Component comments

Scott C said:

Can someone tell me how the derailer (a better grade) will differ from a lesser grade?

Not a lot. Maybe slightly lighter.
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> flcl?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Can someone tell me how the derailer (a better grade) will differ from a lesser grade?

Not a lot. Maybe slightly lighter.
--

Maybe less inherent slop in the pivots, etc.?

Mike

"Scott C" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<eX4Ma.1588$926.192@sccrnsc03>...

Quoted message said:

I'm looking at buying a new bike.. each model seems to have a low end, mid range, and high(er)
end bike, the components being the difference - derailers, wheels, maybe breaks, ... ... and my
question is, does it really make a difference (I ride about 30miles a weekend). I'm specifically
looking at a Specialized Expedition - which comes in a Sport, Deluxe, and SE grade. I rode the
Deluxe and the SE ($100 difference) and personally I did not notice much of a difference, if
any. OK, I'm not a great judge, so do you 'experts' think I'd be better off spending the
additional $100 ?

Can someone tell me how the derailer (a better grade) will differ from a lesser grade? They both
move the chain from sproket to sproket.. and seem to do it effortlessly. On my 20 year old
Specialized bike, that I ride now, it's physical work to change to a lower gear on the rear
derailer - on the new bike I rode, a simple click changed the gears, no effort at all.

Thanks

Scott

The primary difference between the various component groups is weight. The differences in
performance that do exist are fairly subtle. Ramp patterns on cassettes and chainrings get made with
more detail at higher levels, the springs in canti break pivots are made with tighter tolerances to
make centering easier, etc. But the performance differenes are never really critical for
non-competitive riders. Deraileurs especially tend to work very adequately regardless of price
level. What's most important for good shifting is that everything is set up right... even the
smallest mistake/inaccuracy in setting up the cable housings or adjustment screws on a deraileur can
make it perform much worse. Unfortuneatly, many shops don't pay the same amount of attention to
setting up cheaper stuff as they do more expensive stuff, leading to some misperceptions about the
real differences between components of different quality levels. By the same token, the cheaper a
wheel is, the higher the chance of its hub coming from the factory mis-adjusted and undergreased,
the rim being untrue and the spokes untensioned and not stress relieved, etc, and there are plenty
of shops that don't correct these problems consistently and/or adequately. And then there are some
real differences in design and features, like v-brakes with parallel linkage systems. One of the
most important quality difference in mtb components is whether or not the crankset has replacable
chainrings. Cheaper cranksets have the chainrings riveted in place, and so when they wear out you
have to get a new crankset. Personally I would recommend getting something that at least has
replaceable chainrings. Now none of this covers suspension, which are where a lot of the real
differences between modern mtbs are. The status quo is that everyone wants one (or the industry
wants everyone to want one, or whatever) and manufacturers make few real bikes that don't have them,
but the ones they put on cheaper bikes are total [censored] that are pretty much only there to look like a
shock. Although I don't have experience with the specific forks on the bikes you're looking at, the
Expedition range uses SR/"Suntour" forks, which along with RST pretty much define crappy low-end
forks. These have all sorts of serviceability/adjustability/longevity/consistency/functionality
issues and should be avoided - you're better off with a rigid bike.

Scott C said:

I'm looking at buying a new bike.. each model seems to have a low end, mid range, and high(er)
end bike, the components being the difference - derailers, wheels, maybe breaks, ... ... and my
question is, does it really make a difference (I ride about 30miles a weekend). I'm specifically
looking at a Specialized Expedition - which comes in a Sport, Deluxe, and SE grade. I rode the
Deluxe and the SE ($100 difference) and personally I did not notice much of a difference, if
any. OK, I'm not a great judge, so do you 'experts' think I'd be better off spending the
additional $100 ?

I agree with Nate about the fork, unless you're 100% sure you'll only ride it on fairly smooth
surfaces and even then it's a liability due to its weight and maintenance. Better off rigid or
getting a better suspension fork.

The main differences in component groups are weight, strength, and higher degrees of precision. If
you're riding around town, none of those will really matter in the long run and the Sport model
should be acceptable with its Acera components. If you want to ride trails, especially with some
technical features, you'll probably want components that are on the stronger side (Deore, XT; I
think you'd be happier with an entirely different bike if you plan on doing technical riding). That
doesn't mean you can't ride the Sport model off-road; you can, you'll just have more maintenance
issues to deal with over the long term. You'd still have maintenance issues with other component
groups as well.

As for the money, it really depends how much you have to throw around. Nate's advice about
replaceable chainrings is sound. The Acera set-up on the Sport model is serviceable, so it
should suffice.

