sykerocker 

OK, the most complex I've owned so far is a 2x9 road bike, and I recently picked up a 3x9 Trek 6500 mountain bike that'll hopefully get broken in before the end of the month. Over the years I've developed something of a philosophy about drivetrains. First off, a triple chainwheel is good, but on a road bike I regard that triple as a (2+1) x whatever. The low chainwheel is invariably 'tree climbing gear' and I'll normally only work on the two larger chainwheels unless I seriously have to climb with a loaded bike. No matter how many cogs on the freewheel. Not sure how the Trek is going to affect this, as I only periodically bounce in and out of mountain biking.

As to the rear: 5 is good, 6 is way better because my freewheels are normally set up splitting that 5 speed middle cog (where I usually ride on the flats using the big chainwheel) into two because it gives me a subtle choice depending on terrain. Seven speed, I guess, is slightly better, but we're starting to venture into diminished results compared to the increased complexity. Eight speed rears is definitely advancing that diminished expectations problem, and nine speeds is the furthest along I ever went because, at that point, I could see absolutely no improvement over eight other than another click on the brifters.

Given that realization with nine (plus we're not talking different, more expensive chains), it should be pretty obvious why I never bothered building up anything with a 10 speed rear. Also, at this point, I wasn't exactly crazy where the looks of modern bicycles were going.

Now, from my experience, the one thing that kept this all workable is that (for Shimano anyway, which is mostly what I ride), at least with a 5 thru 9 (and, from what I understand, 10) speed rear, it's all a matter of pick your rear, pick your indexed shifter/brifter, and you can stick just about any derailleur in between and it'll work. I've always loved Shimano for that interchangeability. My understanding from the 11 speed front (and I've never messed with them, just read a few early reports when they were introduced) is that Shimano has given up that interchangeability in favor of an 80's/90's Campagnolo attitude of "you buy the complete set or else". No thank you. By this point, bicycle technology has reached the point that it no longer makes any sense to me.

Electric shifting? Why? It doesn't make any sense to me (unless you're racing professionally, of course), and, if anything, it goes totally against the inherent simplicity that is a bicycle. Ditto for hydraulic disc brakes. These are bicycles, not motorcycles.

Curmudgeon? Outside of bicycles, I long ago decided that God ordained that automobiles were supposed to have three pedals on the floor, and motorcycles have two levers on the handlebars. I detest automatics.

Finally, what do I ride most of the time? The classic Sturmei-Archer AW equipped British roadster. Which, for distances of 10 miles or under, is the most sufficient bike of all.