Campagnolo Athena vs. Potenza
06-11-17, 05:24 PM
#26
FLIR Kitten to 0.05C
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska
Posts: 5,331
Bikes: Roadie: Seven Axiom Race Ti w/Chorus 11s. CX/Adventure: Carver Gravel Grinder w/ Di2
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2349 Post(s)
Liked 406 Times
in
254 Posts
A Veloce or Athena crankset is less than USD60? I find that hard to believe ... send me a link? That'd be the equivalent of Sterling £45.00 or so, The cranks are subject in any case to the same duty rates as the European-made tooling, so there should be almost direct comparability in price differential.
Alas, for me $60-150USD crosses the line for an expensive tool. Especially when its use is of very limited scope, and the value of the part it services is maybe $100USD depending on level. A $200USD caliper or torque wrench at least works for more than PT cranksets. AFAIK, PT is the only currently-sold crank system that requires a unique-snowflake-you'll-never-find-it-locally crank puller. Hence the common recommendation in the USA to not bother with PT. And the aforementioned aversion to PT.
There's also the other matter that in most of the USA...good luck finding a shop that owns a PT bearing puller. It isn't like you can just go to the shop and have it serviced. I'd probably have to cross at least 3 state borders to find a shop that stands a chance, and even then they'd at best only own the Park CBP3/5 (which youn don't recommend). Customers just don't like bizarro standards that require bizarro tools.
06-11-17, 05:36 PM
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,949
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3952 Post(s)
Liked 7,298 Times
in
2,947 Posts
I apologize for a slight side-track: When did Athena cranks switch from ultra torque to power torque and why did Campy do this?
06-12-17, 10:41 AM
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 878
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 129 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
...the rear derailleur return spring in Athena only generates 900g (max) of force where The Chorus / Record / Super Record spring is rated at 1.25 kg ... this is so that there is enough return tension on the cable to correctly operate the UltraShift lever. The Athena RD, apart from early versisns made in 2009/10, was designed for the PowerShift lever introduced in Athena in MY 2011.
....
Older pattern CH / RE / SR rear gears with the same cable pull ratio as Athena are still available, they are now sold as spare parts rather than as groupset items and have been since 2015.
....
Older pattern CH / RE / SR rear gears with the same cable pull ratio as Athena are still available, they are now sold as spare parts rather than as groupset items and have been since 2015.
Thank you.
Question: I have pre 2015 SR shifters with an older Chorus 11 RD. I heard the pre-2015 RDs are not rated for 29t cassettes. I was going to get an Athena medium cage but this steered me clear.
Curious if the old 10 speed CH / RE / SR medium RD would work with SR11 shifters and a big cassette?
06-12-17, 12:24 PM
#29
Full Member
Thank you.
Question: I have pre 2015 SR shifters with an older Chorus 11 RD. I heard the pre-2015 RDs are not rated for 29t cassettes. I was going to get an Athena medium cage but this steered me clear.
Curious if the old 10 speed CH / RE / SR medium RD would work with SR11 shifters and a big cassette?
Question: I have pre 2015 SR shifters with an older Chorus 11 RD. I heard the pre-2015 RDs are not rated for 29t cassettes. I was going to get an Athena medium cage but this steered me clear.
Curious if the old 10 speed CH / RE / SR medium RD would work with SR11 shifters and a big cassette?
The confusion arises because the pre 2015 derailleur doesn't work well with 11-29. It was designed for a max range of 17T on the cassette, so 12-29 max with the H Screw mod done. You might persuade a pre 2015 RD to work with 11-29 - they "sort of" will on some frames - but shifting can be a bit flaky in the middle of the cassette, esp with a bit of wear on the chain / muck on the cables etc - all the usual caveats about working beyond the designed capacity of the kit. Hence we say "not recommended / compatible" ...
As always with derailleur capacities there is also a proviso that the derailleur hanger is long enough - from centre wheel spindle to centre top pivot bolt needs to be 24 - 28 mm. Most modern frames are fine, older steel frames with traditional "horizontal" dropouts can be more problematic.
There was no 10s SR!
These older 10s RDs *might* work but they were never formally tested with wide ratio cassettes on the UltraShift 11s levers. The whole geometry of the upper part of the RD is different so you might not get any more capacity out of them than you do from a current RD.
