. Riding 9 for five years has had no less durability or functionality issues for me whatsoever, except for enjoying wider spread range and or closer jumps.

And I ain't getting any younger, hence thinking of another cog to play with.
For instance I really like a 9 SPD 12-27, and the 10 SPD 12-30 has the same cogs but with the 30 added on. Use a crank like a 48/36/24 and the ten spd 12-30 would make a nice setup.
Just ideas I have, but really was curious how much less 10 spd chains have lasted for some of you.

djb

D1, your points about 9 are very valid, and I'm still leaning to 9 for this reason. 3,4,500 bucks less on a build could mean a whole lot of traveling expenses in cheaper countries, and I have had excellent life from square taper bb's and lean to them as well because of my experience.

tekhna

Expectations to the contrary, I haven't noticed much, if any, change in longevity from 9 to 10, or even 10 to 11 for that matter.

mrvrsick

Seeing that 5800 is <$400, and 6800 is <$600, I can't see the price difference between 9 and 11 speed being so significant.

I have 9 speed dura ace, been on two frames now, and will most likely go on a third in its life. If I were starting a totally new build, I'd definitely go 11 speed.

djb

Thanks

djb

Thanks but this is really more from a touring angle, so no 11 for now.

D1andonlyDman

The components I'm using on my current 3x9 build are 9-speed mostly Ultegra class, with the exception of 105 brakes, a Tiagra 12-27 cassette, Dura Ace 7700 downtube shifters, and a Campy Record crank that's been tripleized, and those components have cost me, all in, less than $300.

The difference for a double crankset is much less than for a triple crankset, and BTW, Shimano doesn't make a Triple for 11 speed road.

djb

DT shifters, I have to say I have no urge to ride DT anymore. Funnily enough I put my old DT tourer on the trainer this winter and the movements came back pretty fast, I did ride DT a long time though.

D1andonlyDman

Well, they are indexed shifters. Actually, the reason I did that (aside from cost, and they saved me over $60) is that I've found that when I ride Brifters, I rarely change grip positions and my hands get numb after less than an hour of riding, whereas with downtube shifters, I naturally change frequently between a range of different hand positions and don't suffer that problem.

caloso

I don't have any 11-speed experience, but I agree that I haven't noticed any difference between 9 and 10.

djb

My old tourer is from 91 I think, and is indexed 7 speed. Can't say I have your issue with brifters, I just change up all the time no matter the bike, but whatever works for you.