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.