Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07.
Quote | Reply
Campagnolo will go to a unique, 2 piece crank and bottom bracket configuration of the 2007 model year.

The crank/BB is different than the Shimano in that the crank is 2 "L" shaped items that fit together mechnically in the center of the bottom bracket spindle.

The predominant technological change is the use of ultra-narrow external bearings that lower the crank "Q" factor substantially placing the rider's feet closer together. The bearings are now external, and the spindle is no longer the traditional square taper Campagnolo has been using.

I have no insight into the cosemetic appearance changes of the externals of the cranks.

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Do you know where we can see these new cranks? Are they on a website anywhere?
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.

Greg Kopecky - Slowtwitch Tech Editor
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Nope.

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [cochise] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
stay tuned...they are working closely with FRM
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [Bob Timmons] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Who is FRM?

Greg Kopecky - Slowtwitch Tech Editor
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [gregk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Cool Italian components: http://www.frmbike.de/catalog/index.php?language=en
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [campagfan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [gregk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
While I don't have a problem with square taper, it's good to see them updating and staying competetive.
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?
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hmmmmm....



Quote:


February 11, 2006--We're hearing reports (again) of deep discounts in Campagnolo cranksets, leading (again) to speculation about the demise of Campagnolo's square-taper bottom brackets. See our May 22 rumor ... we've been down this road before, and still no sign of a new bottom bracket. More likely, according to our sources, is a need to compete with component maker FSA, who offers nice equipment at a lower price than Campagnolo.

Thought this was neat too

Quote:
Component maker Full Speed Ahead is still looking to overtake Campagnolo's #2 spot. Rumor has it that FSA is working on a complete 11-speed gruppo that will expand their offerings from cranks, wheels, handlebars, etc., to include derailleurs, levers, and brakes. We've used FSA's cranksets and bars like them--let's see how the new gruppo looks ...

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

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [Record10Carbon] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.

Greg Kopecky - Slowtwitch Tech Editor
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [gregk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | 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.





Where would you want to swim ?
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [Greg X] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
design-wise, i think their solution is not particularly optimal. but it will be very interesting to see it and how it turns out.


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?
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [Record10Carbon] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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 ?
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [Record10Carbon] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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 ?
Last edited by: Greg X: Feb 16, 06 21:40
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [Greg X] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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?
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [Record10Carbon] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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 ?
Last edited by: Greg X: Feb 16, 06 21:52
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [Greg X] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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?
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [BigBloke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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?
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [Record10Carbon] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
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.


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

Scott
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [smartin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"and the whole 'Narrowbike' experiment Trek tried with LA"

And how did that work out?.. poo poo.
Quote Reply
Re: Campagnolo goes to more current crank configuration for '07. [Pooks] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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
Quote Reply

Prev Next