The pull ratio:derailleur movement wasn't specifically designed for wider cassettes with an UltraShift lever, at the time that Campagnolo were making 10s UltraShift, MY2009 & 2010, the max on 10s with a medium cage was 27T and as no tests were conducted on 11s cassettes using the 10s derailleurs, you might get acceptable performance, you might not ... it also depends what you consider "acceptable"...
Last edited by gfk_velo; 06-12-17 at 01:19 PM.
06-13-17, 04:15 PM
#30
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,637
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4736 Post(s)
Liked 1,532 Times
in
1,003 Posts
I'd disagree - the shift works pretty much identically.
All I would say is that the Chorus FD uses a plastic insert on the outer cage plates so that the chain, coming up from the small to the big ring is nudged back into proper engagement with the chainring - this system has been in use since the first days of 10s.
In recent years, we've seen more derailleurs shedding this plate. The advent of more users opting for chains such as those from YBN and KMC has probably been a factor - the very square leading edges of the links on these chains appear to "snag" these plates more readily, especially when shifting at higher torque values which are in any case inherent with lower-ratio gears / compact cranksets.
The 2015 and later FDs RE and SR have a moulded carbon outer and don't use this bumper plate - so there is no plate to be stripped away - they are still potentially damaged by third party chains, though, which is part of the reason that we can't warranty for durability or performance with other maker's chains.
All I would say is that the Chorus FD uses a plastic insert on the outer cage plates so that the chain, coming up from the small to the big ring is nudged back into proper engagement with the chainring - this system has been in use since the first days of 10s.
In recent years, we've seen more derailleurs shedding this plate. The advent of more users opting for chains such as those from YBN and KMC has probably been a factor - the very square leading edges of the links on these chains appear to "snag" these plates more readily, especially when shifting at higher torque values which are in any case inherent with lower-ratio gears / compact cranksets.
The 2015 and later FDs RE and SR have a moulded carbon outer and don't use this bumper plate - so there is no plate to be stripped away - they are still potentially damaged by third party chains, though, which is part of the reason that we can't warranty for durability or performance with other maker's chains.
If I did opt for a eg. a RE FD to replace a Chorus, hopefully this doesn't mean I'd also have to start using Record-level chains for warranty purposes (ie. a Chorus chain is just as useable with a SR FD)?
06-14-17, 01:42 AM
#31
Full Member
So, what's the point of the plastic bumper plate on the Chorus outer cage plate?
If I did opt for a eg. a RE FD to replace a Chorus, hopefully this doesn't mean I'd also have to start using Record-level chains for warranty purposes (ie. a Chorus chain is just as useable with a SR FD)?
If I did opt for a eg. a RE FD to replace a Chorus, hopefully this doesn't mean I'd also have to start using Record-level chains for warranty purposes (ie. a Chorus chain is just as useable with a SR FD)?
In Campagnolo's case, the ramp on the inside of the inner cage plate operates in tandem with the ramps and lift pins on the back of the big chainring to lift the chain, which shifts slightly past the big ring, hits the bumper plate and is deflected down to mesh cleanly with the big chainring. On downshift, it is a "pusher" to assist the chain off the downshift teeth.
You can use any Campagnolo chain, from Potenza up to Record ... link shaping and flexibility are all the same. Any other chain, unless it exactly mimics the shape and width of the Campag chain (in which case it would potentially be in breach of patent anyway) won't work properly with the ramp entries and lift pins anyway, as well as being problematic for this plate.
As an aside, I'd be saying the same were I advising on SRAM (SRAM chain) and Shimano (Shimano chain) ... all of these systems are just that - systems - all have differing requirements and 3rd party chains, by their nature can't fulfill all of them. Unfortunately, gone are the days where you could fit basically *any* "x-speed" chain and everything would work perfectly. Expectations about, in this case, shifting under load and speed of shift, are such now that such inter-operability has gone by the wayside ... 3rd party chains will "work" but not as well and come with potential other issues, as in this case.
Last edited by gfk_velo; 06-14-17 at 01:45 AM.
06-14-17, 04:21 AM
#32
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,637
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4736 Post(s)
Liked 1,532 Times
in
1,003 Posts
Basically it's a way of managing the width of the "gate" on the 11s FD. Shimano have a similar one on the inner plate of their current 11s FDs, which the chain is in contact with on upshift and before the FD is trimmed on the inside ring.
In Campagnolo's case, the ramp on the inside of the inner cage plate operates in tandem with the ramps and lift pins on the back of the big chainring to lift the chain, which shifts slightly past the big ring, hits the bumper plate and is deflected down to mesh cleanly with the big chainring. On downshift, it is a "pusher" to assist the chain off the downshift teeth.
