Great point. 1.2% difference in time and 0.2% difference in power. And this is without error of measurements, which can be huge for a power meter (Shimano claims 1.5% only for a calibration). Even any small disturbance by a car or pedestrian would matter here a lot. I would trust this more if it would be done more than 1 time to see the spread. Yet, we all know that a good bike can actually give you over 10% if you compare 1000 and 10000-dollar bikes.
@@transkryption it is actually quite a scientifically accurate comment. For example, Shimano claims a power meter calibration error of 1.5% which is bigger than the time difference here.
I believe wheels/tire/tube combo matter more than rest of bike. I would like to see the same test with the exact same wheel set being used on both tests.
I want to add something that was not taken in consideration: in the recent years it's because of tactics that a tourwinner will not win it with more than 5-10 minutes simply because when he has a lead of let say a few minutes he won't take the risk of attacking at the beginning of a climb for instance. They switch to defensive riding tactics. But that doesn't mean he and his superbike aren't capable of winning with a bigger difference. They just don't try.
This tour it was a bit different. I loved it, finally a real course again, like the Giro and Vuelta. It because Sky-Ineos can't control the course anymore in the mountains. Good riddance.
@@harrybruijs2614 it’s got little to do with the course … what’s a “real” TDF course anyway? Teams have copied sky/ineos and are now competing properly. You should be grateful to Sky for lifting the whole quality of the teams
@@IverKnackerov That is a very good point. Wasn't a fan of Sky but had to admit they brought in a professionalism rarely seen in pro bike racing before. Warming up and warming down was laughed at - now they all do it. And many more standard practice operations from other sports. Whisper it softly - the pre-Sky doping made for very lazy training on the assumption that dope would make up the difference. I said at the time, assuming Sky did not dope (ha ha), it was still not a level playing field because their budget at the time enabled them to replicate the effects of doping with sports science, specialist chefs, and expensive training camps at altitude which had rarely been attempted before. IK also said that they had the only realistic professional sports budget and noted that their entire year budget was not far off a top football player's individual salary
@@MrJaycobsen According to bike calculator that one watt counts for 1 second. It's to less of a difference too make something out of . The positions may wary on the bikes also.
Could anyone win the TDF on 105? Maybe not. But--more importantly--do ANY of us watching this video actually need top level group sets? Absolutely not, lol.
The notion of whether someone “needs” expensive gear is daft, in my opinion. No one “needs” a road bike at all. For most people, cycling is a hobby, and people are free to spend however much money they can afford. There’s no reason to think that you have to be fast to “earn the right” to buy expensive gear.
I'd love to see some robustness tests of modern bikes and components. I feel for the average rider, aerodonamics and weight are not as important as reliability, i.e. not having to work on the bike constantly. I also wonder how modern steel and aluminium materials compete against cfrp in the field of reliability and robustness. Can a modern Superbike be used in 50 years from now (like so many vintage bikes from the 70s you see around)? Is it correct that components "don't last as long as they used to" as is often said?
As a casual commuter, I’d love to see your idea put into action. A week after purchasing my road bike, it was having shifting problems and the front wheel was out of true. It’s all fixed now, but I try to use that bike and wrench on it more often, because I want to make sure it’s actually up to the task of reliably taking me places. At one point, I was contemplating swapping to some touring bike wheels (but rim brake wheels aren’t as easy to find as I had hoped), because the durability was far more important to me than the weight.
@@mericanignoranc3551 normally it's the cables ends and ferrules fully seating more over time. Rarely is it true cable stretch. It used to easy to pre seat the outers but just yanking on the exposed shifter or break cable. But as time has gone on more and more bikes have internally routed cables so you can't really pre seat/pre stretch what ever you'd like to call it
In 1999 i finished 2e in La Marmotte in just over 6 hours. I was riding a Colnago c40 with Dura ace 9. The bike weight was 8 kilo with the Helium wheels. I think with a bike of 2022 i will not make a lot of time on it. It is in the leggs not in material. Good leggs and condition that is what you need, of course a good looking bike with super components give you a little bit extra when you look down on the Gallibier when you are sufering. Best regards.
Even though I was somewhat dissatisfied for using totally different bikes, I appreciate the interesting experiment. Thumbs up for the peoples’ groupset!
I think you need to do this test with the same frame. Just switch out the group. Also even though 105 may weight more can they not use lighter stuff elsewhere to stay as close as possible to the UCI weight?
I think it’s kind of hard for most normal people to think of a $5,000 bicycle being “mid-tier”. Before I got interested in bikes, I probably would have assumed that $5,000 would get you the absolute cream of the crop. Then, when I started shopping around and looking at some of the top brands, my presumptions were very quickly laid to rest. Sometimes it still doesn’t really compute how a bicycle, no matter how advanced, could possibly be worth $10-18k. In reality, it isn’t, unless you’re either a fairly wealthy enthusiast or you’re competing professionally against top tier racers.
As someone with at least one bike with every Shimano road groupset (minus sora). I can say that Tiagra & 105 are the best groupsets in terms of price to performance and time in the sweet spot of maintenance. In my experience it seems as if any serious rider with minimum mechanical assistance would be better off with 105 rather than Ultegra or DA since the higher sets require greater more constant maintenance to perform at 100% . In reality through with training, the realistic 6-7w difference between the top 3 sets is nulled by max power and power fluctuations. In a TT environment 105 might cost you a close top 10 but it won't be the reason you can't make the time cut off, that is all on you. That's also why team training bikes and self owned/bought team member bikes don't usually don't have DA. Not every rider is a mechanic or has a mechanic on hand for keeping the tip top at tip top. That being said I'll take all unwanted Dura Ace equiped bikes people want to get rid of now, preferably for free.
The title of this episode was can you win the tour on 105. With the latest generations of Dura ace, Ultegra and 105 said to have the same level of performance and only weight being the difference. So all you need to do to the pro level bike is add the wieght difference of the group set for the second run. GCN is great but this was pointless to many variables.
The Tour wasn't won on Shimano components but rather Campagnolo. Yes, shock horror!! I realise that Campag doesn't have the stranglehold that it once had but it's still in there and viable with a decent range.
