Do you know where we can see these new cranks? Are they on a website anywhere?

Interesting. I heard rumors about this- Campy saying that they would be updating one of their oldest designs i.e. unchanged in basic design for a long time. While I don't have a problem with square taper, it's good to see them updating and staying competetive.

Nope.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

stay tuned...they are working closely with FRM

Who is FRM?

Cool Italian components: http://www.frmbike.de/catalog/index.php?language=en

Tom D.- you likely heard this from the same place as I: The euro cycling press has had snippets in the UK glossies. Colango already has the cranks.

I say, about time. I am all for the traditions, but it's high time for new kit at the campag factory. I reckon the new BB will be the knack of it, and of course, the price- being campag.

This was an intercept from your side of the pond. I also heard there are bikes on the road now with the equipment and that there may be an uncharacteristically early release. Only time will tell. Our first good look will be on the Tour de France team bikes.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

Huh? I think that it is not to far a strech to say that Campy for decades has been ahead of the curve time and time again over Shimano...hell, how many years did it take Shimano to get 10 speeds out, and they still dont have it throughout their line...Campy isnt the one playing catchup here.

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

Hmmmmm....




Thought this was neat too

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

Dude, I'm a Campy guy like you. Note I said "staying competetive". Remaining. Continuing to do so. I'm not saying they're behind. Okay, they had 10-speed first. That's not to say that every part they make is perfect from all standpoints. Both Shimano and Campagnolo have their strengths and weaknesses. Whether Campy "needs" to ditch square taper is up to your (or anyone's) personal opinion. They obviously felt that it was important enough to update the design, even if only for the sake of updating (and thus "competitive" in the eyes of consumers). The purists will always be mad when things change. Campy will say that the reason for the update is weight, stiffness, or whatever. My guess is that it has to do more with market pressure. Regardless of why or what caused it, I'm sure that Campy will come up with their own clever solution. There are advantages to being first OR last in a certain market. The first guy gets the limelight and appeal of simply being first. The last guy gets to learn from everybody else's mistakes. It can be very tough, though, if the first guy gets it pretty darn right (read: Dura Ace 10 crankset). Campy will have to be lighter, stiffer, prettier, and (I hope) have a lower q-factor.

I will probably be buying a few of the old cranks and Phil Woods to match. I should make it thru my lifetime with 4 or 5 more cranksets.

design-wise, i think their solution is not particularly optimal. but it will be very interesting to see it and how it turns out.

---

---

Where would you want to swim ?

Typical ST post -

• There may be a new BB
• There may not be a new BB
• If there is (and there might not be) - it could be like "two L's" (then again, it might be like two tree frogs cause this may not even exist)

And alas...."i think their solution is not particularly optimal"!!!! I am about to beat my head into the monitor...you think that something that may or may not be one way or another because you - and probably no one on ST knows anything about, is a bad idea?

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

yes, shimano has some drawbacks and campy should get a lot of credit for a lot of things (QR levers, many modern derailleur refinements, etc.), but unfortunately campy's major innovations were decades ago.

i think 20 years from now, people will view STI (putting the shifters in a combined brake/shift lever) as an enormous innovation affecting speed, climbing ability, safety, you name it. and, unless i have missed the boat completely, shimano was first by a long shot with this elegant and very clever idea.

give credit where credit is due.

---

---

Where would you want to swim ?

ok, you want better precision?

how about, "their solution as reported in the press, is not particularly optimal." ?

and isn't it past your bed-time?

---

---

Where would you want to swim ?

Suntour beat them to it, but it was a bad system (as was early STI for that matter). Sachs also had something out there really early...but, GripShift and bar end shifters were way ahead of and the progress into STI...so much for giving them all the credit eh?

And yes, it is past my bed time.

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

i know the early road gripshifts, but they were just glorified end shifters, no?

suntour? any leads as to what it looked like? are you talking about the 'thumbshifters' that mounted on the drops near your brakes? if so, that's not the idea of COMBINING the systems and using the same lever to do both -- shift and brake.

i never heard or saw any sachs systems at all. any leads as to where i can take a look at that?

the first gen. DA and Ultegra STI worked pretty damn well in my opinion. it could have been lighter, yes, but the operation was excellent in my book. i don't know, but as inventions go, i was very impressed with the concept and execution of STI. and i am a born skeptic.

---

---

Where would you want to swim ?

The Suntour thing was a wing nut type deal - but alas, ahead of STI and did locate the shifter and brake next to eachother. Sachs was VERY much lke Ergo...

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

Reducing the "Q" factor substantially is an interesting idea. Ultra-innovative former world hour record holder Greame Obree built his own very narrow bottom bracket (with the infamous washing machine bearing) so as to have a very low Q-factor. He beat the world with it. It makes sense that moving the legs closer, and into air which is already turbulent from the frame and front wheel would improve aerodynamics. After all, if your body is flat, then most of the drag is presumably in the legs. Just adjusting your shoeplates can reduce your Q-factor significantly.

Does anybody know of any research proving that reducing the Q-factor is quantitatively beneficial.

The whole Q Factor thing was created by Tom Ritchie I think...other than Obree I cant recal anyone making any claims to anything performance wise with it.

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

Well, there is the Walser thing, and the whole 'Narrowbike' experiment Trek tried with LA.

Scott

"and the whole 'Narrowbike' experiment Trek tried with LA"

And how did that work out?.. poo poo.

Part of the introduction of the new crank/BB assembly alledgedly includes some supporting (sales/marketing) research that was conducted by Campagnolo. Purportedly, the results suggest that "Q" factor has a greater influence on power output at a given work load than even crank length....

Interesting theory.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

That would be logical though...

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

[reply]design-wise, i think their solution is not particularly optimal. but it will be very interesting to see it and how it turns out.[/reply]

That's funny... got a crystal ball, huh ;-)

Actually Sachs WAS Ergopower, with a different logo and a slightly altered index spacing. It came out about a year or 2 after Ergopower did.

