Di2 - why wired and expensive?
-
- Posts: 1426
- Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2013 8:51 pm
- Location: Canberra
Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby lobstermash » Fri Sep 27, 2013 11:57 am
I understand what people love about Di2 - smooth, reliable, precise shifting every time. But am I the only person that thinks the system, wired and clunky that it is, is stupidly expensive? I know, I know, monopolised market and all that...
But some perspective, RC vehicles use radiowaves transmitted between a transmitter that sends the proportional inputs of the operator to a receiver that uses that signal to adjust servos and phase timing accordingly. The most commonly used radio frequency for RC nowadays is 2.4Ghz, which has a lot of 'channels' within it. Most RC systems hop between channels and use unique, randomly generated coding to ensure that only the signal from the actual operator is being translated into a controlling signal. These low power systems (generally between 70-200mW) are robust to interference and good for 500-2000m of range. The servos used for RC are extremely efficient at generating torque - a 40g servo can generate >4kg of torque in <0.15s, using just 5V at ~0.2A. Servos are also stupidly cheap - you get what you pay for to an extent, but one with the example stats would cost around $5-$30. As for transmitting and receiving devices, one of the most robust systems retails at ~$60 for the pair (FrSky for those who know RC). Good, reliable and safe Li-ion (and LiFePO4) batteries are also cheaply available for about 1/5 the price of a Di2 pack.
I can't see why a lighter (being wireless and lower power) and cheaper (should be achievable for <$200) system hasn't been produced... Does Shimano have a patent on the concept of electronic shifting, or is it just that nobody else has thought to come up with an alternative system?
- jules21
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:14 pm
- Location: deep in the pain cave
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby jules21 » Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:31 pm
having said that, there's no doubt shimano are putting a big markup on them.
-
- Posts: 9810
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby human909 » Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:50 pm
That said Shimano is top dog for a reason. If manufacturing high quality groupsets was easy we would have plenty of low cost competition. However we don't. We have SRAM which probably prices itself slightly lower. Campy prices itself itself higher. There are other big manufacturers of really cheap gear but they don't get a look in in the top tier.
I would hazard a guess that you are underestimating the R&D required and the manufacturing tooling necessary to produce high quality reliable parts. Otherwise there would be other players entering the market.
-
- Posts: 1426
- Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2013 8:51 pm
- Location: Canberra
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby lobstermash » Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:06 pm
-
- Posts: 5131
- Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 10:41 pm
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby rkelsen » Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:08 pm
You should do it.lobstermash wrote:I can't see why a lighter (being wireless and lower power) and cheaper (should be achievable for <$200) system hasn't been produced.
-
- Posts: 312
- Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 12:01 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby george-bob » Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:21 pm
Several cost push the price up for Di2 over mechanical:
-Newness. Di2 is only on its second generation (arguably third I suppose) the manufacturing and development costs are still going to be higher than mechanical groups.
-Different manufacturing techniques: shimano mainly builds mechanical equipment, retooling (or contracting out) electronics work will be more expensive than building in house mechanical gear.
-Reliability: mechanical systems are inherently simple, electronics require connections, waterproofing, batteries etc. these are all on top of the mechanical elements of the system, making the system more complex and expensive.
-Number of components: Di2 essentially replaces ONLY the mechanical components, the running hear portion of the groupset still has the same degree of complexity as a mechanical set, i.e. most of the mechanical elements remain in place, on top of these are placed the electronic elements.
-
- Posts: 312
- Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 12:01 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby george-bob » Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:24 pm
Wireless would create a whole heap of issues. You would need four batteries instead of one, each unit would require additional transceivers to be included without impacting latency. I really doubt you could include four batteries (and charging ports/hardware) for a lower weight than the wiring harness. Also, in terms of robustness, when you are a bike mechanic suddenly you need to debug a wireless system!lobstermash wrote: I can't see why a lighter (being wireless and lower power) and cheaper (should be achievable for <$200) system hasn't been produced...