GCN is pretty good at pushing their sponsors products, but absolute shyte at science. Always have been. They should have just taken two bikes, same models, and outfitted one with 105 and one with Dura Ace and run the test. But no, they used two completely different bikes with one weighing more than 2 kg more than the other. And there was still only less than 3 seconds difference.
I enjoy the "what if" type of content. I was on a ride and I was thinking of the gear ratio and distance traveled. Here is my suggestion. Do a travel distance in each gear on a cassette. With standard group sets on a race/road bike, gravel, and mountain bike. Thank you for presenting great content, it makes me think in greater detail about my cycling. Ride to the level of your smile.
If you look at a gear chart you can read the distance travelled for each given sprocket/chainring combination. Not sure what that will prove, though, seems a bit pointless.
I think the takeaway is that most of us are not holding 6w/kg for an extended period of time and so a mid-grade group set will be A-OK for the weekend group ride. Anything more may just be bragging rights.
No, it doesn't...this testing is far from scientifically sound. It literally answers nothing. What it does do is describe a very specific situation, on a very specific course, with an extremely low (statistical) power/effect size, and loosely extrapolates this information into a general application. It's "fun facts," but it does not "answer" anything.
Was trying to find a good condition CAAD 12 ultegra within my budget but they were all a bit tatty or too expensive so in the end I went for a 105 that was immaculate for £600. No regrets, it's a great bike.
I suggest using those 80s bike collections to see if the weight of Laurent Fignon’s delta brakes cost him more that 8 seconds in 1989 when compared to Lemonds Mavic/Modolos
Given that they generally aren't going full gas all the time, tactics (drafting, who's pulling who) are far more important than even a 30 second time gap up the final climb at peak performance. It's very non-linear as well when someone breaks, so depending on whether that extra power required puts the rider over the edge, it could be no difference or it could be 10 minutes. Really, really hard to know and why no team would ever take that chance (not to mention Shimano isn't going to sponsor anyone to ride 105).
Can someone show Feather how to sit on a saddle and pedal at the same time? Sometimes he sits, and sometimes he pedals, but imagine if he could combine the two!
I recently made a few upgrades here, frame, wheelset and my groupset is kind of a mix of ultegra and 105 because I kept the front derailleur, the cassete and chain 105, rest is ultegra, and I don't feel any need to go higher than that, specially chain and cassete, a lot cheaper to maintain 105 when you need to change them.
The tractive force for a wheeled vehicle is well known. It consists of cross section area, density of air and velocity et al. When rising against gravity, an addition is Mass ( N ) x Sin Theta. Where Theta is angle of incline. Mass ( N ) = kg x G = kg x 9.81 m/s^2. So,,, Mass is the governing factor in all cyclists who intend riding up a hill.
Fun video, as always. The rigour of this one, though. I thought it was a bit too carelessly sloppy, to be honest. We obviously can't expect a perfectly controlled experiment in a GCN video, but if you're going to do this kind of thing, please make at least a minimal effort to limit some of your variables. Now I have no idea if I should stick to 105 for my reasonably priced, fairly nice mid-level alloy bike, or go all in for electronic Dura Ace.
Proof that i needed to justify the purchase of a top of the line super bike. Jumping dozens of places on the most popular segments around me just by making an upgrade is more than enough of a benefit. We only live once!
Can You Win The Tour de France On Shimano 105? That is easy to answer: No not even on the top level components i would even come close to survive the second day.
To an extent. I rode a 50 mile ride, once, and then tweaked the front disc brake, and rode the same ride 15 minutes faster the next time. Turns out the front brake was slightly clamping on the rotor and I didn’t notice until after the ride. Now, that’s a bit of an anomaly, but it does show that your equipment can make a huge difference.
The answer is yes as long as the shift capability is the same. (Ie; Di2) Keep in mind that at this point the trickle down tech has raised the bar pretty bar. Compare current 105 to Dura Ace 6600 which won the TDF.
The mental advantage of knowing you are on ‘the best’ gear at pro (and amateur) level surely is just or even more important… I know it works for me! Even a new pair of socks makes me feel good and ride better!!
I still think that tactics would be way more of a deciding factor than mid spec vs high spec bikes. Having a teammate to draft off of makes way more of a difference and crucially pogacar having to close down attacks from Vingegaard and Roglic created a binary scenario where Pogacar had to produce more FAR more power than say mid spec vs high spec bikes. The seconds from components aren't necessarily translating as much to times because so much depends whether or not the rider holds a wheel. Where the time gaps come in is the delta after the rider is dropped or rides off the front.
Very interesting video… Very useful too! These kind of comparisons help a buyer to understand what he can expect to get from a bike with a specific amout of money and to decide if it is worth it. Well done 👍
You Serious ? You need someone doing a non controlled experiment on RUclips to tell you if it’s worth buying a 105 vs ultegra vs dura ace ? I’m quite sure most people can work it out for themselves.
@@UselessRandom Yep, I’m serious. A beginner might know nothing at all about components. And even an experienced rider might find it helpful to see a comparison which highlights differences between components. That’s the best use of the web we can do, that is sharing 😊👍
@@zedddddful The chain doesn't last as long, but it's also cheaper to replace. If you monitor stretch and replace appropriately, you shouldn't have any issues getting the rest of the groupset to last much longer than 6 months.
@@zedddddful if anything lasts that short you either do like 10k in 3 months or you do sth wrong. Ive ridden bikes with even cheaper parts (like tourney) with an unlubed chain for years without issues.
Just to point out that the 400g extra weight added to the top-end bike to meet UCI standard is about the same as the weight difference between the dura ace and 105 groupset.
Great video. The only thing that would make it better would be add Ollie in as a "control group ", but really just to see how long it would take Andrew to drop him. I'm pretty sure Las Vegas would have odds on that 😀
I had a similar thought last night as I was taking my 34 year old bike for a ride with it's 34 year old 105 components....they are in great shape still, why should i upgrade? Of course at my level of fitness Dura Ace would only lighten my wallet.
Exactly. I could live like a monk for a month and drop 10 pounds fat and climb much faster on my 20 year old 105 equipped bike than if I spent a couple of grand on Durace electronic 12 speed to save at best a few ounces. Would either be worth it for some strava pb s probably not.
I would love to see a comparrison of a Tour de France bike kitted out with 105 components over a 3 week race. I wonder if the differents would measure in seconds, rarher than minutes.
