Shimano Flight Deck for Dummy Cyclists

Shimano Flight Deck Computer

Sometimes you have to read all the way through a freelance post before your dumbassery detector sounds the alarm, and sometimes the condition is pretty much in your face. Today's DotD candidate was closer to the "read all the way through" end of the spectrum for the staffer who turned it up, but the Antisocial Network's chief bicycle mechanic recognized the stench of bull immediately. The awardee? returning candidate Matthew Ferguson (tapped twice already for misinformation about bicycles). The topic? SportsRec.com post "How to Shift Gears With a Shimano Flight Deck Shifter"...

The reason? Ferguson never mentioned that there is no such thing as a "Shimano Flight Deck Shifter." No, Matthew, Shimano makes several shifters – Ultegra, 105, Dura-Ace – that are compatible with their Flight Deck cyclocomputer. "Compatible" means that riders need not take their hands off the shift levers to change the display on the computer; they need only press raised buttons on the hoods with their thumbs. Pretty slick idea, in fact...
Matthew, on the other hand, failed to mention this compatibility at all, focusing instead on Shimano's family of integrated shifter/brake levers, the STI groups. In doing so, Ferguson managed to mangle a few facts and provide a few fuzzy instructions:

• "Not long ago, shifters on racing bicycles were located on the downtube of the frame." – Not all of them: some were on the top tube, some on the stem, and a few on bar ends (AeroBars).
• "...shifters have been integrated with the brake levers... Shimano Flight Deck shifters are an example of this design." – Ummm, no: Shimano's Dura-Ace or Ultegra, yes; but Shimano's Flight Deck is a cyclocomputer.
• "Push the brake lever into the bike to shift from the small chain ring into the large chain ring..." – Push it "into" the bike? Isn't there a better way to say this, such as "toward the stem"? Sure there is...
• Of the cogset: "Contrary to most assumptions, bigger cogs create smaller ratios and smaller cogs, larger ratios." – Not contrary to "most" assumptions, contrary to ignorant assumptions by people who don't ride bikes! BTW, the ratio is dependent on both the chain ring and the sprocket, just in case you wondered...
• "Peddling [sic] will be more difficult, but your bicycle will travel farther with each pedal revolution..." – Wait, what is it you're selling here, Matt?

Ferguson never mentions important points such as avoiding the "forbidden" combinations – largest chain ring to largest cog, smallest to smallest. Matthew also doesn't mention when to use the large chain ring (flats, tailwind, downhill) and when to use the small chain ring (climbing, headwind). And he never mentions that the shift pattern is not simply A1, A2, A3, A4... B1, B2, B3... – it's controlled by the ratio in the numbers of teeth on the two ends of the drivetrain and may be something like A1, A2, A3, B1, A4, B2... depending on whether or not the crankset is compact. In other words, Ferguson knows little or nothing about bicycles, making him a perfect candidate for Dumbass of the Day.

copyright © 2017-2022 scmrak

DD - BICYCLES