Anyone got some good info for relative C&V newbies on period Groupsets. It's not so bad when starting with a complete bike to change one item to match the period but when starting with a scratch frame then it's a little more difficult, so anyone who could share a bit of knowledge would be greatly appreciated or maybe there are resources available that you can point me towards for this info.

So, this is the thing - I'm mostly used to Modern Shimano so would have to consider that my cyfer when trying to understand comparisons, so if you could put it in that context it would be great. I have one Campag set, so not a complete Philistine, it's just for shorthand the Shimano, Dura Ace, Ultegra, 105 comparison works best for me when talking about relative period performance levels.

I'd like some info on the equivalent options for these 3 tier levels for between the 50s and 80s. I don't have a specific build in mind at the moment but it's nice to know what to look out for so if I pull a groupset together over time for a particular era / style then I can keep an eye out for a suitable frame and vice versa.

Thanks in advance and no glass hammers please.

So you are wanting someone to spoon-feed you on several decades of technical development on bicycle components from a myriad of manufactures on several continents rather than doing the research and learning something for yourself?
Where should we start to make it simple and concise?

Just post WWII road racing in Europe by French manufacturers through the Hinault era and the consolidation of that industry, or something more broad ranging?

-Bandera

Velobase.com is a terrific reference for the info you seek.

There weren't really groups until Shimano began to dominate. Bikes used to be built with a mix of preferred components. This site: Disraeli Gears - a derailleur collection is a great walk through the development of the rear derailleur. Great for context.
Beyond that... I've been surfing this site almost daily for 7 or 8 years and I still learn something new pretty regularly.

Really? Odd since "Gruppo" is the Italian from which the current term derives.

Extra Point Question:
What manufacturer, and in what year, was the 1st Complete Bicycle Gruppo offered to the cycling public?

Extra-Extra-Point Question:
Name the components included.

Hint: It's Not Shimano.

-Bandera

You can look at catalogs from Raleigh and Peugeot thru the years and pretty much see what was low, mid, and upper level components.

Interesting though how Rene Herse used Huret Allvit derailleurs for quite awhile. Sticking with French made components.

Once Shimano entered the scene everything went to h, e, double toothpicks. There stuff worked great but lacked in aesthetic appeal.

If shimano was the first then what were gran sport, nuovo and super record considered? Zeus also had a couple different levels of full groupset if I recall. Check out some of the older Campag catalogs available online and they'll show a picture of the full Gran Sport, Nuovo and Super Record groups (hubs, headsets, calipers, lever...etc) so you can see each group has actual different components between them.

Campagnolo systematically expanded their product line through the decades to 1968, where they introduced brakes, yes in very small quantities but that set the plate for complete ensembles from one manufacturer. Shimano did later begin to offer even more, freewheels and chains, freehubs and even stems, rims and wheels, components Campagnolo later included or continued to avoid.

It is interesting now that the full ensemble manufactures moved into complete wheels and reduced their presence in seatposts, headsets, pedals. Often still made but not market demanded or expected.

Frank Berto's The Dancing Chain

Campagnolo catalogs readily available online

Group sets ("gruppos") were a marketing invention by Tulio Campagnolo and until the advent of proprietary indexed shifting schemes were mainly a cosmetic issue.

I wish I could cite the source of the info I'm going off of but I can't remember where I read it. Oh well, as I said, you can learn something new every day around here.

Thanks for the replies.
@Bandera - It's a Forum, this is the medium for asking these questions. If baffles as to why there is always at least one responder in forums who's stock answer is, why don't you look it up yourself on the internet.
@nlerner & [MENTION=147177]BluesDaddy[/MENTION] - Thanks, these are great resources and I have used them a lot also but it's still hard to place some components in the overall scheme of things based on the info available there.

I do know that the further you go back the less groupset orientated it gets. I suppose the reason for my question was that, with modern components, 3rd and even 4th tier sets are perfectly functional for most riding and can even be raced on competently save weight weenie issues, but then there are lower sets that become a compromise to quality and function.

When selecting components for a vintage build, it's easy to play it safe and go with the top tier parts but in many cases that would be the same as going out today and buying Di2 or EPS for a bike only used for the Sunday club spin, an unnecessary extravagance, when 105 or Veloce or somewhere inbetween would be perfectly adequate. That's not to say that top tier isn't appropriate with the right frameset but for a stock non chromed or fancy lugged frame then mid-tier might be more fitting.

Maybe I'm trying to run before I walk, my knowledge bubble is quite good back as far as the late 80's but starts to get a bit fuzzy after that but this time last year I didn't have any vintage bikes and 4 years ago no bikes at all so prob just takes a little patience.

