As the title says. Is there any difference between Nuovo Record & Super Record front derrailleurs? If there is, my limited knowledge cannot tell!

Thanks!

~Frank

Super Record had black anodized pivot arms. Aside from the cage hole and narrow band anomolies of the the first generation ones ('78) I think they are pretty much identical except for the colored arms.

Super Record parts were out awhile before there was a Super Record front der. So for a pre '78 Super Record gruppo a Record derailleur would be correct.

Correct - but until 1978 (when the 4-hole FD showed up), SR shared the front derailer with NR.

-Kurt

And don't forget the Titanium adjuster screws!
Makes it all worthwhile apparently.
According to Velobase :
A fine derailleur, but essentially identical to the Record/Nuovo Record of the same period with 3 holes except slightly lighter due to using titanium limit adjustment screws, and having a black finish. Unit made with clamp-on, and braze-on tab mounting. Beware of units sold without the original titanium screws, and/or control arms painted black as opposed to the original anodized finish; it can equate to approximately a $25-$50 value difference. So now we know!
Robin.

I'm calling BS on this folk-lore.... Not your fault, but there is incorrect stuff posted to Velobase by well meaning individuals, that does not get sufficiently put through the mill.

Now prove me wrong...

Back up from Campagnolo catalog... Check weights and part numbers, Olympic Catalog (1984) Old numbers were the same across a number of models , 774. New numbering system Only NR and SR share the same limit screw number. OK check the arms... They share the same new system number with an added suffix for the anodized part, guess what it is... /SR Of course there was no old number... the black anodized piece had not been in the old numbering system.

Next point: Campagnolo's listed weight for NR is 92g; for SR it's ...wait for it... 92g

Last point: Personal experience... I' had plenty of SR front derailleurs pass through my hands, including NOS NIB. Stainless steel. Campy never even claimed they were Ti


Caveat: I could be wrong, but without actual proof... BS. Campagnolo FD's came through with stainless steel limit screws, which could easily be mistaken for Ti at the scale of the screws, if that's what you expect to see. Ti, I've never seen them, to my knowledge. (Funny thing, some NR front derailleurs have those screws... As I say, I could be wrong. Show me.


How many folks have been reverse - hornswoggled into ponying up extra bucks. Value difference indeed... I have at least 5 or 6 SR fronts, if anyone wants to swap their NR's plus 35 bucks... I can't remember my velobase rights info so I can't change it until I find it. This myth has been around a long time, though I doubt it was BITD.

Wear a mask, help your fellow man.

Cheers, Eric

Hi Eric,
Very comprehensive debunking of BS there. Well done for quoting personal experience, it is the best.
Yes, I have seen absolute howlers on Velobase, and elsewhere on "reference" sites. Usually a little more woolly headed speculatory sort than the authoritative looking statement about SR FD's.
I think have also seen them in Campagnolo parts sheets with wrong number or name assignation, but could be wrong as I didn't note the specifics for reference .
As to the SR adjuster screws themselves - of course, stainless steel!
Even passes the 'magnet test' if they are Austenitic SS (i.e. not magnetic), just like Titanium is.
Hey-ho, I'll just reset my BS compass another notch more to 'doubt everything until proven'..

Now, what about Super Record versus NR Rear Derailleurs?
Did they have any Titanium on them, or is it another pile of the old steaming stuff?
Even then it was only the jockey setscrews and those old limit adjusters (again) that are alleged to be Titanium.
Let's take a look at those Campagnolo spec. sheets, eh.....?
Any weight estimations (I mean 'Mass' really, of course. Mass in grammes, weight in Newtons) to hand there Eric, or anyone else with actual hands-on knowledge?
Regards,
Robin.

Only the large bolts at each end were (are) Ti... except when those were made from aluminum. The "story" goes there was a cold-war western hemisphere shortage of titanium, and so (like steel replacing the copper used in pennies during part of WWII), Campagnolo switched to aluminum as a substitute. Seems to have been around '80-'81 IIRC.
Not having researched (googled) it... Seems likely as a reason, given the US-USSR friction at the time. Switched back to Ti for the rest of the SR run, till '87, (the RD with no markings on top). I remember the first one of those I found, thought it was some sort of prototype.
Cheers, Eric

Now if someone will just send me a pair of those Ti hubs, I'll be all set...

The volume of two SR adjusting screws in so small that, even if they were made from titanium, the total difference in weight would be only about 0.5g, I don't know what what degree of hierarchy you'd have to be in SOWW (Sacred Order of Weight-Weenies) to justify this, but it would be pretty far up the ranks. Does anybody else find it ironic that the acronym for the Order resembles the name for a female pig?

