Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

Shimano Compatibility charts?

Started by DMF · · Last activity · 21 posts · 8,098 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
23 September 2006
Last activity
27 September 2006
Original author
DMF
Posts
21
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
8,098
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 21
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. This question has to do with the Shimano Road Compatibility charts. Here are the charts:

    Road front drive
    Road rear drive

    First, how to read them (I'll only list 6000 and 7000 series parts). Second, how much to believe them. 😉

    What's the rule for reading embedded boxes? The ST-6510 shifter is (obvously) compatible with FD-6500. So if the rule is to trace compatibility through connectors of the enclosing box (the only way to get between those two), ST-6510 is compatible with the following front derailleurs: FD-7700, FD-7703, FD-6500, FD-6503. Correct? Likewise ST-7703. Correct? So why the blue lines? The two blue lines on the left appear to be redundant with the black lines between the larger boxes. Or do they apply only when using the 7703 as a triple, thus the cryptic footnote?

    Since I have to use the FC-6503 crankset, reading right to left I must use FD-6503 and ST-6510.

    FD-6603 is compatible with ST/FC-6603 and nothing else.

    Yet I've had several people tell me that FD-6603 will work with the 6500-series components. Anyone have direct experience with these bits? And if they'll interoperate, care to comment on the meaning of "compatibility" in Shimano-land?

    Reasoning a bit on this, from looking at the Rear chart, you see that RD-6600-GS is interchangable with RD-6500-GS in a 9-speed triple setup. Yet I understand that the front chainring spacing is the same between 9- and 10-speed systems. I would think that the 10-speed rear chainring spacing is narrower to fit another cog in the same space. The only other difference is the chain, which is common to both front and read. So wouldn't that imply less compatibility at the rear than at the front? Yet the rear is listed at compatible and the read incompatible?

    Ow! My brain hurts. :eek:

  2. Yes, believe them. I have them in the Shimano Book.

    You seem confused, mixing 9 and 10 speed ideas. What do you want to build? What is the frame you will be using?

    Many things are NOT compatible. I recently found HG70 cassettes need HG 73 or 93 chain, and that's only in 9 speed! You should see the cassette damage from a lower grade (non Shimano) 9 speed chain! Stay with the charts, they work. 😉

  3. gclark8 said:

    You seem confused, mixing 9 and 10 speed ideas.

    Huh? *I'm* not mixing 9- and 10-speed - the chart is. The only 10-speed components I've mentioned are the RD-6603 (deemed compatible) and the FD-6603 (deemed not compatible), and I only mention them to explore Shimano's idea of "compatible".

    Quoted post said:

    What do you want to build?

    A 9-speed triple from an existing 9-speed double. I don't want to change the ST-6510 shifters ($$) or go to a 10-speed chain. Everything else is open for discussion.

    Quoted post said:

    What is the frame you will be using?

    What difference does the frame make?

    I appreciate the attempt to help, but please go back and read my OP carefully. It took me 30 minutes to write it; please spend more than 30 seconds reading it.

  4. DMF said:

    Yet the rear is listed at compatible and the read incompatible?


    Ahh! Can't type. That should read:

    "Yet the rear is listed as compatible and the front incompatible?"

  5. DMF said:

    Huh? *I'm* not mixing 9- and 10-speed - the chart is.....Frame..... I appreciate the attempt to help, but please go back and read my OP carefully. It took me 30 minutes to write it; please spend more than 30 seconds reading it.

    I suggest you phone Shimano and have an arguement with them! I didn't write the chart. 🙄 You are the one confused, I built an Ultegra Triple 9 speed Tri bike OK. :p Try downloading the 9 speed Ultegra chart from 2004.

  6. gclark8 said:

    Try downloading the 9 speed Ultegra chart from 2004.


    From where? There are no compatibility diagrams on the www.shimano.com.au site and no year-specific data on the other Shimano sites.

  7. gclark8 said:

    I suggest you phone Shimano and have an arguement with them! I didn't write the chart. 🙄 You are the one confused, I built an Ultegra Triple 9 speed Tri bike OK.


    Take the chip off your shoulder. I asked how to read the chart and you've contributed nothing by way of answer.

    Anyone could build a triple if he stuck to the pre-defined groups. I'm interested in cross-group compatibility. If you have nothing to say about that, why post?

  8. Because if he didn't post, you can be sure your reply post would be 0 (zero, nil, nada) and you would be even more frustrating.🙂

    Honestly, reading at your original post is already very confusing, too many code numbers which for most people may mean nothing. Even you said yourself that your brain hurts typing those, what makes you think other people won't feel the same?

    If you think George is rude with his reply, read your own posts, there's no indication you appreciate that at least someone made an attempt to help you, even if it's not to your liking.

    There are so many other bike forum on internet, you are free to bring your attitude there.🙂

  9. mysrh said:

    Because if he didn't post, you can be sure your reply post would be 0 (zero, nil, nada) and you would be even more frustrating.🙂


    It's a fair cop. :o

    As to confusing, I'm well aware of that. But how else does one ask questions about a confusing chart?
    😕

  10. BTW, the charts I posted are the ones currently on the Shimanu USA site, but they aren't the most recent. I have found a poor copy in another publication that includes the newer groups (Dura-Ace triple, 105 10-speed). If I can find newer (or older) charts, I'll post the link(s).

