Camilo

Six Channels? What luxury: We had four: 2,4,5 and 11. 3 networks and 1 public TV, mostly "educational" (TV Spanish anyone?)

To the OP: it's easy to understand. This was the technology available, the alternatives (stem or bar end) weren't as useful (stem - very bad!) or as efficient (bar end - slightly less positive shifting because of cable length and friction). Downtube were the height of racing technology back then. They aren't now.

This whole discussion reeks of old stodgy people disparaging new technology. It's so cliche. To put it in perspective, I was born in the early 50s: you do the math.

Stem shifters back in the day, and today are the absolute worst. At any reasonable riding position - hoods, drops and even tops, you have to sit up, take a hand off the bars and to shift. Totally kludgey. DT and bar end shifters are inteded to be used while in the cycling position, leaning forward.

I like downtube friction shifters - the do the job, are simple, adaptable, lightweight and inexpensive.

I like bar end friction shifters for the same reasons, and the difference in performance is almost indistinguishable to me.

I like downtube and bar end indexed shifters better because they really do work better in getting the gear change "right now" (no trimming and less skill needed), but the problem of course is that they're not universal like friction shifters. I grew up with friction shifters, but even with decent skill, it's damn hard to shift 9 speed and above cassettes cleanly and efficiently without indexing. So whether you think it's a good thing or bad thing, indexing is almost essential for the higher speed cassettes.

If any of the above were the only technology available today, I'd be content and ride my bike as fast and as much as I do not. If friction were the only option, I'd probably just stay with 8 speed cassettes, and no big deal (I have a bike with 8 speed and it does everything I need it to... but I prefer 9 or 10).

Integrated brake/shifters: I have them, use them, and love them. They are definitely an improvement in the technology, not simply progress made in order to sell more expensive stuff. They are a great refinement of making shifting easy, efficient and safer (hands on the bars at all times). Definite drawbacks of weight, expense, complexity, totally non-universal, etc. But there's no doubt in my mind that they work very very well compared to the older stuff - you can have smaller jumps between shifts and can more easily shift more often to make riding more pleasant, if not more efficient.

But my main point is it is so funny that people think that technology ends/peaks years ago. I read somewhere that (I'm remembering poorly, I know):

Technology (or music or whatever) that existed before I was about 15 is old fashioned
Technology (or music or whatever) that existed when I was 15-40 is normal and the best and showed real and valid progress
Technology (or music or whatever) that came on the scene after I turned 40 is either awful, unnecessary or both.

My cars, bikes, skis and other things I use a lot are absolutely work better, have better features, and as much or more fun than the stuff I grew up with. Music? Let's just say if you don't like Hip Hop these days, what did you think of the Osmond Brothers or Cowsills back then? The peak of pop music?

bulldog1935

wrong and won't be reading again - it really sucks to editorialize about others on the forum

stick to the topic and your opinions on that, not your opinions on them

you're always right about your own opinions

you're always wrong about how others think

fietsbob

Many attempts at making brainless auto shifting trasmission for bicycles have come and gone in failure


A current scheme that seems to work is the NuVinci CVR 360.. I does not shift For you

But it is simple to use, and the gear ratios are continuous . you just twist the grip till the effort feels right.

RichSPK

I like downtube shifters. I can live with brifters, but I don't really care for them.

It's no big deal to take a hand off the bars for an instant, and my hand falls easily to the downtube shifters.

Aesthetically, brifters look big, bulky, and ungainly to me. Stem shifters add a lot of clutter where I want to mount things like a computer and headlight.

It won't make or break a deal for me, but my ideal bike has downtube shifters (and friction shifting; I have no need for index shifting).