What I’d like to see is a bike with dura-ace components and weight added to the UCI limit then the same frame with 105 components. Ideally with the frame built with 105 being just on the UCI limit so effectively the weight advantage of duraace is negated.
I would say it would be almost impossible for a numer of reasons. 1st is that 105 doesn’t include a 54 front chainring. Now only 50 (di2) and a 52 will be available in january. On fast rolling stages you need that speed. 2nd is weight. With disc brakes it is almost impossible to reach 6.8 kg even with red or dura ace, add 0,5 kg and the mountain stages will be harder. Lastly the long rear derailleur takes slightly more wind and a 105 chain uses a few more watts than dura ace chain does. Performance otherwise is just as good and the teams could use 105 on their training bikes with no issues.
Seems like 3 seconds is within a margin of error unless you guys are extremely precise with timing. I'd like to see a longer test if possible. Anyway, great video and it's always fun to see Mr. Feather!
Having owned a mid spectrum bike for several years, but had the opportunity to ride a high spec bike, you can easily tell the difference, and as others have commented, top notch wheels would probably be more important overall. I can't justify the extra cost, but you do get what you pay for.
I'd like to know if a rider could win a grand tour today (or tomorrow) with a mechanical group set. That's a challenge that we'll never see realized, as it might show that we've all been scammed by the "need" for an electronic group set. It would also only be possible to test using Campagnolo components, because Shimano and SRAM have eliminated mechanical group sets from their high end offerings. Disc or rim brake would be up to the rider's choice, but since most frame makers are eliminating rim brake frames from their lineups, let's say that disc brakes are OK for this test.
Many riders prefer mechanical. Cancellara famously chose mechanical when he was offered electronic DA, and I believe Sagan prefers it as well. Personally, I like Campag mechanical and prefer it over Di2 because there is greater movement of the lever that is required, giving it a better tactile feel.
The answer is yes. You can easely compensate for the weight difference by going to pee before the start. For trimmers: buy a medium or even a cheap bike and loose your excess weight. I have heard people of 90 to 100kg boast about the weight of their bikes and components and how much difference it makes, but loose 10, 20 kg and see how much difference that makes in your purse and performance. Almost all my Strava records I have done on a old Batavus with the old elliptical 105 set. I was younger and lighter then. When I bought a new 3 kg lighter bike with new 11 gear 105 set the difference was at most 10 seconds on some longer sections back to back. And that's probably explained by less friction and the better aerodynamics. That was the whole improvement in 35 years. About 1,5seconds per/km. That is a lot on 5000 km, but most of a course you are in the bunch and they are not riding faster now then 35 years ago. So the difference is made in timetrails and uphill, mainly the last one, about 200km. That is 300 seconds= 5 minutes. I think the talent of a Eddy Merckx would compensate for that.
Great fun. But stop with the Eurobike already - you've gotten your money's worth I suggest. And thank goodness you had access to a premiere athlete like Andrew to stand in for Pog. ; )
As said below… tactics… the tour is not a race in which every rider gives it his all at every moment, sometimes they ride along and only at key moments gof for it… so those 3 seconds in four minutes… I guess this would boil dow to: can you win a time trial stage with mid-spec equipment, that would probably be no.
Can 105 win a major race like the Tour? Absolutely! The right combination of rider, bike frame, tactics & strategies, nutrition, training and genetics would pretty much negate any small advantage Dura Ace would offer over the the small difference of 105. All things being equal the weight differences could easily be overcome by a slightly smaller breakfast and or less coffee lol 😂. I really believe a very talented and genetically gifted rider is way more important than anything else involved. if you have a genetic phenom hit the peloton it probably won’t matter if they 105 or whatever!
That Orbea frameset is much more aero than that Canyon one. I think if you hit the 10.000 likes, you should get the same bike (shape) in mid tier and top tier guise, and try again.
imo, just the chainset alone, if Claris and Super Record were the same 'speed' then the difference in your segment would be much more than a clutch of seconds. In other words, your older DA chainset you used, propped up the mid-range groupset significantly.
It was a fun test, but you can't draw any conclusions on a sample size of one. Secondly for the test to be valid you would need to do the test on the same bike to eliminate the possible variance caused by the bike itself, which in this case easily could have been the difference. What we need is a wealthy person to sponsor a top tour team and then fit the team with mid level components. I am sure the SRAM, Shimano and Campy wouldn't like that. In my humble opinion, Jonas Vingegaard would have still won last year's tour with Ultegra or 105 and this year's with Force or Rival. His mechanics would have those mid level components working flawlessly. Weight difference would be addressed by making reductions in other areas of the bike. But I love the way GCN mixes the serious videos with stuff just for fun and entertainment!
I would love for you to repeat this test with top spec bikes for every 2-3 years going back to the 90s How would Miguel indurains bike compare to vingegaard
@@harrybruijs2614 i have to say I don't care about that, too many uncertainties, but pitting the bikes up against each other with the same rider, that is possible
you need a way longer climb for this test. 3 seconds could be a random gust of wind, or a couple more cars passing in the opposite direction. That being said, many years ago Thor Hushovd won the u23 worlds tempo on a shimano 105 spec bike.
It appears to always be the rider on the day that makes the real difference. In the real world there's other riders to chase, draughting, team tactics and other "in race" incentives that would possibly negate any differences measured by a power meter and stopwatch. And then there's placebo, would having lower level components create a mental block to optimum performance?
You really need more samples for this one. More riders, more days, more climbs, more distance - with similar equipment. The gap experienced could have been a different anomaly where the 105 bike came out on top.
How much of a difference is there between the one Watt missing from his mid-grade run as compared to his top of the line run? For the distance and degrade traveled would that one Watt make up a couple of seconds he was behind on the mid grade bike?
This is the point. When you have such a very small difference between runs that one watt could be three seconds. I think the take home is that the two runs were startlingly similar.
its about the bike reaching 6.8 kg for the big Tour climbs not drive train weight.... my bike is 7.5-7.7 kg with mostly 105... If I threw climbing wheels on it were talking 7.0 kg with almost all 105 except wheels. Many Tour winners have mixed components to add ballast over the years... My old rim brake bike with dura ace is like 6.5 kg probably not allowed in a UCI race.