You can use any Campagnolo chain, from Potenza up to Record ... link shaping and flexibility are all the same. Any other chain, unless it exactly mimics the shape and width of the Campag chain (in which case it would potentially be in breach of patent anyway) won't work properly with the ramp entries and lift pins anyway, as well as being problematic for this plate.
As an aside, I'd be saying the same were I advising on SRAM (SRAM chain) and Shimano (Shimano chain) ... all of these systems are just that - systems - all have differing requirements and 3rd party chains, by their nature can't fulfill all of them. Unfortunately, gone are the days where you could fit basically *any* "x-speed" chain and everything would work perfectly. Expectations about, in this case, shifting under load and speed of shift, are such now that such inter-operability has gone by the wayside ... 3rd party chains will "work" but not as well and come with potential other issues, as in this case.
In Campagnolo's case, the ramp on the inside of the inner cage plate operates in tandem with the ramps and lift pins on the back of the big chainring to lift the chain, which shifts slightly past the big ring, hits the bumper plate and is deflected down to mesh cleanly with the big chainring. On downshift, it is a "pusher" to assist the chain off the downshift teeth.
You can use any Campagnolo chain, from Potenza up to Record ... link shaping and flexibility are all the same. Any other chain, unless it exactly mimics the shape and width of the Campag chain (in which case it would potentially be in breach of patent anyway) won't work properly with the ramp entries and lift pins anyway, as well as being problematic for this plate.
As an aside, I'd be saying the same were I advising on SRAM (SRAM chain) and Shimano (Shimano chain) ... all of these systems are just that - systems - all have differing requirements and 3rd party chains, by their nature can't fulfill all of them. Unfortunately, gone are the days where you could fit basically *any* "x-speed" chain and everything would work perfectly. Expectations about, in this case, shifting under load and speed of shift, are such now that such inter-operability has gone by the wayside ... 3rd party chains will "work" but not as well and come with potential other issues, as in this case.
Interesting on the chains. Though don't a number of bike manufacturers sell multi-brand specced drivetrains. Eg. FSA cranks with shimano cassettes, etc. or is this 'system' issue mostly about the FD/RD and what brand chain is used? KMC chains seem pretty ubiquitous out there.
06-14-17, 05:41 AM
#33
Full Member
As to the FD bumper, I was more asking why Chorus FD has this plastic bumper (replaceable item?), when it seems from RE and SR that you can achieve the same by just shaping the outer plate?
Interesting on the chains. Though don't a number of bike manufacturers sell multi-brand specced drivetrains. Eg. FSA cranks with shimano cassettes, etc. or is this 'system' issue mostly about the FD/RD and what brand chain is used? KMC chains seem pretty ubiquitous out there.
Interesting on the chains. Though don't a number of bike manufacturers sell multi-brand specced drivetrains. Eg. FSA cranks with shimano cassettes, etc. or is this 'system' issue mostly about the FD/RD and what brand chain is used? KMC chains seem pretty ubiquitous out there.
As I mentioned, it's only an issue if you don't follow the specification.
Yes, there are lots of OEs who go in for mixed marriages - but that doesn't necessarily mean that the equipment manufacturers are happy about it and it doesn't mean that they work as well as they could.
Mixing of componets by bike manufacturers can result from any number of causes from the bike manufacturer wanting to say "Brand X, range Y, equipped" at a certain price point, to issues tied up with professional team sponsorship - maker "X" will supply kit and more importantly cash for a team, if their bike sponsor uses maker "X"s kit on their production bikes, for instance. It usually results in warranty being handled by the bike manufacturer and / or only a limited warranty being offered to the bike manufacturer.
I worked with one manufacturer a few years ago who specced a third party crankset and chain with an otherwise complete groupset - they had quite a significant number of claims which abruptly stopped when they swapped the production the following year to using full groups ...
KMC are pretty ubiquitous, it's true - but they have the same challenges as all the other third party chain makers out there (and there are quite a few makers) ...
In all these cases you are looking at a component which has to comply with (if we only look at Campagnolo, Shimano and SRAM) three different FD designs, three different sets of ramps and pins on the outer chainrings, six different force ranges applied to the derailleurs to make shifting happen (because electronic is very different to mechanical), three different possible tolerance ranges for the fit of the chain to the chainrings (none of which are published for obvious reasons of technical and commercial sensitivity) and so on. In some cases they are also specced to work with "thick-thin" chainrings used on 1x systems (no front changer) ... from a design and manufacturing perspective, it's an impossible task. They may do all of those things "OK" but there will be other problems associated, as I mentioned. Hence all of the requirements around warranty and my comments about the difference between "working" and "working to spec" ...
