Shimano Ultegra Di2 Electronic Transmission Review - BikeRadar

this looks gooood, i wonder what someone like canyon or cube can knock a whole bike out for. i tried the dura ace di2 recently and i was intially sceptical but its superb. glad the working class, well sort of now have access to it. my full sram red might be moving over soon...

Give me a nudge when they have it battery free design using a dyno hub or some sort of energy recovery system.

Bikes should not need batteries!

This is a technology for professional racing teams that is just being sold to recover some development costs as they know the overpaid wannabee public will buy it.

I'm getting more and more grumpy and more and more cynical about the way companies and manufactureres use technology not to improve lives (if ever they did), but to control and own the users (market) (ref. computers, cars, mobile phones, Sat nav. etc). This stuff is all patented. Hardly any of it is user-serviceable. And the best bit for the manufacturers and shareholders is that the users will never stop having to buy the batteries, which will be thrown in a hole when they're spent. All my senses tell me this technology (more accurately the business philosophy) is absolutely in opposition to nearly every principle of bike riding.

The fact that professional teams use is absolutely no reason whatsoever to think it has any real benefit for everyone else. They are paid to use it and they give it away or throw it away when they're done.

If cycling and particularly in this case wannabe pro-cycling hadn't become so recently popular and fashionable amongst the well-off, politically-idiotic-but-proud-to-be-consumers generation, this destructive, pointless nonsense would never have seen the light of day.

I agree; It's a novelty that wont last - it will go the same way as pneumatic tyres and battery lamps!

@ Daddylonglegs

Christ, it can't be easy being you!

It's okay, I'm used to it Dr.

Anyway, someone needs to bother.

What is wrong with manufacturers bringing new tech to market? Part of evolving the sport isn't it? I wonder how upset people were when the derailleur was invented?

If it works and people enjoy it, great, buy it. If you prefer mechanical, leave well alone. Hardly worth getting upset about.

its a good system, at least the dura ace is. people even campag have an electric system. its going to be the future. i personally love the idea. especially the tt bike buttons. im all for it

Difference with pneumatic tyres and battery lamps - and freewheels and derraileur gears for that matter Careful is that those things were a step forward. This is a step sideways, designed to allow the manufacturer to retain control of the product and keep the buyer dependent on them and their licence-holders. It's entirely predictable because it occurs in many industries.

I ride a Dura Ace-equipped Look road frame in the Summer and an aluminium frame with old (15 years) Dura-Ace in the Winter. Over the years I've owned and ridden custom frames and off-the-peg frames in all manner of materials; hung with Shimano, Campag and Suntour. I've road-raced, mountain-bike raced and toured. I've also worked as a cycle mechanic and in bike retail.

So by now I can tell the difference between technology for the improvement of cycling and technology solely for the improvement of shareholder profit and market (that's a euphemism for buyers, owners and users) control.

The marketing of this stuff has been intense (eh, BikeRadar?), which tells us something about the scepticism this technology is being greeted with. It also tells us when we look at the way it's being marketed and who the marketing is being aimed at, who they think will buy it.

I don't care if people do buy this stuff - it's a free country. But I do care if the numbers of people buying it (after endless intense marketing) cause Shimano to justify ending the production of high-end, non-electric transmissions which, in terms of pure function, are still some of the very best available.

Daddylonglegs,

Have you ever been out of the saddle, in a semi sprint or mini 1 in 6 hill that needed powering through, and lost (or gained) just that extra bit of cadence that made life too difficult, and the only appropriate gear change was a big/little ring shift?

Then thought, "C**p no chance will I be able to change rings like this, i KNOW i will throw the chain", had to sit down, loose momentum, alter hand positions to be able to swing a lever through 45 degrees, wait for the ring change to complete, re-alter hand positions again, back out the saddle, then spin (or grind) back to a comfortable cadence?

With Di2, instead of all that, you press a button. Nothing else.

It's stupid for people that have never used for a decent period of time to make claims about sideways or backwards or forward steps.this is a step forwards. I've been on Di2 full time for 12 months now, on 2 bikes (summer and winter) and it is definetly a step forwads. Its as much a step forward as downtube levers to STI was.

And get rid of those mechanised looms too! I hate progress!

@ dudos

Of course, many times. The question though is what's being thrown away to get an advantage like that? I respect your experience, but what you describe is a situation only ever really occasionally encountered in a race or by someone out on a hard bash. It seems to me in this case and generally speaking, the payout to the user is far smaller than the payout to the producer. And the long-term implications of changing cycle transmissions from entirely mechanical devices to non-user-serviceable electro-mechanical devices are largely negative for cycling generally, though largely very positive for Shimano.

I'd argue that STI was in one respect a retrograde step because, as it's name implies (Shimano Total Integration), it put an end to the 'mix and matching' that commonly went on amongst roadies and manufacturers. But this didn't matter so much because the deal was far better because the improvement in performance was considerable for - crucially - all levels of user. No one now would want to return to - let alone road-race with - down-tube shifters and non-indexed five-speed hubs.