Of course the dura ace chainset isn’t only an advantage in weight, but *supposedly* in transmission efficiency too. Not that the result would change massively… ;)
But what about Sram Rival, which on paper matches up with Ultegra? Or a mix of Sram components + Shimano crankset, which is lighter than Ultegra and barely heavier than Dura-ace?
Feather's bike is lighter than most of the pro bikes on GCN racing so the difference between a bike used on the tour would be even smaller. All the small hills in between will not add up as much because they are often below the gradients of the Alpe and ridden faster and the GC guys will ride in the slipstream of the domestiques. Next try: Get Wout van Aert and test how much difference 105 vs. Dura Ace is on rolling terrain. My guess: Not at all.
The thing is that the final conclusion is based on a single data point. It would have been more accurate if Feather went up the climb 3 times on each bike in order to calculate averages. This 1 W difference might account for 1 second, wind might have changed and so on. Other than that, finally a new video featuring Andrew 😁
the 3 second diff probably cancels out pretty quick if they take more than one sample, usually all of gcn experiments fails in that regard and end up being an ad disguised as a scientific comparison
1 W is a 0.2% difference, and 1 s is a 0.4% difference. Yet, there was nothing being said about the power meter, which calibration error is 1.5% for Shimano which is bigger than the whole time difference. So, yeah, a lot of errors involved.
You should have added the descent as well. A super bike will descend quite a bit faster with better wheels and more aero frame . The super bike will also go faster on the flats with more ease .
So - pretty much equal and differences not measurable to any meaningful margin of error. That leaves slick gear changing and braking - probably impossible to test but, if a dropped gear is more likely in a turn near base of AdH, that could lose the stage or the overall. And a sprint finish might be helped by slicker changing. Braking down a hill into a turn might be better on the more expensive option. Marginal gains at best! I wish I had not gone for an Ultegra secondhand 2018 Specialized Roubaix Expert - should have held out for 105 and with higher quality wheels, wider rims and 28c tyres
Novice bike up a climb? Sure! But what about MY novice body up a climb! I reckon you'd need to do 684 watts for 40 mins with me on your bike. I can do it for about 2 pedal strokes. But you've got this!
Do you think the Tour de France could be won on 105?
Didn't Froome do it on Sora?
If you had stuck in on Jonas' bike this year, I think the answer is probably yes.
You forgot one part of the equation - how much difference in time did that 1 watt make?
Nope
@@xeno242 He said it in the video. Three seconds, which given the additional distance on the Alp would extrapolate to around thirty seconds.
Come on guys (especially Dr. Bridgewood) - the error margin here was far greater than the time difference - the results were at best inconclusive
Agree - the differences were miniscule and for all practical purposes, identical.
What are you some Scientologist or something?
Great point. 1.2% difference in time and 0.2% difference in power. And this is without error of measurements, which can be huge for a power meter (Shimano claims 1.5% only for a calibration). Even any small disturbance by a car or pedestrian would matter here a lot. I would trust this more if it would be done more than 1 time to see the spread. Yet, we all know that a good bike can actually give you over 10% if you compare 1000 and 10000-dollar bikes.
@@transkryption it is actually quite a scientifically accurate comment. For example, Shimano claims a power meter calibration error of 1.5% which is bigger than the time difference here.
I believe wheels/tire/tube combo matter more than rest of bike. I would like to see the same test with the exact same wheel set being used on both tests.
What is a tube ?
agree , frame aerodynamics to
Totally agree! Very good Point!
Correct, the least variables the better. All you are looking for is the performance of the gears
I want a TDF winner to do a double blind on a $150 bike to prove it is neither the bike nor the steroids.
I want to add something that was not taken in consideration: in the recent years it's because of tactics that a tourwinner will not win it with more than 5-10 minutes simply because when he has a lead of let say a few minutes he won't take the risk of attacking at the beginning of a climb for instance. They switch to defensive riding tactics. But that doesn't mean he and his superbike aren't capable of winning with a bigger difference. They just don't try.
This tour it was a bit different. I loved it, finally a real course again, like the Giro and Vuelta. It because Sky-Ineos can't control the course anymore in the mountains. Good riddance.
@@harrybruijs2614 it’s got little to do with the course … what’s a “real” TDF course anyway? Teams have copied sky/ineos and are now competing properly. You should be grateful to Sky for lifting the whole quality of the teams
What's the risk of attacking early If he's so good?
@@Fred-eh7lj I could name a lot of different scenarios, but that's irrelevant. It's the kind of tactics they actually use in the recent years.
@@IverKnackerov That is a very good point. Wasn't a fan of Sky but had to admit they brought in a professionalism rarely seen in pro bike racing before. Warming up and warming down was laughed at - now they all do it. And many more standard practice operations from other sports. Whisper it softly - the pre-Sky doping made for very lazy training on the assumption that dope would make up the difference. I said at the time, assuming Sky did not dope (ha ha), it was still not a level playing field because their budget at the time enabled them to replicate the effects of doping with sports science, specialist chefs, and expensive training camps at altitude which had rarely been attempted before. IK also said that they had the only realistic professional sports budget and noted that their entire year budget was not far off a top football player's individual salary
The 3 seconds is likely not statistically significant. Lets ride the same bike up the same road with the same poer 30 times and see what happens.
Exactly! And the avg watt was also higher only 1 watt, but that could be the 3 sek
and get pog to do it
but you are right...3 seconds is propably withiin the noice or jitter of the measurement
and kill the guy doing that... lmao
This is GCN, not a peer reviewed scientific study.
@@MrJaycobsen According to bike calculator that one watt counts for 1 second. It's to less of a difference too make something out of . The positions may wary on the bikes also.
Could anyone win the TDF on 105? Maybe not. But--more importantly--do ANY of us watching this video actually need top level group sets? Absolutely not, lol.
I swear at this point, people only get Dura ace to show they can afford it...lol.
Exactly. And the video meant to be a little funny and casual. Other posts are taking things too seriously I feel.
I ride DuraAce, why the hate. My watt privilege entitles me to ride faster than you 🤣🤣
Yes, Dura Ace for the coffee break, Ultegra for the run. :-)
The notion of whether someone “needs” expensive gear is daft, in my opinion. No one “needs” a road bike at all. For most people, cycling is a hobby, and people are free to spend however much money they can afford. There’s no reason to think that you have to be fast to “earn the right” to buy expensive gear.
