[Closed] XT or XTR for trail riding?

I like XTR, but I tend to pick and choose what parts of the groupset I use eg I wouldn't use an XTR cassette it doesn't shift any better than XT, it doesn't last any longer and its not a great deal lighter. Bear in mind the cost of replacement parts with XTR too, don't come on here moaning when you need a new XTR middle ring and its 120 quid.

Buy a 2 litre camelbak, and only half fill it. 1Kg saved, for free.

Drink the remaining litre, sweat some of it out - even more weight saved.

I really fail to see how 1lb really makes that much difference when the bike, rider, kit, water, tools, etc adds up to over 100Kgs. I can understand spending money on the 'best' functionally, and wouldn't want a 5Kg rear mech, but I have always felt that the huge price increase from XT -> XTR really was hard to justify. Fair enough if there is some functional reason as well as the weight saving.

The only bit of XTR kit that I feel justifies the extra cost are the shifters

So is it XT or XTR for you Dave? You've had a small rant and question but you haven't given your preference 😉

A lb in bike weight can make a difference - get a set of wheels a lb heavier than your existing ones and you will feel it more...extra weight on the rider isn't the same as extra weight on the bike...extra weight on the bike is felt more readily as your body is being used to move the bike...

I'm posing the question as I'm curious - I was pretty much decided on the XT-specced machine but thought I'd have a look at the XTR version anyway...and that tickled my fancy but my practical head tells me XTR isn't worth getting as it is expensive/doesn't last any longer and doesn't have any functional improvement over XT...so I thought I'd ask as I've no real experience of XTR (other than the XTR rear mech on my bike - which works just as well as the XT mech on my commuter).

Saying that, although I fancy a new bike, I'm needing to find the cash to purchase it so no doubt this will all fritter away to nothing...

I'm running XTR on one bike, XT on another. There are some other benefits - for instance the XTR generally shifts better. I'm not aware of any longevity issues either. The majority of the XTR kit I have was obtained 2nd hand though - thereby reducing the cost difference.

Given the current cost of components, I suspect that you'll be getting a better deal buying it as part of a build than you would on its own.

If you have the money to burn and fancy XTR then go for it, if you're just trail riding though I don't think you'd lose any sleep if you settled for XT (or even SLX for that matter). As someone else mentioned, make sure you can afford the replacement stuff as well not just the initial purchase cost 😉

Get the XT version and upgrade the shifters, XTR is lighter and does shift a little bit better but in terms of actual fun there's nothing between them, go for XT and then upgrade a few things on the bike as an off the peg machine is never perfectly set up, what bike is it because sometimes the extra cost is worth it if there is an upgrade in wheels etc between the two models.

im rocking XT cranks and LX mechs, XT cassette, RF chainrings, XTR cables, KMC x9 chain, and SRAM shifters,

why?

because I can, and IMO those bits tick the value/performance scale in the right places.

You rock them? Are they a bit grizzly?

Dick - For my money it's XT, or SLX in fact.

Not really a rant though, I can quite understand people using XTR on a general use trail bike, even on a going to the shops bike if they want to. The few times I have used XTR it's been older kit inherited on bikes, and didn't seem any better functionally than XT, so to my mind it was just a weight thing. I've always considered XTR more fragile though - based on talk more than experience though.

Fair point that weight in certain places is more noticeable than in others - there's no doubt that weight at the wheel rim is far more important than anywhere else. But an extra 1lb over the groupset or in my rucsack whilst general trail riding?

My choice would be go for the XT and spend the savings on personal preference upgrades (wheels?)

Only differences between the 2 bikes is the XTR has carbon brake levers/fancier saddle/carbon seatpost and bars plus RLC forks instead of RL...saying that the price is significantly more.

I'm going back to my XT choice...practical head has won out rather than the need to waste more money after reading the comments...biggest issue wouldn't be the initial purchase but the on-going costs...which is a very fair point, I don't have the cash to waste on replacing XTR with XTR...XT is more manageable...

If you're splashing the cash, does that mean you're coming out on Tuesday, so to speak?

depends how rich you are!

no significant difference in shifting quality or weight.

XTR is like having a really nice car to commute to work in - nice but doesn't really make your commute any better.

Get XTR if you fancy some nice kit on your bike (hey, I love it as much as anyone) but don't pretend that it'll actually make you ride better/enjoy your riding any more, just appreciate it for what it is - nice kit.

I've been using XTR for trail riding for a while now but as above, I pick and choose the bits. Shifters, both mechs and chainset. I don't bother with the hubs/wheels, brakes, cassette or chain. If you look after it, like any bike bit, longevity doesn't seem to be an issue.

Having said that, given the current shift in market prices, if anything does need replacing for the next few years, it's more likely to be XT than XTR. No one needs XTR, but if you've got the money, why not.