The problem I have is that this technology while being a benefit in the way you describe will make no positive difference to the vast majority of users who may eventually be forced to have it due to the stranglehold Shimano have on all levels of bike component production, thus condemning them to an endless payout on new batteries and specialist servicing.

On my race bike I would use nothing else but Dura-Ace particularly in the transmssion because it is significantly better and more reliable in several small, but crucial areas. However I would not assume that these small but significant advantages that are really only noticeable under certain quite specific conditions would be appreciated by all users.

to be fair mix and match was lost along time ago. campag design their stuff not to work with shimano in anyway. sram have some parts that work, chain/cassette/ front mech. but you cant mix and match your sti's and mechs. the electric is proven and consistent over the last 12 months. its worth noting one of the htc riders used mechanical dura-ace on his general bike and di2 on the tt bikes as he preffered the feel. but having lightly experimented with di2 i thinks genuine inovation and will be very succesful and im sure shimano will never drop mechanical gearing not in our lifetime at least.

@ Daddylonglegs

I presume you still you dial up Internet? If no one moved to broadband think how cheap dial up would be now! Does the same job, just a little slower

As for your race bike, surely it would make more senseto use 105 rather than dura ace. Parts are cheaper to replace and the weight saving probably doesn't benefit a amateur rider. Not to mention shimano's profit margins are probably greater on the dura ace gear you buy.

Let me know when you guys want to sell your old 9 Speed Ultegra. I would be interested. I guess I'm a stick-shift over semi-automatic transmission kind of guy. To me it is the feel and the experience. I've ridden Di2 and it sounded like I had a robot between my legs. No thanks.

i'm with daddylonglegs, electric shifting man whatever next, some sort of e-bike, Oh, wait a minute....

i just recon its taking away from what riding is all about, but i'm sure there are many many folk out there that are already getting their old mech/shifter etc ready for ebay just to have the next big thang!

@ Markwb79

I'm afraid that Daddylonglegs point has gone over your head. At first I thought the same then read on. Its a bit like owning an Apple product, except you don't really own it, you feel like your renting it.

It's good to see progress happening, and change will always happen. I'm not a shimano fan, and haven't tried this new electric shifting. I'm open to it and would love to try it.

One point though. The battery is expected to last 1000km's and be able to be recharged at least 500 times. My mechanical Campag groupset has lasted since last summer and still doesn't need recharging. That's more eviromentally friendly, don't you think?

Electronic shifting is an effective solution to certain problems. Whether those problems are real or significant depends on your viewpoint. But what electronic shifting certainly is not is efficient, which is something quite different from effectiveness. That is why it is so incongruous with the rest of a bicycle to attach motors and batteries on to it. Bicycles are the most efficient form of transport. If you want effectiveness, ditch the bike and take a car - they are the most effective form of transport, but grossly inefficient. And the price of a Di2-equipped bicycle, at least the Dura-Ace version currently available, is comparable to that of a small, or secondhand, car.

I'm genuinely on the fence about electronic shifting, having not had the chance to try it yet. I can see Daddylongleg's point completely - there is a wonderful simplicity about mechanical shifting that allows it to do the job it is designed for very efficiently while being completely transparent to the user and completely serviceably/tweakable, down to the last spring in the dérailleur. This is fully in line with the simplicity of the bicycle itself, and with the spirit and ethos of cycling. With electronic shifting the only control you have as a consumer is being able to buy it, and perhaps if you are lucky to pay someone else to service it. There is currently no part of my bike that I can't service myself, and I find the idea of that changing for ever to be rather disturbing.

So the question is, does the performance advantage justify this sacrifice? Obviously this will have a different answer for different people, depending on how much weight they place on functional transparency and being able to do their own servicing (as well as on the magnitude of the performance advantage).

There is almost (for the lack of any other word) a spiritual dimension to this. The bicycle is a mechanical augmentation of a human being, transforming muscular energy into motion and opening up an extra dimension of mind-body self-expression. Gear shifting may require minute amounts of energy compared to what is required to push the cranks, but this energy is nonetheless seamlessly integrated into the whole system. Similarly the integration that a rider feels with his/her bike means that the body image is effectively projected beyond the body itself and onto the bike. This isn't just a trite analogy, there really will be parts of the brain of an experienced cyclist that have developed to extend the mind into the whole bike/body system, just as there are parts that are mapped onto the legs, arms, hands etc. A cyclist is a biological-mechanical cyborg. With electronic shifting he/she becomes an electro-biological-mechanical cyborg. That's quite a profound step to take just to make gear shifting a tiny bit easier.

This isn't a revolution, it's not designed to be. The bike has been developed within an inch or it's life over the past century, making something revolutionary just isn't going to happen anymore. However electronic shifting is a step forward and we're still on v1 and now v1.1, once it goes wireless and is integrated into head units then more possibilites open up.

