Weight comparions XT vs XTR – justify extra cost?

  • This topic has 27 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by  mcboo.
Viewing 28 posts - 1 through 28 (of 28 total)
  • Weight comparions XT vs XTR – justify extra cost?
  • sweaman2
    Member

    I’m sure this has been asked but a (very) quick search didn’t bring it up.

    Friend has asked what is the weight difference comparing XT to XTR for identical parts (Say a 2×10 drive train including cassette with 160mm disk rotors not including wheels). My hunch is not enough to justify the extra cost but I’d love it if someone had some hard numbers to back this up….

    druidh
    Member

    If every gram counts then it’s worth paying the extra.

    FWIW, I reckon XTR shifters and mechs are nicer to use, so it’s not all about weight.

    Premier Icon Garry_Lager
    Subscriber

    The type of component makes a big difference if you’re trying to justify xtr, like druidh says. I’d always have xtr pedals, for example, on my good bike as they last years. My personal experience with xtr brakes has been bad (pistons got sticky v fast), but ignoring this and assuming they are actually better, then brakes also makes sense IMO.

    Drivetrain though – you can tan a cassette in a year if you ride your bike a lot (2.5 times the price of an XT) – rings on a 2×10 chainset likewise. You’d need to be either rich or a racer to justify this sort of thing IMO.

    Premier Icon thisisnotaspoon
    Subscriber

    What he said, I usually use XT cranks as they weigh less and last indefinitely, but SLX cassettes as the weight difference is minimal. XT shifters are nicer too. My previous mech was XT, my new ones are Zee and SLX as I mash them into rocks too often to shell out £50/month on mechs like I have done this summer.

    sweaman2
    Member

    All good thoughts. But any hard numbers on weight…

    mikewsmith
    Member

    try the shimano site or call a bike shop?

    Depends what you consider value really. Guessing it’s in the £1/g end of things.

    Premier Icon Northwind
    Subscriber

    I’ve got a couple of sets of M970 XTR cranks. The weight difference in the arms over the same age of XT is only about 40g! There’s a fair bit more difference overall but it’s mostly in the rings, which of course a) wear out and b) cost a fortune to replace.

    So now I have XTR cranks with deore rings :mrgreen:

    Premier Icon njee20
    Subscriber

    If weight matters you should mix and match. XX and X0 cassettes are both lighter than XTR.

    Is it worth it? Personal. I think the cassette is the hardest to justify, it’s all very good though.

    glasgowdan
    Member

    XTR is NOT worth the extra for weight savings alone.

    Try a dura ace or other top roadie 11-25 cassette to save weight!

    b r
    Member

    XTR is NOT worth the extra for weight savings alone.

    What does your bike weigh, out of interest?

    For 9 speed, on my scales:
    XT 11-34 cassette = 297g
    XTR 11-34 cassette = 248g

    So 10 speed will be heavier – I’m guessing 400g for an SLX 10 speed?

    uwe-r
    Member

    You can look at weight in grams saved (wont be much) or % saved (could be say 30%), if you save 30% on every component that is the road to ubber light.

    Value for money, NO. XTR is ridiculously (IMO) priced unless it is something that will last along time.

    As others have said, the shifters are obviously nicer to use – I’ve had XTR shifters for ages and they’re one of my favourite bits. Also I’ve had good experiences with XTR (9 speed) chains so I run XTR chains too. But cassettes and chainrings, no way. I change my cassette easily more than once a year, and XTR at £145 vs XT at £40 is a hard sell.

    I’m no weight weeny though – for racers I imagine it’s pretty easy to justify to the cost of XTR if you’re competitive, even if the advantage is relatively minor.

    We’d all have XTR (or Saint) everything if we could afford it, right?

    orangeboy
    Member

    If you have the money buy xtr or xx
    But xt still works very well
    For weights try the forum on weight weenies website
    http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/

    uwe-r
    Member

    But xt still works very well

    And Deore stuff.

    Premier Icon Paceman
    Subscriber

    The main weight saving is in the alloy used for to make the chainrings and cassette, both of which are consumables which need replacing regualrly if you’re a serious rider. Not worth the extra cost in my opinion.

