Shimano 2300 vs Ultegra

bus_ter

About 18 months ago I bought a bottom end road bike to see if I would enjoy road biking (and I do!), it came fitted with Shimano 2300, which for those who don't know is OEM stuff below even Sora level. Recently I bought myself a lovely new carbon bike with Ultegra groupset. The shifting is a little crisper, and there's less chain noises when changing gears. Otherwise it's exactly the same! I don't really know what I was expecting to be honest. It's a little lighter, but for the extra money you could easily make much more substantial weight savings elsewhere. Will it be more durable? Well my Sora 2300 has done thousands of miles in all conditions, and all I've done is change a warn (very cheap) chain last year for a few £'s.

I don't know what anyone else thinks, but from my personal experience high end groupsets are absolutely appaling value for money. It's such a mature technoology I think they've got it all sussed out in the cheap components.

fivethirtyonepm

i think the term you are looking for is 'law of diminishing returns'... this applies to everything, not just groupsets. a bentley is still just a car with seats, an engine and wheels, but it comes many many times more than bmw m5 which is equally as brisk, almost as comfortable etc etc.

without high-end high-cost groupsets such as ultegra and dura ace pushing the boundaries on technology and materials usage, you would not get the trickle-down that allows groupsets such as 2300 to be as good as they are.

Omar Little

Does 2300 not have the thumb levers? I cant get on with the Shimano shifters like that

But yeah it will be perfectly functional...as long as things work fine then the biggest limitation on the bike is the rider rather than poor componentry level.

petemadoc

I can't reach the thumb shifters on sora/2300 when I'm on the drops which is a flaw.

But yeah I agree, 105 is more than adequate. Di2 may be worth paying for but money is usually better spent elsewhere.

Doesn't it go like this in order of importance, frame, wheels, groupset

centimani

Oh FFS, don't set me off again...
I agree ( as a sole/fitness/pleasure cyclist)
All my bikes have had Sora or Xenon, both more than adequate for my riding style and needs, both very reliable.
I'm in the process of speccing a new bike and really want Veloce, just because, but then the little guy in my head says...why ??? even at veloce level, let alone anything higher, all you're getting is bling, not something thats going to make any discernable difference to the overall experience.

I'd just about convinced myself to get Veloce...now you've blown it apart again :?

t4tomo

But don't forget the satisfaction of seeing someone with a similar bike and being able say "Ah you've got the 2300 / Xenon version, mines the Ultegra / Veloce." Worth the extra money everytime.

Think L'Oreal - "because you're worth it" / Stella - "Reassuringly expensive".

Other random thoughts - My road bike has ultegra and it is super smooth and reliable. On various mountian bikes I've had / got with various Acera, Alivio & low end Deore equipment. I also have a older mountain bike with XTR on it and the changing is noticable quicker and smoother and more reliable despite it being on a '98 bike.

Bobbinogs

The more expensive components are not more durable (Dura-ace will last half as long as 105) but it is all about the finer points of performance and weight so, as others have said, it's diminishing returns based on what it is you want from your groupset.

The trickle down point made above is also very valid, this year's Tiagra is just as good as 105 from a couple of years ago... and the current 105 is up with the Ultegra from a few years ago too.

Personally, I think 105 (with the odd Ultegra component in the mix) is great...and I also think Veloce (with the odd mix) is great but if I was buying bike #5 then I might look at treating myself (which is a large part of every speccing decision). Still not sure about electric shifting though, perhaps I am a bit too old school to want electric bits on my bike (before you know it I will have the audax scrutineers checking my frame for the concealed motor ).

sfichele

2300 vs Ultegra?

bus_ter wrote:

The shifting is a little crisper ... Otherwise it's exactly the same!

You've got to be F$$K1$G kidding right?

