PeteHski

So am I trolling here or just pushing back at your completely pointless lecture about the definition of the word "obsolete" (cherry picking one of many definitions as if it was an absolute) and the continued use of DT friction shifters by C&V enthusiasts, which I wasn't even arguing with? Maybe you should stick to C&V if they are more civilised.

L134 

Originally Posted by @PeteHski
I haven’t used a friction shifter since the early 1980s when I bought my first bike with indexed gears. Can’t say I ever felt the need to go back.

And this is a key point in evaluating your comments. I believe what makes indexed shifting so wonderful is all the R&D that went into modern chains and cassettes that eliminate the need to overshift and trim in order to complete a good, quick shift. The indexed shifter itself is relatively old school - it pulls cable (excepting for those who like to electrify their bikes). Friction shifters pull cable too and, with modern chains and cassettes, shift wonderfully. I use friction not because it is C&V but because it works so wonderfully, is so durable, and I find it much more flexible and versatile than indexed (yes, I can construct a custom hodgepodge of components that, in fact, are compatible). Indexing is the root source of incompatibility. You make your arguments based upon decades old experiences which are obsolete and irrelevant. I have used indexed and don't like it for various reasons, that it is not C&V is not one of them.

Atlas Shrugged

Only if you repeat the thoughts of the collective if any premise is questioned or exaggeration disputed one is quickly scolded out of of the room. One man's Troll is another's, independent thinker.

PeteHski

It’s not my fault that DT friction shifters were superseded by indexed shifters decades ago. That’s just how it is. I would suggest you are a very niche user of friction shifting with a modern drivetrain.

Just for the record I didn’t have a problem with friction shifting back in the day. It just disappeared as the tech moved on.

SurferRosa

Words have literal meanings. Apparently, those who continue to misuse the same word constantly either fail to understand this or are simply trolling.

I "generally" do. But as a fallback measure, so I needn't make this same mistake again, I'm updating my ignore list with you included. Please do the same for me. tia!

PeteHski

I see what you did there.

SurferRosa

Hey, don't worry, AS, I later thought of you as one particular outlier when I wrote that ... which must really warm your heart as our own C&V contrarian. Ayn would be so proud.

gecho

Friction probably worked better back when freewheels only had 5 cogs and the spacing was wider. I had to friction shift with 9 speed once when my index ring broke and found it more difficult to land on a gear properly. When I could hear the rear derailleur it would let me know if I wasn't centered on the cog. But whenever there was enough traffic noise where I couldn't hear the derailleur, it was much more difficult it ended up skipping more.

PeteHski

Most words actually have several meanings. You just cherry picked one of them to support your little pointless rant. Another interpretation was even presented by genejockey which you conveniently ignored.

Germany_chris

I friction shifted 11speed for a while it's not harder and in many ways its better because if the all the ramps and such on modern gear but you need to re-train your hand.

Friction shifting is still obsolete

SurferRosa

Actually, far less overshift/trim is required with 7-speeds (ime).

squirtdad

I use friction with 6 speed on my Cino/eroica bike. it is fun to go back too. between the gearing and friction shift it is a bit of a different style of riding and I shift way less. (also have friction on my errang bike, but rarely shift

11 speed indexed manual brifters for my "good" bike (ultergra r8000) love it. shift more often, but over all super....

have not used electronic....

tomato coupe

You keep harping about the definition of "obsolete", but you conveniently edited out part of the definition in your post. That's disingenuous, at best.

SurferRosa

Disagree. I think it's a very strict term that doesn't apply here.

If you paid attention to the very poor, trolling-type metaphors used earlier by others, like the steam engine and a typewriter, they're trying very hard to frame this in the same way. It's not. And that should be obvious to the non-troll.

What knowledgeable person would say a 1969 Porsche 911 is "obsolete"? It might be waaaay "out of date," but that's a fantastic piece of machinery that most car enthusiasts would love to drive.

Maelochs

Just about everyone who uses or has used both systems (and I am using a sample which extends beyond BF) says that because of its ease and precision, they shift more with indexed and particularly with indexed brifters over down-tube shifters. The upside is that the rider is more often in a gear better suited to the intersection of the terrain, the rider's ability, fatigue level, and weather conditions ... in other words, the rider can ride more efficiently by shifting more frequently, and when shifting cannot be done well while standing, needs a reach and often a weight shift, and needs to be done with a bit of precision (and like almost all the older riders here, i got very good at friction shifting---and indexed is still more precise and reliable) riders tend not to extract the maximum mechanical advantage from their machinery.

