Bicycle Mechanics - Campagnolo

Rode my mates Scott with Ultegra today and it shifts as smooth as silk. My Campy Centaur is extremely "clunky", always has been (5000 kms).

Why is this so, or is this just the way things are?

Rode my mates Scott with Ultegra today and it shifts as smooth as silk. My Campy Centaur is extremely "clunky", always has been (5000 kms).

Why is this so, or is this just the way things are?

Because Ultegra is at the second tier of Shimano components and a better quality than your Centaur. Trust me if you upgrade to Chorus you would never ask this question again.

Campy and Shimano have different design philosophies leading to different feel and action in their components so what you have noticed is typical. They both work well and have their strong points and weaknesses.

Campyphiles will claim that Centaur is fully the equal of Ultegra, Chorus is Dura Ace and Record is in a class all by itself. Shimanophiles claim they are all wet. The Campy/Shimano debate is about as acrimonious as any bike debate ever gets. Generally, it's a waste of time for both sides. :)

Relatively new to road cycling. Have a 928 monocoque CV 120 2005 model with Century Grey Centaur set. Had first accident with car pulled out from side street 2 weeks ago (5,500kms in 14 months) and written off most components except for rear derailleur and frame. I have option for new Bianchi Lugged 928 with Chorus but only double chain ring. We ride hills every week and I have got use to longer rides falling back to triple. I found that Centaur needed adjustment, particularly as fall to side can knock derailleur out of alignment with cogs slightly. Need to service and adjust.

Recent Cycling magazine rated Ultegra and DuraAce well above Chorus and Centaur. I prefer Campag due to quick changing of gears. Thinking on keeping carbon Bianchi as very used to true, reponsive ride.

Melbourne Bianchi rider

Recent Cycling magazine rated Ultegra and DuraAce well above Chorus and Centaur.

Can you give me a reference to this article? Preferably a web site. Thanks.

The article is in Ride Cycling Review Magazine - Summer 2--6 Issue 31 http://www.ridemedia.com.au

This is Australian published magazine 4 issues annually. Article on pp130- rated flex of 12 gear designs from Capag, Shimano, FSA and Zipp. Placed sets on rig where bottom bracket was fixed to cast iron beam that protudes from the spine of the jig. Attached at a 90 degree angle, it allowed testers to apply two weights of 20kg each to a specially created dumbell arm. Readings taken with sensitive gauges with both 20kg and 40kg weights loaded on the left crank arm. Each crankset received the same treatment. The list results as follows:

12 - FSA K-force Megaexo; 11th FSA SLK Megaexo; 10th Zipp 300; 9th FSA Gossamer Megaexo; 8th Gampag Centaur Aluminium; equal 6th Campag Centaur Carbon CT/Campag Record Aluminium; 5th Campag Chrous Aluminium; 4th Campag Recrod Carbon; 3rd Campag Chorus Carbon CT; 2nd Shimano Dura-Ace and 1st Shimano Ultegra.

Testing for Lateral Rigidity due to loss of energy and (forward momentum) due to flex.

Because Ultegra is at the second tier of Shimano components and a better quality than your Centaur. Trust me if you upgrade to Chorus you would never ask this question again.

Shimano and Campy simply have different feel; ride what you prefer. But the difference in feel between Centaur and Chorus (or Record) is close to non-existant. I would challenge you to tell me the difference in a true blind test.

Thanks for the info. I can't read the current issue on line so I'll get the details when it becomes a "back issue".

As to the relative ranking in this one specific test, I'm not surprised the two Shimano cranks tested the stiffest. Their large diameter spindles, external bearings and large hollow crank arms should be stiffer than Campagnolo's relatively small diameter conventional square taper design. I'm a little surprised that the FSA's cranks, with a bottom bracket design similar to Shimano's, didn't test higher.

Now as to the usefulness of this test, I don't think it tells us anything of value to the rider. Unless the deflection due to flex was so large it upsets your cranking smoothness it is meaningless.

I haven't seen the test numbers but I expect the differences from the best to the worst were within a millimeter or so. Flex of this magnitude is not a waste of energy and doesn't reduce rider efficiency. The "energy" you use to flex the crank is returned on the next half rotation and is miniscule anyway. If the energy loss was significant, the cranks would come back hot to the touch.

Magazines are forever doing this kind of comparison because it gives numbers they can use to rank components and it fills editorial pages. The value to the reader is nearly zero.

Now as to the usefulness of this test, I don't think it tells us anything of value to the rider. Unless the deflection due to flex was so large it upsets your cranking smoothness it is meaningless.


Magazines are forever doing this kind of comparison because it gives numbers they can use to rank components and it fills editorial pages. The value to the reader is nearly zero.

Agreed. Crankset flex tests have nothing to do with ranking components for any criteria other than flex. Not much use to anyone except the big hammer pro sprinters. It says nothing about shifting performance or riding comfort.

Al

Thanks for the feedback.

The important thing is to get the bike in order with a group set that works for the riding I do. I am definitely not in the league of riders bending cranks - unless I keep up hitting cars.:mad:

By the way, the overall difference from Dura Ace to FSA was 41 pts to 13 pts with middle 7 group 9th FSA Gossamer 22pts to 3rd Campag Chorus Carbon 32pts, average of 26.4pts.