-
- Posts: 441
- Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 6:18 pm
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby DoubleSpeeded » Fri Sep 27, 2013 5:25 pm
shimano seem to be the leaders and have bought out electronic shifting.
like you said, it would probably be more affordable to some and more competition if other manufacturers produce them also.
problem is ive heard theres no manual over-ride. so if its out of battery, theres manual shifting.
a thing of the future, but it appears to add some weight
-
- Posts: 1426
- Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2013 8:51 pm
- Location: Canberra
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby lobstermash » Fri Sep 27, 2013 6:15 pm
RC systems don't ever need calibrating after the first time (and they use as pathetic as 8-bit processors with about 128 bytes (yes, bytes, not kb) of flash memory).
I'm no engineer, but to me, the Di2 system design seems pretty lazy (wiring purely for the sake of using a single battery) and over-complicated (pretty customised parts that over-complicate the mechanism IMO). The cynic in me says it's to patent proprietary components and price gouge for something that should be much simpler, and creates a few red herrings for competitors design-wise.
-
- Posts: 372
- Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2011 11:27 am
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby Dimis » Fri Sep 27, 2013 7:55 pm
If it was that far progressed to begin with, they wouldn't be able to repeatedly fleece the consumer who has to have the latest and will pay for the privilege.
Now that comment may upset those who have gone out and purchased a Di2 system, but you just stand by and watch how upgrades to these systems will be rolled in.
Mechanical shifting for me thanks.
My bike doesn't need a green footprint. Haha
- RonK
- Posts: 11508
- Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 2:08 pm
- Location: If you need to know, ask me
- Contact:
Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby RonK » Fri Sep 27, 2013 8:27 pm
Why, it would be a piece of cake then, and very profitable too.lobstermash wrote:My 8 channel RC radio system, with LED backlight and 200mW transmitter, consumes about 0.1A/hour (from 12V converted to 5V, so some power wasted there). Servos (only two required) run on even less power (also 5V). This could be achieved with quite impressive endurance with quite small batteries. Thinking even bigger (concept wise), three small solar panels would have no trouble supplying power (much like the old solar powered calculators). With small backup batteries, you'd never run out of power...
RC systems don't ever need calibrating after the first time (and they use as pathetic as 8-bit processors with about 128 bytes (yes, bytes, not kb) of flash memory).
I'm no engineer, but to me, the Di2 system design seems pretty lazy (wiring purely for the sake of using a single battery) and over-complicated (pretty customised parts that over-complicate the mechanism IMO). The cynic in me says it's to patent proprietary components and price gouge for something that should be much simpler, and creates a few red herrings for competitors design-wise.
I wonder why only three manufacturers have attempted electronic systems and only two have succeeded.
Maybe they are just dumb, or plain lazy.
But here's your chance - build your own and make a fortune.
- joshnh
- Posts: 111
- Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2013 9:14 pm
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby joshnh » Fri Sep 27, 2013 9:06 pm
- rebilda
- Posts: 252
- Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 6:08 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby rebilda » Fri Sep 27, 2013 9:36 pm
The trouble is, if you go out at night or early in the morning and switch on your High Intensity LED front light, the wireless computer suddenly stops working because the frequency from the light interrupts the wireless signal.
I'd hate for that to happen to my Di2 - wireless
I have been using a Di2 bike for 2 years. The cost of the whole package (Di2 Bike, complete) was only marginally more than buying the groupset on it's own. I am still really enjoying the bike, and would buy another one in a heartbeat.
-
- Posts: 1426
- Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2013 8:51 pm
- Location: Canberra
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby lobstermash » Fri Sep 27, 2013 9:48 pm
You look at when they attempted it... Mavic's last attempt was 1999 and Campy had a play in the early 2000s. Technology has moved on and become a lot cheaper in the last decade...RonK wrote:
I wonder why only three manufacturers have attempted electronic systems and only two have succeeded.
Maybe they are just dumb, or plain lazy.
2.4Ghz, or 5.8Ghz (both freely available and easy bandwiths to access), are pretty much impervious to interference over the range of a bicycle frame. I don't think you'd have to worry turning your light on.