Quoted message said:

Can someone tell me how the derailer (a better grade) will differ from a lesser grade? They both
move the chain from sproket to sproket.. and seem to do it effortlessly. On my 20 year old
Specialized bike, that I ride now, it's physical work to change to a lower gear on the rear
derailer - on the new bike I rode, a simple click changed the gears, no effort at all.

Weight and strength primarily, precision secondarily. Have you had anyone look at your old bike to
see why it's difficult to shift? I have a bike as old as yours and it shifts flawlessly.

Mike S. mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet said:

David Damerell:

Don't delete attribution lines, please.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Can someone tell me how the derailer (a better grade) will differ from a lesser grade?

Not a lot. Maybe slightly lighter.

Maybe less inherent slop in the pivots, etc.?

Maybe. Which will make about no difference with today's fancy tooth profiles.
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> flcl?

Scott C said:

Thanks Nate and Cyclist101 - great answers for me. I could spend hours picking your guy's brains..
I appreciate the complete answers.

Anytime.

Quoted message said:

I will look in to the difficult shifting.. it does shift correct each time (analog shifter), but
it's very hard to upshift (into a lower gear). Maybe a spring issue (if there is one!)

Are they thumb shifters or twist? Do you know if it's indexed (click) or friction (slides without
clicking; easy to over- or under-shift)?

Sometimes replacing cables and housings make all the difference in the world, especially on older
bikes. The housings can get dry and brittle and cause the cable to stick even if you've sprayed lube
around the ends of the housings. Replacing your shifters, if they're malfunctioning or something, is
also a lot less expensive than a new bike. That is, if you're happy with your bike otherwise.

Thanks Nate and Cyclist101 - great answers for me. I could spend hours picking your guy's brains.. I
appreciate the complete answers.

I will look in to the difficult shifting.. it does shift correct each time (analog shifter), but
it's very hard to upshift (into a lower gear). Maybe a spring issue (if there is one!)

Scott

"cyclist101" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Scott C said:

I'm looking at buying a new bike.. each model seems to have a low end,

mid

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

range, and high(er) end bike, the components being the difference - derailers, wheels, maybe
breaks, ... ... and my question is, does it

really

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

make a difference (I ride about 30miles a weekend). I'm specifically

looking

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

at a Specialized Expedition - which comes in a Sport, Deluxe, and SE

grade.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I rode the Deluxe and the SE ($100 difference) and personally I did not notice much of a
difference, if any. OK, I'm not a great judge, so do

you

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

'experts' think I'd be better off spending the additional $100 ?

I agree with Nate about the fork, unless you're 100% sure you'll only ride it on fairly smooth
surfaces and even then it's a liability due to its weight and maintenance. Better off rigid or
getting a better suspension fork.

The main differences in component groups are weight, strength, and higher degrees of precision. If
you're riding around town, none of those will really matter in the long run and the Sport model
should be acceptable with its Acera components. If you want to ride trails, especially with some
technical features, you'll probably want components that are on the stronger side (Deore, XT; I
think you'd be happier with an entirely different bike if you plan on doing technical riding).
That doesn't mean you can't ride the Sport model off-road; you can, you'll just have more
maintenance issues to deal with over the long term. You'd still have maintenance issues with other
component groups as well.

As for the money, it really depends how much you have to throw around. Nate's advice about
replaceable chainrings is sound. The Acera set-up on the Sport model is serviceable, so it should
suffice.

Quoted message said:

Can someone tell me how the derailer (a better grade) will differ from a lesser grade? They both
move the chain from sproket to sproket.. and

seem to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

do it effortlessly. On my 20 year old Specialized bike, that I ride now, it's physical work to
change to a lower gear on the rear derailer - on

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

new bike I rode, a simple click changed the gears, no effort at all.

Weight and strength primarily, precision secondarily. Have you had anyone look at your old bike to
see why it's difficult to shift? I have a bike as old as yours and it shifts flawlessly.

"cyclist101" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Scott C said:

Thanks Nate and Cyclist101 - great answers for me. I could spend hours picking your guy's
brains.. I appreciate the complete answers.

Anytime.

Quoted message said:

I will look in to the difficult shifting.. it does shift correct each

time

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

(analog shifter), but it's very hard to upshift (into a lower gear).

Maybe a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

spring issue (if there is one!)

Are they thumb shifters or twist? Do you know if it's indexed (click) or friction (slides without
clicking; easy to over- or under-shift)?

Sometimes replacing cables and housings make all the difference in the world, especially on older
bikes. The housings can get dry and brittle and cause the cable to stick even if you've sprayed
lube around the ends of the housings. Replacing your shifters, if they're malfunctioning or
something, is also a lot less expensive than a new bike. That is, if you're happy with your bike
otherwise.

Maintenance? What's that?? I just ride my bike till the wheels don't turn any more then give it to
the LBS and they make it all better...

