I've been thinking about shifters lately.
As I've been working on a current project, I was trying to decide what shifters to use, and I had several choices - one of them being bar-end shifters.
Ever since Shimano introduced their STI system (Shimano Total Integration) with the brake and shift levers combined into a single complex (and expensive) unit, practically any road bike sold today has some version of "integrated" brake/shift levers, or as some of us call them, "brifters." I've been told that only "squares" call them "brifters" and that all the cool roadies laugh at the term and at the people who use it. But what can I say? Like most retrogrouches, I'm so "square" that I still say things like "square" (as opposed to "groovy"). Anyhow, Saint Sheldon called them brifters, and who am I to argue with that?
Lots of people call the integrated brake/shifter systems one of the greatest developments in modern cycling. The thing is, I've got a couple of bikes with brifters: one with Shimano's STI, and another with Campagnolo's Ergo. They're nice, but the main thing either system has going for it is convenience. With shifting controls right there at the fingertips, it seems to me that one shifts gears a lot more frequently. Is that because the levers/buttons/paddles/or-what-have-you are so close at hand - or is it because they are usually paired up with a drivetrain that has anywhere from 8 to 12 cogs in the back (multiplied by however many chainrings one has)? Shifting is easy, so you shift more often. But is it necessary? Better? I'll stick with convenient.
Then again, bar-end controls have probably 80% of the convenience with fewer drawbacks than brifters (yes, I came up with that figure after careful scientific analysis, and in no way is that a subjective, made-up, "gut-feeling" statistic).
What drawbacks? How about cost, complexity, and vulnerability? The location of integrated brake/shift levers makes them more vulnerable to crash damage. Case in point: I hit some black ice on my commuting bike last winter, hit the pavement, and knocked one of the brifters half-way round the handlebar. Luckily they just got scuffed up but didn't break - but if they had, there would have been no repair option other than full replacement (and could I have bought just one brifter, or would I have had to buy the whole set?). If they do get damaged, or if they wear out, the only remedy in most cases is to replace the entire unit, which is not exactly cheap. Then there's the complexity of the systems which means there is a lot going on in that small package, and a lot more that can go wrong. I don't know about others, but I find it really annoying to have to replace an entire component or a whole system all because one small part broke or wore out. Campagnolo levers have an advantage over Shimano in that one can replace internal parts when they get worn - but doing so might be beyond the capability of most home mechanics and even some shop mechanics. Just like our computers, phones, televisions, appliances, and other electronic goods, integrated controls on a bike become yet another situation where "repair" really just means "replace."
Keeping brake levers and shift levers separate means that individual components can be much simpler with less to break or wear out. If they need maintenance or repair, they can be easier to work on. And if something does need to be replaced, one can often replace the individual part or component and not a whole system. If one crashes and damages a traditional brake lever, the shifting components are unaffected, and replacing a brake lever alone is a lot cheaper than an integrated component. Or conversely, if the shifter needs to be replaced, the brake levers are unaffected, and so on.
Also, both down-tube shifters and bar-end shifters are less vulnerable to damage. And the bar-ends levers are still easy to reach and can be operated without removing one's hands from the bars, though it might mean moving the hands away from the brake levers for a moment. If you really must brake and shift simultaneously, as I'm sure everyone does regularly, you've just lost some convenience.
Bar-end shifters have been around a long time - at least since the 1940s, if not earlier. The overall style of bar-end shifters hasn't really changed much since they were first introduced, and many of them look outwardly similar, though the internal mechanisms have changed some. Here are a few notable ones, old and new.
Some more modern/current options:
I have bar-ends on a number of my bikes. I like them for their convenience and for all those "-ity's." You know the ones I mean: simplicity, reliability, durability, and repairability. It's nice to know such things are still valued enough to be an option in a throwaway world.
As I've been working on a current project, I was trying to decide what shifters to use, and I had several choices - one of them being bar-end shifters.