Last edited by gfk_velo; 06-14-17 at 05:50 AM.
06-14-17, 07:59 AM
#34
Senior Member
@gfk_velo: I'm building a new bike with Athena 11 and I bought all the components separately in order to save quite a bit of money (It all came up to just over $400 with careful shopping including a carbon UT crankset and carbon 2011 Ultrashift levers). Will using those Ultrashift levers be a problem with a new RD? Should I be looking for a 2010/11 RD instead? Thanks!
06-14-17, 05:56 PM
#35
Full Member
@gfk_velo: I'm building a new bike with Athena 11 and I bought all the components separately in order to save quite a bit of money (It all came up to just over $400 with careful shopping including a carbon UT crankset and carbon 2011 Ultrashift levers). Will using those Ultrashift levers be a problem with a new RD? Should I be looking for a 2010/11 RD instead? Thanks!
UltraShift on the most recent Athena RD (RD12-AT1) can sometimes work OK when everything is new and clean, if the cable runs are simple and if you are scrupulously careful about cutting cables dead square, making sure that the cable runs are completely free, etc - but it's still picky to set up. You really have to do everything 110% by the book.
As an earlier poster noted, his set up worked initially but is starting to get a bit flaky after (I think he said) about 12 months use ... I think he's been lucky, in most cases IME say 3-5,000 km and you'll start to see a degradation in shifting and even then you'll probably have had to tweak it once or twice.
For those reasons, we just don't advise it - Campagnolo state quite clearly in their documentation that it's a non-compatible combination.
If you can find an RD9-AT1 or RD10-AT1 rear gear, they'll work with UltraShift but anything later than that (RD12-AT1) will suffer the issues described above.
06-14-17, 06:47 PM
#36
Senior Member
Hi there
UltraShift on the most recent Athena RD (RD12-AT1) can sometimes work OK when everything is new and clean, if the cable runs are simple and if you are scrupulously careful about cutting cables dead square, making sure that the cable runs are completely free, etc - but it's still picky to set up. You really have to do everything 110% by the book.
As an earlier poster noted, his set up worked initially but is starting to get a bit flaky after (I think he said) about 12 months use ... I think he's been lucky, in most cases IME say 3-5,000 km and you'll start to see a degradation in shifting and even then you'll probably have had to tweak it once or twice.
For those reasons, we just don't advise it - Campagnolo state quite clearly in their documentation that it's a non-compatible combination.
If you can find an RD9-AT1 or RD10-AT1 rear gear, they'll work with UltraShift but anything later than that (RD12-AT1) will suffer the issues described above.
UltraShift on the most recent Athena RD (RD12-AT1) can sometimes work OK when everything is new and clean, if the cable runs are simple and if you are scrupulously careful about cutting cables dead square, making sure that the cable runs are completely free, etc - but it's still picky to set up. You really have to do everything 110% by the book.
As an earlier poster noted, his set up worked initially but is starting to get a bit flaky after (I think he said) about 12 months use ... I think he's been lucky, in most cases IME say 3-5,000 km and you'll start to see a degradation in shifting and even then you'll probably have had to tweak it once or twice.
For those reasons, we just don't advise it - Campagnolo state quite clearly in their documentation that it's a non-compatible combination.
If you can find an RD9-AT1 or RD10-AT1 rear gear, they'll work with UltraShift but anything later than that (RD12-AT1) will suffer the issues described above.
06-14-17, 07:00 PM
#37
Full Member
If you check the 2011 spare parts listings (available at www.campagnolo.com under Support and Documentation), you will see that RD11-AT1 is associated with the PowerShift lever ... not UltraShift. It's the 1st one that is.
I'd forgotten the change in 2012 where the top pivot bolt design was altered to bring Athena in line with CH, RE and SR which gave rise to RD12-AT1.
06-14-17, 07:37 PM
#38
Senior Member
Apols, I forgot about a step in the derailleur development.
If you check the 2011 spare parts listings (available at www.campagnolo.com under Support and Documentation), you will see that RD11-AT1 is associated with the PowerShift lever ... not UltraShift. It's the 1st one that is.
