Originally Posted by
spectastic
yea I know they're made from more expensive alloy. And I will interject and say that cost/benefit is a matter of opinion. I've never ridden ultegra or 105, but something tells me I'm not going to notice the difference, unless I'm doing time trials or riding cross country. I don't really care about smooth shifting or 3 pound differences. If the bike can get from point A to point B and allow me to enjoy the ride, then it's good enough for me.
What I would like to know more is how do these more expensive alloys compare with lower end components. As far as I know, durability and light weight are the only factors weighing in.
Go ride with a high end groupset then come back and say it wasn't nicer. Over the last 10 years having ridden with all levels but Tiagra on the road, Dura Ace is the best, followed in the order they descent. Having a bike fitted with Shimano 2200 will be fine if not racing or doing any distance, the better ergonomics, stopping power, crisper shifting etc is noticeable under heavy use, and the weight can make a difference on hills.
The same is true for the MTB groupsets; with both road and MTB, innovations are normally introduced at the high end, and trickle down over the next few years, last year XTR introduced the shadow+ RD (clutch) which is now down to SLX level, but was well worth the additional cost of the RD over using any other, the same with the current brakes on both the road and MTB systems, they were introduced at 7900 / XTR level respectively, and have dropped down the ranges over the following years..
For durability, at Dura Ace / XTR level, have found these to be no less durable than any other, they may cost more initially, but when you come to upgrade, they also hold their value better than the lower end parts, which can off set the initial cost.