Hiro11

Chiming in from the depths of page 8 with my opinions:
1. FD shifting is much better with friction downtube shifters. Much easier to infinitely trim.
2. RD shifting is very slightly better with indexed brifter setups. I may shift a bit more with the newer setups but it's close. Friction RD was not as hard to use as some people make it out to be.
3. Brifters are a RELATIVE pain to setup and maintain when compared to DT shifters. Dealing with housing, friction and bar tape. Periodically de-gunking the brifter. Etc. However, modern brifters are very reliable so this is not a major concern to me.
4. DT + dedicated brake levers is a much more elegant solution than brifters, at least to me. The oldschool welded BB cable guides, one piece of housing, tighten the wingnut to increase friction shifter setup is more aesthetically and mechanically pleasing to me than a modern Rube Goldberg form-over-function internal cable/brifter setup.
5. Wireless electronic setups like eTap are the first true step forward from DT shifters. Once that technology becomes mature, bulletproof and cheaper, that's the way I'm going to go.

genec

I hate designs made by legal committees... they often eschew efficiency and good engineering. Take for instance the recent gas can designs, that are supposedly safe and spill free... they are a royal PITA to use, and spill gas every time.

I too have DT shifters on my old steel frame bike... and used them quite well for decades. What are these "brifters" folks are speaking of... some new fangled technology?

bulldog1935

it's like index shifting. Some people literally can't ride a bike without it and fall apart when it needs adjustment.
For me, 8 speeds and lower, I'd rather friction shift (on my Campy 8sp it's so good, even it feels mindless).
My daughter has an indexing 9sp and I have one, as well, and we both like them.
No question, index shifting is mindless. I know some who would rather friction shift 10. They can knock their lights out. That's just preferences.

v8powerage

I think there are golden eras of everything like there was golden era of cinema, rock and roll, ask anybody who's into audio and they'll tell you when there was golden era of amplifiers and speakers, so same can be true for bikes.

While fan of downtube shifters I'm not too keen on fraction when it comes to the rear derailleur I'm always scared it will upshift itself in least desirable moment, however front one is very good to be friction because of possibility of 0.0001 mm trim which comes in handy if your chainring isn't perfectly straight for instance..

Rowan

There is so much BS here about cable stretch. I challenge those who say cables stretch in normal use on a bike to prove it. They can't because the forces on even a front derailleur shifter are not significant enough to cause the cable itself to stretch, especially modern stainless steel cables.

What *does* happen is that the entire cable system, including the ferrules and outers, BB guide and the rollers within the shifters need to be bedded in. That's where the idea that pre-delivery "cable stretch" came from in service shops. Yep, run the shifters up and down a few times, and pull the brake levers hard a few times. Adjust. But that's not because the inner cable has stretched. Geez, if I can cause the rear derailleur on my bikes to change up to bigger cogs with my *little* finger on the cable, how the hell is that going to cause stretch of the inner cable?

Gears go out of adjustment during use? Sure... as the groves wear in the plastic sheath used within the outers, and on the BB guide, and the barrels within the shifters, as well as flattening of the cable.

I've also read where people who should know better think that cables do stretch after installing in old outers. Of course, they give the impression of stretching, but what those people forget is that by inserting the new cable in the old housing, the grooves have been disturbed, the new cable won't settle into the grooves until after they have been used a few times, and end up being slack.

himespau 

This was always my impression as well, but I'll admit to never measuring a cable before and after riding with it for 1000 or so miles.

Bandera

Did you miss:

In the assembly of new machines in the C&V period whether equipped w/ down tube, stem or barcon controls we stressed the cables on the assembly stand to "stretch" them before delivering them to the customer, as was necessary. It was SOP, and required in my shops whether on a Twinn-Stick Varsity or a Raleigh Pro "back when": Then Good to Go.

Call it what you care to: Bedding In, Stretch or Elongation a properly assembled machine back when had it's derail and brake cables properly stressed and re-adjusted before delivery to the customer in which case it was Good to Go and not before.

Oddly enough we didn't have the flat wound SS modern cables required for current indexed shifting which is intolerant of imprecision in cable tension like this new set:

" Jagwire Cables: Cables are pre-stretched"
Hmmm....They are What? Impossible? Cables don't "stretch" in 2016.