Wouldn’t a fair test be the same bike with two different group sets????
And the rider's perceived effort (possibly a blind test?)
@@mattwake7230 blindfold test on the road let’s goooooo
yeah word. Not sure if a blind test would be necessary (or even possible) if the power output is the same though.
Also with power meter.
That wouldn’t help them sell dura ace components.
I think you should make this test with the same frame and change the group set. First one with shimano dura ace, and second one with shimano 105.
Ollie I got really excited when you said Tadej would be joining you! 😁Thanks for having Feather, he is awesome as well. Nice little test. Thanks
Love Ollie’s quirky and dad sense of humour
I'd love to see some robustness tests of modern bikes and components. I feel for the average rider, aerodonamics and weight are not as important as reliability, i.e. not having to work on the bike constantly. I also wonder how modern steel and aluminium materials compete against cfrp in the field of reliability and robustness. Can a modern Superbike be used in 50 years from now (like so many vintage bikes from the 70s you see around)? Is it correct that components "don't last as long as they used to" as is often said?
As a casual commuter, I’d love to see your idea put into action. A week after purchasing my road bike, it was having shifting problems and the front wheel was out of true. It’s all fixed now, but I try to use that bike and wrench on it more often, because I want to make sure it’s actually up to the task of reliably taking me places. At one point, I was contemplating swapping to some touring bike wheels (but rim brake wheels aren’t as easy to find as I had hoped), because the durability was far more important to me than the weight.
@@Rocky4719 When you get a new bike cable stretch will cause shifting problems and is perfectly normal...you need a tune up.
THIS!!! Get it done Ollie!
@@mericanignoranc3551 Yeah, to this end, our local bike shop offers a free tune up within 30-90 days of purchase, I believe precisely for this reason.
@@mericanignoranc3551 normally it's the cables ends and ferrules fully seating more over time. Rarely is it true cable stretch. It used to easy to pre seat the outers but just yanking on the exposed shifter or break cable. But as time has gone on more and more bikes have internally routed cables so you can't really pre seat/pre stretch what ever you'd like to call it
In 1999 i finished 2e in La Marmotte in just over 6 hours. I was riding a Colnago c40 with Dura ace 9. The bike weight was 8 kilo with the Helium wheels. I think with a bike of 2022 i will not make a lot of time on it. It is in the leggs not in material. Good leggs and condition that is what you need, of course a good looking bike with super components give you a little bit extra when you look down on the Gallibier when you are sufering. Best regards.
Wtf is a Legg
Andrew is such a great sport. He really earned that lettuce
Even though I was somewhat dissatisfied for using totally different bikes, I appreciate the interesting experiment. Thumbs up for the peoples’ groupset!
At $$1900 Shimano 105 is NO LONGER "the groupset of the people". That is now Tiagra 4700.
@@lastfm4477 Wot? You can have a bike with 105 for less than 1000$.
Man, first Filippo Ganna and now Pogacar. I'm beginning to doubt all pros to keep their commitments with GCN...
Its very unlikely that any of these pros would turn up in Bath! Show biz smoke and mirrors!
I love that Andrew Feather always seems up for helping out in videos!
He loves it, and we love him 😍
That man's legs!
Getting paid probably helps ;)
Always fun having feather on the channel.
I think you need to do this test with the same frame. Just switch out the group. Also even though 105 may weight more can they not use lighter stuff elsewhere to stay as close as possible to the UCI weight?
The lettuce 🥬 part of this video was the highlight lol
Love these videos, made me laugh a lot thanks Ollie and Alex for the constant entertainment
The treatment of Shimano 105 here is much better than in the 105 Di2 video, where Ultegra instead was the enthusiast's groupset. I like the change.
I think it’s kind of hard for most normal people to think of a $5,000 bicycle being “mid-tier”. Before I got interested in bikes, I probably would have assumed that $5,000 would get you the absolute cream of the crop.
Then, when I started shopping around and looking at some of the top brands, my presumptions were very quickly laid to rest. Sometimes it still doesn’t really compute how a bicycle, no matter how advanced, could possibly be worth $10-18k. In reality, it isn’t, unless you’re either a fairly wealthy enthusiast or you’re competing professionally against top tier racers.
As someone with at least one bike with every Shimano road groupset (minus sora). I can say that Tiagra & 105 are the best groupsets in terms of price to performance and time in the sweet spot of maintenance. In my experience it seems as if any serious rider with minimum mechanical assistance would be better off with 105 rather than Ultegra or DA since the higher sets require greater more constant maintenance to perform at 100% . In reality through with training, the realistic 6-7w difference between the top 3 sets is nulled by max power and power fluctuations. In a TT environment 105 might cost you a close top 10 but it won't be the reason you can't make the time cut off, that is all on you. That's also why team training bikes and self owned/bought team member bikes don't usually don't have DA. Not every rider is a mechanic or has a mechanic on hand for keeping the tip top at tip top. That being said I'll take all unwanted Dura Ace equiped bikes people want to get rid of now, preferably for free.
I love my Tiagra stuff. If I’m paying for the gear, I’m spec’ing Tiagra.
The title of this episode was can you win the tour on 105. With the latest generations of Dura ace, Ultegra and 105 said to have the same level of performance and only weight being the difference. So all you need to do to the pro level bike is add the wieght difference of the group set for the second run. GCN is great but this was pointless to many variables.
last gen 105 was the same mechanically as DA and ultegra, new 105 is basically last gen ultegra mech with 1 more gear and without new hyperglide
You sure the chains are actually equally fast?
The Tour wasn't won on Shimano components but rather Campagnolo. Yes, shock horror!! I realise that Campag doesn't have the stranglehold that it once had but it's still in there and viable with a decent range.
@@DougMorley1 I hate to break it to you but this years TDF was won on Shimano.
GCN is pretty good at pushing their sponsors products, but absolute shyte at science. Always have been. They should have just taken two bikes, same models, and outfitted one with 105 and one with Dura Ace and run the test. But no, they used two completely different bikes with one weighing more than 2 kg more than the other. And there was still only less than 3 seconds difference.
