Software would be the solution wouldn't it?!?!? Maybe a shifter that uses BT to pair with the cyclists smart phone. The shifter could use an app that accesses the GPS function. That way the smart phone processors [along with the app] could calculate the proper gear... based on the terrain. Or... if a pre-selected route was programed the app could make gear selections based on advancing conditions.

This might be handy as the app could detect a cyclist slowing while approaching [say] an intersection and shift appropriately. Then later... maybe shift just as the cyclist begins a hill climb. Then changing the shift plan as the smart phones gyro/position sensor detects that the cyclist has stood up to pedal.

Yeah..... cycling just like in the old days when I was a child.

Wait a minute. You're saying driving is fun? That is truly bizarre. Not since the day I got my license at 15.

Just a new way to make more money off bikers who want the latest and newest. I'm manually shifting while saving cash and weight.

In motorized vehicles I'll take an auto every time if given a choice. Not that I've not spent plenty of time in my life with standard transmissions and having to shift gears, talk on the phone and eat all at the same time in traffic and sometimes on bad roads. On a bike well by the time I can afford Di2 auto shifting will likely be standard.

I think the first safety bicycle was very near perfection. Although there has been technological changes in recent years... I don't think the basic road bike has seen any improvements since indexed shifters.

"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage - to move in the opposite direction." (Attributed to E. F. Schumacher or A. Einstein)

If I were king...
In a race, there would be nothing electronic. No bike computer, no HR monitor, not electronic shifting, no radios - nothing.
But...I would use every piece of technology for training.

I'm on my automatic bicycle now

I've never raced myself and am way too old to start. Unless maybe enough old fools got together for a race. So... I have no business telling racers how they should race.

I don't need a (stinkin) "charger" to get my bicycle ready... and I don't need broadband or BT to go for a ride ether. And I like it that way too! But, I really like technology and I do take a smart phone with me when I ride. I've already decided that this season was the last one of paper-base mileage/data records. Next year I switch to an app. Maybe that's how it all starts.

I love cycling enough that I am confident cycling will seemingly (at least to me) be here forever. But it does appear that bicycles are a mature technology. Typically... I think... that means that something else will be found that will take the bikes place. Thank God bicycles weren't replaced by Segway's (as some thought they might be). But something else will come along.

Am I the only person who watch the video!

Post of the objections raised were addressed there. Many assumptions voiced in this thread were put to rest by the reviewer.

Also, his conclusion was that it might best be used bu riders doing a TT or Tri. Also, it is only SOFTWARE, there is not hardware.

Agree with you bob. Many of the comments were ridiculous. Just software + Power Meter which makes it a good reason to get a PM. :)
To me, the advent of auto shifting as an 'option' to manual shifting on Di2 bikes really sways the balance of demand for Di2 moving forward. Especially in a couple of years after they work the bugs out. For casual riding, just set it in automatic and when getting busy, switch to manual mode. Just software and if PM comes along for the ride, all the better. In fact, the only reason I would purchase Di2 would be for autoshifting capability.

There is the benefit of being able to text and shift at the same time.

And, there are a lot of car models that come only with automatic tranny. Fortunately for me my Focus ST comes with a manual....actually ONLY available with manual. :)

I watched it before my first post. The implication from the video is it is for racing. My objection is it automates a human skill. It removes one more thing that differentiates rider 1 from rider 2 - like the other things I'd get rid of. As each area where human skill is needed, is eliminated, you get closer to just competing with an erg machine and declaring the winner the one that puts out the most power.

For rec riding, it may be fine, ride what you want - even if it has a motor as long as it is quiet and doesn't smell.

That's just silly.

Nobody's built an auto-cornering device yet. There's still a lot of skill to bike racing.

I can't see the UCI allowing autoshift in pro races. For all the different techs that have and haven't been accepted, and 3:1 ratios and weight limits that have to be followed, a simple "gear shifting must be controlled by the rider, and only by the rider" would make the distinction and hold back the autos.

As as to the benefits/ negatives of it, the difference between car and bike autoshift must surely be that in a car, you're relying on incidental feedback; the engine sounds like it's racing a bit, the car feels like it's pulling a bit hard, the rev counter is low/high. When cycling, you have automatic biological feedback right from your legs and lungs to your brain. There's still some skill involved in interpreting those signals, but it's an inherent part of "learning the contours of the landscape," to paraphrase the quote at the front of the 41.

Yeah Doge, believe you will get a lot of opposition to what you just wrote. Also, it is not clearly established that autoshifting will be faster for racing. In fact, it might possibly be the opposite. Perhaps in 5 years with more iterations of algorithm refinement and sensor improvement. Even then it is unknown. I actually think its really the underlying reason to get electric shifting on a bike. Otherwise, I am happy with mechanical groupsets.
Btw, I am a car guy and worked in design in the industry. A Porsche with paddle shifters is a blast to drive. I grew up driving sticks and have owned more sticks than autos. Having both manual and auto mode is the way to go.

I wasn't talking about those, like yourself, who simply are not attracted to the idea, that's completely fine; I was more referring to the majority of posts that raised concerned that were clearly dealt with by the person introducing the product and by the reviewer.

Personally, I really don't know what I think about the idea. I may he open to it, as long as I could override it at will, but it would take some convincing before I uploaded the software to my electronic shifting.

I live in a hilly area and have to shift a lot. Seems to me I would be in "override" mode the entire time. When I want to shift due to a change in terrain, I want to shift NOW, not 20 feet ago, or 20 feet further.

Bob, you really need to get off the fence. ;)

Or if I decide a want to stretch a little and stand up to pound a gear over that hill, just as the "brain" in my drive train shifts into the little ring. yee ha

If you don't think that couldn't be baked into an algorithm to prevent shifting to the small ring, you haven't thought it through. All that would be required is a seat weight sensor. :)

It's just linear shifting to get smaller jumps in ratio. Imagine you're in the middle ring and you get to the biggest cassette cog, if you downshift again it would go to the smallest chainring and simultaneously move 2-3 upshift in the rear to give you the exact next sequential ratio, all with one shifter. No left shifter. Pretty great concept.

As opinionated as I am I really am on the fence on this one. I am in the process of building my first Di2 bike so that may eventually sway me one way or the other but, for now, I remain thoroughly undecided.

Watch the video - not gonna happen.