I've also got 2300, on my commuter and its a piece of junk compared to the ultegra shifters. The thumb shifters are horrible and clunky. The main levers seem much stiffer, whereas the ultegra levers make light work of changing gear.
After two years of riding, the 2300 shifters are all wobbly and loose. I'm constantly fettling with the buggers to keep the gear changing working properly. Whereas I never have to mess around the Ultegra setup

Now don't get me wrong. On a cheap commuting bike the 2300 shifters are perfectly acceptable kit, and do the job (just). But they don't compare to Ultegra at all. In terms of diminishing returns its certainly true that the difference between 105/Ultegra/Dura-ace is very small and just a few grams. But these three levers are a massive class beyond 2300

cedargreen

In daring to suggest that cheaper kit is just as good you have committed the cardinal sin of calling into question one of the fundamental laws of road cycling which is that basically the whole point of it is to spend ever increasing amounts of money on ever more exotic bicycle componentry. The whole industry is built on this foundation- Campagnolo's reputation among UK cyclists was established in the 1950's when it was so expensive and exclusive that people saved up for years just to buy a sprocket or brake lever with the fabled Campagnolo logo. Nowadays it's the groupset hierarchy which maintains the system. And the system works- my Ultegra equipped bike is, in cycling terms, light years ahead of my previous bike which had Sora. In non cycling terms the levers are a bit shinier and the shifting is a bit crisper (whatever that means). And anyway, Ultegra is better because it's more expensive, not the other way round. If you're going to participate in a road forum you will have to come to get used to this, otherwise you will simply make a fool of yourself by making ludicrous statements like 'my incredibly expensive wheels haven't made much difference to my speed' as if somehow the point of expensive wheels is to make you go faster. The point of expensive wheels is that they cost more than cheaper wheels, and are therefore inherently more desirable . You must be careful though- notice that I have Ultegra and not top-of the range Dura Ace, which would simply be showing off. You need a rationale for more expensive kit- the most common one being that it's lighter- even if it's only a few grams and you'd save more by having a pee before you set off on your ride.

sfichele

Just realised that I haven't got 2300 on my commuter they are STI-2200 instead. oops - he's pulls foot out of his mouth and goes for a dslyxia test [sic].
However, I suspect the 2300 aren't much better. Or perhaps they are? If they are I'll think about changing to them, because the 2200 series isn't great.

adwt2004

Well said and I agree with every sentence!

adwt2004

cedargreen wrote:

In daring to suggest that cheaper kit is just as good you have committed the cardinal sin of calling into question one of the fundamental laws of road cycling which is that basically the whole point of it is to spend ever increasing amounts of money on ever more exotic bicycle componentry. The whole industry is built on this foundation- Campagnolo's reputation among UK cyclists was established in the 1950's when it was so expensive and exclusive that people saved up for years just to buy a sprocket or brake lever with the fabled Campagnolo logo. Nowadays it's the groupset hierarchy which maintains the system. And the system works- my Ultegra equipped bike is, in cycling terms, light years ahead of my previous bike which had Sora. In non cycling terms the levers are a bit shinier and the shifting is a bit crisper (whatever that means). And anyway, Ultegra is better because it's more expensive, not the other way round. If you're going to participate in a road forum you will have to come to get used to this, otherwise you will simply make a fool of yourself by making ludicrous statements like 'my incredibly expensive wheels haven't made much difference to my speed' as if somehow the point of expensive wheels is to make you go faster. The point of expensive wheels is that they cost more than cheaper wheels, and are therefore inherently more desirable . You must be careful though- notice that I have Ultegra and not top-of the range Dura Ace, which would simply be showing off. You need a rationale for more expensive kit- the most common one being that it's lighter- even if it's only a few grams and you'd save more by having a pee before you set off on your ride.

This is top stuff! my whole office is roaring with laughter at this, so true! Says me with mere tiagra...