Seriously, once you start riding older bikes, or off-road, you'd better learn at least the very
basics of bike maintenance: cleaning & lubing in particular. Those two aspects of bike maintenance
will keep your bike happy for a long time.

You don't have to be very mechanically inclined to wipe off the dirt. Or very mechanically inclined
to look for pivots and spray them with Tri-flow, then wipe them off.

Mike

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

David Damerell said:

Don't delete attribution lines, please.

Why waste space and time scrolling past the things when you can go look

at

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

who wrote what on the main thread?

I count four defective assumptions here;
1) Propagation of news articles is universally reliable.
2) All newsreaders are threaded.
3) It is somehow easier to grind back up the thread than to look at the text of the article you
are reading. [with perhaps 3a) Everyone's newsreader has the same interface.]
4) Attribution lines consume a significant amount of space.
--
David Damerell

The attribution lines take up LOTS of space when you start getting into really long threads. Since I
don't want to read the damn things when I'm following a thread, I chop them out when I reply.

Mike

Mike S. <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> wrote: [Vile linewrap corrected - get a real newsreader!]

Quoted message said:

David Damerell:

Quoted message said:

Mike S

Quoted message said:

David Damerell wrote:
>Don't delete attribution lines, please.
Why waste space and time scrolling past the things when you can go look at who wrote what on the
main thread?

I count four defective assumptions here;
1) Propagation of news articles is universally reliable.
2) All newsreaders are threaded.
3) It is somehow easier to grind back up the thread than to look at the text of the article you
are reading. [with perhaps 3a) Everyone's newsreader has the same interface.]
4) Attribution lines consume a significant amount of space.

I notice you have not responded to #1 through #3 here. When do you plan to do so?

Quoted message said:

The attribution lines take up LOTS of space when you start getting into really long threads.

This is not correct if proper quoting procedure is used, which is to trim attribution lines that
have no associated text. Here we have only four attribution lines, which would occupy a mere 1/6 of
the "lowest common denominator" 80x24 terminal.

Quoted message said:

Since I don't want to read the damn things when I'm following a thread, I chop them out
when I reply.

So your posts should conform to your own personal preferences, even if those preferences are based
on defective assumptions, rather than generally accepted standards; since presumably you post for
your own benefit, and not in the hope that anyone else will read it.
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> flcl?

"David Damerell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Mike S. mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet said:

David Damerell:

Don't delete attribution lines, please.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>Can someone tell me how the derailer (a better grade) will differ from a lesser grade?
Not a lot. Maybe slightly lighter.

Maybe less inherent slop in the pivots, etc.?

Maybe. Which will make about no difference with today's fancy tooth profiles.

Actually, I think this is not true. I recently built up a new bike and swapped components around
between 4 bikes in the process. This resulted in a few examples of old derailers with new shifters
and the opposite, new derailers with old shifters. The slop from wear in the old derailers made for
much less precise shifting than the wear in the shifters.

Sometimes the more expensive components are lighter, sometimes more durable. I'm not much of a
weight weenie, but for those components that wear out, the additional service life may be well worth
the extra cost. A lot of low-end components seem designed for light use and probably represent a
poor value for high mileage cyclists. Off the top of my head:

Things that don't wear out for me: Shifters (I don't use STI, obviously, but barcons, grip &
rapidfire), brakes & levers, cranks (yet).

Things that do (other than consumables like tires, pads, chains): Hubs (esp freehub bodies & axles),
bottom brackets, headsets, saddles.

Cheap parts that are more durable: chainrings (steel), chains (at least as durable), cassettes

Cheap parts that are less durable: rear derailers, hubs, pedals

[Vile linewrap corrected - get a real newsreader!] Outlook Express isn't a real reader?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

David Damerell:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>David Damerell wrote:
>>Don't delete attribution lines, please.
>Why waste space and time scrolling past the things when you can go look

at

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>who wrote what on the main thread?
I count four defective assumptions here;
1) Propagation of news articles is universally reliable.
2) All newsreaders are threaded.
3) It is somehow easier to grind back up the thread than to look at the text of the article you
are reading. [with perhaps 3a) Everyone's newsreader has the same interface.]
4) Attribution lines consume a significant amount of space.

I notice you have not responded to #1 through #3 here. When do you plan to do so?

Why bother? You've got a bug up your [censored] about something. I'm not going to change just because some
idiot on usenet isn't happy with what I'm doing. If someone died and made you GOD of usenet, I must
have missed that memo.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The attribution lines take up LOTS of space when you start getting into really long threads.

This is not correct if proper quoting procedure is used, which is to trim attribution lines that
have no associated text. Here we have only four attribution lines, which would occupy a mere 1/6
of the "lowest common denominator" 80x24 terminal.

Quoted message said:

Since I don't want to read the damn things when I'm following a thread, I chop them out when
I reply.

So your posts should conform to your own personal preferences, even if those preferences are based
on defective assumptions, rather than generally accepted standards; since presumably you post for
your own benefit, and not in the hope that anyone else will read it.
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> flcl?

Mike S.' mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet said:

[Vile linewrap corrected - get a real newsreader!] Outlook Express isn't a real reader?

No, it's not. It's an email client, and a bad one at that.

Quoted message said:

Why bother? You've got a bug up your [censored] about something. I'm not going to change just because
some idiot on usenet isn't happy with what I'm doing. If someone died and made you GOD of usenet, I
must have missed that memo.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So your posts should conform to your own personal preferences, even if those preferences are
based on defective assumptions, rather than generally accepted standards; since presumably you
post for your own benefit, and not in the hope that anyone else will read it.

What he said. You apparently post not in the hope that anyone will read it, so I'm going to make
sure I won't be reading it in future. Ta, and bye.

Jasper

Mike S. mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet said:

[Vile linewrap corrected - get a real newsreader!] Outlook Express isn't a real reader?

No. It is the worst widely deployed newsreader in existence, and has the curious distinction of
becoming worse still with each successive version.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

David Damerell:

Quoted message said:

Mike S. <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> wrote:

I notice you have not responded to #1 through #3 here. When do you plan to do so?

Why bother? You've got a bug up your [censored] about something. I'm not going to change just because
some idiot on usenet isn't happy with what I'm doing.

So you _do_ post as a strange form of mental masturbation, and not for other people to read. Well,
there's an obvious response to that - and somehow I suspect I won't miss your bragging about
supposedly spinning huge gears even though your knees will drop off if you shift across a 2-tooth
difference...
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> flcl?

Peter Cole said:

"David Damerell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Mike S:

[Differences in derailleur quality]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Maybe less inherent slop in the pivots, etc.?

Maybe. Which will make about no difference with today's fancy tooth profiles.

Actually, I think this is not true. Sometimes the more expensive components are lighter, sometimes
more durable. I'm not much of a weight weenie, but for those components that wear out, the
additional service life may be well worth the extra cost.

I am unconvinced. I have a 15-quid Shimano Tourney rear derailleur; it has well over 6,000 miles on
it. Move the lever, the gear changes - it's no different from when it was put on, and the shifting
can't really be better than that. A more expensive derailleur will have to last an awfully long time
to be cheaper in the long run.
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> flcl?

"David Damerell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I am unconvinced. I have a 15-quid Shimano Tourney rear derailleur; it has well over 6,000 miles
on it. Move the lever, the gear changes - it's no different from when it was put on, and the
shifting can't really be better than that. A more expensive derailleur will have to last an
awfully long time to be cheaper in the long run.

6K miles is less than a year for me, typically. Plus, I do a lot of winter (wet, salty) riding.
Derailers have a finite life (I have a box full of used up ones), old rear derailers have a
noticeable amount of play in the pivots. Index shifting requires some precision, friction doesn't.
Appearance may be deceiving, but the Tourney derailer looked like a pretty shabby. I wouldn't be
surprised if an Alivio or LX derailer lasted easily 2X and would certainly provide better shifting
over that lifetime. I just moved a 7 year old Alivio from my main bike to a beater. It is a bit
sloppy, but then it has probably 40K+ (all-season) miles on it.

Peter Cole said:

"David Damerell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

I am unconvinced. I have a 15-quid Shimano Tourney rear derailleur; it has well over 6,000 miles
on it. Move the lever, the gear changes - it's no different from when it was put on, and the
shifting can't really be better than that. A more expensive derailleur will have to last an
awfully long time to be cheaper in the long run.

6K miles is less than a year for me, typically. Plus, I do a lot of winter (wet, salty) riding.

6K is almost exactly a year for me, and I have the same commute in winter
- and here you get wet all the year round.

Quoted message said:

Index shifting requires some precision, friction doesn't. Appearance may be deceiving, but the
Tourney derailer looked like a pretty shabby. I wouldn't be surprised if an Alivio or LX derailer
lasted easily 2X and would certainly provide better shifting over that lifetime.

I don't see that another derailleur could provide better shifting. I move the (indexed) lever, the
gear changes - there's not a lot else it can do. And I'm not saying that the Tourney's _gone_ after
6K miles - I'm saying it's just the same as when I bought it (admittedly I've taken it apart and
cleaned it once) - any reasonable guess as to its total life multiplied by the 2X or 3X that a more
expensive unit would cost is starting to look like some external event will trash it first anyway,
if that makes any sense.
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> Distortion Field!