WickerParkRider

I'm looking to upgrade my all-purpose ride from Sora/Tiagra, and I'm wondering if anyone who haunts the commuting forum has upgraded from 105 to Ultegra/Dura Ace. I've never raced (and never want to)---but I do use my bike for the daily commute, put on anywhere from 30 to 100 recreation miles on weekends, and do some light touring. Given my riding habits, would the difference in cost between 105 and Ultegra/Dura Ace be justified by a noticeable improvement in performance, or are the higher-end groups targeted to gram counters? Thanks in advance...

andypants

I heard from a gut touring the U.S. that the 105 shifters were just as good as the upper levels. I have very little experince with them, but do know there is a significant jump between tiagra and 105.

FidelCastrovich

New 105s versus old Sora/Tiagra will definitely make a difference. First of all, because it's old(your current system) and probably not working as well as it did when you first got it.
Secondly, because the 105s from the same year performed better too.
Lastly, because technology trickles down. Its a widely accepted and common process. 2007's 105 is 2003's DuraAce.

Now, are you going to feel an actual increase, or enhancement in your own performance? Probably not. The system will shift more smoothly, especially under load. The shifts will be shorter and more seamless. The ergonomics keep improving, so you may feel more comfortable and thus more efficient. More in tune, more one-with-the-bike.

If you just feel like it, and have the $$$ - go for it. If you think that it will in some way make you into a better rider or your machine into a better one - it probably won't.

I vote - modern 105 is more than enough for your needs.

late

Are you talking about going to 10 speed, or just being new shifters for your existing
9 speed setup? If you want 10 speed, that is your call. But I'd wait and replace
the current stuff with Ultegra as it wears out.... if you are staying with 9.

WickerParkRider

I'm running a triple up front right now, which I don't really need (can't remember the last time I used the granny ring). I was therefore thinking about going to a double with a 10 speed, but then I heard some folks saying the 10 speeds wear down quickly, so now I'm not sure. I'm open to thoughts on this topic, too.

late

Yeah, I also heard that the 10 speed stuff wears out fast.
There's lots of things to spend money on, maybe something else

JeffS

I'm not sure why, but I'm slightly happier with my 9-speed 105 shifters (two different bikes) than my 9-speed DuraAce shifters.

That said, I'd still have a hard time buying 105 stuff if I were building a bike from scratch - just because I tend to overspend.

robtown

I'm building my first road (touring frame) bike and am using Ultegra 9 spd. I sent back a $60 105 crankset because I found the Ultegra 6500 series for $10 more. Pricepoint has the FD and crankset for the best price. A BIN at Ebay of $42 for the RD-6500. $67 for DuraAce barcon shifters at bikeman [don't know if it includes cables] (got mine $56 shipped used on Ebay) and Nashbar has them with cables for about $77. Ebay also has a BIN on 105 brifters for about $138.
I expect the Ultegra is as good as 105 and hope it's better. I wanted the "new" bike to be different than the current bike that has 105.

UmneyDurak

I don't think it wears out that much faster then 9 speed. Most likely a rumor that was blown out of proportion. It's always "I hear".
Anyway. I had Ultegra ten speed on my bike before it was destroyed. Now I have 105 ten speed. Shifting on Ultegra was definitely more crisper then on 105. That said, unless you are racing you won't really notice the difference, or care about it. For most people 105 is a sweet spot. You still get good performance and spent less money.
Heck I had Tiagra shifters, and 105 nine speed drive train on one of my bikes and it worked just fine.

CommuterRun

I think the higher in price you go in bikes and parts, the less return you get in performance over the next lower shelf item. Middle shelf being just about right for the vast majority of regular cyclists who don't race, and even some who do.

nelson249

For a commuter I can't see anything better than 105 being required. Even for a decent road machine, 105 is perfectly acceptable. I really can't see paying the premium unless you intend to road race seriously.

brunop

consider campy. really. look at centaur. i really do think campy is a better deal. smoother and i think more durable. and it makes for a cleaner cockpit whic makes for easier bag mounts.

nitropowered

I'm going to put in a plug for Campy as well.

But anyway, if you do decide to get Dura Ace, get an ulterga or 105 cassette. The dura ace cassette has Titanium cogs that wear out quicker and are not as tolerant to road grime and dirty chains. Same goes with Campy, get a Chorus or lower cassette instead of getting the Record.

WickerParkRider

Thanks to everyone for the feedback. Sounds like 105 should serve my needs---which is what I figured, but I wanted to check with folks who aren't trying to sell me something before heading to the LBS. Although, the boss did just drop an $800 bonus on me this morning. Hmmm...

I'll probably give Campy a shot at some point, but after a lifetime of riding bottom-end Shimano, I think I'd like to give a better Shimano group a try first.

UmneyDurak

One thing about campy is try it before buying it. When I tried it I didn't really like the feel of shifting, and how you had to shift with your thumbs. I prefer Shimano. I want to say this is totally a personal choice, before people go in to long rants about how great Campy shifting is.

Sawtooth

Both my friend and I have Giant TCR's as our primary road bikes. Mine has Dura Ace. His has 105. His bike is maybe 1 or 2 lbs heavier (most of that in the wheels) than mine but I can tell no difference between shifting quality. His is just as crisp and fast as mine. His 105 is an absolute joy to ride.

I also have a racing buddy who can hang with cat 2s and has 105 on his bike.

I have absolutely no problem recommending 105. Dura Ace may be sexier, but in terms of performance and performance only, it is not worth the extra $$, IMO. It is mostly for bling factor.

Cyclaholic

I recently went to a new Dura-Ace 10sp road bike from an Ultegra 10sp with 1,500 miles on it. No appreciable difference, both are beautiful, high precision groupsets.

I commute on a Surly with Deore LX & XT 9sp components shifted with Dura-Ace barends, with about 15,000 miles on it. It's nowhere near as smooth and precise as the 10sp road groupsets but still 95%+ as good as when I built her.

I can't really comment on 105... not enough riding time.

Daily Commute

I upgraded from an old Tiagra rear derailleur to a new 105, and it made a decent difference. I've had the 105 for a couple years of heavy, all-season commuting, and it's holding up fine. I got it on sale for about $25, so it was definitely worth it. I don't think it would be worth the difference for my non-indexed front derailleur where precision is less important.

For commuting, I like my dura-ace bar end shifters (the only kind?). I would not want the 105's that work on the brake levers because sometimes I have to work them with mittens. Also, if I have shifter problems, I want to be able to replace only my shifters. If I have brake problems, I want to be able to replace only my breaks.

Sammyboy

It's not entirely true that 2007's 105 is 2003's Dura Ace, because they're for different purposes. Some of what's best in DA may trickle down, but DA is built to be super light race gear - things get drilled and lightened and whatever else, and that DOESN'T trickle down. Then again, you may not want it to. What's good for racing isn't always good for commuting.