This is not something I have heard debated ... i have Seen it debated here, but here people debate just to debate. In actual discussion, where no one is going to pretend that the other person is just a couple quotes from posts, nobody denies that brifters and indexing make shifting more convenient. This does no militate that people use only brifters, or that people cannot use bar-end or down-tube (or crotch-crushing) friction shifters and get the same pleasure from a ride .... and performance comparisons are meaningless unless one is willing to do back-to-back multiple tests with matched riders and no one cares enough ......

But nothing is "better" except what a person thinks is better .... to me "better" is convenient, accurate shifting ... unless I am in my car, when I choose the stick-shift and clutch.

Who cares?

genejockey 

Well, you may THINK that, but given that the people who make the dictionaries don't agree, what you think is not really relevant.

Steam locomotives were made obsolete within the memory of living man, and typewriters were still the predominant way of producing documents at about the same time friction levers became obsolete. Typewriters are still being used and still being produced. You can still buy new ones and they still work, but they've been superceded so they are no longer current, hence, obsolete.

(raises hand) Carburetors. Points and condenser ignition. Air cooled. Skinny tires.

And yet it is of a style or kind no longer current. And your opinion notwithstanding, that means it's obsolete.

Germany_chris

There are use cases where friction whether it be down tube or barcon absolutely fits the bill, we all have different requirements, want's and needs I have a set of 11sp Diacomp shifters from VO and when Russ's 12sp friction/index shifters hit VO I'll buy them too I really don't want the friction shift option to go away because it allows a level of flexibility that's not available anywhere else.

The issue at this point in the thread is semantic, there are enough people out there like me that want friction shifters to shift modern cassettes that a business case has been made to make new versions and improve them but in the end that doesn't mean they're not obsolete tech and that is the sticking point.

Maelochs

Oh, and SuerferRosa? You might think that all the words add up and the answer is unavoidable but ... the rest of us are not stupid.Your exceedingly narrow definition of "obsolete" (right t down to editing the definition to meet your needs) really hurts your credibility.

The debate over the Meaning of the word "Obsolete" is ridiculous---we can all look it up, and editing definitions to get a specific range of meaning which suits a specific argument is dishonest. Ask any of the major bike parts producers, and they will tell you friction shifting is obsolete---using a valid definition of the word. Talk to a bunch of tourers and they will say otherwise ... using a different, and equally valid, definition of the word. (Though I will say, as a person who has done some touring,indexed shifting is fine with me for touring, too.)

In any case .... this is a matter of people saying "My favorite color is better than yours." And on top of that, you are telling us that bluish green and reddish blue are not blue ..... It's silly.

if you want General Cycling to be as "pure" as you claim C&V is (though another C&V user disputes that was well ... and your response supports his objections ) then don't come here picking silly fights and dishonestly, at that .... and then further, don't tell all the GC users how stupid and uncouth they are compared to C&V posters.

Sorry, but that is pretty stupid and uncouth ...

And don't take any of this seriously.

genejockey 

Another good analogy is the mechanical wristwatch. It is an obsolete technology, because there are newer technologies that do the primary job of a watch - keeping and displaying the time accurately - much better. But people, including me, prefer them for reasons having nothing to do with superior performance. To be sure, even after quartz movements made mechanical movements obsolete, a number of companies have continued to refine the technology, so that the best mechanical watches of today are even more accurate. But a $20 Casio is still superior as a timepiece. Their performance is good enough to rely on them to keep you on time for appointments, etc, but they are obsolete, viewed strictly in terms of their primary function.

79pmooney

I thought trolling with bamboo poles and wood boats was OK here. Maybe a little off topic.

genejockey 

See first line of signature, below.

Germany_chris

I wear a mechanical watch every day it tickles all the right places in my brain, just like surfers ‘69 Porsche.

in response to yesterday’s sub debate




Here’s my brand new 2023 Surly Disc Trucker it has all the things that the C&V types hate except it’s down tube shift bosses.




Here’s my late ‘80’s Bruce Gordon Rock ‘n Road it doesn’t have down tube shift bosses.

So I guess the down tube shift bosses debate has changed.

genejockey 

Me too! Today's is a watch that was already obsolete the day it was introduced in 1951 - the Elgin Automatic. It's a bumper automatic that came out after full rotor automatics had replaced bumpers.

SurferRosa

Just like steam engines, typewriters are not "obsolete" in the same way as down tube shifters. This should be obvious to anyone with a well rounded, comprehensive view,. And yet, you don't point this out. You want to lump everything that you think is "obsolete" in the same bucket. I don't know why you want to do this, to be so confined in your language and brush with such a meaningless, broad stroke. Maybe that's just the way some people treat internet forums such as this one.

​​​

njkayaker

This is dumb. It's an overly narrow definition.

If anything exists, it's almost certainly going to be used by somebody (even if it's only one somebody)..