I'd forgotten the change in 2012 where the top pivot bolt design was altered to bring Athena in line with CH, RE and SR which gave rise to RD12-AT1.
If you check the 2011 spare parts listings (available at www.campagnolo.com under Support and Documentation), you will see that RD11-AT1 is associated with the PowerShift lever ... not UltraShift. It's the 1st one that is.
I'd forgotten the change in 2012 where the top pivot bolt design was altered to bring Athena in line with CH, RE and SR which gave rise to RD12-AT1.
Last edited by kansukee; 06-16-17 at 08:52 AM.
06-15-17, 01:59 PM
#39
Full Member
So the one I have isn't Ultrashift then? I keep finding conflicting documentation about this...
ps: I just listed my Athena rd; I found a pristine Record 11 spd rear mech 2010 for $150 bucks so this will work and I will actually break even on the deal. Thanks for the info!
ps: I just listed my Athena rd; I found a pristine Record 11 spd rear mech 2010 for $150 bucks so this will work and I will actually break even on the deal. Thanks for the info!
In general, a change of compatibility is marked by both (or more) parts that all have to interact all changing year identifier together - so if the FD, RD and levers all update at the same time, that would be a good indicator that an overall change has been made.
You have to know that, say, CH, RE and SR mechanical groups from with any given year-identifier are cross-compatible with each other (EPS, only in a more limited way) but a lot of information can still be gleaned from the information in the spare parts files. From time to time Campagnolo do include some limited compatibility info as well.
As a generality, the best route to good, solid info is to email one of the Service Centres ... with no insult to denizens of web fora like this one intended, what appears on the web in some cases is based on conjecture or individual's experiences in their particular set of circumstances. Different configurations of frames can give completely different results sometimes - component manufacturers test with a very wide range of designs and publish their criteria but an individual saying *X and Y combined with Z worked for me even though the manufacturer says it won't work" are not necessarily offering advice that they *know* will work on a whole range of bikes. Additionally. people have different levels of tolerance for how well things work - so something that would drive me crackers might be perfectly acceptable to others. Some advice is good - but ultimately these days, everyone has access to hitherto undreamt-of levels of good technical information and any manufacturer's technical representatives are generally just an email away - if you have access via the Service Centres to information that is completely solid, I'd regard it as the way to confirm what you need to know.
Last edited by gfk_velo; 06-15-17 at 02:09 PM.
08-20-17, 03:19 PM
#40
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,637
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4736 Post(s)
Liked 1,532 Times
in
1,003 Posts
The plastic bumpers are replaceable. In RE / SR the cage is carbon fibre so it can be suitably constructed (in terms of hardness) and moulded - but the cost is higher and it's also a range-differentiator. In Athena, Campag shape the (steel) outer cage. Chorus is the odd one out because it's an alloy cage and without expensive surface treatment to super-harden it, it's not viable to just shape it like Athena, because the alloy would otherwise just erode away in time ... hence the replaceable bumper plate.
08-20-17, 07:04 PM
#41
Senior Member
Wow. Lots of incompatibilities between Campy 11-speed componentry.
I've ridden Campagnolo almost exclusively since the 70s, and I have 7 (8?) road bikes equipped with Ergopower, but this complicated mess of affairs is why I haven't nor will ever 'upgrade' to 11-speeds.
Plus the ridiculous requirement for a $250 chain pin 'peening' tool.
If I cannot service it, I don't buy it.
I've ridden Campagnolo almost exclusively since the 70s, and I have 7 (8?) road bikes equipped with Ergopower, but this complicated mess of affairs is why I haven't nor will ever 'upgrade' to 11-speeds.
Plus the ridiculous requirement for a $250 chain pin 'peening' tool.
If I cannot service it, I don't buy it.
08-20-17, 11:59 PM
#42
Full Member
I've decided to pick up a Record derailleur to swap onto bike and remove the Chorus. 99% odds I won't see a difference, but oh well... found a good price and just did it. Bought an S2 version, only because it was cheaper where I shopped and available, and I read somewhere (?) that the extra bits that make it "S2" can be removed.. I hope this is correct?
08-21-17, 12:08 AM
#43
Full Member
Wow. Lots of incompatibilities between Campy 11-speed componentry.
I've ridden Campagnolo almost exclusively since the 70s, and I have 7 (8?) road bikes equipped with Ergopower, but this complicated mess of affairs is why I haven't nor will ever 'upgrade' to 11-speeds.
Plus the ridiculous requirement for a $250 chain pin 'peening' tool.