Recent Cycling magazine rated Ultegra and DuraAce well above Chorus and Centaur.

And why is this magazine worthy of any trust at all?

This statement was made only in context of a specifc test. Worth reading the other comments. Clearly, it is conceded that the results of this test taken in isolation has little significance for most riders. The important thing is that most components fall closely together in respect to stiffness (flex) and overall feel and personal preference is what I would base my purchase on.

Thanks for all the info, but I think we've gone off topic just a tad.


My original question was - Am I stuck with the clunkiness or should it be better than this, eg as smooth as Ultegra?

Rode my mates Scott with Ultegra today and it shifts as smooth as silk. My Campy Centaur is extremely "clunky", always has been (5000 kms).

Why is this so, or is this just the way things are?

I've ridden both. Campy and Shimano both work very well. My current ride is a Daytona 10 speed, same as Centaur. If I'm standing on the pedals or really mashing the Daytona is louder. When I'm spinning at a constant speed and shift then it's very quite, almost silent.

There are several possible things that effect smoothness. Adjustment has a lot to do with it. Cables are another. Chains are a real culprit. So are chainrings and cassettes. Bicycles have several sub assemblies that work together. They are as good as the weakest link.

If your Centaur isn't shifting well at 5000 kms and the chain is original it's time to replace. Try a new Campy narrow chain with 5.9mm width. All reports back so far have been complimentary. A new chain is way cheaper than a new group. Good luck.

Tim

I've ridden both. Campy and Shimano both work very well. My current ride is a Daytona 10 speed, same as Centaur. If I'm standing on the pedals or really mashing the Daytona is louder. When I'm spinning at a constant speed and shift then it's very quite, almost silent.

There are several possible things that effect smoothness. Adjustment has a lot to do with it. Cables are another. Chains are a real culprit. So are chainrings and cassettes. Bicycles have several sub assemblies that work together. They are as good as the weakest link.

If your Centaur isn't shifting well at 5000 kms and the chain is original it's time to replace. Try a new Campy narrow chain with 5.9mm width. All reports back so far have been complimentary. A new chain is way cheaper than a new group. Good luck.

Tim

Thanks Tim, that all makes perfect sense. I was also told that the ratios on the rear cassette could have something to do with it. IE I run a 12-26 so there are a couple of larger jumps. If I ran an 11-23 this might be different. Is this valid?

Thanks Tim, that all makes perfect sense. I was also told that the ratios on the rear cassette could have something to do with it. IE I run a 12-26 so there are a couple of larger jumps. If I ran an 11-23 this might be different. Is this valid?
Campy doesn't make a 12x26 cassette so either its a 12x23, a 12x25, a 13x26 or you are using a SRAM cassette.

Campy's 12x23 or 13x26 cassettes are straight blocks all the way to the 19T cog and a the 12x25 is straight to the 17T cog so an 11x23 wouldn't help the situation at all. If it's really a SRAM cassette then there is your problem. The spacing isn't correct.

I agree that tuning the cable adjustments will probably help and shifting under high loads will make ANY drivetrain clunk.

Rode my mates Scott with Ultegra today and it shifts as smooth as silk. My Campy Centaur is extremely "clunky", always has been (5000 kms).

Why is this so, or is this just the way things are?

When I first decided to upgrade to brifters (I hate that term) I rode both Ampy and Shimano. I hated the vague, imprecise feel of Shimano shifting and loved the solid, precise shifting of Campy. Different strokes for different folks.

last year, I was helping a friend test ride new bikes. I was shocked to find that on the same bike (model line), the centaur group felt smoother than the ultegra group! I was expecting them to be equal or that the advantage would go with the Ultegra. Not sure if the differences were in the set up, this is but one data point.

However, there are 2 definite things that I like about the campy groups.
1. front deraileur indexing, there are severial adjustments between shifts which allows you to make adjustments to keep the chain clear.
2. The shape of the hoods feel soooo much better :)

Thanks Tim, that all makes perfect sense. I was also told that the ratios on the rear cassette could have something to do with it. IE I run a 12-26 so there are a couple of larger jumps. If I ran an 11-23 this might be different. Is this valid?
I'm not sure about the ratios. I do know that Campy seems to sensitive to chain width. Shimano uses a slimer chain and some say shifts better because of it. When you use the 5.9mm chain on a Campy group most riders say it's an immediate improvement. Like I said, It's cheaper to try a new chain than a whole new group. Mine Daytona, now Centaur performs great.

Tim

Definately would recomend the narrow chain. I switched my C10 to the Veloce narrow at the start of the year and notticed a improvement.

I switched from the normal Campy 10 chain to a Wipperman, and the drivetrain was noticeably quieter and the shifting was even better than it already had been.

I switched from the normal Campy 10 chain to a Wipperman, and the drivetrain was noticeably quieter and the shifting was even better than it already had been.

Did a bit of a search on Wipperman and Connex and the feedback looks encouraging. Thanks for this tip and others. Seems I have a few avenues to go down. BTW I've got a '95 ish Campione D'Italia as well mmmmmm steeeeel.