-
- Posts: 1426
- Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2013 8:51 pm
- Location: Canberra
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby lobstermash » Fri Sep 27, 2013 9:54 pm
-
- Posts: 2631
- Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:36 pm
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby eeksll » Fri Sep 27, 2013 10:49 pm
I have a mate who is a electronics/rc hobbyist. I reckon he is really only making the RC cars because of his interest in electronics. We just need those guys to like cycling, but like the OP said the electronics complexity is probably so low it wouldn't really spark any interest in him.
- andione1983
- Posts: 244
- Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 7:29 pm
- Location: SE Melbourne, Australia
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby andione1983 » Fri Sep 27, 2013 10:54 pm
Sent from my Galaxy far far away....
MTB - Boardman Team Pro (2013)
- RonK
- Posts: 11508
- Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 2:08 pm
- Location: If you need to know, ask me
- Contact:
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby RonK » Sat Sep 28, 2013 10:23 am
As H909 has already suggested, you seem to underestimate the R&D that has gone into electronic transmission systems.lobstermash wrote:You look at when they attempted it... Mavic's last attempt was 1999 and Campy had a play in the early 2000s. Technology has moved on and become a lot cheaper in the last decade...RonK wrote:
I wonder why only three manufacturers have attempted electronic systems and only two have succeeded.
Maybe they are just dumb, or plain lazy.
2.4Ghz, or 5.8Ghz (both freely available and easy bandwiths to access), are pretty much impervious to interference over the range of a bicycle frame. I don't think you'd have to worry turning your light on.
" Campy had a play in the early 2000s" - well no, in fact Campy produced their first version in 1992, and since have spent 20 years developing EPS to the point where they were satisfied it was ready to release to the market. You can see the timeline here.
Yeah, maybe you can throw together a crude system with a few batteries, switches and servo motors, but that is a long way from producing a system that can gain marketing acceptance. For example, Campy put much effort into making the tactile "feel" of the buttons identical to the mechanical Ergopower levers. You may think this isn't important, but when you read reviews like this one it's not hard to understand why Campy put so much effort into getting it right.
- Duck!
- Expert
- Posts: 9876
- Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 8:21 pm
- Location: On The Tools
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby Duck! » Sat Sep 28, 2013 10:32 am
-
- Posts: 14394
- Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm
- Location: Bendigo
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby warthog1 » Sat Sep 28, 2013 10:37 am
This is typical of cycling, as has been pointed out.
As far as wireless goes, why replace one battery with 4?human909 wrote:For starters prices are based on what the market will pay, NOT what the equipment costs to manufacture.
AFAIC cable works very well with no complexity. Why make something more complex than is necessary anyway?
That said those who use di2 all seem to like it.
-
- Posts: 14394
- Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm
- Location: Bendigo
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby warthog1 » Sat Sep 28, 2013 10:40 am
Yes they areDuck! wrote:Rolexes aren't cheap either.....
-
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2013 8:08 am
- Location: Adelaide
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby mtbkym01 » Thu Oct 03, 2013 1:30 pm
I'm also an RC hobbyist, and have seen issues with 2.4 getting glitches which its not supposed to do, i've also seen systems unbind themselves from time to time, so it's not as reliable as it should (and would need to) be
JMO
- Alien27
- Posts: 252
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 5:59 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby Alien27 » Thu Oct 03, 2013 2:36 pm
I cant imagine the servers and mechanical components on an RC plane are under even a hundredth of the stress the components of a group set on a bike are, nor would RC plane servers need anything like the power the ones on a group set need. The devil is always in the detail. Producing something for a hobbyist that can tinker and accept the odd failure, is an entirely different prospect to producing something that simply can not fail under just about any circumstance. The group set needs to be very robust, very strong, light, have a long battery life and be completely water and vibration proof.lobstermash wrote:My 8 channel RC radio system, with LED backlight and 200mW transmitter, consumes about 0.1A/hour (from 12V converted to 5V, so some power wasted there). Servos (only two required) run on even less power (also 5V). This could be achieved with quite impressive endurance with quite small batteries. Thinking even bigger (concept wise), three small solar panels would have no trouble supplying power (much like the old solar powered calculators). With small backup batteries, you'd never run out of power...
RC systems don't ever need calibrating after the first time (and they use as pathetic as 8-bit processors with about 128 bytes (yes, bytes, not kb) of flash memory).