If Suntour was ahead of STI, it wasn't by much. Same year, if I recall, and was never taken seriously.

Shimano also invented index shifting, don't forget. IMO, that was the single biggest innovation, since doing that paved the way for the integrated shifters. Campy took a long time to catch up.

IMO, campy has been spending a lot of time in areas that don't really make any sense (e.g. electronic shifting) and the bling factor (carbon everything). It is high time that they actually developed NEW designs rather than just refine the old ones. Their last significant change was back in 1998 when the Ergo levers were redesigned, and maybe the introduction of compact cranks. Since then, it has been about making things out of carbon.

(No, going to 10 speed isn't significant IMO. I haven't noticed any difference in my performance as a result of adding additional gears).

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

My awareness of this forum, and in particular this thread has come through it being mentioned on the Campy Only website's New/Rumours page.I've gone to the trouble of joining this board inorder to quote your post as it highlights just the kind of rubbish I often read about advancement of cycling component technology. It's all about wanting rather than needing.

On the one hand you state that the last significant change Campag made was the redesign of the Ergopower lever in 1998 and then go on to write off the 10 speed introduction as insignificant as you didn't notice any difference in your performance. Can you tell me what difference the change of Ergopower design made to your performance?

You write off Campag's research in to electronic shifting as not really making any sense yet you add that you want them to develop new designs rather than just refine old ones. What exactly is it you want them to look in to? Do you think outboard bearings on your bottom bracket will make a noticeable difference in your performance? It will clearly have to make a bigger difference than having more choice of gear ratios for the same or less weight as that's rather too subtle, evidently. If you are in to racing I would have thought that, for example, adding an 11T to your gears without having to lose any of the existing ratios in your favourite cassette was beneficial.

And another thing, you say Campag took a long time to catch up with Shimano's STI. STI was launched in 1991....Ergopower was released in 92.....clearly an eternity for you but Campag spent the time coming up with a design that was cleaner, lighter, cheaper, repairable and triple compatible from the outset. Time well spent I think.

They will never understand. Thanks for your post.

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

Slam!

Tom, I'm hearing whispers you may see these far sooner - Paris Nice. Some manufacturers will be rolling some new kit out here so everyone better get their microscopes out !

Suntour actually put indexed shifting on some Schwinn bikes in the 1960's. Indexing didn't really take off until the STI thing. Lot of people would set the DT shifters to friction rather than index because they thought that they were smart enought to count to seven.

Sachs had indexing when it was still Huret the system was called "Aris" and it worked well.

Shimano had an indexing system about 1970 called "positron" that was a flop but worked well

Shimano used to be known not so much for innovation as just being weird.

I don't think Indexing was a big deal in and of itself. It was the marketing that finally made it a big deal.[repl

---

________________________________________

Captain Gray Beard PhD
Cyclist and Retro-Grouch

The ergopower redesign in 98 was a substantial step forward in terms of the comfort of the lever hoods. They were reduced slightly in size, rounded more, and provided a better variety of options for gripping the levers. I cannot push an 11T (neither can most mortals), so the "advantage" of an extra cog is somewhat wasted on an 11.

OK, electronic shifting. I say that it doesn't make sense to spend time there because I really don't see that the advantages to shifting electronically outweigh the downsides in terms of expense and reliability, especially not with current UCI restrictions on frame design. regular shift cables have proven to be robust, reliable and lightweight, and the standard double diamond frame format does not have any real barriers in terms of cable routing that would necessitate electronic shifting. BTW, the Mavic ZAP system was beneficial on the Lotus frame, when it worked.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

Clarification: I said that Campy took a long time to catch up, in reference to index shifting. SIS came out in around 1984, if I recall correctly, and Campy really didn't have anything that worked well until they came out with Ergopower. That is 8 years to catch up. (unless you really think that Syncro was a good system).

Just a few ideas:

Using outboard bearings gives the overall system the potential to be stronger and stiffer at the same weight, hence weight reduction potential with no loss of durability and no added cost. That could be an advancement.

updating the design of the levers, could be an advancement

Perhaps something could be done in terms of integrating levers with the handlebars. That could be an advancement.

(I say could be in all cases because it depends entirely on execution.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

The "2L" thing sounds like it might be similar to the Sweet Wings design (of course I could be completely wrong).

And isn't Q-factor largely a function of the chainstay width?

---

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some are born to move the world to live their fantasies...

https://triomultisport.com/
http://www.mjolnircycles.com/

As noted above - during the time of indexing downtube levers more often than not most folks would have their levers in friction mode...so...why would Campy want to "catch up" to something people had placed no value on?

I can remember Dura Ace on my Raleigh Technium Pro...the indexing would work right after a tune up, them maybe for another 100 miles. Then it was a flip with a coin and back to friction shifting.

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

I didn't have Dura-Ace, so I can't speak for how well that worked, but I did have seven speed Ultegra. It worked very well, once the cable had settled, and had a significant advantage over friction. No fine-tuning the lever so that you wouldn't skip gears. I can remember using campy nuovo record shifters, being perfectly in gear, and starting an uphill sprint in my 15 or 16 cog. by the time I had hit the top of the hill, I had ghost shifted down at least one cog, sometimes 2 if I was sprinting hard enough. Maybe it was just my equipment, but indexing eliminated that little feature of friction shifting combined with flexible frames.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

Campy tried to "catch up" and if you recall, their solution was unusable. Hence none of the Campy sponsored pros would use Syncro. I cannot speak with any authority if the shimano pros were running in friction mode or not, but I believe that most were using idexed since I remember pros talking about the "click" telegraphing a jump when it came to the sprint, for example.