XTR is nice, that's about it. Why buy a BMW or Merc? I find it interesting that you never need to justify buying a nice car to anyone, but if you mention on here that you like nice kit or light weight people jump down your throats.

I really fail to see how 1lb really makes that much difference when the bike, rider, kit, water, tools, etc adds up to over 100Kgs.

It does. You might fail to see it but it does, sorry 🙂 And as for half filling a camelbak, you can do that as well as saving money on your bike. And you'd only have half the water. FAIL (to get the point)!

but don't pretend that it'll actually make you ride better

I don't think anyone actually thinks that. Maybe this mythical marketing-led gullible fool who thinks that nice bikes go faster (as if that were the point).. but not real people!

XTR? Pah. You want [url= http://www.shimano-yumeya.com/ ]Yumeya[/url]!

Altho I haven't read thru all the replies but I know that a national champ in the UK last year won the his category title running mainly XT gear. Good enough for race winning performance then must be OK for general riding.......

Oh I don't know, I find it considerably harder to justify a BM than XTR!
I have always wondered about flash cars. I have never heard anybody say,'I'll bet he's a really good bloke in that Porsche'
My only criteria in car choice is to find one that is cheap to run and you can stuff loads of gear and bikes in.

doesnt xtr require xtr specific rings?
nuff said.
im not paying a small fortune for a consumable thats marginally lighter.
mechs and shifters, maybe, ide go forthe cranks, if they were 104bcd, but i think shimano may have shot themselves in the foot there...

so if its a whole bike build, do you.
buy XT and upgrade over time
buy XTR and sell of the crank while you can get rid of them shiney and unscratched.

Ide go with XT myself

if youve got the money, stuff what they all say.
its your bike and it makes you happy, get xtr.
you shouldnt snap cranks or break anything on either.

I wouldn't bother with xtr but then I ride plenty of lx/dx kit on my Nomad - it's often cheaper to save weight elsewhere, and there are often better (non-bike) things to spend money on.

(some of you may not understand that last sentence)

Deore or SLX if you have the extra cash.

XT and XTR are designed for racing and have you seen the new prices? 🙁

But hey what do I know about bike speccing 🙂

SSP

the bike, rider, kit, water, tools, etc adds up to over 100Kgs

Well no if you are not riding 2Dh bikes at the same time.

i use xtr shifters and chainsets.
i use xt cassettes and rear mechs.
i have used xt shifters - not as good as xtr.
i have used xtr rear mechs - no gain over xt.
i used RF chainsets - terrible reliability and fit issues.
go for performance as opposed to weight.

hth dick.

I prefer XTR shifters by a mile, I always think the key contact points you have with the bike need to be as best you can get so pedals/shifters/grips/saddle I take care over what I choose.

XT/XTR/X0 on the other bits is down to weight/cost/longevity etc. I think XTR is aimed at trail riders first, not racers. There are a lot more riders who are casual than racers and Shimano want to sell them XTR. In my experience, XTR lasts really well, performs great and of course looks the biz - it is not just for racers.

the bike, rider, kit, water, tools, etc adds up to over 100Kgs

Well no if you are not riding 2Dh bikes at the same time.

Maybe not if you're 8 stone wet through. For the more generously proportioned then 100Kg all-up is not far off the norm

I've always used the mix n match XT this, LX that, SRAM or middleburn the other approach for my bikes for a mix of pimp/cost effectiveness/weight.

Then last year I just splooged some cash on a complete XTR drivetrain for my 5" trail sofa. Awesome, simply awesome. It looks dead tatty now, becuase I've battered it, still works fabulously and I'm kinda proud to be running round on XTR that has obviously been used and abused, not polished each weekend.

I'm 100kg before I get the bike, kit, water, tools, etc taken into account.

XT for me, 'cos I know it works with minimal maintenance and pretty much utter dependability and until recently the prices were not ridiculous if you looked around.

Thought SLX does look pretty good

Weight, though not the primary issue for me, does make a difference, particularly in wheels, but also at the end of swing arms and on forks (it's the sprung to unsprung weight issue, which makes the susspension work (slightly) better). So no heavy LX cassettes (they may be lighter now but the one I just took off was horrendous compared to the XT I stuck on).

a national champ in the UK last year won the his category title running mainly XT gear

Does anyone seriously think that the point of bling gear is to actually make you faster?

Buy the XT and use the extra money for a new pair of shoes / camelbak / helmet etc.

epo-aholic - Member
no significant difference in shifting quality or weight.

Anyone who thinks that XT shifts as good as XTR is kidding themselves. The cassette makes no difference as someone has pointed out above, but XTR shifters, mechs, chainsets and cables are so smooth it's almost zero effort. Oh, and over 400g in weight is considered a significant weight saving on a trail bike.

XTR is more expensive, that's the only excuse anyone needs to plump for the exceptionally good XT.

My preference? XTR on the race bike, and a mix of XT and XTR hand-me-downs on the trail bike.

You only need Deore.

But you want XTR 🙂

XT is a not a bad compromise.

Conks

XTR cranks have more crank length options, so if you're tall or short you might want to stump up for them.

Whatever, don't get XTR cassettes.
The ti spider (freehub interface) wears out before the cog teeth, which is pretty bloody ridiculous.

The ti spider (freehub interface) wears out before the cog teeth, which is pretty bloody ridiculous.

Eh? How on earth does that 'wear' out?

Shimano Exage Country.

Ti cassettes are a luxury piece of bling to be sure. Spending money on something that lasts is one thing, but cassettes are a consumable.

conkerman - Member
You only need Deore.

But you want XTR

XT is a not a bad compromise.

Like your approach, conkerman. Deep

[i]Eh? How on earth does that 'wear' out? [/i]

On mine (not bought new by me, btw) the splines wore out. No longer fitted snugly against the freehub. Rattled like a bugger and took me ages to find what the problem actually was!

i did use the word 'significant' of course there is a difference just not one that quantifies the lightening of the wallet. Things like rear mech, cassettes and chainrings can wear out quickly and the difference in replacing these particular parts with xt and xtr is huge and in my opinion doesn't outweigh the marginal benefits...make sense?

DezB - Member
Whatever, don't get XTR cassettes.
The ti spider (freehub interface) wears out before the cog teeth, which is pretty bloody ridiculous.

The spider is made of alloy, just like the XT. Sounds like poor mechanics, those parts should never wear.

epo-aholic - Member
Things like rear mech, cassettes and chainrings can wear out quickly and the difference in replacing these particular parts with xt and xtr is huge and in my opinion doesn't outweigh the marginal benefits...make sense?

Yeah, totally. XTR cassettes do last quite a bit longer than XT (especially for people who don't use the smaller cogs), but it's nowhere near the 3x price difference.

Only you can justify the price. XTR is noticebly better than XT and the shifting also feels quite a bit different. Quite a bit different from other Shimano groupsets in my opinion.

I went partially XTR after I was replacing worn out SRAM X9 stuff. I was sick of how little time my SRAM stuff was lasting so had decided to go back to Shimano and noticed at the time that XTR was only a little bit more expensive.

I'd be happy with either XT or XTR but there is no doubt that XTR is nicer to use.

"doesnt xtr require xtr specific rings?"

Not any more they don't.

XTR cassettes last a fair bit longer than XT as the biggest few sprockets are titanium. They're quite a bit lighter, proportionately. I thought it was worth an extra £20, which was the deal at the time, but not worth the full RRP difference.

XTR rear mechs seem to keep on working better in really bad, mayhem-style mud. I have one XTR and one XT and there does seem to be a functional difference, although that could be the difference between standard and shadow.

XTR chainsets don't seem much better than XT, though they are a little lighter. they scuff more easily. XTR BB seems to last a bit longer too.
Again, I've got one of each.

Don't know about the hubs, brakes or shifters, though I might try XTR shifters next time I need some, given what's been said above.

As for "it's only worth it if you're racing" argument, i've never understood that logic. Surely whatever riding you do, it's important to you and you want to get the most out of it you can. If you [i]think[/i] XTR gives some benefit to your riding, why not go for it? Lots of us like light bikes; you don't need to be a pro racer to enjoy the feel of a lightweight bike or to enjoy slightly better, more reliable shifting.

As for the racing comment. XTR is nice stuff to own and if I could afford it all my bikes would be XTR/X0. What it won't do is noticeably improve your riding experience when compared with XT. It is lighter though so if you are sweating blood to finish 1 second ahead of someone in a 2 hour race it will be helpful.

I plumped for XTR on my race bike - but go for XT longevity on the trail bike.

Agree that XTR shifters are rather nice.

What if you're sweating blood to beat your mate up the hill, or to clear that ultra-tricky climb you've never managed before? is that any less important, just because you don't have a race number on?

erm, am I the only one who buys bike components partly depending on what is on offer at the time??

I'd say if you want XTR, get XTR. You can obviously afford it if you are asking the question and if you get XT you will probably regret it.
Me, I'd rather have XT/SLX and spend the remainder on something else.

As for durability - my LX front mech and XT rear were replaced late last yr after ~7yrs. Seems like good value to me.

I just looked at the price of XTR pods - £133. That's quite a lot.

What depressed me more was that XT pods are £85. I bought the pods AND a shadow mech for £70 last summer.