Originally Posted by
bocobiking
A couple of things:
1. The comments are all ignoring aliasfox's second objection to electronic shifting, the “ conceptual” objection. For me, that's the big one. My love for the bike is grounded in it being the “simple machine,” one that I can work on with no black boxes.
2. A thought experiment concerning ease of shifting and lack of maintenance: Everyone seems to love electronic shifting because it works flawlessly and never requires any maintenance; it’s easy. What if an automatic transmission were available for bikes, one that shifted perfectly for the terrain the way auto transmissions do. And this transmission never required user maintenance, just a black box that required no user knowledge or skill or effort. Such an invention would take away the arduous tasks of pushing buttons and having to think about what gear to be in.
Assume that weight were not an issue. Would such an invention be a bridge too far for you, or would you be eager to adopt it? And what would be your reasoning?
I think the “conceptual” objection is largely ignored because the vast majority of riders are pretty comfortable with electronic devices and in some ways electronic shifting actually simplifies your bike. Brifters are certainly less complicated without the intricate cable pull mechanicals. The “Big One” for me is zero cable routing or maintenance/tuning. It cleans up the bike nicely (especially when fully wireless).
It should be obvious why you wouldn’t really want automatic shifting on a bike. Do I want to spin up this next climb or shall I get out of the saddle and mash over it on the big ring? Even on the flat I often adjust my cadence to suit my mood. So what I do want is the ability to manually choose gears as quickly and smoothly as possible. For me the best current solution is SRAM AXS with its very intuitive paddle shift. Objecting to it on a purely “conceptual” basis means you have to stick with clumsy mechanical shifters and cables. No thanks.