We had the Huret/Schwinn Approved cables thin and loosely braided, the SunTour bar-con beefier cables routed exotically under the tape in a long casual curve or at best a Campag NR DT front stout cable running w/o casing directly via a metal guide to the derail.

What happens when a loosely braided metal cable is stressed? It compresses/stretches/elongates as the strands compress under load. The longer and more exotically routed the more stuff happens along with the bedding-in of other components.

In the assembly stand after "we stressed the cables" as previously noted there was always Slack in any design, even the NR front w/ the beefiest cable and no housing to compress.
The result after re-adjust as noted: Good to go.

Same w/ brakes.
After the 1st dozen assemblies or so, it's SOP.

BTW: The most critical cable tension on assembly was with SA/AW hubs/shifters when we all learned on 1930's tech. The "wrong" tension on the control cable and the hub wouldn't shift into low, much/much worse the Wrong cable tension would result in a nut-mashing "false neutral" in 1-1.

What happened post assembly was maintenance for the owner to decide on after we got the systems settled-in/stretched/stressed/whatever word you like.

-Bandera

ThermionicScott 

Since this thread, which continues to have legs, has been bumped again...
Y'know, that guy makes it look pretty easy and straightforward. I might run the risk of becoming a Cambio Corsa proselyte if I ever got the chance to try one.

bulldog1935

I would love to have an old Clubman or Pathfiner with the front suicide shifter, but the back would be a bit taxing to learn.

jefnvk

For as much as I actually end up shifting on most MUPs, it'd be a cool piece to add to the C&V collection and to pull out and ride on occasion!

Certainly wouldn't want to tackle many hills on it, though.

Lakerat

Take your hand off the drops of a racing handlebar and let it hang. It will be inches away from a DT shifter. Simple, light, beautiful.


I suppose if you learned to shift a bike with brifters, DT shifters could be a challenge. I don't suffer that affliction since I have ridden DT shifters for 30 years.

v8powerage

Yes same here I learned on donwtube shifters, so for me it's natural. and I just don't understand how can you give up ability to downshift/upshift multiple gears, with old sti you can't downshift more than 1 cog and new ones are generous enough to give you 3 down but that's nothing when you got 11 gears, you'd have to go at least 5 down since gears are tightly spaced, and it's really important cause often I get car cutting me and then braking all of the sudden so have to downshift quickly.. I will ride downtube shifters as long as I ride bike don't care for briefters at all.

Lakerat

I bought a Campy 28 speed bike today, of course with brifters. On the first ride I noticed that the cassette upshift button is designed for used while riding on the hoods. While in the drops reaching up for them is maybe less convenient than downtube shifters.

shelbyfv

Wow, sounds like interesting gearing!! Exactly how is that set up?

Lakerat

27

bulldog1935

because of overlaps, you don't really know that until you do a gear analysis.

My 3x7 cyclotouriste setup, half-steps plus granny up front and wide-7 rear, it has 18 gears

My 2 x 9 wide compact double, you can count out 18 gears, but best way to look at it is two sequential 1 x 7

Stucky

When I was a kid I had an El Cheapo with stem shifters. I think that is what discouraged me from riding in the drops for a long time, because it was very inconvenient to use the stem shifters from the drops. I wasn't till I was in my 20's that I got a bike with DT shifters, and then started acclimating to the drops, because I didn't have to do contortions or change my position to shift. DTs are the best if you want to spend a lot of time in the drops. Brifters are as bad as stem shifters if you (like myself) like to ride on the lowest part of the bars.

Having to scoot my hand forward and up is much more of a pain (and a very unnatural motion) than is just quickly and easily reaching down and flicking the DT lever. DTs are the PERFECT shifters for road bikes. The whole point of a road bike is to be in an aerodynamic position, by riding in the drops. When I was younger I'd spend all of my riding time on the tops or hoods; It was kinda pointless having a drop-bar road bike.