If SRAM hadn't made their versions, I wonder if Shimano would have updated theirs? Never mind, good to see we won't all be forced down the flippyshifter route.

Every time I look at one of those, it just looks like a solution looking for a problem.

It'll probably also help them to avoid getting 'Microsoft style' monopoly lawsuits.

It's a good thing though, it'll be even better if they decide to offer stand alone brake levers on XT and XTR too for people who prefer RF+, gs or have no shifters at all.

David - Microsoft style lawsuits? No, not really. Not even close. Miles off in fact.

Look, its simple. Really it is.
Shimano are market leaders because they continue to produce damn good kit at very competitive prices. Not because they're evil and have voodoo dolls of their competitors' factories with needles and swords and burning crosses sticking out of them.

The existing XT-level hydro lever is still current...

I dunno, stick up all this exciting new stuff and everyone just wants to discuss RF+ :-)

saint with shimano flopshift? just wondering how many other 'freeriders' have broken brake levers and shifters when casing a jump/drop, it gets expensive, even moreso when you have to replace both the shifter AND brake lever because they're stupidly an all in one unit.

shimano? bah... i'm going sram.

The thinking is that they're actually less likely to break than regular levers because they can move in all directions. So rather than them bending or breaking you just pick your bike up in a different gear to when you crashed it :-)

Mike - h'mm. Still I'm all for burning the spinning jennys so what do I know.

It's good to see innovation but not at the expense of sacrificing a successful product line. To be fair to Shimano, they seem to have a history of long product support (e.g. 8 speed).

It's fine to lead the market or even create the market but that doesn't mean you always know best.

If this was STW, I'd be asking 'what shifters for my singlespeed?' but thankfully it isn't.

I toyed with joining two shifters together with a couple of bits of cable and a big spring for psychological benefit on a single. But never got around to it.

I have to say I quite like DC for a lot of things, it's only when it gets tight and techy that I become averse. But then I like choice too :-)

What we all need is... more bikes :)

Well, the Big S's decision to continue with the RF+ has scuppered my plans to corner the market by buying the final production run of the RFs and then blowing-up the SRAM factory so I could make charge unwitting riders extortionate amounts for a shifter and make my fortune. Mmmmuuuhhhaaaa!

Tend to agreed with Al though – what! – the flippy is a solution to a non-extant problem. I know two riders who have this set-up and still use the removable thumb shifter!

Still, the HONE kit looks rather nice.

Crap name though, 'HONE' wtf is that supposed to mean.

Do you not possess a dictionary? It means to improve or sharpen.

Two questions about the Hone.

How heavy & how much?

Looks nice though - are those axle mounted mechs rapid rise or standard?

Ok, so that's 3 questions.

I know what 'hone' means, what I meant was that it was a crap name. (good point, well argued)

If you know what it means, why ask "wtf is that supposed to mean"? ;-)

Wendy, weights no idea, price LXish, mechs low normal.

Glad to see that Shimano has finally released the full details of it's plan for future groups.
Personally I uite like flippy shifting for XC, and don't give a toss about Dh so they can fight their own battles for dedicated component groups.

HONE: Cool name. A non race name for a non race groupset...

As for innovation, bring it on man, ludites are a dying breed, heres a shovel

Yes, Shimano's monopoly of gears for bikes is purely on merit. They don't really spend any money on advertising, and their products are the best available, at a reasonable price. The way the cycle market works, if a competitor (eg SRAM) can provide better parts at a lower price, then they will increase their market share.

With Microsoft, this is not the case. In a typically American way they spend huge ammounts on advertising, rather than relying on the merits of their products. They have a true monopoly because it is unviable to not use their products if you have a PC. If you have a PC, for the vast majority of users, you have to have MS Windows. The PC software market has become totally dependant on Microsoft, so they can do whatever they like.

In the cycling market, this would be equivalent to Shimano finding a way to prevent people from using or fitting equipment from other manufacturers on their bikes. ie, "If you own a bike, you have to use Shimano" - at the moment this is not true, you can have just as good a bike without a single Shimano part.

Being a semi-luddite im a bit confused by all this rapid rise malarky. are those new RF+ shifters compatable with a standard rear mech?

I think so, all the shifter does is pull or release cable. It's the mech that determines whether pulling or releasing cable shifts the gears up or down.