Cyclists blame "utterly ridiculous bike prices" for brands' ongoing struggles, after Giant's sales slashed again; Visma–Lease a Bike's cursed 2024 continues; Devastated Arsenal fan turns to... Lance Armstrong; Bargain hunting + more on the live blog

You want SRAM, Shimano and Campagnolo to all use the same electronic signals? Why? It's not like their mechanical shifters are compatible, and furthermore, the hydraulic brake systems are different.

KDee wrote:

You want SRAM, Shimano and Campagnolo to all use the same electronic signals? Why? It's not like their mechanical shifters are compatible, and furthermore, the hydraulic brake systems are different.

I think that is a very good point, but there really is no good reason why they couldn't make the systems compatible.

Almost every ANT+ or Bluetooth compatible sensor is compatible with every other receiving unit. You can use a Garmin radar sensor on a Wahoo head unit for instance. SRAM AXS shifters are bluetooth at least for the sensor part of it and compatible with most head units.

All it takes is for one of the manufacturers to publish their protocol as an open standard, but it doesn't suit their business model so everything is proprietary. Hardly surprising, but still dissapointing.

It's a software thing.  WIth mechanical anything it's difficult to get them to interoperate becase you need to have the same physical dimensions and gear/pull ratios.  WIth electronics, if they all used the same protocol e.g. Send 32 to go up one gear, send 33 to go down a gear, send 44 to go to 4th cog, 45 to fifth cog etc. it wouldn't matter who's shifter was on the bike or who's derailleur.

 I'm stuck with SRAM on one of my bikes.  I love the hydraulic brakes but the mechanical shifting is sh*t (I'll never buy SRAM again).  If I could change just the rear derailleur for a Shimano one I would but as it is mechanical, I have to change the levers. 

Mr Hoopdriver wrote:

It's a software thing.  WIth mechanical anything it's difficult to get them to interoperate becase you need to have the same physical dimensions and gear/pull ratios.  WIth electronics, if they all used the same protocol e.g. Send 32 to go up one gear, send 33 to go down a gear, send 44 to go to 4th cog, 45 to fifth cog etc. it wouldn't matter who's shifter was on the bike or who's derailleur.

 I'm stuck with SRAM on one of my bikes.  I love the hydraulic brakes but the mechanical shifting is sh*t (I'll never buy SRAM again).  If I could change just the rear derailleur for a Shimano one I would but as it is mechanical, I have to change the levers. 

Unfortunately, Shimano don't make it easy to work with their Di2 wire protocols.

Here's an interesting piece about reverse engineering it: https://hackaday.com/2019/03/26/reverse-engineering-shimano-bike-electronics/

The github repository doesn't seem to exist anymore - I don't know if it's just been moved or if Shimano got a bit arsey about it.

hawkinspeter wrote:

The github repository doesn't seem to exist anymore - I don't know if it's just been moved or if Shimano got a bit arsey about it.

Surely not.

The annoying thing to me is that as soon as 'electronic' is added, it adds massively to the price and makes things more proprietary.  I'm struggling to find one, but nearly every rear derailleur uses the same fitting, parallelogram and jockey wheel design style whether that is electronic or cable so why does a servo motor and control electronics add so much ?   It's just as bad with the newer Chinese manufacturers.  Their electronic systems are still costed at what I would consider a premium price over their mechanical version.

Mr Hoopdriver wrote:

Surely not.

The annoying thing to me is that as soon as 'electronic' is added, it adds massively to the price and makes things more proprietary.  I'm struggling to find one, but nearly every rear derailleur uses the same fitting, parallelogram and jockey wheel design style whether that is electronic or cable so why does a servo motor and control electronics add so much ?   It's just as bad with the newer Chinese manufacturers.  Their electronic systems are still costed at what I would consider a premium price over their mechanical version.

The price of any item is not always a relationship with its direct input costs (materials, labour, distribution, etc). The R&D costs must be recovered too, amortised over sales. The development cost of a mechanical derailleur will be far less, spread over many more sales. Compare the higher development cost of electronic shifting systems, with less units sold to recover. 

Mr Hoopdriver wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

The github repository doesn't seem to exist anymore - I don't know if it's just been moved or if Shimano got a bit arsey about it.

Surely not.

The annoying thing to me is that as soon as 'electronic' is added, it adds massively to the price and makes things more proprietary.  I'm struggling to find one, but nearly every rear derailleur uses the same fitting, parallelogram and jockey wheel design style whether that is electronic or cable so why does a servo motor and control electronics add so much ?   It's just as bad with the newer Chinese manufacturers.  Their electronic systems are still costed at what I would consider a premium price over their mechanical version.

It's because they can get away with it.

The advantage to them of going proprietary is that they can patent it and then prevent others from making compatible products by threatening to sue them for infringement.

Wow, do you think everything should cost exactly what you want it to cost?