If I cannot service it, I don't buy it.
I've ridden Campagnolo almost exclusively since the 70s, and I have 7 (8?) road bikes equipped with Ergopower, but this complicated mess of affairs is why I haven't nor will ever 'upgrade' to 11-speeds.
Plus the ridiculous requirement for a $250 chain pin 'peening' tool.
If I cannot service it, I don't buy it.
Compatibility information is all out there - Campagnolo publish the information and it's freely available at www.campagnolo.com.
What few manufacturers spend time on is explaining the "why" of the various compatibilities. This is natural - because where do you stop? Do you go as far as "x doesn't work with y" because of this mechanical difference or do you then start explaining why the decision was made to have that mechanical difference in the first place - was it production cost or just a marketing decision? If it was a production cost, why is it cheaper to do it one way than another? And so on.
The chain peening tool is something you will need once in the life of the chain, if you adopt a sensible chain care policy - removal of the chain once installed is a rare thing to need to do and Campagnolo prefer the absolute security offered by riveting a link in the same way as every other link in the chain is joined, to master links that can and do open / break with far greater frequency than riveted joins. They certainly have the expertise and experience to make a joining link it's just that up to now, they have preferred not to - it's not that they make a fortune out of selling the tools, either - given that it's a tool so infrequently used (somewhat like BB taps and facing tools or a proper headset press), it's probably worth a trip to your bike shop to get that bit of the job done, if no other - use them or lose them!
Last edited by gfk_velo; 08-21-17 at 12:14 AM.
08-21-17, 05:56 AM
#44
Expired Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 11,546
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3674 Post(s)
Liked 5,435 Times
in
2,761 Posts
I've enjoyed the in depth Campy info provided by gfk_velo in this thread. I've always been curious about Campy and now it seems Chorus groups are priced just a little over the new Ultegra and Record is no more than Dura Ace. I think it would be interesting to have a "Why choose Campy?" thread full of real info like the shaping of chain plates mentioned above.
08-21-17, 06:42 AM
#45
Voice of the Industry
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1188 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
8 Posts
Will start and saying gfk_velo offers greater depth of insight about Campy here than any place on the web in my experience and we are so fortunate for his expertise. Thank you gfk_velo.
Now for my modest input on the subject of Campy compatibility which is challenging to digest for even a gearhead and long time bike builder like me. Campy doesn't make it easy. We could have a philosophical discussion about 'why' Campy does what they do and I believe the truth isn't without its dark side directed toward lack of compatibility promoting greater profit for Campagnolo. That is my opinon designing similar product. It is too easy to not make products compatible which makes backward compatibility less feasible to promote sales.
So the compatibility issue is complex for reason that gfk_velo writes with greater clarity than I have seen explained anywhere.
What do I do? First, I am not as much a slave to fashion as many that ride Campy for example. Yes, Campy has undeniable beauty, but that isn't why I ride mechanical Campy. I ride it because functionally I find the shifters ergonomically superior to anything available and I believe the lever and thumb button is the best shifting system. I have ridden all the competition and that is my opinion. I continue to hope for Shimano and Sram to continue to refine their shifters but they aren't there yet although have made some strides. Also, I am not beholden to Campy cranks with what I believe are their design limitations...or Campy brakes...I run Shimano dual pivot because I believe they are better and I do not run Campy chains because I can't be bothered with a special chain joining tool. I vastly prefer a quick removal master link.
What do I run?
Two bikes, both with Campy.
Bike #1: General purpose and light touring
2011 Centaur 10s carbon shifters
2011 Centaur Front Derailleur
2014 Veloce Rear Derailleur
105 11s Crankset
KMC 10s chain
FSA Kwing handlebar with internal cable routing.
Bike shifts very nicely and has since it was built
Bike #2: Training and for group rides
2014 Chorus 11s Carbon Shifters
2012 Centaur Front Derailleur
2014 Athena 11s short cage Rear Derailleur
2006 Chorus UltraTorque Crankset...yes 2006 and still going strong
KMC 11s chain
FSA Kwing handlebar with internal cable routing
Bike also shifts nicely
A couple of things. Shift integrity is a relative thing. Both bikes above shift nicely. But, I am very vigilant about adjustment and maintenance...probably more than typical...certainly relative to others I ride with.