Apart from pure weight saving there's zero advantage to running downtube shifters but some still do, whether it's aesthetics or they're just stuck in the past but give it 5 years and electronic shifting will be the norm on any bike over £1k and probably much lower. Is it a massive improvment or mechanical STI? Not unless you're TTing but it's still an improvment and given people are willing to pay hundreds/thousands for tiny aero improvments or weight saving then I think electronic shifting already has it's place, it doesn't need to justify itself.

Also whoever said it's only for the pros then think again, Shimano are a business, the pro peloton doesn't generate their revenue, we do. they use the pro peloton as a marketing tool, we're their market - electronic shifting is designed for us.

There will always be people resistant to change. I don't see what's wrong with a company trying to tie in users to their products...every business in the world does this. If you don't like electronic shifting the don't buy it...simple as. Your choice as a consumer allows you to buy whatever you want, no ones forcing this on you.

It really gets on my nerves when people take on a 'sky is falling' tone when they suspect a company is trying to make money.

On the topic of this, I've not seen it in action, but as a consumer if I decide it provides a sufficient benefit for the price involved I will make a purchase, if not, I wont.

I can see both points of view however as a dyed in the wool Campag fan i'm more on the side of Daddylonglegs.

This represents a cheaper alternative to Duraace, and what's more if the review is to be believed there really is little point in Shimano making a mechanical DuraAce group as Ultegra Di2 is better (allegedly).

However THAT is precisely my worry.

By phasing out (and be in under no illusion that is what will happen) mechanical groupsets Shimano wins on 2 counts.

1. They FORCE you to buy the batteries/parts specifically for that groupset.

2. For the folk who will not swap to Di2, what's the betting that once SRAM comes on board with an electronic group that they'll start to charge that little bit extra for MECHANICAL mechs & brake levers.

They have mentioned that the battery will last 500,000km which is more than the vast majority of us will likely cycle in our lifetime.

However when Toyota launched the Prius they said the batteries would last around 10 years.

My mate has a Prius which is 7 years old, out of warranty and he needs new batteries. This is a guy that mainly commutes on the motorway so the battery isn't stop/starting.

Cost was over £2000 at a Toyota delaership.

His wife averages 10mpg more in ANY conditions in her Golf TDI.

It's supposed to be "the future" but i'd remind forl that genetically modified foods were "the future" 20 years ago and now people are turning to organic foods (like they grew hundreds of years ago) in droves.....

@DavidJB: I don't think anyone here is advocating that Shimano should be prevented from manufacturing and marketing electronic groupsets. Merely advocating that cyclists should not buy it (or buy into the philosophy.) So what, really, is there to get on your nerves? If there is nothing wrong with companies trying to tie in users to their products, surely there is nothing wrong with me, and others, pointing out to people that that is what they are doing?

This isn't really a review. More of a hype article before the real review.

Road kit isn't really my department, but this has piqued my interest. From an engineering point of view, that the electronic shifting tackle works at all is damned impressive!

I can, however, appreciate the points made that running this kit puts you further into the lap of the manufacturer for support/upgrades. I refuse to own anything made by Apple because of these issues; if I buy equipment I expect to be able to do what I want with it, not what its maker wants me to do. As things stand a SRAM shifter will more-or-less happily control a Shimano mech, and vice-versa, and any Tom, Dick or Harry will flog you a cable that works with either. The electronic stuff will probably never offer this kind of compatibility and interchangeability.

That said, it'll be a hell of a long time before this stuff is anything other than a very expensive toy for the well-off and/or sponsored rider. It's expensive in the first place, has largely unproven long-term reliability and, as is clear from the mixed reception in these comments, appeals to only a portion of the target market. As an analogy, VW have been knocking out reasonably-priced, reliable and efficient dual-clutch semi-auto DSG transmissions for years now, but the manuals still outsell the DSG by a considerable margin, despite the car mags having predicted the impending death of the manual transmission for the best part of the last 20 years! So I personally do not fear the imminent demise of the faithful thumbshifter.

I wonder how long it'll take Shimano et al to come up with an MTB-oriented variation of this system which can cope with ultra-low-RPM, maximum-torque shifting combined with a good old mechful of soggy mud and undergrowth, sustained vibration and the occasional bashing of the high-tech super-duper mechs against logs and rocks!

I have the strong feeling this is just a complex and expensive way to solve the problems created by the 2:1 actuation ratio.

Seems kind of pointless. A step in the sideways direction.

You can get the same quality of shifting through a well maintained mechanical system. On the other hand is all the tech really necessary or justified if only to install and forget about it.

Looks like an incredible marketing ploy to appeal to the bunch of cyclists who sit more in front of the PC surfing the net. If Shimano aren't careful they could lose the plot. I can think of a dozen other things which could still be improved upon in a mechanical system.

So I assume that if I want to get on the electronic shifting, all I need is the new Shifters, FD, RD, and the electronic control box?

Do I need to upgrade the chain, sprockets, cranks, or the bar tape perhaps? ;)

Im really chuffed these will be a TT version :)