Anyhow, that is aside from my original point, since without the development and refinement of indexed shifting, there could be no ergopower / STI. Maybe I should really give the credit to Suntour, since they invented the slant parrallelogram rear derailleur, and apparently the first version of indexed shifting (I didn't know that, cool)

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

"Using outboard bearings gives the overall system the potential to be stronger and stiffer at the same weight, hence weight reduction potential with no loss of durability and no added cost. That could be an advancemen"

I don't like the idea of the outboard bearings. I think the approach is a hack. IMO the way to go is with an "oversized" BB shell and internal bearings. But Shimano et al have no control over frame tubing so they did the only thing they could. (In the interest of full disclosure, I just bought an outboard bearing crankset.)

I'm with you on this one. I think Pinarello and Cannondale have the right idea. FSA made an effort to make a new standard bb- a press-fit bottom bracket in an oversize shell, using an ISIS spindle (called MegaTech). Overall it was going to be lighter and have much longer bearing life than current setups and at least equal stiffness. The ISIS idea was great, but doesn't work well within the confines of a standard size bb shell.

And I bought outboard too (DA 10 on my tri bike, XT on my mtn). Still have square taper Campy on my roadie, though. My cross bike has ISIS; my first bb didn't last 6 months of riding.

I agree, it is a stopgap measure until the standards change. I don't think there is anything "bad" about outboard bearings, just that new frame standards in the BB could make the system that much better.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

Their solution wasn't unusable....their only problem was that it wasn't as good because they didn't use something which today is taken for granted in allowing good indexing....a top jockey wheel with float...up until 1993 Campag were still using jockey wheels running on ball bearings for their Record mechs and normal wheels for the lesser stuff. Yet again Campag was shooting itself in the foot by over engineering it's stuff...just like SGR pedals and Delta brakes (both of which I own). I successfully used my 1986 C-Record rear mech with an original Syncro lever (the one with the little inner lever) and the next version (with the big knurled part that you pulled away from the frame an turned to swith between friction and indexed) on my retro special for several years once swapping the top jockey wheel for a modern one. It was very effective. edit and will continue to be once I get the space to build it up again.

It's easy to say no pro teams would use this or that but sadly as that was my favourite pro cycling period I can confirm they did use Syncro....I still have the editions of Winning Magazine with the pictures! :)

But what you post here applies to standard square taper bottom brackets. You're writing off one line of innovation yet you...or riders in general...are demanding innovation on a perfectly effective standard just because Shimano has gone to their system....and the poor darlings are left slightly insecure about their un-oversized parts. If you want stiff get a Record/Chorus carbon chainset....everyone says they are 'noticeably stiffer' (though I wonder if they are just trying to convince themselves they are having seen their bank balance noticably decrease) and you'll have a system that is lighter than Dura Ace....and possibly just as stiff, maybe some magazine should do a lab based test rather than just judging it by feel

I'm going to show my Shimano ignorance here by asking if any part of the new style cranks/axle combos are replaceable when they wear out/break or do you need to buy a new chainset? If the axle snaps (which it did for some lucky pro as pictured on the cyclingnews site last year) do you have to buy a new chainset? I don't see any advantage for the user in permanently joining a quite expensive component to a consumable item.

Campag has a very attractive range of carbon chainsets in normal and compact designs and for this year introduced alloy compact designs and an upgraded Centaur bracket....I see no point in binning all that just to keep up with Shimano's ideas. Unless they intend to offer both systems like they still do with headsets (offering three different methods of another simple interface). By delaying their change they have bypassed the 'splined instead of square axle interface' fad and if they wait a bit longer I expect they can cash in on the potential that the MOst design has.

Unless there is a defect, the shimano crank system will never wear out. It is not a consumable item, same as campy BB's. the only consumable on both the shimano BB and the campy BB are the cartridge bearings.

I never said that the old square taper system is bad, or that it needs to be fixed. There is a potential there to make the system better, thats all. an oversized BB can be made out of lighter materials, larger bearings can be used that will give increased durability, whatever. I don't think that the potential of the external bearing-type systems have been fully realized. I do have an external bearing system on my mountain bike. Nothing wrong with it, nothing great about it, except that the bearings seem to be better sealed against the elements. I only have about a year on the system so far, so not a lot of experience yet.

All I said was that I don't see the net advantage to elec shifting. if there is one, tell me what it is.

Contrary to what you may be thinking, I don't think that Shimano is the greatest thing since sliced bread. They have gone down the wrong path (in my opinion, again) on a number of things over the years. (Biopace, rapid rise, etc). I use Octalink BB's, but I think they are crap, as the bearings are too small and are prone to contamination. No choice though if you use an Ultegra crankset (came with the bike). I prefer Shimano's road levers, since they are more comfortable to me. Personal opinion, nothing more.


Edit: you aren't seriously saying that Syncro was a good system, are you? It might have been, had campy developed it as a complete system rather than just levers. But it was heavily dependent on having just the right freewheel at a time which cog spacing was uneven on most freewheels, paired with just the right derailleur. They were marketing the levers as being universally compatible, or something like that. Syncro II might have been a bit better, I never tried that one.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

This is much like years ago (now my age shows) when Aluminum was just out on bikes...there were a couple - notable were Mizuno, and of course Vitus. Vitus was I think the first Al bike to get respect as it was super light as compared to SLX bikes of the day and ridden in TdF by Fignon (who could sprint like a mad man on the thing). The Vitus at the time was SUPER flexy (I think Vitus riders invented the term chain rub) and they would often break. A smart guy from PA (I think) knew that if he had oversize Al tubes he could add stiffness and strength...but the weight went up - from there it took Cannondale YEARS to get a bike that was not laughable for all but heavy riders or riders who didnt mind their teeeth being rattled out of their heads.