I enjoy the "what if" type of content. I was on a ride and I was thinking of the gear ratio and distance traveled. Here is my suggestion. Do a travel distance in each gear on a cassette. With standard group sets on a race/road bike, gravel, and mountain bike. Thank you for presenting great content, it makes me think in greater detail about my cycling. Ride to the level of your smile.
If you look at a gear chart you can read the distance travelled for each given sprocket/chainring combination. Not sure what that will prove, though, seems a bit pointless.
I think the takeaway is that most of us are not holding 6w/kg for an extended period of time and so a mid-grade group set will be A-OK for the weekend group ride. Anything more may just be bragging rights.
Pretty much answers the question about whether anything above 105 is worth the money unless you are racing at a top level though
totally agree. the latest gen 11s 105 hydraulic is incredibly good.
No, it doesn't...this testing is far from scientifically sound. It literally answers nothing. What it does do is describe a very specific situation, on a very specific course, with an extremely low (statistical) power/effect size, and loosely extrapolates this information into a general application. It's "fun facts," but it does not "answer" anything.
I really wanted Ulterga and now I'm not so sure
Well said 👍🏻
Was trying to find a good condition CAAD 12 ultegra within my budget but they were all a bit tatty or too expensive so in the end I went for a 105 that was immaculate for £600.
No regrets, it's a great bike.
1:03 GCN very own STIG 😂 - In the next GCN show, he takes off his helmet and becomes Tadej Pogačar 😱
That lettuce gag killed me. Andrew Feather is such a great sport.
Can't wait for Andrew Feather's race up alp d'huez on the Eurobike!
What a time to be alive. "Sorry mate, I can't join you for a ride today as I forgot to charge my pedals."
you could still ride, you just wouldn't have power data
I suggest using those 80s bike collections to see if the weight of Laurent Fignon’s delta brakes cost him more that 8 seconds in 1989 when compared to Lemonds Mavic/Modolos
That was clever, Pogacha doing a test in 105 is hilarious I deed @GCN Tech 🤣👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
Given that they generally aren't going full gas all the time, tactics (drafting, who's pulling who) are far more important than even a 30 second time gap up the final climb at peak performance. It's very non-linear as well when someone breaks, so depending on whether that extra power required puts the rider over the edge, it could be no difference or it could be 10 minutes. Really, really hard to know and why no team would ever take that chance (not to mention Shimano isn't going to sponsor anyone to ride 105).
Can someone show Feather how to sit on a saddle and pedal at the same time? Sometimes he sits, and sometimes he pedals, but imagine if he could combine the two!
lol
Mountain goats don’t sit often
I recently made a few upgrades here, frame, wheelset and my groupset is kind of a mix of ultegra and 105 because I kept the front derailleur, the cassete and chain 105, rest is ultegra, and I don't feel any need to go higher than that, specially chain and cassete, a lot cheaper to maintain 105 when you need to change them.
The tractive force for a wheeled vehicle is well known. It consists of cross section area, density of air and velocity et al.
When rising against gravity, an addition is Mass ( N ) x Sin Theta. Where Theta is angle of incline.
Mass ( N ) = kg x G = kg x 9.81 m/s^2.
So,,, Mass is the governing factor in all cyclists who intend riding up a hill.
And knowing most of them add weights to keep the bike at 6.8Kg, higher end components basically have very few advantages if any.
Fun video, as always. The rigour of this one, though. I thought it was a bit too carelessly sloppy, to be honest. We obviously can't expect a perfectly controlled experiment in a GCN video, but if you're going to do this kind of thing, please make at least a minimal effort to limit some of your variables. Now I have no idea if I should stick to 105 for my reasonably priced, fairly nice mid-level alloy bike, or go all in for electronic Dura Ace.
the whole error of power meter calibration of 1.5% (from Shimano) is bigger that the presented time difference =)
Great video guys!!
Proof that i needed to justify the purchase of a top of the line super bike. Jumping dozens of places on the most popular segments around me just by making an upgrade is more than enough of a benefit. We only live once!
Can You Win The Tour de France On Shimano 105? That is easy to answer: No not even on the top level components i would even come close to survive the second day.
At the end the day it's still down to the engine pushing the pedals
To an extent. I rode a 50 mile ride, once, and then tweaked the front disc brake, and rode the same ride 15 minutes faster the next time. Turns out the front brake was slightly clamping on the rotor and I didn’t notice until after the ride. Now, that’s a bit of an anomaly, but it does show that your equipment can make a huge difference.
@@someinconsequentialusernam7799 ...that's what she said.
The answer is yes as long as the shift capability is the same. (Ie; Di2) Keep in mind that at this point the trickle down tech has raised the bar pretty bar. Compare current 105 to Dura Ace 6600 which won the TDF.
too bad trickle down tech also means trickle down prices!
The mental advantage of knowing you are on ‘the best’ gear at pro (and amateur) level surely is just or even more important… I know it works for me! Even a new pair of socks makes me feel good and ride better!!
Another great vid ✊
I still think that tactics would be way more of a deciding factor than mid spec vs high spec bikes. Having a teammate to draft off of makes way more of a difference and crucially pogacar having to close down attacks from Vingegaard and Roglic created a binary scenario where Pogacar had to produce more FAR more power than say mid spec vs high spec bikes. The seconds from components aren't necessarily translating as much to times because so much depends whether or not the rider holds a wheel. Where the time gaps come in is the delta after the rider is dropped or rides off the front.
Very interesting video… Very useful too! These kind of comparisons help a buyer to understand what he can expect to get from a bike with a specific amout of money and to decide if it is worth it. Well done 👍
You Serious ? You need someone doing a non controlled experiment on RUclips to tell you if it’s worth buying a 105 vs ultegra vs dura ace ? I’m quite sure most people can work it out for themselves.
@@UselessRandom Yep, I’m serious. A beginner might know nothing at all about components. And even an experienced rider might find it helpful to see a comparison which highlights differences between components. That’s the best use of the web we can do, that is sharing 😊👍
@@ronnyoutlaw a beginner should buy a Tiagra
@@ronnyoutlaw Really? BEGINNERS are going to go buy a Dura-Ace equipped bike?? Only if they're dentists.
@@lastfm4477 Probably they don’t know what Dura-Ace is… and if it’s worth the price. Unless they watch video such as this one 😉
Time for some more sora and lower groupset stuff.
Can't get Sora stuff to last more than 6 months waste of money.