If you listen to gfk_velo, he correctly writes about derailleur compatibility. Of course we all know about cable pull ratio compatibility. That is the elephant in the room about whether components can work together. But he writes about shift quality relative to rear derailleur spring rate which I believe to be valid. If you notice, I combine Ultrashift shifters with Powershift rear derailleurs. In theory, I believe worse case because of the lower internal cable friction of Powershift shifters promotes a lower spring rate rear derailleur to keep actuation levels as low as possible. But, I do mix and match and shifting is good...even with the less than optimal combination of lower spring rate Powershift rear derailleur coupled with Ultrashift shifters which are explained to have higher internal cable friction based upon their design complexity of upshifting multiple cogs with a single thumb lever push.
Other thing which is unknowable for me, I have never run a Campy chain. I don't believe in it even though it may have slightly better wear and may even shift a bit better. Countless run KMC chains on Campy bikes and some Campy bikes are shipped out Europe with KMC chains.
But, for nth degree performance, gfk_velo is correct of course. He knows more about Campy than any of us. But, cross compatibility Campy can work nicely as I experience each day..even with internal handlebar routing which further taxes a rear derailleur spring rate that isn't optimal for a given shifter model...above being my experience in addition to previous iterations of Campy which were less complex compared to the latest proliferation of new Campy models with incompatible cable pull ratio to the versions I ride.
Now for my modest input on the subject of Campy compatibility which is challenging to digest for even a gearhead and long time bike builder like me. Campy doesn't make it easy. We could have a philosophical discussion about 'why' Campy does what they do and I believe the truth isn't without its dark side directed toward lack of compatibility promoting greater profit for Campagnolo. That is my opinon designing similar product. It is too easy to not make products compatible which makes backward compatibility less feasible to promote sales.
So the compatibility issue is complex for reason that gfk_velo writes with greater clarity than I have seen explained anywhere.
What do I do? First, I am not as much a slave to fashion as many that ride Campy for example. Yes, Campy has undeniable beauty, but that isn't why I ride mechanical Campy. I ride it because functionally I find the shifters ergonomically superior to anything available and I believe the lever and thumb button is the best shifting system. I have ridden all the competition and that is my opinion. I continue to hope for Shimano and Sram to continue to refine their shifters but they aren't there yet although have made some strides. Also, I am not beholden to Campy cranks with what I believe are their design limitations...or Campy brakes...I run Shimano dual pivot because I believe they are better and I do not run Campy chains because I can't be bothered with a special chain joining tool. I vastly prefer a quick removal master link.
What do I run?
Two bikes, both with Campy.
Bike #1: General purpose and light touring
2011 Centaur 10s carbon shifters
2011 Centaur Front Derailleur
2014 Veloce Rear Derailleur
105 11s Crankset
KMC 10s chain
FSA Kwing handlebar with internal cable routing.
Bike shifts very nicely and has since it was built
Bike #2: Training and for group rides
2014 Chorus 11s Carbon Shifters
2012 Centaur Front Derailleur
2014 Athena 11s short cage Rear Derailleur
2006 Chorus UltraTorque Crankset...yes 2006 and still going strong
KMC 11s chain
FSA Kwing handlebar with internal cable routing
Bike also shifts nicely
A couple of things. Shift integrity is a relative thing. Both bikes above shift nicely. But, I am very vigilant about adjustment and maintenance...probably more than typical...certainly relative to others I ride with.
If you listen to gfk_velo, he correctly writes about derailleur compatibility. Of course we all know about cable pull ratio compatibility. That is the elephant in the room about whether components can work together. But he writes about shift quality relative to rear derailleur spring rate which I believe to be valid. If you notice, I combine Ultrashift shifters with Powershift rear derailleurs. In theory, I believe worse case because of the lower internal cable friction of Powershift shifters promotes a lower spring rate rear derailleur to keep actuation levels as low as possible. But, I do mix and match and shifting is good...even with the less than optimal combination of lower spring rate Powershift rear derailleur coupled with Ultrashift shifters which are explained to have higher internal cable friction based upon their design complexity of upshifting multiple cogs with a single thumb lever push.
Other thing which is unknowable for me, I have never run a Campy chain. I don't believe in it even though it may have slightly better wear and may even shift a bit better. Countless run KMC chains on Campy bikes and some Campy bikes are shipped out Europe with KMC chains.
But, for nth degree performance, gfk_velo is correct of course. He knows more about Campy than any of us. But, cross compatibility Campy can work nicely as I experience each day..even with internal handlebar routing which further taxes a rear derailleur spring rate that isn't optimal for a given shifter model...above being my experience in addition to previous iterations of Campy which were less complex compared to the latest proliferation of new Campy models with incompatible cable pull ratio to the versions I ride.