I'm no engineer, but to me, the Di2 system design seems pretty lazy (wiring purely for the sake of using a single battery) and over-complicated (pretty customised parts that over-complicate the mechanism IMO). The cynic in me says it's to patent proprietary components and price gouge for something that should be much simpler, and creates a few red herrings for competitors design-wise.
I would imaging getting the last 1% waterproofing and reliability costs as much if not more than the first 99%.
I'm fairly sure shimano make their best money on their top group sets however as has been said before the electronic group sets have to have nearly all the same mechanicals as mechanical group sets, with the only difference being cables replace wire, plus there is the extra server, battery and computer components.
-
- Posts: 1426
- Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2013 8:51 pm
- Location: Canberra
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby lobstermash » Thu Oct 03, 2013 3:59 pm
On contrare, RC helis are subject to much greater forces than a derailleur.Alien27 wrote: I cant imagine the servers and mechanical components on an RC plane are under even a hundredth of the stress the components of a group set on a bike are, nor would RC plane servers need anything like the power the ones on a group set need.
There are people that documented using servos quite successfully online, including Hobbyking ones. The resolution required for shifting on a derailleur is much less than most control surfaces on RC vehicles. Waterproofing servos and RC systems is also pretty easy. I actually think some of the points in one of the other Di2 threads are realistically why nobody's really bothered developing a smart, cheap system.
- Alien27
- Posts: 252
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 5:59 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Di2 - why wired and expensive?
Postby Alien27 » Thu Oct 03, 2013 10:24 pm
Happy to be corrected, I have absolutely no experience with RC planes and the like. But if I change up the front derailer with the bike on the stand and no chain, using my left hand on the shifter while trying to stop the derailer moving with my other hand I'm pretty sure the shifter wins the battle. I can't imagine the server in a remote control plane being that strong, wouldn't you just break a component or stop its movement?lobstermash wrote:On contrare, RC helis are subject to much greater forces than a derailleur.Alien27 wrote: I cant imagine the servers and mechanical components on an RC plane are under even a hundredth of the stress the components of a group set on a bike are, nor would RC plane servers need anything like the power the ones on a group set need.
There are people that documented using servos quite successfully online, including Hobbyking ones. The resolution required for shifting on a derailleur is much less than most control surfaces on RC vehicles. Waterproofing servos and RC systems is also pretty easy. I actually think some of the points in one of the other Di2 threads are realistically why nobody's really bothered developing a smart, cheap system.
And I also agree with a lot of the other posts as well. Just thought the big factor is that last bit of system waterproofing and reliability and I also doubt it's any laziness on shimano's part using wires and only one battery. Just doesn't fit with their company's image or reputation.
- General Australian Cycling Topics
- Info / announcements
- Buying a bike / parts
- General Cycling Discussion
- The Bike Shed
- Cycling Health
- Cycling Safety and Advocacy
- Women's Cycling
- Bike & Gear Reviews
- Cycling Trade
- Stolen Bikes
- Bicycle FAQs
- The Market Place
- Member to Member Bike and Gear Sales
- Want to Buy, Group Buy, Swap
- My Bikes or Gear Elsewhere
- Serious Biking
- Audax / Randonneuring
- Retro biking
- Commuting
- MTB
- Recumbents
- Fixed Gear/ Single Speed
- Track
- Electric Bicycles
- Cyclocross and Gravel Grinding
- Dragsters / Lowriders / Cruisers
- Children's Bikes
- Cargo Bikes and Utility Cycling
- Road Racing
- Road Biking
- Training
- Time Trial
- Triathlon
- International and National Tours and Events
- Cycle Touring
- Touring Australia
- Touring Overseas
- Touring Bikes and Equipment
- Australia
- Western Australia
- New South Wales
- Queensland
- South Australia
- Victoria
- ACT
- Tasmania
- Northern Territory
- Country & Regional
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
- All times are UTC+10:00
- Top
- Delete cookies
About the Australian Cycling Forums
The Australian Cycling Forums is a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.
Bicycles Network Australia
Forum Information
Connect with BNA
This website uses affiliate links to retail platforms including ebay, amazon, proviz and ribble.