T-Mar is right. I just replaced the rear derailleur on my Medici . It came with a Patent 74 Nuovo Record and I put a Patent 82 Super Record just because the bike is a 1982 model. When I held the derailleurs in my hand I couldn’t feel any weight difference , it would take a scale. I am sure it is even more true for the front derailleur. The shifting and performance on my bike is the same after the switch. To me it is just to make the bike more correct . It is more like a visual preference than anything else. The only significant weight difference I have seen between SR and NR components is on the Superleggeri pedals . The SR with titanium spindles is noticeably lighter.

i have a few NR front derailleurs in near mint condition, the three hole version, and have thought about disassembling them to send the arms out for anodize just to make them look like they are SR. Not for resale or anything but just looks. I have not done it but may at some point. The machine shop next door to me that I do cutters for is constantly sending stuff out and has offered to throw in a few of my bike parts if I ever wanted to do so.

I laugh at the ti adjuster screw proclamation.
there was a time in the mid 80’s when only Super Record front Mechanisms were available- black anno arms. That is why one of my bikes has one where the balance of the bike is Nuovo Record- and even have the lip front cage in harmony with the pre CPSC cranks.

i did buy a wrecked Super Record rear mech from a customer during that period, so my Nuovo Record rear mech has Ti bolts.

the very late rear mechs do shift a bit better- the cage was redesigned- most easily identified bu the Countersunk bolts that enter from the Back and the visible nuts from the outside.

Even the stock SL pedals are significantly lighter than Record, due to the aluminum cages versus the steel cages. My scales register a 74g difference per pair. And the SL pedals get even lighter as they age, due to the high wear rate of the aluminum cages! They really should have been re-designed with a replaceable cage but that would have mitigated the weight savings and replacement sales. Still, my aluminum cage MKS Unique clones don't wear nearly as fast.

Pretty sure the cages on SL/SR pedals are Dural. I've drilled into a few pairs and that stuff is tough! First, the anodizing - much thicker than any other on similar pedals (black anodizing from both my Barellis and Suntour Superbe pedals wore through to silver after less than one hundred miles) - is stronger and the Dural beneath is at least as high on the Rockwell scale as the numbers provided for Campy's chainrings. High wear rate of these cages can only equate to extremely high mileage - or metal cleats. My views based on 25+ years of experience using Campy SL/SR pedals in both road and track models.

DD

My first pair of these SL pedals came to me when I built up a 1973 Paramount for a friend who bought it on eBay . He rides vintage road bikes but like many does not like clips and straps, opting for Shimano clipless . He gave me the pedals that came with the Schwinn. They were wrapped in bubble wrap and stayed in my parts bin for a while , waiting for the right bike. I had no idea what they really were other than Campy pedals. I then got another bike to refurbish for myself that had what I thought were the same pedals , black anodized Campy pedals. When I was putting the bike back together I removed the dust caps and checked the grease and they were good to go. I decided to get out the gifted pair to check them and they seemed to be lighter so I did the magnet test and viola . I now have quite a few pair of these SL pedals , two of them are SR and I love them and been riding with them ever since . I have not noticed any exceptional wear problem. I have one pair that is worn on the tops through the anodize but I suspect they have many miles on them so I got them cheap. They are just as nice and smooth as my other ones that are near perfect. The Medici deserved SL SR pedals so one pair is on that.

I know this thread is about front derailleurs but I have to say the Campy SL pedals are my favorite pedals. I too like some of the MKS pedals but have changed my regular rotation of bikes over to SL or SR. The look and function , to me , are classic!

What you say makes sense and I concur about the wear rate on their chainrings but it doesn't correlate with my personal experience for the SL pedals. Mine showed significant wear after one season and were ready to be tossed at the end of the 2nd season, when an axle broke. There was no questions asked on the axle replacement but the rep refused to budge on the cage wear. I was hoping that he would give me a complete new set of pedals but all I got was a replacement axle. That didn't do me any good, given the cage wear. I think I may still have them around, someplace.

Sounds like you gave them quite the miles/workout in less than 2 years! I was surprised to read further and hear about the SL axle breaking - was it on the outboard end? I seem to recall that's where some Ti axles broke, but I could be mis-remembering. Myself, I'm amazed I've not broken one, Ti or steel, in all my years of using/abusing them. I'm not light these days, I push stupid-small gears uphill (I can't help myself there), and have broken at least 5 freewheel cogs in the last few years (3 steel, two alloy) as a result. But never a pedal axle - not even the supposedly-suspect ones in the Barellis. Go figure

Edit: Sorry for my part in derailing the thread there for a bit! Back to front derailleurs...

DD

No, it was on the opposite end, just shy of the inboard race, if I recall correctly. The rep kept the broken axle. To this day, as a result of that failure some 40 odd years ago, I have an orphaned Campagnolo pedal axle sitting in one of my parts bins. I remember that prior to the failure, there was a short period with a mysterious creaking that I could not locate. Then there was the "Eueka!" moment, shortly after the "WTF!" moment of being stunned by the failure.