Last edited by Campag4life; 08-21-17 at 08:34 AM.
Likes For Campag4life:
08-21-17, 08:17 AM
#46
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: A Yankee in Houston, TX
Posts: 1,074
Bikes: State Bicycle Co. Undefeated Track SS/FG, Lynskey Helix-Bronze
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked 204 Times
in
95 Posts
I have similar experiences as Campag4life since switching to Campy about 6-7 years ago. I've had Chorus 11, SR11, SR11 EPS and as personal preference, I've always used KMC X11SL/DLC chains along with a Rotor 3D+ crankset and eventually a Rotor 3D+ with Praxis chainrings. Shifting was always smooth, responsive, no issues.
With my newest and current build, I decided to try Potenza 11. As always, I'm sticking with another KMC DLC chain along with a Praxis Alba crankset. I'm sure it'll be the same, smooth and responsive shifting as prior Campy groups.
With my newest and current build, I decided to try Potenza 11. As always, I'm sticking with another KMC DLC chain along with a Praxis Alba crankset. I'm sure it'll be the same, smooth and responsive shifting as prior Campy groups.
08-21-17, 08:54 AM
#47
FLIR Kitten to 0.05C
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska
Posts: 5,331
Bikes: Roadie: Seven Axiom Race Ti w/Chorus 11s. CX/Adventure: Carver Gravel Grinder w/ Di2
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2349 Post(s)
Liked 406 Times
in
254 Posts
Wow. Lots of incompatibilities between Campy 11-speed componentry.
I've ridden Campagnolo almost exclusively since the 70s, and I have 7 (8?) road bikes equipped with Ergopower, but this complicated mess of affairs is why I haven't nor will ever 'upgrade' to 11-speeds.
Plus the ridiculous requirement for a $250 chain pin 'peening' tool.
If I cannot service it, I don't buy it.
I've ridden Campagnolo almost exclusively since the 70s, and I have 7 (8?) road bikes equipped with Ergopower, but this complicated mess of affairs is why I haven't nor will ever 'upgrade' to 11-speeds.
Plus the ridiculous requirement for a $250 chain pin 'peening' tool.
If I cannot service it, I don't buy it.
Use a KMC masterlink.
Yes, you're going to die. Probably later than Campagnolo official documentation would lead you to believe, and probably not as a result of using a masterlink instead of buying the $250 chain tool.
03-26-21, 12:17 AM
#49
Newbie
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Arguments against buying the right tools for the job on the basis of price are indicative of people refusing to accept the price of admission to home servicing and needing to adjust their view of the world. I'll buy an expensive tool and use it once, because it is the right tool for the job and makes the job easier. Do you hammer a nail with a screwdriver? Of course not.
If you don't like the tool cost, go and support a LBS. Otherwise - silence is golden. I don't believe the cost of the Campagnolo chain tool is outrageous. Expensive, yes. But if you have multiple bikes it gets used often enough and even if you do not, after you hold one in your hands and use it the opposition will melt away.
If you don't like the tool cost, go and support a LBS. Otherwise - silence is golden. I don't believe the cost of the Campagnolo chain tool is outrageous. Expensive, yes. But if you have multiple bikes it gets used often enough and even if you do not, after you hold one in your hands and use it the opposition will melt away.
Last edited by laager; 03-26-21 at 12:26 AM.
03-26-21, 05:16 AM
#50
Expired Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 11,546
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3674 Post(s)
Liked 5,435 Times
in
2,761 Posts
Arguments against buying the right tools for the job on the basis of price are indicative of people refusing to accept the price of admission to home servicing and needing to adjust their view of the world. I'll buy an expensive tool and use it once, because it is the right tool for the job and makes the job easier. Do you hammer a nail with a screwdriver? Of course not.
If you don't like the tool cost, go and support a LBS. Otherwise - silence is golden. I don't believe the cost of the Campagnolo chain tool is outrageous. Expensive, yes. But if you have multiple bikes it gets used often enough and even if you do not, after you hold one in your hands and use it the opposition will melt away.
If you don't like the tool cost, go and support a LBS. Otherwise - silence is golden. I don't believe the cost of the Campagnolo chain tool is outrageous. Expensive, yes. But if you have multiple bikes it gets used often enough and even if you do not, after you hold one in your hands and use it the opposition will melt away.
Likes For shelbyfv: