Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,158 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Is there any functional difference between the 10 speed 105 and ultegra cassettes? My research suggests they weigh about the same, and both use the same chain.

I'm talking about average recreational/fitness use...3000-5000 km per year, some club rides, centuries, etc.
________
HOTTYMESS
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Weight is the only real difference. Except for the shifters, there isn't really any difference between 105, Ultegra, and Dura-Ace, other than weight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,389 Posts
tim is on fire..

timfire said:
Weight is the only real difference. Except for the shifters, there isn't really any difference between 105, Ultegra, and Dura-Ace, other than weight.

adn speaks the truth. shifters have slightly noticeable difference with DA...anyone who says differently are a Shimano marketer's success story...ride what works and you can afford. I've put over 7,000 mi. on a 105 cassette...no problems..still has many left in it...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,525 Posts
Not really

timfire said:
Weight is the only real difference. Except for the shifters, there isn't really any difference between 105, Ultegra, and Dura-Ace, other than weight.
Actually, DA cassettes use a bunch of Ti cogs, which makes them 1) extremely expensive, 2) wear rapidly, and 3) slightly lighter. A VERY poor return on the bang for the buck scale. Same deal with Campy Record cassettes. If you're not racing at the professional level, these cassettes make NO sense, IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,263 Posts
Kerry Irons said:
Actually, DA cassettes use a bunch of Ti cogs, which makes them 1) extremely expensive, 2) wear rapidly, and 3) slightly lighter. A VERY poor return on the bang for the buck scale. Same deal with Campy Record cassettes. If you're not racing at the professional level, these cassettes make NO sense, IMO.
Great point. In this case, more $$= less durability. Poor choice for most riders.
I happen to be a fan of the SRAM 970 cassette over either Ultegra or 105. Weight weenies shows it at about equal to Ultegra in gram count (lighter than 105), but at significantly less $$$. I've abused SRAM cassettes for years on my MTB's- and now use one on my roadie. Reliable & priced right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
607 Posts
When it comes to cassettes - and you’re paying - go with the more economical one. I’ve used Dura Ace, Ultegra, and 105 9sp cassettes-no difference that I could perceive.
Just upgraded to 10sp and picked up 105 and Ultegra cassettes to get specific ranges. They’d have both been 105 if I could’ve gotten what I wanted.

Des
 

·
Moderatus Puisne
Joined
·
15,882 Posts
I seem to recall Campy claiming that Chorus-level cassettes were plated or treated differently somehow than Centaur ones, making them last a bit longer; ditto for chainrings.

Any truth in that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,525 Posts
No so's you'd notice

Argentius said:
I seem to recall Campy claiming that Chorus-level cassettes were plated or treated differently somehow than Centaur ones, making them last a bit longer; ditto for chainrings.

Any truth in that?
I've used Record, Chorus, and Veloce' cassettes, and the only one that seems to wear faster is the Record, due to the Ti cogs. This is based on riding each one 9-10K miles and looking at the teeth, but it's not real scientific (no measurements taken). I replace the cassette when I replace the chain, so the best experiment would probably be to replace the chain much more often and see how long you go before you get chain skip. My general experience with metal coatings is that they may help a bit with abrasion and friction, but that they wear through fairly quickly and therefore it is the strength of the underlying material. My impression is that the primary difference between Chorus and lower level cassettes is that the Chorus uses aluminum cog carriers to save (a bit of) weight.
 

·
Roadbike Rider
Joined
·
1,260 Posts
Isn't Ti harder than most heat treated steels?

Kerry Irons said:
I've used Record, Chorus, and Veloce' cassettes, and the only one that seems to wear faster is the Record, due to the Ti cogs. This is based on riding each one 9-10K miles and looking at the teeth, but it's not real scientific (no measurements taken). I replace the cassette when I replace the chain, so the best experiment would probably be to replace the chain much more often and see how long you go before you get chain skip. My general experience with metal coatings is that they may help a bit with abrasion and friction, but that they wear through fairly quickly and therefore it is the strength of the underlying material. My impression is that the primary difference between Chorus and lower level cassettes is that the Chorus uses aluminum cog carriers to save (a bit of) weight.
I thought the Ti would wear better
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
381 Posts
hello....Bertrand

I sent some email through this site and never gotten answer from you.......I was asking some questions regarding your bike purchase, is it possible for you to send me an email through this site so that we can talk privately? Hope to hear from you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,525 Posts
Way off

Chainstay said:
I thought the Ti would wear better
Thinking doesn't make it so. Ti is NOT a wear resistant metal. My own crude tests with a Campy Record 6/3 cassette suggests that Ti wears about 5x faster than steel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,158 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 · (Edited)
reply sent

.........
linus said:
I sent some email through this site and never gotten answer from you.......I was asking some questions regarding your bike purchase, is it possible for you to send me an email through this site so that we can talk privately? Hope to hear from you.
________
Justin bieber fan
 

·
Roadbike Rider
Joined
·
1,260 Posts
Rockwell C Hardness

Kerry Irons said:
Thinking doesn't make it so. Ti is NOT a wear resistant metal. My own crude tests with a Campy Record 6/3 cassette suggests that Ti wears about 5x faster than steel.
Isn't wear resistance related to hardness? I looked up hardness levels on metweb. Ti alloys runs from about 25-35 on the Rockwell C hardness scale. Tool steels are much harder but so much depends on the alloy and the heat treatment with many steels much softer than Ti
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,525 Posts
Hardness, shmardness

Chainstay said:
Isn't wear resistance related to hardness?
Perhaps related to, but not a function of. You can have a very hard material that is brittle and spalls easily, and it will wear quickly. I dont know that there is some other property that you can measure that will drectly predict wear resistance. Metallurgists, feel free to chime in, but it is widely known and reported that Ti cogs (and Ti chains) wear very poorly.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top