    Similar or greater weight savings can be made elsewhere on components which last for years, e.g. contact points, wheels, seat post, bars etc.

    XT does the job, no probs woth me.

    Premier Icon dreednya
    Subscriber

    I try and use higher end stuff in situations where they are less likely to break, so front mech and shifters and cassette. Rear mech is too vulnerable unless you don’t mind replacing it when your brand new XTR mech gets twanged on its maiden voyage – might happen, might not

    Premier Icon Nobby
    Subscriber

    We’d all have XTR (or Saint) everything if we could afford it, right?

    Not sure I would, no.

    I run XTR shifters & mechs beacause they just work brilliantly. If I was in the market for brakes I’d not bother with XTR this time as, weight aside, I think that XT is a better set up.

    OP – Madison publish the individual component weights on their website if you really want to know.

    b r
    Member

    I’m no weight weeny though – for racers I imagine it’s pretty easy to justify to the cost of XTR if you’re competitive, even if the advantage is relatively minor.

    I don’t race, but am reasonably weight-weenie – can’t fathom why anyone wants to haul more weight around than is actually necessary.

    FACT – less weight = easier hill climbing

    Premier Icon Paceman
    Subscriber

    Depends on what you can afford, or what you can justify spending with other commitments such as family.

    Premier Icon andeh
    Subscriber

    As some mamil asshat on a carbon Ibis said to me, when I suggested that riding in the Peaks on a wet day is like listening to pound coins fall down the drain, “Think yourself lucky you don’t have XTR!” 🙄

    shem
    Member

    XTR is great for when your telling people in the pub what spec you have 😀

    It probably justifies itself if you’re elite racing similarly able others. If not, then there are more variables than groupset affecting the weight and performance of the bike. Not to mention the quality of the engine.

    teasel
    Member

    Before a recent purchase of mostly XT components I had the opportunity to do a back-to-back comparison and can honestly say that although XTR shifters etc perform better than XT, I wouldn’t say it was as good as the price difference suggests.

    mauja
    Member

    The weight difference for a full XTR v XT is about half a pound.

    The chainset and cassette account for more than half of the weight saving so if you’re only interested in saving weight these are the items to go for but like others have said they’re expensive and are the items that tend to wear out. They also don’t really offer any performance benefit other than weight over XT.

    Some of the items aren’t actually much lighter but I do think things like the shifters are nicer to use than XT ones so it’s not just about weight saving.

    The front mech is probably the worst value, as it offers no real weight saving and doesn’t really offer any advantage over XT so you only really buy it to complete the groupset.

    Obviously it’s expensive but if you can afford it then why not, it’s lighter, some of it works a bit better and it looks nicer than XT in my opinion.

    Premier Icon zippykona
    Subscriber

    For those that care my new slx is as follows…
    Rear mech 272
    Chain276
    Front mech 156
    Shifters with cables 302
    Crank 24,32,42 822
    BB 100
    Cassette 11,36 374

    ransos
    Member

    For ultimate weight saving you should mix and match using info from weight weenies.

    For functionality, XTR shifters feel more solid, and the pedals take a huge amount of abuse. I’m not convinced there’s much if any difference in the rest of it (speaking as someone with a full XTR group).

    I run XTR shifters & mechs beacause they just work brilliantly. If I was in the market for brakes I’d not bother with XTR this time as, weight aside, I think that XT is a better set up.

    Aren’t the ‘trail’ XTR brakes just like the XTs but with a better finish and lighter weight? I can’t think of a reason (besides price) why you would choose XT over XTR.

    mcboo
    Member

    I run XTR shifters & mechs beacause they just work brilliantly. If I was in the market for brakes I’d not bother with XTR this time as, weight aside, I think that XT is a better set up.

    This

    I’ve got mostly XTR on the bike, the group before last (965?) just went on and on for years. I’m not sure the current set is as durable but I love the way it all shifts. Rear gears tick back and forward like a clock, and the front never feels like its going to let you down, it’s just exact.

    All came on a new bike with a XT cassette which has just gone after 18 months, just replaced for same for £45.

Viewing 28 posts - 1 through 28 (of 28 total)

The topic ‘Weight comparions XT vs XTR – justify extra cost?’ is closed to new replies.