intence

Trying to justify going with Red. About $150 more than if I go with Rival. I'll also use a Red Crank (just because I already have it, and got a good deal on it).

Everything else will be Rival/Force.

Is it worth $150 extra for the Red shifters, or is Rival close enough?

I'd appreciate feedback from anyone who's used both extensively ... Thanks!

kimconyc

Depends on how significant $150 is for you financially.

If it's not that big of a deal, go with the Red shifters.

I have bikes with both Red and 09 Rival shifters, however, and they are both good. If you don't have both to compare side-by-side, you would not notice the lack of Zero Loss on the rear with the Rival shifters.

FWIW, I like the looks of the Rival shifters and calipers better than Red.

achoo

IBTFCDP

(chain drop post)

TrojanHorse

I believe Force was updated this year with zero loss, which would explain the tiny price difference between Force & Red brifters. Frankly, it looks like the Rival levers have zeroloss too, so I'm not sure why you would spend $150 more.

I went with Red shifters when I upgraded my bike this year because... well, why not. The rest of my components are Force. I've been pretty pleased with the way they work too although i wish there was a trim position on the small chainring. Oh well.

From SRAM:

"Built around SRAM’s DoubleTap® technology, SRAM Rival controls offer a performance advantage that other competition level shifters can’t touch. With Zero Loss shifting front gears are engaged immediately. And, like SRAM Red, SRAM Rival has its front trim position on the big ring. Added cable routing options allows for both brake and shifter cables to run along either side of the handlebar. SRAM Rival also incorporates the popular reach adjust feature, which SRAM invented, and allows riders to customize their brake and shift levers. Now every rider has a choice on positioning their DoubleTap® levers."

kimconyc

Your beliefs mislead you.

Only Red has ZL on the rear.

MDcatV

there is a cyclingnews review of sram force 2010 that concluded red was no functional improvement over force except for weight savings.

kimconyc

Hollow cassette, ceramic pulleys, ceramic BB, ZL shifting for the rear. Diminishing returns but returns nonetheless.

By cyclingnews' logic, there would also also not be any functional improvement of 7900 over 6700 besides weight savings.

intence

+1, this is what I gathered as well. I currently ride Rival on my other bike, so if Red is significantly better, I may have the upgrade the old bike as well

Seriously though, the differences I could find were as follows:

Red: 280g, Zero Loss on Front and Rear
Force (2010): 303g, Zero Loss on Front
Rival (2009+): 330g Zero Loss on Front

Unless I find Force for only a small premium over Rival, my main decision is whether to go Red or Rival. It's $150 more, but without having ridden Red, it's hard to justify whether it's forth the premium (50% more than Rival, is it 50% better). If I don't spend the money on the Red shifters, it will probably go to better wheels. FD/RD will be Force or Rival, Brakes are Rival, Cranks are Red.

So, go Rival and put the $150 towards the wheels, or go Red simply because it's the "Top Shelf" group?

kleinboogie

I have the 2010 Red and the Rival 2010 seems very close, less the bling. Functionally you'd be justified saving the money and going Rival. My guess is the 2011 Red will have some other new marketing thingie so just get what you need. GL

sqharaway

Check out this review from testrider: https://www.testrider.com/fly.aspx?la...xid=81&cid=292

kimconyc

AFAIK, the only thing coming out is SRAM Red LTE (A.K.A. SRAM Yellow). It's hard to improve upon a perfected system.

SRAM seems to be pushing APEX since it sort of builds upon the XX Mtn groupset but in road form (basically can push triple gears in a double) at a very affordable price (this is a total homerun for OEM LBS distribution channel).

kleinboogie

That was a great review, I watched a few days ago. Ben rocks. He answers the support questions, as does Andy over at Competitive Cyclists.

Psimet2001 

Only Red has zero loss on the rear. Force has it on the front. Zero loss is a feature I wish I had. in that light i would recommend spending the extra for the Red shifters if the extr spend is not an issue for you financially.

That said i have raced on Rival shifters for 2 seasons and i haven't missed a beat.

Functionally all groups are the same. they all have gears and they shift. The only group with a functional difference IMHO would be Shimano's Di2. So....pointless to discuss.

Red overall has many differences - the chainrings are a different material, the crank is different, the RD has a full carbon cage - Force is 1 plate carbon, RD has ceramic bearings in the pulleys (yay....), BB - most off the Shel Red groups would be spec'd with the Black box BB which is ceramic, Cassette - 1090 single piece over the Rival Force 1070. I won't discuss the chains because all of their 10spd chains suck IMHO.

AngryScientist 

if you can afford it just do it. i believe you should get the best equipment you can afford, so you never look back, or feel the need to "upgrade"

kimconyc

You are now banned from the 41.

Yaniel

No way, he fits right in. He said afford, not need.

guadzilla

What exactly is "zero loss"? Pardon my ignorance

AngryScientist 

if only i followed my own advice...

kimconyc

Basically, requires less of a "throw" to shift gears--meaning, you don't have to push in the lever as much on the right SRAM Red shifter compared to SRAM Rival/Force to either shift up or down gears.

It's hard to tell the differences in sensitivity unless you have a Red equipped bike and a Rival/Force side-by-side.

Psimet2001 

I'd like to add to that a little -

It is the elimination of the spooling or lever take-up when starting to shift. With Rival and Force you have to push the lever over a distance before it begins to engage - or pull cable. With Red/zero-loss the cable moves the second you touch the lever. The shifts are therefore much quicker, smoother and do require less effort. There is no "slop" in the lever.

As for noticing - I can and have easily noticed on every set I have ever touched or used. The lack of zero-loss Contributes to Rival and Force feeling more "chunky clunky".

Those with Rival and Force....go out to your bike and lightly push on the lever until it stops (starts to "shift). look at the distance it travels. All of that is gone with zeroloss.

sd790

Just throwing this into the mix. Yesterday, my 2009 Rival shifter broke for the SECOND time in a year. Something sheared off inside the shifter that left me riding home in my 50/12. I am beginning to question their durability, although SRAM is covering it under warrantee with no problem. Would Red be any better?

guadzilla

Thanks - that is sort of what I was guessing (and it explains the specifics of why Rival front shifting is so absolutely amazing!).

Rob - I'll try out the distance thingie you mentioned. Given how little throw there is in rear shifting for Rival, I dont imagine there is a huge difference in going to zero loss - but I that "chunky clunky" shift feeling. Maybe Red is in my future, when I do my next bike upgrade (in a few years from now!).

kimconyc

I have over 30,000 miles across 3 SRAM equipped bikes (2 SRAM Red and 1 SRAM Rival) and have had zero functional problems and normal, aesthetic wear and tear.

What kind of shifter cables are you running by chance? Are they 1.2mm diameter or 1.1mm?

umd

I have a little more miles (maybe 40k?) between 3 sets of components (2x Red, 1 original Force). About 10k miles in, something broke in my rear Force shifter, it would still shift but the lever would not return on its own. No problems with my Red shifters, but I've killed 2 Red RDs. One detonated and set pieces of the cage flying into the wheel. The one broke the spring that returns the cage to the high gear.

intence

How many miles on it. I just crashed this weekend, taking even more big chunks of material off the top of my Rival shifters. They still shift fine, 2nd hard crash, shifters are beat up, but are still working beautifully.