So, on point...what did the larger diameter stiffer bike provide? Just another brand that is all...no gain, no better performance nor weight advantage over other bikes of the time. Not sure what material they are going to use for a larger diameter, longer lasting, stiffer (but not brittle) BB Spindle.

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

Compared to a vitus, the original cannondales didn't break. they had plenty of other issues, since they were learning how to weld frames and keep them straight, and they were WAY overbuilt. The engineering concept was sound, as evidenced by where frames are today, it just took a few years to develop and refine the execution of the idea. Unless, of course, you are aware of 2lb steel frames made with std diameter tubing?

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

No one could ride a Cannnondale any distance - they beat the rider up - they made them lighter, they broke...it took YEARS and you still never ever hear a company say (to quote another ST member) "Rides like Auminum"

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

Ok well if the Shimano bearings are replaceable then that's at least something.

I'm not exactly pro-electronic shifting but thats only because all I have seen is the prototypes....so I'm not trying to sell the idea to you but clearly the shifting action will be lighter....and quicker...there would be no issues with frame flex creating ghost shifts....or gunk clogging the cable tunnel under the bottom bracket.... the wizardry that tells the motors to move maybe programmable so they will work with 8,9,10,11 speed cassettes, the gumph I have seen on the subject says that Ergobrain is at the heart of the system. At this point I haven't seen that Campag have tried multiple shifter button positions like the Zap system had but it wouldn't take a lot to add it. The mechs are taking most of the R&D effort.

Syncro 1 was ok....it was fine for me a couple of years ago although admittedly I don't race. They worked with a number of popular freewheels of the time fromtheir own super expensive alloy version (which I have, bloody lovely they are too) Regina, Maillard and Suntour and a number of different makes of chain, lets face it the Shimano design was heavily dependant on using just the right freewheel too....a Shimano one.

the 2.8 series had a lot of issues with breaking, and then they got better. Of course it took years, when did I say it didn't?

Not really sure what the ride quality of a 20 year old aluminium frame has to do with whether an oversized BB spindle might be an improvement. Not that there is anything wrong with a square taper, of course.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

Hell for years Dura Ace was only compatible with Dura Ace - no other group - had to be pure DA (for the rear shifting at least) Chain, Cogs, Hub, Shifter...not even 600 Ultegra would work with it.

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

Yup....I was gonna say that :)

Kleins predated cannondale by quite a bit, and were amongst the lightest frames of their time. Bicycling raved about the "feel" of the bike.



Styrrell

---

Styrrell

"Bicycling raved about the "feel" of the bike."

And as we all know, Bicycling is widely regarded for its insightful and non-biased reviews. (Though I am a Klein owner!)

There may be some benefits to electric shifting, but I think that the downsides outweigh those. Can't ever say that I wished a cable actuated derailleur was faster, I don't think an electronic one would be any faster since the delay is in actually moving the chain to the next cog, not in the actuation of the shift. ghost shifting isn't really an issue with properly maintained equipment, and road bikes don't really get enough gunk on them in the course of a single ride to prevent shifting.

I just expressed my reservations over where they had been heading. I like Campy equipment, but I'd like to see refinement in other areas than electronic shifting and adding a gear (which in my experience is more finicky than 9 speeds, and just means that I have fewer options for 9 speed parts now. Perhaps they are focussing more on what I would like to see (not that I am necessarily right, although I'd like to think so). Maybe by moving to a new crank system they can eliminate most of the metal parts on the crank, and have full carbon all the way through? Probably would need metal surfaces at the bearing supports and where the left and right cranks connect.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

"And as we all know, Bicycling is widely regarded for its insightful and non-biased reviews. (Though I am a Klein owner!)"


So you mean I can get legs/lungs/VO2 like Lance in 2 weeks like the Bicycling article says I can?

Rats

I'm just waiting for electronic, wireless shifting. Think about it. Nice clean lines. No added weight for any type of cables....and best of all...us computer geeks could develop a hack to allow us to shift YOUR bike. Now that would bring a whole new strategy to racing.

I would love to see a integrated computer with power measuring capability built into Campy or Shimano (or SRAM for that matter)

Can I please have it at cheaper than SRM or is that too much to ask?

Not that excited about bottom bracket changes, I currently have Octalink, Campy square taper, ISIS and FSA external bottom bracket on different bikes and I cant tell a damn bit of difference between them.

Why? Carbon for the sake of carbon? That is honestly why I got my Record Carbon crank....carbon for the sake of carbon. I cant tell it is not a Shimano 105 crank if I am not looking at it. What has this whole rest of the periodic table done to us that the only ingrediant we want is carbon? It is not the king of everything...



I know, carbon chains...imagine the weight savings...

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

"I've gone to the trouble of joining this board"

welcome.

i think some of us view campy as an enigmatic company, and have experienced both the good and the bad.

the good:

1. ergopower, just a better design.
2. ergopower's hoods, more, well, ergo. more comfortable BY FAR than shimano's STI levers.
3. 10sp, definitely caught shimano sleeping YEARS in advance.

the bad:

1. 10sp cassette options were woefully badly selected, and campy for YEARS offered no ratio wider than 12/25, unless you wanted 13t as your first position cog.
2. 10sp chain was bad, bad, bad, and the permalink design was flawed, and campy maintained it was perfectly fine all the way until the redesign came out.
3. for the purposes of those on THIS board, campy's utter refusal to bring the price of its 10sp bar-end shifter down to a point even TWICE the price of shimano's dura ace bar-end shifter meant that campy would never make any penetration into our market. and it never has.
4. campy ought to have spent time updating its chain and crank/BB instead of carbonizing everything. in recent years chorus has just flat-out been the better group, cost no object.
5. squarehole BBs are woefully old technology. i'm glad campy is updating. but it took them too long.