There are definitely compatible derailers from China. That said, if you're having trouble with your rear derailleur, its not tuned or you just a bent hanger.

A mess of their own making; and one has no sympathy for them. Far too much centrered on the performance/ race sector of the market - when the majority of cyclists aren't. What works for Tadej, Tom or Demi is a fat lot of use to Great Auntie Doris riding to the village hall or the local shops.

It's good to see a few You Tube channels eschewing the modern high tech, and embracing what they have.....Friction shifters for example.

SRAM Apex is outstanding for the money, as is Tiagra. What are you talking about?

OnYerBike wrote:

Similarly, the Di2 version of the 2x12 105 groupset (R7170) is £750 more than the mechanical version. Once the "everyman" groupset, the RRP for a (disc brake, Di2) 105 groupset is now over £1,700 - so that's almost £2k any you don't even have a bike!

 

I don't think anyone, particularly manufacturers, are paying RRP for groupsets. Manufacturers will be buying via the OEM channel, and in that 105 Di2 example, will be paying well under £1000 for it. Considering this example, https://www.boardmanbikes.com/gb_en/products/2398-slr-8.9-di2-disc-carbo... at £2800 RRP (anyone with BC or CUK membership can get 8% off this), take off VAT of £467, leaving £2333 net price for the bike. There'll be a margin for the retailer, a margin for the manufacturer, so leaving much less than £2000 for the total cost of making the bike, frameset, wheels & tyres, cockpit, labour, taxes, etc  That doesn't work if the groupset is £1700.

That's certainly true (even as a member of the general public you can easily find it for sale at well below RRP). But I think the point still stands in general. In fact I think your example of Boardman bikes demonstrates the point perfectly.

The very fact that even a 105-equipped Boardman costs £2.8k is the point - Boardman bikes are known for being the sensible, value-for-money option, so that is a "cheap" option - but £2.8k isn't cheap! 

The (rim brake, mechanical 105) SLR 8.9 is £1,200 (the same further discounts would apply) - but that model looks obsolete when compared to the disc brake Di2 version you have linked (the rim brake model hasn't actually been updated since 2021).

OnYerBike wrote:

The (rim brake, mechanical 105) SLR 8.9 is £1,200 (the same further discounts would apply) - but that model looks obsolete when compared to the disc brake Di2 version you have linked (the rim brake model hasn't actually been updated since 2021).

That's a very good point, although there are some cost compromises on that model, such FSA chainset, Tektro brakes, etc. I don't even really know how Boardman can make that bike for the money, it's remarkable value. That opens up the other point to make when all the naysayers are whining about how it's impossible to buy a decent non-BSO bike for a reasonable sum of money these days ("oh the humanity, it's madness", on road.cc twice weekly), is that for all the £12k+ superbikes seen, there's a decent choice of good bikes available from Boardman, Decathlon and others. 

mark1a wrote:

when all the naysayers are whining about how it's impossible to buy a decent non-BSO bike for a reasonable sum of money these days ("oh the humanity, it's madness", on road.cc twice weekly) 

Sure, it is in fact possible to buy something decent. But I would guess that a lot of people on this site have already got bikes of a certain level, and so are really complaining about the cost should they need / want to replace / upgrade them. For example, 10 years ago I bought a Canyon with SRAM Force. Despite 10 years of career (and, to a lesser extent, salary) progress, replacing that with something equivalent would feel less affordable to me now than the original did then. Or, as I remarked in a recent review - new SRAM Apex isn't much less than I paid for Force 10 years ago... and that came with a Canyon attached.    

Yeah. Glad I opted out of all this many years ago. The very traditional niche components I use are expensive too, but they last, and will hopefully be made a long time yet.

I bought a new hydraulic disc brake bike for under £500 only two months ago.

You can buy a set of Shimano MTB style brake leavers and callipers (front and rear) for £50. I know this because I upgraded my folding bike to Shimano Hydraulic.

The excuse of Hydro Disks being the reason for expensive bikes is a load of rubbish. Let's be generous and allow the manufacturers £50 uplift in prices between rim and disk brakes.

And that bike is almost certainly better than what £2.2k could buy you 10 years ago as well!

Just because the top end moves up doesn't mean the reasonably priced stuff is getting worse. 

How big are you?!! I'm 6 ft 6 and fit nicely on a TCR XL.

Simpler for me Giant sell their bikes in LBSs that are either too far away to travel to, or in ones I won't touch with a bargepole.

Consequently I buy other branded bikes

Now this I can understand. I have 2 Giant dealers within 5km of home. Both sell a mix of city bikes and race bikes. The nearest one I wouldn't get a race bike from. I just don't think they know anything about them. The other one, I went to try a TCR (can't remember which model, a little under 5000 euros), dude in the shop wouldn't even put pedals on it to let me take it for a spin. I could literally just hold it and look at it. Pathetic.