@@zedddddful The chain doesn't last as long, but it's also cheaper to replace. If you monitor stretch and replace appropriately, you shouldn't have any issues getting the rest of the groupset to last much longer than 6 months.
@@zedddddful if anything lasts that short you either do like 10k in 3 months or you do sth wrong. Ive ridden bikes with even cheaper parts (like tourney) with an unlubed chain for years without issues.
@@zedddddful If you can't get sora to last then it is probably something you're doing wrongly. Often the lower range groupsets are more robust.
Are you crazy. Shimano don't want you to buy those.
One small thing - I'd feel a lot less cranky if I scratched my 105 rear der vs my swanky Dura Ace one.
@Yippee Skippy that reminded me of the fall of Laurent Fignon, when his crank broke
Just to point out that the 400g extra weight added to the top-end bike to meet UCI standard is about the same as the weight difference between the dura ace and 105 groupset.
Great video. The only thing that would make it better would be add Ollie in as a "control group ", but really just to see how long it would take Andrew to drop him. I'm pretty sure Las Vegas would have odds on that 😀
Like 30sec and he's dropped on that "climb"
I had a similar thought last night as I was taking my 34 year old bike for a ride with it's 34 year old 105 components....they are in great shape still, why should i upgrade? Of course at my level of fitness Dura Ace would only lighten my wallet.
Exactly. I could live like a monk for a month and drop 10 pounds fat and climb much faster on my 20 year old 105 equipped bike than if I spent a couple of grand on Durace electronic 12 speed to save at best a few ounces. Would either be worth it for some strava pb s probably not.
@@tommaguzzi1723 go easy there, there are monks and then there are Trappist monks and you know which order to choose.
@@ViveSemelBeneVivere would be a blast… Friar Tuck a Dogma or equal…
I just had to gently stroke my Giant Propel Advanced with 105. Loving it xD
Good to hear a fellow Yorkshireman correctly pronounce Bath. Thanks Ollie and Andrew.
But Bath isn't in Yorkshire, so they're pronouncing it incorrectly.
Haha! I see my lettuce comment went down well the other day and you even bought him one. Lovely
I would love to see a comparrison of a Tour de France bike kitted out with 105 components over a 3 week race. I wonder if the differents would measure in seconds, rarher than minutes.
Feelin’ pretty good about my 105!
And so you should! 💪
What I’d like to see is a bike with dura-ace components and weight added to the UCI limit then the same frame with 105 components.
Ideally with the frame built with 105 being just on the UCI limit so effectively the weight advantage of duraace is negated.
I would say it would be almost impossible for a numer of reasons.
1st is that 105 doesn’t include a 54 front chainring. Now only 50 (di2) and a 52 will be available in january. On fast rolling stages you need that speed.
2nd is weight. With disc brakes it is almost impossible to reach 6.8 kg even with red or dura ace, add 0,5 kg and the mountain stages will be harder.
Lastly the long rear derailleur takes slightly more wind and a 105 chain uses a few more watts than dura ace chain does.
Performance otherwise is just as good and the teams could use 105 on their training bikes with no issues.
Seems like 3 seconds is within a margin of error unless you guys are extremely precise with timing. I'd like to see a longer test if possible. Anyway, great video and it's always fun to see Mr. Feather!
3 seconds is also within an error of power meter calibration (1.5% for Shimano).
great concept, and love the analytical approach. good work, dr bridgewood.
I like how you guys finally gave Andrew some GCN kit, unless his sponsors didn’t allow it before..
Was expecting same bike frame, tyres etc with a 105 swap out
Having owned a mid spectrum bike for several years, but had the opportunity to ride a high spec bike, you can easily tell the difference, and as others have commented, top notch wheels would probably be more important overall.
I can't justify the extra cost, but you do get what you pay for.
I'd like to know if a rider could win a grand tour today (or tomorrow) with a mechanical group set. That's a challenge that we'll never see realized, as it might show that we've all been scammed by the "need" for an electronic group set. It would also only be possible to test using Campagnolo components, because Shimano and SRAM have eliminated mechanical group sets from their high end offerings. Disc or rim brake would be up to the rider's choice, but since most frame makers are eliminating rim brake frames from their lineups, let's say that disc brakes are OK for this test.
Many riders prefer mechanical. Cancellara famously chose mechanical when he was offered electronic DA, and I believe Sagan prefers it as well. Personally, I like Campag mechanical and prefer it over Di2 because there is greater movement of the lever that is required, giving it a better tactile feel.
I guess new 105 isn’t selling as well as expected so shimano had GCN step it up
Well, it wouldn't have garnered many sales, given the conclusion.
You are correct Sir!
You can say all you want but the fact is they are exactly the same. If you add that extra watt in to the mid level the time would have been exact.
But maybe the 1 watt loss was down to the groupset?
Would have been more interesting to see the difference in shifting and braking, not just weight.
I think you should do a show, STEROIDS and SPEED vs. EPO doping, see which improves performance more.
The answer is yes. You can easely compensate for the weight difference by going to pee before the start.
For trimmers: buy a medium or even a cheap bike and loose your excess weight.
I have heard people of 90 to 100kg boast about the weight of their bikes and components and how much difference it makes, but loose 10, 20 kg and see how much difference that makes in your purse and performance.
Almost all my Strava records I have done on a old Batavus with the old elliptical 105 set. I was younger and lighter then. When I bought a new 3 kg lighter bike with new 11 gear 105 set the difference was at most 10 seconds on some longer sections back to back. And that's probably explained by less friction and the better aerodynamics. That was the whole improvement in 35 years. About 1,5seconds per/km. That is a lot on 5000 km, but most of a course you are in the bunch and they are not riding faster now then 35 years ago. So the difference is made in timetrails and uphill, mainly the last one, about 200km. That is 300 seconds= 5 minutes. I think the talent of a Eddy Merckx would compensate for that.
Andrew ‘ feather ‘ always loved his surname for his prowess when the road turns up
Great fun. But stop with the Eurobike already - you've gotten your money's worth I suggest. And thank goodness you had access to a premiere athlete like Andrew to stand in for Pog. ; )
As said below… tactics… the tour is not a race in which every rider gives it his all at every moment, sometimes they ride along and only at key moments gof for it… so those 3 seconds in four minutes… I guess this would boil dow to: can you win a time trial stage with mid-spec equipment, that would probably be no.