campy's problem is intense hubris. they make great stuff, but its people have got the worst case of *not invented here* extent in the manufacturing world. they feel that no technology is as good as theirs, and that's in every component category, and they proclaim this even while secretly working in the back room trying to catch up. worse yet, they think nothing of theirs ever breaks or fails. try to get them to honor a warranty item.

in short, campy's folks are VERY talented. they just aren't as talented as they think they are, and that's how my campy super record went from being clearly the worlds best to clearly unwanted by anyone but me in the short span of 5 years (1980-1985 or thereabouts). campy has still never quite gotten over that.

i write this as an owner of 2 campy road bikes, including the 10sp record road race bike i currently ride most of the time. as to "what i want," i have for years wanted AND ASKED FOR a 11-25 or 12-27 10sp, a slightly longer cage on the rear derailleur, a wippermann-style master link on campy's chain, affordable bar-end shifters, an updated crank/BB.

when i say i "asked for" this, i would've purchased some thousands of OEM upper-end kits had i gotten the bar-end shifters. but, campy didn't think this necessary, and as such is STILL shut out of the triathlon.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Dan,

Campy offers 3 lenghts for the rear derailleur in ALL of their gruppos.



As for the cassettes, chain, BB, and bar ends, well... I agree.

I hear ya about carbon for the sake of carbon, but it does have a few advantages, as well as disavantages.

1) corrosion resistance

2) lighter weight.

A carbon BB spindle makes as much sense as carbon steerer tubes, no? probably similar weight savings to be had as well. Not that that transfers into any kind of measurable real world performance.

Carbon chains would be cool, that would go nicely with those carbon chainrings and cassette cogs I saw.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

"Campy offers 3 lenghts for the rear derailleur in ALL of their gruppos."

i am aware of that (or, i should say, i became aware of that after i'd purchased my gruppo and discovered the narrow range of the stock derailleur). i guess i should've phrased it differently. there is little practical use for a derailleur with a 24 or 26 tooth total capacity these days. any gruppo today should come stock with a derailleur that handles in the neighborhood of 29 to 31 total teeth, then if you want to switch it out for something else, fine.

when i asked a certain highly placed campy executive some years back why they didn't make a cogset with a wider ratio than the 12-25 it was because, i was told, campy's european market needs nothing smaller than a 39x25 (hence no need for anything other than the short cage derailleur).

i'm visiting the marmolada and the stelvio (et al) in late april. i think i'll check out the gearing italians use on their climbs.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

"when i asked a certain highly placed campy executive some years back why they didn't make a cogset with a wider ratio than the 12-25 it was because, i was told, campy's european market needs nothing smaller than a 39x25 (hence no need for anything other than the short cage derailleur). "

HA! Yeah, I'm sure everybody in Europe can take Category 1 climbs with only a 39x25. Hmm, I seem to remember a few PRO teams using compact cranksets with 36t gears. Campy probably just wants you to buy a compact crank and front derailleur instead of a larger cassette. Thanks, Campy. They need a 12-27, no question. Just do a short and long cage like Shimano; no need for 3 cage lengths. I have actually had passing thoughts of ditching all my Campy wheels for Shimano's w/ Wheels Manufacturing cassettes, just for the better ratios. Why can't everybody just run the same spacing and freehub body spline pattern?!?!

Don't ask logical questions.

The nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

A couple of years ago people were demanding Campag go to splined axles as that was what Shimano and FSA and whoever were doing. Chainsets wedged on to square axles were just soooooooo old fashioned, splines were far superior, apparently. Thankfully Campag stuck to their excellent square tapered bottom brackets, weathering the fashion for splines, meaning people like me can use 'new for 2006' Centaur brackets on their 1986 C-Record chainsets, for example. Now everyone is demanding Campag bin the square axles for outboard bearings....but I think Campag should continue to hold out to see where this area goes....it will clearly evolve somehow but I reckon they should offer something for the MOst design whilst still using their current brackets in the same way they are doing with hidden/ahead/standard headsets. Do Shimano make hidden headsets yet? Or even Aheadsets? Last time I looked at their catalogue they didn't....it was almost like they resented paying another company to make their own version of their design......the worst case of 'not invented here' extent in the manufacturing world :)

Oh and Shimano knows only too well their stuff breaks.....which of their worldwide recalls came last, the SPD SL cleat or the brake cables?

"Do Shimano make hidden headsets yet? Or even Aheadsets?"

campy doesn't doesn't own the monopoly on hubris. because campy has tradition and style, it still has "gruppo integrity," that is, people buy the entire group, or nothing at all.

shimano doesn't have much tradition, and so doesn't have this luxury. this is why shimano's stubborness has cost them to suffer death by a thousand cuts. first it lost the headset, as you point out. and the seat post. then the hubs. the cranks, the BB, the brake calipers. the chain. now a shimano dura ace "bike" consists of dura ace front and rear derailleurs, and the shifter.

it took them a LONG time to get up to speed on wheelsets, because of its dogged determination to use its keiretsu partner (or at least golf buddies) araya.

at least that has how it has seemed to me. fortunately, it only stayed stubborn for 2 years on the 110mm bolt pattern crank.

why spline instead of squarehole? because the latter is notoriously hard to make, AND you have a much harder object (the broached and coined BB axle) more or less reforming the forged crankarm every time you replace the crankarm onto the BB @ 34 foot pounds or thereabouts -- a nice way to eventually achieve a smaller q-factor :-)

hey, i love campy. i'm going to the dolomites in 6 weeks, for some bocce ball & turkish coffee. and to see how those pretend-simonis crawl up the 18° grades in their 39x25s.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

will you be taking your campy bike with FSA Compacts and 13x29? Dont laugh I know someone who did just that to his c40 to ride some of the passes

p/s disclaimer - I have a campy equiped bike with campy compact cranks (but not the 13x29!)

---

__________________________________________________
Simple Simon
Where's the Fried Chicken??

"campy has tradition and style, it still has "gruppo integrity," that is, people buy the entire group, or nothing at all. "

See I feel I have sinned in this area. I just bought a Chorus grouppo but threw in an FSA crank. Am I a bad person???

I had a Campy bike with Shimano brakes and crankset. What does that make ME??

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

you have sinned but from someone who did something similar the situation is not lost. I changed the f-force to campy chorus carbon cranks. Just wait till the non drive side crank falls off while "just riding along". Ask Ves about it, but I suspect I got one of the faulty sets.

---

__________________________________________________
Simple Simon
Where's the Fried Chicken??

Have a nice time. :) Regarding the conversation you had with 'the executive'. You asked why there was nothing wider than the 12-25 and I take it you mean something starting with a 12T like a 12-27 rather than the 13-26 or 13-29 or 14-28 cassettes etc they made....as well as the triple cranks and long arm mechs they made going way back. So maybe he means that market research at the time found racers wanted mid-range sprocket choice rather than a 27 sprocket. Was the Dolomites part of the conversation? Executives say a lot of crap off the record anyhoo....sometimes it comes back to haunt them.....very soon after in the case of the UKs former high street jewellry store boss Gerald Ratner....one off the cuff remark cost him his job and then the whole business collapsed.



Anyhoo....deep drop calipers is what I want Campag to make....not that I need them myself but it stops me getting a winter frame with mudguard clearance, the thought I'd have to get Shimano or some weirdo make of caliper.

Come on over to the dark side. You know you want to.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

Don't worry...it happens to the alloy clad opposition too

http://www.cyclingnews.com/...p?id=vuelta052/2_14g

"will you be taking your campy bike with FSA Compacts and 13x29?"

pretty darned close. i actually DID replace my record cranks with FSA MegaExos w/34x50 aboard, tho with my 12-25. it rides GREAT.

but no, i'm not taking a bike. i'm just taking running shoes. i'm going to RUN up the marmolada instead (but not in a devil's costume, or with a flag).

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

"Was the Dolomites part of the conversation?"

i brought them up, yes. and i thought it a sort of cheeky thing to say on his part, as it bespeaks a company that doesn't really care to export. "we make parts for those of our italian customers who are retro in their approaches," seemed to be the tenor of the comment.

now let's consider you, an englishman (right?). i was in devon/cornwall not long ago, and it seemed to me some nice climbs in dartmoor begged for something other than a 39x25. so it's not just us americans that need a smaller gear now and then.

i used to race with a 13/21 (and sometimes 23). but that was when 5 cogs were all you could get. now that there are 10, it seems that having a 12t on the back and something larger than 25 to pair with it is a reasonable expectation (i'm not really interested in road riding with a triple).

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Tell me about it....I live in Plymouth!!! :)

"Tell me about it....I live in Plymouth!!! :)"

lucky man.

except it's a shame that the national shire horse center closed down.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Blimey....used to ride past the field they kept some of the flippin' huge horseys in, don't know why it closed down though.....or the Totnes Motor Museum either, they both went around the same time, I think.....strange :(

yup know that feeling, but with FSA crank not DA, luckly for me there was a burrito fast food joint where I could hang out until the wife came to pick me up!

---

__________________________________________________
Simple Simon
Where's the Fried Chicken??

The "Q-Factor" was not created by Tom Ritchey and it doesn't have much if anything to do with aerodynamics

It is a comfort and injury thing. If your feet are closer together they are generally more comfortable. A lower Q also puts less strain on your knees and ankles. Less pain and a more effient spedal stroke might translate into more speed but it might just make it easier to stay on the bike for another 30 km. The Q on road cranks has really gone up in the past several years and if Campy can bring that back down they'd probably make a few friends out of even retro-grouches like me. It is a good idea. You can really tell a difference in the bike if you have one with a low Q and one with a high Q. The low Q will be much more comfortable if everything else is identical.

My only real issue with such a radical change is that those of us with an exisiting bike are sometimes left out in the cold if we don't wish to spend our retirement savings on a bunch of new components. I don't want to have to replace everything when I need a bottom bracket.

I hope that Campy dosn't simply stop making at least one decent crank with a square taper and a bottom bracket in three or four lengths.

I'm sure electric shifting would make my teeth hurt. I don't know how but It it would.

---

________________________________________

Captain Gray Beard PhD
Cyclist and Retro-Grouch

Campy makes fixed to ;-)

I just can't afford it.

I hate the religous parts freeks.
I have had them all beak.

Thom

---

Slowtwitch bitchist place on planet earth

Hmm, so you give Shimano the credit for innovating combined brake/shift levers??? I guess you have missed the boat completely then, to use your own words ;-)

Shimano was not the ones inventing combined brake/shift levers and it was not Campagnolo either. It was the German engineer Hans-Christian Smolik who invented and patented the combined brake/shift levers all the way back in 1981, and he was ahead of both Shimano and Campagnolo by a long shot with this invention. Nobody wanted to by his invetion/patent back then though and it took Shimano many years to pick up the idea. Hans-Chirstian Smolik holds a number of bike related patents and is regarded as one of the most innovative bike inventors/developers.

Here's his company website: http://www.smolik-velotech.de

He has now joined the German bike manufacturer Canyon http://canyon.com/...r_canyon/smolik.html who makes the stiffest bike ever tested by Europe's largest bike magazine Tour, the Canyon F10 bike is also very light and cheap and also has the highest STW (Stifness To Weight) ratio ever tested. Number 2 behind Canyon F10 in the stiffness and STW tests is the new Cervélo R3 which costs double as much as F10.

Hans-Christian Smolik also made the first 6 kg bike in 1981. In 1984 he made the first 5,3 kg bike. 20 years later in 2004 he made a 3,7 kg bike, although this is only a showbike and not very rideable because of the simple components like gear etc.

Give credit where credit is due.

well, seeing as i am unable to really decipher much German, i'd be happy to take your word for it. i stand corrected.

but would you post a link to a drawing or diagram or photo of the 'original' "STI" invention, design, patent, etc. by Hans-Christian Smolik ?

i guess what i really should have said in the post you quoted was that Shimano was the first to bring to mass market a truly usable and highly refined combined shift and brake lever, where one lever actually is able to do both (that is, shift and brake).

---

---

Where would you want to swim ?

---

Brems/Schaltgriff:

Im Bremsgriff untergebrachte Schrittschaltvorrichtung, damit der Gangwechsel sowohl vom Ober- wie vom Unterlenker aus getätigt werden kann, ohne die Hand vom Bremsgriff zu nehmen. Dieses 1981 eingereichte Patent wollte seinerzeit kein Hersteller haben, ist aber von der Funktion her als Vorläufer der 1992 heutigen Brems/Schaltgriffe zu sehen. Skizzen und Bild im Archiv.

---

And Hans-Chistian Smolik's profile from Canyon: http://canyon.com/...r_canyon/smolik.html

i looked all over the site, do you by chance have a link to this original STI-type product, so i could take a look at it? or a patent no. ?

---

---

Where would you want to swim ?

Electronic shifting always gets hammered in user forums for a very simple reason. Not thinking outside the box. I will agree with almost everyone here that current STI/Ergo brake lever shifting systems work great and electronic shifting will probably not improve this much.

But this misses the ENTIRE point of electronic shifting, in that it is ELECTRONIC! Cable based systems have one point of control. Imagine putting shift buttons on the aero bars as well as the break hoods. I don't do tri stuff, but I have speed bars on my bike, and they make a huge difference, but I can't shift on that position. With electronic shifting, I would be able do just that. I will never be able to do that with a cable system.

I would also be able to shift on the top of the bars as well, or any other place I wanted to do so. This is the WHOLE point of electronic shifting.

Now suppose that you add in a heart rate monitor, power monitor, GPS unit and incline detector into the mix. You already know speed and cadence. Now you know where you are on the course, what the grade is, and what is coming up. Now imagine that the bike can figure this all out and select the gear most suitable for you to be in. This is the future.

Cable shifting will look quaint at some point, kind of like most things from 30 years ago. The future is electronic, not cable shifting systems.

Shimano is field testing their new electronic shifting group at the moment

The Japanese riders at the continental team Skil-Shimano http://www.skilcyclingteam.com are already testing a prototype of the new electronic Shimano group at the roads of the Spanish island Mallorca these days: http://weightweenies.starbike.com/...iewtopic.php?t=13863


Shimano patents:

"Motor driven Derailleur" http://v3.espacenet.com/...57&QPN=EP1609716

Electrical shift control device for a bicycle transmission http://v3.espacenet.com/...&QPN=DE69829234T

"If your feet are closer together they are generally more comfortable. A lower Q also puts less strain on your knees and ankles. "

"The low Q will be much more comfortable if everything else is identical. "


That's total BS.

"ideal" Q is directly related to an individual rider's morphology, and a generalization like this is worse than useless - it is mis-informed and just plain wrong.

There is data to suggest that contrary to what you state, more riders need larger "q" than smaller, relative to what is present on modern bikes.

Personally, I am in the small-Q camp; my legs are abnormally close together, so I need as small a Q as possible. That doesn't make my personal preference/requirement a general or absolute "good thing."

- take for example Lance Armstrong; he wound up rejecting a special Trek TT bike with a super narrow profile frame (based on the Walser narrow BB bike,) because the Q was too narrow for him to ride....





.

---

Tech writer/support on this here site. FIST school instructor and certified bike fitter. Formerly at Diamondback Bikes, LeMond Fitness, FSA, TiCycles, etc.
Coaching and bike fit - http://source-e.net/ Cyclocross blog - https://crosssports.net/ BJJ instruction - https://ballardbjj.com/

And it looks like Shimano (as well as Campy) is still not thinking out of the box. They are just producing clones of the existing single control point cable systems. This is doomed to failure in my book.

Electronic shifting only makes sense when you look at the electronic side, ie. multiple control points, automatic control and gear recording (also possible with cable shifting, but what is the point if you can't go the other way once you have the data). Only then does it become interesting.

i am curious to see it, would you post a direct link to a drawing, or diagram, or photo of the 'original' "STI" invention, design, patent, etc. by this engineer, Hans-Christian Smolik ?

---

---

Where would you want to swim ?

[reply]i am curious to see it, would you post a direct link to a drawing, or diagram, or photo of the 'original' "STI" invention, design, patent, etc. by this engineer, Hans-Christian Smolik ?[/reply]

The German text says that photos and drawings are still kept in the Smolik website's archive, but I couldn't find it.

thanks for trying.

and if you happen to find a patent no., let me know...

---

---

Where would you want to swim ?

I guess the new Campagnolo cranksets will look similar to the Negmass crankset and Specialized crankset: http://www.negmass.com










Specialized:

No kidding about the price of those Canyons, dont read German but if I understand it those prices includes all the components and wheels, full Record with Mavics Kys is 3400 Eu which is about 4600 CND and the that is pretty good price considering how expensive Schmolke branded stuff usually is

---

__________________________________________________
Simple Simon
Where's the Fried Chicken??

Say it ain't so.

---

Call me Big Dick

Now my problem is whether to wait for the new design- I am in the process of replacing all my cranksets with longer ones (I have long legs, did a bunch of reasearch/measurements, and turns out I ought to be riding 180's). Record alloy 180's have been out of stock for the past month from all US importers; at least all of them that my LBS can order from. Now I don't know if I should wait for the new design, OR just go with something other than Campy. I emailed FSA about whether they would offer anything other than 170-175; they flat out told me that it isn't cost effective to produce anything outside of that range. My only other option is the Truvativ Roleur alloy (external bearings). Nice crankset, but I'm afraid it won't shift as well as my Campy (and it will interrupt my otherwise full Campy group!). Yarrgh...

I thought about, and still think about, getting 180's or bigger. Did you ever look at the stronglight? They seem to get good reviews, go w/ square taper, and can be had in a range of price points. I'd be interested to know if you have any opinions or experience w/ this brand.

DA makes great 180s.

my prediction: FSA and others in that range will go to making 180s very soon (couple of years).

---

---

Where would you want to swim ?

I haven't looked at Stronglight. Where can you get them? They've got some cool carbon cranks that some pro teams are on, but I don't know anything about them or the sizing.

I've got DA 180's on my tri bike (Shimano components). I was hoping to keep my Campy road bike all Campy, but it is impossible to get Records in 180. Like I said with FSA, they said that there simply wasn't enough demand for anything outside of 170-175 to cover the production cost. If I can't get the Campy's within a few more weeks here I will strongly consider the Truvativs.

I believe that if you look back to about 1968 or so you'll find that Hans-Christian Smolik was also producing the very forst carbon fibre frames. There was a big article about him in Popular Mechanics at about that time which showed him holding up a very pretty carbon fibre frame that weighed about 3 to 3.5 lbs. Since most frames at that time weighed about 6 to 7 lbs it was considered to be quite light.

---

________________________________________

Captain Gray Beard PhD
Cyclist and Retro-Grouch

Fredly, you kind of missed my point.

I was simply replying to the comment that a lower "Q" would reduce the aero drag. That isn't the reason that proponents of a lower "Q" are promoting it. As to research that claims most riders need a larger not smaller "Q" please provide a link. I haven't seen it.

Even if it is true, there is a significant number of people for whom a narrow "Q" makes a lot of sense. Thus Campy would be filling a market corner that Shimano has pretty much ignored.

The Lance Armstrong example is something of a red herring because we are talking about going from a 210 mm to 150 mm or so. The bike Armstrong refused to ride was probably a sub 100 Q and was probably done for a measurable but not significant gains in aero efficency for the price of getting used to a new position; especially since his team was using Shimano parts which have a rather wide "Q". I imagine it would feel quite different.

---

________________________________________

Captain Gray Beard PhD
Cyclist and Retro-Grouch

I wasn't responding to what you meant to say, rather to what you said, which was fallacious.

- There is, btw, significant evidence that low q has positive drag ramifications, for whatever that is worth.

- Do a search for q. There is a lot of significant thinking on the subject available in the public domain.

- Define significant. I am physiologically in -roughly- the smallest 5% of the adult male population in terms of the significant physiological traits that would determine necessity for a low Q; my legs rub together when I walk if my body fat % gets above 7. I can, after adaptation time, ride a week long stage race on a mtn. bike with a triple.

- any measurable gains in aerodynamics are significant, by definition.





.

---

Tech writer/support on this here site. FIST school instructor and certified bike fitter. Formerly at Diamondback Bikes, LeMond Fitness, FSA, TiCycles, etc.
Coaching and bike fit - http://source-e.net/ Cyclocross blog - https://crosssports.net/ BJJ instruction - https://ballardbjj.com/

They have the entire stronglight line at xxcycle.com. I'm not sure what the shipping would be like but the have some kickass cranks there. They even have a sweet carbon crank that's wing-shaped, in track and double configs- the "ultim" I think. The new pulsion activ link ti is frickin sweet too- They have a ton of stuff that is more unique, better looking, and comes in 177.5 or 180. I think they're very popular in England.

http://www.zefal.com/stronglight/accueil.php

Have your LBS call Gita...http://www.gitabike.com...rumor is they may just happen to have some 180's.

---

----------------------------------------------------------

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

Not sure if this has been shown, but the best update I've seen on the 07 campy stuff is here.

http://www.fairwheelbikes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=92

Thanks for the link. I'm sorry to read that Record and Chorus will only be available in carbon. I imagine this will mean a big hike in price. Also, I wonder what it will do for availability of crankset sizes other than 170, 172.5, and 175mm.

[reply]Thanks for the link. I'm sorry to read that Record and Chorus will only be available in carbon. I imagine this will mean a big hike in price. Also, I wonder what it will do for availability of crankset sizes other than 170, 172.5, and 175mm.[/reply]

Actually, as amazing as it is, the price for Record, will be coming down just a touch.

The crank is still a sore subject with the head honchos at Campy. So nothing is positive yet. (Though they will be shown to certain vendors next week) They have reservations, because if frame tolereances are off even slightly it will cause problems with the crank. But Campy feels that it's the square taper that is holding them back. And now with Sram and FSA soon to bring groups to the table, they felt an integrated crank was inevitable.

[reply]Thanks for the link. I'm sorry to read that Record and Chorus will only be available in carbon. I imagine this will mean a big hike in price. Also, I wonder what it will do for availability of crankset sizes other than 170, 172.5, and 175mm.[/reply]

Forgot to mention, carbon record cranks will be available in 177.5 and 180mm as well.

There is a breif write up on cyclingnews.com about this. Not much detail, but for anyone intereste it is there.

Hi Tom,

i am Richard, redactor in chief of French magazine independant in Paris. L'Acheteur Cycliste.

We talk about material, only road. It seems guy you get the first information on Campy new Crankset. I send a mail to them , in Italie but no reply about these pictures. Do you get them by yourself ?

can we use your pictures or not ?



Yhyanks for your help.

[reply]Do you know where we can see these new cranks? Are they on a website anywhere?[/reply]

found a link on the 'rumors' page at campyonly.com:

http://www.campyonly.com/rumors/2006/photos_of_the_new_ultra_torque.html

---

#cureMS

Some photos from cyclingnews.com