  11. gclark8 said:

    Many things are NOT compatible. I recently found HG70 cassettes need HG 73 or 93 chain, and that's only in 9 speed! You should see the cassette damage from a lower grade (non Shimano) 9 speed chain! Stay with the charts, they work. 😉


    I should have thanked you for this observation, George. You're about the only one I've heard this from. Everyone else, even professional mechanics, keeps saying that just about anything is compatible with anything else.

  12. OK, this is about all the 9 speed stuff left on the Shimano site: http://cycle.shimano-eu.com/catalog/cycle/products/group.jsp?FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=2534374302040803&ASSORTMENT%3C%3East_id=1408474395181426&bmUID=1159126687935

    The 2004 9 speed Compatibility Chart will have to come from Shimano by e-mail or Fax. I did not say it would be on the net. I did say phone them!

    Your LBS will also have it available in their 2004 shimano Service Parts Book. I only have the 2005 and 2006 Books. 9 speed Ultegra will now be in short supply, you may have to use Tiagra or 105.

    It may be cheaper to buy a second hand 9 speed triple bike, swap the required components and rebuild both and resell the surplus bike as a double.

    Another option, dare I say it:
    use the middle and outer from a Deore MTB (38/48)
    or find a 9 speed compact crankset (34/50) 110pcd, http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/cranks/110-compact-double.html with a 12-27 cassette if you just need lower gearing.

  13. I'm hoping someone will put a 2004 book on eBay...

    Actually, while 9-speed Ultegra is vanishing from the usual online retailers, it is readily available on eBay. I expect to be able to obtain the four parts I need (BB, FC, FD, RD) for <$200. New where possible, used where the deal is irresistible.

    What is getting rarer than hen's teeth is Dura-Ace 9-speed triple parts, at least in English thread.

    An Ultegra-level compact would cost more, hard as that is to believe. Nor do i want to drop to a 50 top ring. I use all the gear I can get descending and still run short with a 53/12. I just moved from a 25 to a 27 cassette, but no way that will make the Georgia mountains rideable (for me, anyway).

    European Shimano site is weird. Is that the main site? On US site they mention *nothing* except the very latest part, like nothing else exists.

  14. I guess that your basic question is whether there is any way in which 9 and 10spd front mech road parts (left shifter, FD, triple-length BB, triple chainset) cannot be combined. Apart from not mixing Octalink v1 and Hollowtech II, I am not aware of any bad combination, but I'm no expert. Does anyone know better?
    I agree that the Shimano charts are not particularly helpful.

  15. Bump these friggin' ads all the way to the bottom. 😠

  16. DMF said:

    A 9-speed triple from an existing 9-speed double. I don't want to change the ST-6510 shifters ($$) or go to a 10-speed chain. Everything else is open for discussion.

    Isn't the difference between a triple and a double in the shifters (as well as the crankset, obviously). In other words, the FD, chain BB etc are all the same, but you need the triple STI shifters which you don't have if you already have the double.

  17. rdk said:

    Isn't the difference between a triple and a double in the shifters (as well as the crankset, obviously). In other words, the FD, chain BB etc are all the same, but you need the triple STI shifters which you don't have if you already have the double.


    As I understand it, you're wrong on all points (except chain).

    If you were right about the shifters, the charts should show it and they don't, except for the 7703 triple shifter, spec'd only for an all-Dura Ace triple setup. Charts show that the ST-7701 works with non-DA triples. Nor have I ever seen an Ultegra or 105 "triple" brifter.

    The FD and BB do have to change with the crank, along with the RD.

  18. As a general answer to some of your original questions--independent of any charts: compatibility (or incompatibility) charts, tables, or rules as presented by the manufacturer can in many cases be violated with perfectly acceptable results. Many components are interchangeable even if the manufacturer says they are not. The non-authorized combinations may not work on all frames and in all situations, but sometimes the best thing to do is try it.

    gclark8 has made alot of useful contributions to this forum but is definitely a Shimano by-the-book guy. If you have a specific component combination question, someone else here has probably tried it and may be able to comment on whether it works or not.

  19. If you download the individual Service Instuctions they contain a Compatability Table, this may be useful.
    http://www.shimano.com.au/publish/content/australia/en/cycling/customer_support/service_diagrams/road_bike_service.MainContentPar.0008.Schematic.0026.File.tmp/st_6510_si.pdf It has both 105 and Ultegra 9 speed triple shifters and drive covered.

  20. DMF said:

    Nor have I ever seen an Ultegra or 105 "triple" brifter.


    In the 9spd world, ALL 105 and Ultegra front brifters work with either double or triple chainrings. There was no such thing as a double-only brifter in these gruppos, in recent years at least. DA, however, certainly had a double-only 9spd brifter.
    I have no idea about 10spd bits, but I should be surprised if things were different.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.