2alexcoo

centimani wrote:

Oh FFS, don't set me off again...
I agree ( as a sole/fitness/pleasure cyclist)
All my bikes have had Sora or Xenon, both more than adequate for my riding style and needs, both very reliable.
I'm in the process of speccing a new bike and really want Veloce, just because, but then the little guy in my head says...why ??? even at veloce level, let alone anything higher, all you're getting is bling, not something thats going to make any discernable difference to the overall experience.

I'd just about convinced myself to get Veloce...now you've blown it apart again :?

I would say diminishing returns set in above Veloce, but it's definitely worth buying over Xenon.

There's no plastic parts in Veloce, you get the new shape Ergo levers, and it looks better!

brianonyx

adwt2004 wrote:

cedargreen wrote:

In daring to suggest that cheaper kit is just as good you have committed the cardinal sin of calling into question one of the fundamental laws of road cycling which is that basically the whole point of it is to spend ever increasing amounts of money on ever more exotic bicycle componentry. The whole industry is built on this foundation- Campagnolo's reputation among UK cyclists was established in the 1950's when it was so expensive and exclusive that people saved up for years just to buy a sprocket or brake lever with the fabled Campagnolo logo. Nowadays it's the groupset hierarchy which maintains the system. And the system works- my Ultegra equipped bike is, in cycling terms, light years ahead of my previous bike which had Sora. In non cycling terms the levers are a bit shinier and the shifting is a bit crisper (whatever that means). And anyway, Ultegra is better because it's more expensive, not the other way round. If you're going to participate in a road forum you will have to come to get used to this, otherwise you will simply make a fool of yourself by making ludicrous statements like 'my incredibly expensive wheels haven't made much difference to my speed' as if somehow the point of expensive wheels is to make you go faster. The point of expensive wheels is that they cost more than cheaper wheels, and are therefore inherently more desirable . You must be careful though- notice that I have Ultegra and not top-of the range Dura Ace, which would simply be showing off. You need a rationale for more expensive kit- the most common one being that it's lighter- even if it's only a few grams and you'd save more by having a pee before you set off on your ride.

This is top stuff! my whole office is roaring with laughter at this, so true! Says me with mere tiagra...

If you think I am going to take notice of a thread posted by a loser who has Tiagra then you don't know the sort of 105 clad poster you are dealing with. :evil:

andy46

I've gone from an alloy frame and fork Trek 1.1 with 2300 gears and unbranded brakes to a full carbon bike with a full 105 groupset. The gears are much nicer to use and I'm glad to not have thumb shifters now although they weren't a big problem.

The thing that surprised me the most was the brakes, these are much better!

adwt2004

brianonyx wrote:

If you think I am going to take notice of a thread posted by a loser who has Tiagra then you don't know the sort of 105 clad poster you are dealing with. :evil:

Lol! 8)

I'll fetch my mate who has dura ace to beat you down!

g00se

centimani wrote:

Oh FFS, don't set me off again...
I agree ( as a sole/fitness/pleasure cyclist)
All my bikes have had Sora or Xenon, both more than adequate for my riding style and needs, both very reliable.
I'm in the process of speccing a new bike and really want Veloce, just because, but then the little guy in my head says...why ??? even at veloce level, let alone anything higher, all you're getting is bling, not something thats going to make any discernable difference to the overall experience.

I'd just about convinced myself to get Veloce...now you've blown it apart again :?

If you're getting Veloce, go for these ultrashift 2010 levers rather than the new ones (powershift only):

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Campagnolo-Veloce-Ultra-Shift-10sp-Ergo-Levers-2010-/170677977678?pt=UK_sportsleisure_cycling_bikeparts_SR&hash=item27bd33424e

(to be 100% sure of compatability, get a 2010 rear mech too).

2011+ doesn't have ultrashift until you get up to Chorus - but 2009 and 2010 had ultrashift as an option on all the groups below.

Ultrashift vs Powershift is worth the upgrade and at that price, it's much the same as powershift levers... http://www.campagnolo.com/jsp/en/tech/id_14.jsp