R7000

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Johnno260

Veteran
Location
East Sussex
Please can someone explain this to me the pro's and cons.

I'm looking at the different options with the Shimano groupsets and I don't know the pro/con of the different options.

My current cranks are 172.5, I'm tempted to get the 170mm as I have a tiny amount of toe overlap, the teeth on it are 53.39t

I was tempted by the Ultegra but it's a way higher price point.

If it helps I have some ok climbs where I live.
 

Attachments

  • r7000.JPG
    r7000.JPG
    10.2 KB · Views: 3

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
I can't help with Ultegra comparisons or anything but I have R7000 (not the full groupset - I have some other brakes).

All I can say about it is that it is very good and a big improvement on the SRAM Apex that it replaced. (Well that wasn't difficult because one of the Apex shifters was broken, but it's an improvement on the Apex even before it wore out and started failing).

The shifting is very light touch and ... well ... that's it. It works really well.

If you want lower gearing, then note that R7000 supports a 34t big sprocket. Note that it not only supports it, but the manufacturers say it does. Some other gearing setups support big sprockets in practice but you have to go past the manufacturer's limits to do so.

Can't comment on Ultegra or crank lengths.
 
Last edited:
Location
Loch side.
My current cranks are 172.5, I'm tempted to get the 170mm as I have a tiny amount of toe overlap.

If that's the reason why you want to change crank lengths, you're wasting your money. Overlap is something you just live with. It is only an issue on awkward starts, thereafter, a non-issue.
 
OP
OP
Johnno260

Johnno260

Veteran
Location
East Sussex

no no not the only reason, this is all something I'm just considering but was thinking would the shorter crank help.

it's more I want to understand what the different teeth options mean.
 
OP
OP
Johnno260

Johnno260

Veteran
Location
East Sussex
I wouldn't bother with toe overlap - you are unlikely to solve it with 2.5mm. As an upgrade might be worth it.

I didn't think it would, I have gotten used to it and it's very minimal I was just thinking if I was to upgrade would it help.

It's more the gearing differences I'm confused on.
 

Milkfloat

An Peanut
Location
Midlands
You don't say what you have on the back of yours right now, but if you are struggling on the hills in 53/39 (on the front) and you keep the same ratios on the back you might be better off with a 50/34. To cut a long story short - the bigger numbers on the front means a harder gear, the bigger on the back means easier. Most common at the moment is 50/34 front and 11/32 rear.
 

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
it's more I want to understand what the different teeth options mean.
That's a whole different kettle of fish.
What gearing are you running at the moment and what changes do you hope for? (apart from an all round good gear changing experience).

I'm assuming that you're considering the commonest setup of 50/34 teeth on the chainset. Then you will probably end up with 11-X on the cassette. The X will be the number of teeth on the biggest sprocket. 34 is the biggest you can run and will give you the lowest bottom gear. Or you could go for 32 (low but not super low) or 28 (meh, not very low).

There are tons of other ways to slice it but that's probably the commonest.

I run a 34T big sprocket (and a 34T little ring). Yes, it's low. No, it's not a mega-low gear like some touring bikes have. Yes, it's definitely noticeably lower than the 32. But what does that mean to you? Well, I can't say as gearing is quite a personal taste thing.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
Johnno260

Johnno260

Veteran
Location
East Sussex
Thats what I have currently, if it's the most common setup I suppose it would be best to stick with it.
 

Attachments

  • 5800.JPG
    5800.JPG
    4.5 KB · Views: 5

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
Also what decides on a long or short cage RD?
Long answer

The chain needs to be long enough to go around the big chainring and biggest sprocket, and the cage is needed to take in the slack in the chain that is introduced when using smaller sprockets and/or ring. The bigger difference between the two extremes, the longer the cage needed.

The amount of slack that a derailleur can cope with is called its capacity. It's the difference between (small chaingring + smallest sprocket) and (big chainring + big sprocket). So if you have 50/34 up front and 11-28 in the rear you need a capacity of (50+28) - (34+11) = 33

The R7000 GS (long cage) has a capacity of 39 so it can cope with 50/34 and 11-34
The R7000 SS (short cage) has a capacity of 35 so it can cope with 50/34 and 11-30 but not 32 or 34.

Specs:

https://bike.shimano.com/en-EU/product/component/shimano105-r7000/RD-R7000-GS.html
https://bike.shimano.com/en-EU/product/component/shimano105-r7000/RD-R7000-SS.html

Someone will no doubt be along to say "didn't you know you shouldn't ride in big-big blah blah blah"
Someone else will probably be along to say that they've used a short cage mech with some unfeasible combination and it worked. Yes, the manufacturer's specs can be exceeded.

Edit to add:
Note that the derailleurs are also rated with min and max low sprocket, so if you go for a GS derailleur your biggest sprocket should be between 30 and 34. You shouldn't run a cassette with biggest sprocket of 28 with this if you want to stay within the manufacturers limits. It would probably work though. Similarly if you have an SS you shouldn't run a cassette with a biggest sprocket of 30 or more regardless of capacity considerations. But the manufacturers limits are probably a bit conservative.

Short answer: Unless you are a super fast powerful climber, or you live in an exceptionally flat area: Go for the GS.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
Johnno260

Johnno260

Veteran
Location
East Sussex
So the bikes back from a full strip down service and the R7000 upgrade, I know some of this is placebo I'm sure, but I think the R7000 is better, better ergonomics on the hoods and they seem either smoother at shifting or are way better setup.

The bike looks better, above all else it's something I wanted over needed and it put a smile on my face.

Question I have is on cables, mine where in a sorry state and around 4yrs old. when should I be looking at changing these? either in mileage or timeframe.
 

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
I know exactly how you feel. A while back I changed from worn out (and in parts broken) SRAM Apex to R7000. It was like having a new bike.

I change my gear cables if I start to see fraying near the mechs, or if the shifting becomes wonky. Generally if I feel there is reason, not just because of time or mileage. Also if the bike is going to the shop for something else then I may ask them to do it then.
 
Top Bottom