Can 105 win a major race like the Tour? Absolutely! The right combination of rider, bike frame, tactics & strategies, nutrition, training and genetics would pretty much negate any small advantage Dura Ace would offer over the the small difference of 105. All things being equal the weight differences could easily be overcome by a slightly smaller breakfast and or less coffee lol 😂. I really believe a very talented and genetically gifted rider is way more important than anything else involved. if you have a genetic phenom hit the peloton it probably won’t matter if they 105 or whatever!
I think Eddy Merckx would trash them with a 105.
@3:09 that was terrifying seeing him being released into traffic. Like a bad F1 pit stop.
Using the slipstream is more important than tiny difference of your own material
That Orbea frameset is much more aero than that Canyon one. I think if you hit the 10.000 likes, you should get the same bike (shape) in mid tier and top tier guise, and try again.
imo, just the chainset alone, if Claris and Super Record were the same 'speed' then the difference in your segment would be much more than a clutch of seconds. In other words, your older DA chainset you used, propped up the mid-range groupset significantly.
El hábito no hace al monje. Salu2 dsd mixco Guatemala.
It was a fun test, but you can't draw any conclusions on a sample size of one. Secondly for the test to be valid you would need to do the test on the same bike to eliminate the possible variance caused by the bike itself, which in this case easily could have been the difference. What we need is a wealthy person to sponsor a top tour team and then fit the team with mid level components. I am sure the SRAM, Shimano and Campy wouldn't like that. In my humble opinion, Jonas Vingegaard would have still won last year's tour with Ultegra or 105 and this year's with Force or Rival. His mechanics would have those mid level components working flawlessly. Weight difference would be addressed by making reductions in other areas of the bike. But I love the way GCN mixes the serious videos with stuff just for fun and entertainment!
I would love for you to repeat this test with top spec bikes for every 2-3 years going back to the 90s
How would Miguel indurains bike compare to vingegaard
This is a good idea. GCN's test are always lacking in this regard. They only ever compare 2 things.
And how Indurain would compare to Vinegaard
@@harrybruijs2614 i have to say I don't care about that, too many uncertainties, but pitting the bikes up against each other with the same rider, that is possible
you need a way longer climb for this test. 3 seconds could be a random gust of wind, or a couple more cars passing in the opposite direction. That being said, many years ago Thor Hushovd won the u23 worlds tempo on a shimano 105 spec bike.
It appears to always be the rider on the day that makes the real difference. In the real world there's other riders to chase, draughting, team tactics and other "in race" incentives that would possibly negate any differences measured by a power meter and stopwatch. And then there's placebo, would having lower level components create a mental block to optimum performance?
Of corse! Lance may do that with sora groupset !
You really need more samples for this one. More riders, more days, more climbs, more distance - with similar equipment. The gap experienced could have been a different anomaly where the 105 bike came out on top.
at least with the same power meter, which can give a bigger error than the shown 1.2% alone.
How much of a difference is there between the one Watt missing from his mid-grade run as compared to his top of the line run? For the distance and degrade traveled would that one Watt make up a couple of seconds he was behind on the mid grade bike?
This is the point. When you have such a very small difference between runs that one watt could be three seconds. I think the take home is that the two runs were startlingly similar.
its about the bike reaching 6.8 kg for the big Tour climbs not drive train weight.... my bike is 7.5-7.7 kg with mostly 105... If I threw climbing wheels on it were talking 7.0 kg with almost all 105 except wheels. Many Tour winners have mixed components to add ballast over the years... My old rim brake bike with dura ace is like 6.5 kg probably not allowed in a UCI race.
Of course the dura ace chainset isn’t only an advantage in weight, but *supposedly* in transmission efficiency too. Not that the result would change massively… ;)
105 is really good component. But it is hard to wash the backside of right crank.
But what about Sram Rival, which on paper matches up with Ultegra? Or a mix of Sram components + Shimano crankset, which is lighter than Ultegra and barely heavier than Dura-ace?
Feather's bike is lighter than most of the pro bikes on GCN racing so the difference between a bike used on the tour would be even smaller. All the small hills in between will not add up as much because they are often below the gradients of the Alpe and ridden faster and the GC guys will ride in the slipstream of the domestiques. Next try: Get Wout van Aert and test how much difference 105 vs. Dura Ace is on rolling terrain. My guess: Not at all.
🤣🤣🤣🤣the lettuce as payment 😂😂
The thing is that the final conclusion is based on a single data point. It would have been more accurate if Feather went up the climb 3 times on each bike in order to calculate averages. This 1 W difference might account for 1 second, wind might have changed and so on.
Other than that, finally a new video featuring Andrew 😁
the 3 second diff probably cancels out pretty quick if they take more than one sample, usually all of gcn experiments fails in that regard and end up being an ad disguised as a scientific comparison
1 W is a 0.2% difference, and 1 s is a 0.4% difference. Yet, there was nothing being said about the power meter, which calibration error is 1.5% for Shimano which is bigger than the whole time difference. So, yeah, a lot of errors involved.
You should have added the descent as well. A super bike will descend quite a bit faster with better wheels and more aero frame . The super bike will also go faster on the flats with more ease .
Lesser bikes, as Ollie mentioned, can have identical aero shapes but cost far less. The frame and wheels are no more aero, just lighter.
So - pretty much equal and differences not measurable to any meaningful margin of error. That leaves slick gear changing and braking - probably impossible to test but, if a dropped gear is more likely in a turn near base of AdH, that could lose the stage or the overall. And a sprint finish might be helped by slicker changing. Braking down a hill into a turn might be better on the more expensive option. Marginal gains at best!
I wish I had not gone for an Ultegra secondhand 2018 Specialized Roubaix Expert - should have held out for 105 and with higher quality wheels, wider rims and 28c tyres
You could build a bike with 105 closer to the UCI weight limit and the time difference would be nil. So YES you could win on 105
How about testing something like the Aethos or the Bianchi Aria?
Novice bike up a climb? Sure! But what about MY novice body up a climb! I reckon you'd need to do 684 watts for 40 mins with me on your bike. I can do it for about 2 pedal strokes. But you've got this!
One important thing to note is that many fully integrated bikes aren't compatible with mechanical groupsets