[ Usenet FAQs | Search | Web FAQs | Documents | RFC Index ]
This is the second posting of the summary of STI/Ergo experience. The summary was modified to include more on STI durability and also the range of shifting avaliable from each system. As before, I am open to any comments or inputs. lars THE CASE FOR COMBINED SHIFTERS AND BRAKES. Shifters that are easily accessible from either the brakehoods or the "drop" position are an advantage when sprinting or climbing because the rider is not forced to commit to a single gear or loose power / cadence by sitting down to reach the downtube shifters. They also make it much easier to respond to an unexpected attack. At first the tendency is to shift more than is necessary. This tendency levels out with experience. There is also an early tendency to do most shifting from the bakehoods and the actuators seem to be difficult to reach from the drop position. This discomfort goes away after a few hundred miles of use (hey, how many times have I reached for the downtube on my MTB or thumbshifters on my road bike???). All experienced riders expressed pleasure with the ability to shift while the hands were in any position, at a moments notice. The disadvantages are extra weight, added weight on the handlebars (feels strange at first) and expense. Lack of a friction mode was listed as a disadvantage by a rider who had tried out STI on someone elses bike but does not have Ergo or STI. It was not noted as a problem by riders with extended Ergo / STI experience. A comparison of the weight of Record/Ergo components and the weight of the Record components they would replace reveals that the total weight difference is in the 2 to 4 ounce range (quite a spread - I came up with 2 oz from various catalogs, Colorado Cyclist operator quoted 4 oz of the top of his head). The weight difference for STI seems to be in the same range. The change probably seems to be more because weight is shifted from the downtube to the handlebars. There was some concern from riders who had not used either system regarding the placement of the actuating buttons and levers for Ergo and STI and their affect on hand positions. Riders with experience have not had a problem with the placement of the actuators although one rider stated that the STI brakehoods are more comfortable. ADVANTAGES OF EACH SYSTEM. The Sachs/Ergo system was mentioned as a separate system. In fact (according to publications) it is manufactured By Campagnolo for Sachs and is identical to the Campagnolo system with the exception of spacing of the cogs on the freewheel/cassette. With the Ergo system, all cables can be routed under the handlebar tape while the STI system does not route the derailleur cables under the tape. Those that voiced a preference liked the clean look of the Ergo system. Both Ergo and STI seem to be fairly durable when crashed. Experience of riders who have crashed with either system is that the housings may be scratch and ground down but the system still works. The internal mechanismsof both systems are well protected in a crash. Both Ergo and STI allow a downshift of about 3 cogs at a time. This capability is very handy for shifting to lower gears in a corner to be ready to attack as you come out of the corner or when caught by surprise at a stop light. Ergo also allows a full upshift from the largest to the smallest cog in a single motion while STI requires an upshift of one cog at a time. Riders voiced their satisfaction with both systems. While some would push one system over the other, these opinions were equally split.
Send corrections/additions to the FAQ Maintainer:
Last Update May 13 2007 @ 00:21 AM