Originally Posted by
Jonathandavid
...which would be relevant if I had claimed brifters to be unreliable. They have more parts that can break down, but I don't think someone using them should automatically have reason to worry.
Your post certainly implied that STI is more delicate. My experience with both STI and Shimano Rapid Fire indicate that while these are complicated mechanisms they aren't particularly delicate...nor unreliable.
Originally Posted by
Jonathandavid
Good for you. I don't enjoy working on the cables of my derailleur at a campingsite, and I don't like having to wait for the end of the day for an opportunity to remove the noise from the chain against the cage. A friction shifter is a better choice if you want low maintenance, something many tourers find important.
You don't have 'to wait for the end of the day' to make an adjustment. Adjustments can even be made on the fly. Even if you have to stop, the whole process of tightening a cable takes less than 30 seconds. And it's not like
any shifter...friction or indexed...is going to go out of adjustment constantly. If it does there is a larger issue that should be addressed. I did 1200 miles over a month and never had to make any adjustment to the bike that entire time. I commute regularly (3000 miles per year) which is much more demanding on equipment and I seldom make adjustments to either the front or rear cables for the STI I use for my commuter bike.
Generally speaking, however, if my bike has an issue, I fix it when the issue arises rather than wait until the end of the ride. It's not all that hard to do and usually forestalls problems that can arise from ignoring a problem.
Originally Posted by
Jonathandavid
Having spoken with tourers who did experience it, I think it's possible. So it's a consideration for me.
Indeed. I would not go so far to say "It never happened to me so it's impossible."
Having used STI and barends, the barend shifters are much more likely to be shifted by simply bumping the shifter. The shift the STI while leaning the bike against something, the outer lever has to move a very long way inward to make a shift...we're talking most of an inch...and the inner lever, which requires less movement, is protected by the outer lever. It's just not something that would be easy to accomplish by simply leaning the bike against something.
In either case, shifting when not moving isn't a
problem but more of an annoyance. In the case of the barends it's a much, much, much more common annoyance.
Originally Posted by
Jonathandavid
As I said: brifters are made for racing. If you can buy a cheaper, simpler part that allows more shifting, you're not doing something wrong. Bradley Wiggins has to pay attention to terrain, I prefer to enjoy the terrain.
You are missing the point.
Originally Posted by
Jonathandavid
Yes, falling is dangerous. This is irrelevant to the point that shifting from the brake levers is largely redundant for touring, but an advantage for racing.
Again you are missing the point. Shifting from the hoods of a heavily loaded, slow moving bike while climbing is much easier and much more stable from the hoods than from a barend. The reason that the STI are more important in the Peloton is that shifting doesn't involve taking your hands off the bars so you are less likely to wobble when shifting. When riding on congested roads with heavy traffic passing very close to you, a wobble could have far worse consequences than one in a Peloton. It's not 'irrelevant' for touring and probably more relevant for touring cyclist who isn't in as a controlled situation as racers are.
Originally Posted by
Jonathandavid
There's a bit of cognitive dissonance involved. People like the brifters, they want them on their bikes and the reasons come later, to justify the choice. Nothing wrong with that. Bar end shifters are a more humble choice and offer slightly more benefits, depending what you find important.
The same could be said of barend shifters. People want them because they have an irrational fear that they can't keep the mechanism working. They may offer benefits
to you but for those of us who don't use them, they don't offer the same benefits.
I, personally,didn't selected STI because I wanted them and then found justification for them later. I saw the inherent value in them even for touring over barends from the moment that they were introduced. I didn't choose them because they were high tech or because they were fashionable. I chose them for their utility and for the fact that they are, in my opinion, a superior mechanism over the barends.
If
you find bar ends to be a better choice then, by all means, chose them but don't go all retrogrouchier then thou about them being the 'more humble choice'. That the main reason I responded to your post in the first place. You posted some things about STI that just aren't true and tried to show that the barend is a better product. It's an equivalent product but not necessarily better. It's certainly not better because it is 'humble'.