FWIW, I thought the way his answer was posted was pretty snotty. But the point was taken, by me.
All this information you seek has been written down. Some of it for decades.
You are asking someone here to write it all down again. Ostensibly so you can sit at your computer and read it.
In other words, it might look to some like you are seeking instant gratification.
If not exactly instant, then unwilling to do some work.

+1 I agree that this does seem a bit "lazy" (Pun intended [MENTION=395994]LazyLegs[/MENTION] !)...but...sometimes...researching on this particular site is quite a hassle...as we all know, the search engine here is, ahem, "stellar"...as in...you might see stars before you get your answer. Yes, you can use the Google "site:bikeforums.net" trick, but, even there it can be quite taxing to try and find the information. Besides, we are ALWAYS adding new information...I have researched the particular topic in this thread...but...learned more via this thread itself...so, sometimes, writing it down again can be a good thing!

True. But there are other sites to check too. As has been said, Campagnolo came up with the idea of offering full component sets as a "gruppo" fairly recently in terms of bicycle history. What? Early 60's as the Record group? Since then, it's only really been SunTour and Shimano to offer sets as a group set, AFAIK. And perhaps a couple of obscure French companies.

Iab mentioned a very good resource on the subject. The Dancing Chain, by Frank Berto. Well worth a look, OP.

Not a stock answer at all.
You are asking for an Enormous Undertaking of comparative research across decades of technical change by many manufacturers serving distinct markets and functions.
An effort of this size and scope is not really suitable for a quick forum response off the top of one's head.

A quick synopsis will not likely be forthcoming, although copyrighted work by dedicated researchers on facets of the topic is available.
Note other responders are pointing you at research sources, use them if you are actually interested in learning the technical history of the sport.

Like cycling itself research on it's technology takes considerable time and effort, and no one can turn "the cranks" for you.

-Bandera

Perhaps narrowing it down to SunTour, Shimano, or Campy would be a good start. From there, you could look into(both this thread and elsewhere) what the top components were for a certain time.
SunTour made dozens of RDs each year, or at least it seems that way when looking at spec sheets from their yearly catalogs.
And each brand changed their lineup every year in small ways.

The other thing that would be good is if you could list what type of bike you are looking to build up. Touring? Race? This would affect suggestions.

Yes, point taken it was a bit broad of a question, rather than specifically is X derailleur appropriate for Y frame/ time period etc. It was more impatience and tiredness (was up past my bedtime ) than laziness. Not quite sure the task is 'Enormous' either (But it's best not to go there with the misappropriation of words thing again ) bikes have had a pretty slow evolution between end of WWII and start of the 90's so some slow and steady reading as prescribed by Dr. Bandera ( I sincerely jest) should get me there.

You have much to learn.

If you have a particular frame on your hands, it might be worth sharing that, or focusing your research on what was available at that particular point in time. Once you're familiar with that, it's relatively easy to add to your knowledge of how the groups evolved to that point, and how they continued to evolve from there.

Give a man a fish, feeds him for a day. Teach a man how to fish, feeds him for the rest of his life.

With that in mind, the OP's question could take hours of keyboarding to answer properly. Best to learn how to find this and that on your own, then share what you have found with others. My opinion, of course.

I am a firm believer in encouraging someone to do their own researching, and learning how to do so. I have no links to other sites on my website, save one (Bicycles for Humanity). I do this on purpose, pointing the student in the right direction, then allowing him to learn from the effort.

For example, if period correct components are the target, learn how to determine the vintage of components...



The WE is important information pertaining to the year and month the component was made. Learn this simple method for dating, and finding a set of period matched components becomes much easier.

Do tell?



-Bandera

@randyjawa - I came across your site a few years back when I picked up a NOS Moser frameset like you did. It was great reading about your bike collection and the unique story involved in each project. There is some great advice on there but unfortunately in my attempt not to build the bike up with emotional purchases, I did nothing with it for a year. So it's true, you can be shown the path but walking it and gaining the experience for yourself is where the real value is.

Admonishedly Yours.

Slow steady evolution, single parts changing over several years but backwards compatibility being retained. You can still put quite recent groupsets on most of those old frames, save some rear end respacing. Whereas in recent years there has been a proliferation of standards, overlapping and incompatible that even after a few years specific parts can become harder to attain than for a bike fifty years old. It wasn't a reference to performance evolution, just the proliferation of headset and BB standards etc. An oldschool friction shifter doesn't pose the same incompatibility issues as indexed shifters and derailleurs. So you might commit the sin of pairing two style incompatible pieces together but they will still function until such time as you decide to correct the style error. Buy the wrong part today and you buy twice etc.

The operative word is "Complete" which, I might argue, is subjective. However in the greatest sense of the term I'd suggest this includes everything short or stem, saddle, bars and rims...

But you're not.