Ever since Shimano introduced their STI system (Shimano Total Integration) with the brake and shift levers combined into a single complex (and expensive) unit, practically any road bike sold today has some version of "integrated" brake/shift levers, or as some of us call them, "brifters." I've been told that only "squares" call them "brifters" and that all the cool roadies laugh at the term and at the people who use it. But what can I say? Like most retrogrouches, I'm so "square" that I still say things like "square" (as opposed to "groovy"). Anyhow, Saint Sheldon called them brifters, and who am I to argue with that?
Lots of people call the integrated brake/shifter systems one of the greatest developments in modern cycling. The thing is, I've got a couple of bikes with brifters: one with Shimano's STI, and another with Campagnolo's Ergo. They're nice, but the main thing either system has going for it is convenience. With shifting controls right there at the fingertips, it seems to me that one shifts gears a lot more frequently. Is that because the levers/buttons/paddles/or-what-have-you are so close at hand - or is it because they are usually paired up with a drivetrain that has anywhere from 8 to 12 cogs in the back (multiplied by however many chainrings one has)? Shifting is easy, so you shift more often. But is it necessary? Better? I'll stick with convenient.
Then again, bar-end controls have probably 80% of the convenience with fewer drawbacks than brifters (yes, I came up with that figure after careful scientific analysis, and in no way is that a subjective, made-up, "gut-feeling" statistic).
What drawbacks? How about cost, complexity, and vulnerability? The location of integrated brake/shift levers makes them more vulnerable to crash damage. Case in point: I hit some black ice on my commuting bike last winter, hit the pavement, and knocked one of the brifters half-way round the handlebar. Luckily they just got scuffed up but didn't break - but if they had, there would have been no repair option other than full replacement (and could I have bought just one brifter, or would I have had to buy the whole set?). If they do get damaged, or if they wear out, the only remedy in most cases is to replace the entire unit, which is not exactly cheap. Then there's the complexity of the systems which means there is a lot going on in that small package, and a lot more that can go wrong. I don't know about others, but I find it really annoying to have to replace an entire component or a whole system all because one small part broke or wore out. Campagnolo levers have an advantage over Shimano in that one can replace internal parts when they get worn - but doing so might be beyond the capability of most home mechanics and even some shop mechanics. Just like our computers, phones, televisions, appliances, and other electronic goods, integrated controls on a bike become yet another situation where "repair" really just means "replace."
Keeping brake levers and shift levers separate means that individual components can be much simpler with less to break or wear out. If they need maintenance or repair, they can be easier to work on. And if something does need to be replaced, one can often replace the individual part or component and not a whole system. If one crashes and damages a traditional brake lever, the shifting components are unaffected, and replacing a brake lever alone is a lot cheaper than an integrated component. Or conversely, if the shifter needs to be replaced, the brake levers are unaffected, and so on.
Also, both down-tube shifters and bar-end shifters are less vulnerable to damage. And the bar-ends levers are still easy to reach and can be operated without removing one's hands from the bars, though it might mean moving the hands away from the brake levers for a moment. If you really must brake and shift simultaneously, as I'm sure everyone does regularly, you've just lost some convenience.
Bar-end shifters have been around a long time - at least since the 1940s, if not earlier. The overall style of bar-end shifters hasn't really changed much since they were first introduced, and many of them look outwardly similar, though the internal mechanisms have changed some. Here are a few notable ones, old and new.
| Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.  |
| When Campagnolo introduced its first parallelogram derailleur, the Gran Sport, they also offered a bar-end lever, going back at least as to 1953. The examples above, with the familiar blue covers, probably date to the '70s but were made for a couple of decades (as I understand it, the smaller parts are not interchangeable with the earlier Gran Sport ones). I once had a pair of these, and my main complaint was that they had to be set very tightly to prevent slipping or "auto-shifting" but when they were tight enough not to slip, they were awfully stiff to move. |
| Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.  |
| Simplex bar-end control: earlier basic friction version. I have no personal experience with these, but mechanically speaking, these aren't all that different from the Campagnolo version shown above, and I'd expect them to work similarly. |
| Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.  |
| Simplex Retrofriction Shifters: These came out in the 1970s and have the same spring-clutch mechanism that made their Retrofriction downtube levers such a revelation. I've never used the bar-ends which are harder to find than the downtube mounted version (which I have and do use) - but that spring in the middle of the lever lets them work smoothly with a light touch, and without slipping. |
| Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.  |
| SunTour Power Ratchet Bar-Cons: These were introduced in the early '70s and became among the most popular bar-end controls of all time. The concept is similar to that of the Simplex Retrofriction ones shown above, but the execution is a little different. These have a fine ratcheting mechanism that allows a light touch and action without slipping. The ratchet means you can feel the tiny little 'clicks' when moving them, so they're not quite as smooth as the Simplex - but it's still a very effective solution. |
| Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.  |
| One of the great things about the SunTours is that they were made for many years with only the slightest changes, and they are almost completely re-buildable. Most (maybe all) of the small parts are interchangeable from one year to the next, so they're virtually immune to obsolescence. And believe it or not, you can still find the parts. |
| Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.  |
| Here's an interesting one - Shimano "Fingertip Control" bar-ends. No group name on them, but I sometimes see them listed for sale as Dura Ace. Circa late '70s, I believe. These have a large coil spring inside which counterbalances the spring in the derailleur. No clicks or ratchets. No clutch. Just one spring working against another. |
| Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.  |
| This is what the Shimano shifter looks like inside - it's very simple, really. Here's how they work: The spring in the rear derailleur is typically "high normal" - in other words, its natural position is to be in the high gear (smallest cog). The spring in the lever is "low normal" - in that it wants to move the derailleur to the lowest gear (largest cog - and by the way, this is all completely reversed for the front derailleur). To set them up, you have to move the lever against the spring to the opposite end of its travel and hold it in place while you pull all the slack out of the cable at the derailleur and then tighten the pinch bolt. It helps to have one of those cable pulling tools, aka a "4th hand tool." When you have them all set up properly, the two springs basically fight it out, tug-of-war style, and the derailleur stays in place where you put it. The movement takes a fairly light touch as there is very little friction. The same mechanism was also used in early Shimano Deore "thumb shifters" for mountain bikes. |
Some more modern/current options:
| Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.  |
| Modern Shimano Indexing levers - available for 8, 9, 10, and even 11 speeds. My Rivendell has the 9-speed version - nearly 20 years old and still going strong. I don't know about the 10 and 11-sp. versions, but my old 9-sp. ones can be switched from indexing to friction, but the indexing is bulletproof so there'd be no reason to switch them. The bodies, or "pods" have been copied by other makers because they are compatible with many standard downtube shift levers - which means customizing options. |
| Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.  |
| Current production Dia Compe levers. Notice that the pods are identical to the Shimano pods shown above. The levers have an extra-fine version of the SunTour Power Ratchet mech. Grant Petersen/Rivendell was instrumental in getting that ratchet mechanism resurrected, originally for a near-exact re-issue of the late '80s SunTour Sprint shifters (dubbed "Silver"), which they would then pair with the Shimano pods for some smooth-action bar-ends. Dia Compe later made this more "traditional" styled lever with the same internal mechanism. The levers themselves can be mounted on the pods, or on the downtube. |
| Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.  |
| The latest version of the Rivendell Silver shifters (Silver 2) is without a doubt styled with bar-end and thumb-shifter applications in mind. Currently available from the Rivendell website. |
I have bar-ends on a number of my bikes. I like them for their convenience and for all those "-ity's." You know the ones I mean: simplicity, reliability, durability, and repairability. It's nice to know such things are still valued enough to be an option in a throwaway world.