I've raced for almost 30 years now. I started on 6 spd down tube shifters (Shimano).

I've not only tried EVERYTHING out there in terms of manufacturers, I once ran a Campagnolo Service Center.

I think I've got it covered.

You have no idea of what you are talking about. You are very funny.

Seriously.

All true, but it was more entertaining when you approached everything from the pedantic POV.

I think you also forgot one universal bike forum truism....the answer to any "what-is-best" question is "what-I-already-own-and-I-couldn't-possibly-be-wrong"...

This thread needs a Rodney King quote.

Don't get me wrong -- I'm on the integrated shifting bandwagon. Keeping hands on the bars yields a safety benefit, I love being able to click through gears when standing or accelerating, and the convenience allows for better gear choices. While not as reliable as DT, it's reliable enough that I don't think people should worry about it. I use the old tech on my 'bents because I don't need to take hands off the bars.

The reason I brought it up is that you don't switch between the front rings very often so taking your left hand off the bars momentarily is not a big deal. Road bikes are too quick to abandon old tech that works. For example, we always try to solve the problem of improving gear selection by adding yet another cog. But simply by going triple, you could have fewer cogs and still achieve both tighter gearing and wider range than can be accomplished on a compact or standard mated with an 11sp.

It's a cosmetic feature. It doesn't move, it just looks like it does.

I think they are both overrated. If you just ride a lot and never replace your chain you get telepathic shifting. Seriously, put down a load of power and your bike knows you want to shift and the chain jumps automatically.

As they used to say in "Mash", "Wait for it." I won't disappoint you.
Of course this drives a lot of the answers, but I am impressed with how many Shimano and SRAM folks say, "Go ride and decide."

Totally with you. See also non-integrated seatposts, threaded bottom brackets, cone hubs, and external cabling. All are arguably better than what is currently in fashion.
This is a really good point. Also, going this way would allow for slightly thicker/more durable cogs and chains and less finicky shifting. Cramming 11 cogs back there is getting a bit ridiculous.

/retrogrouches unite! Form of a Rivendell Atlantis!

I have road bikes with Shimano Ultegra 6700 and Campy Record 10 and I have to say both do their job well, but with a different character. The campy shifters have smaller hoods and would be better for someone with smaller hands, the shifting is much quieter than the Shimano but due to the design, if you aren't used to it, can be more prone to overshifting. The Shimano group snaps audibly into gear when you shift but can shift less gears at a time (2 down, 1 up), has slightly larger hoods, and requires less force to accomplish an upshift and provides more leverage to downshift. I only have SRAM currently on my MTB so I can't really make a good comparison to the other road stuff, but it shifts fine too in my experience.

I've restored three Campy Ergo shifters (mid-late 90's vintage) to full, like-new function after many thousands of miles, with just a some new "g-springs" and fresh grease. The shift function in my son's 9-spd Dura-Ace front brifter was trashed after far less use. We replaced the shifter function with a DT lever.

BTW, I far prefer the shift effort on my Sachs New Success version of these Campy-built brifters (with Sachs NS RD's, which i think is the big difference) to the comparable version of Campy Chorus on my wife' bike.

Sorry you misunderstood the entire argument...that Shimano and Sram are now copying Campy ergonomics. There is no debate. That is the reality.
If you superimposed the CAD data for all three shifter groupsets...latest from the big three, the topography of the CAD surface would be almost identical. This is because Campy came forward with the best ergonomics before the others did and now they are copying Campy. Btw, this has not always been the case. There has been synergy right along...a major back and forth of reverse engineering since the inception of STI. For example when Shimano came forward with STI, Campy then followed suit. When Shimano arguably had the best ergos aka DA7800, once it was realized that more surface area on the hoods reduced hand psi and Campy had skinny shifter hoods as a throw back to brake levers...Campy countered with arguably the best ergos which are emulated now by the big three. DA7800 led the march on greater surface area on the hoods....then Shimano threw up all over themselves with poorly designed hoods for DA7900...which we ill fitting, bulbous and mushy and universally panned by bike reviewers. Add me to the mix. Further, shift performance was an abomination with DA7900. When Shimano went to under bar tape routing their pull ratio and RD spring rate weren't up to the task...bulky shifting on many bikes that weren't favorable to hidden cable routing. Further shift performance was aggravated by poor shift detents. Shimano has changed ever single deficiency with DA9000...their best mechanical effort yet.When Sram came to the road party, they were clueless about ergonomics and their shifters reflected that. Sram has taught us however they are fast learners and every year their shifters and shifting have improved. Their yaw adjusting front derailleur is a technical watershed for 0 trim and I believe you will see a derivative of this on future Campy and Shimano mechanical groupsets if they can work around the patent infringement. Point is, Campy has been out in front from a technical standpoint for the last 4 years. You can deny this all you want as many technically clueless road bike riders...which btw are in the majority, do. Campy has been for guys that can discern the difference. The rest should be driving Hondas and riding Shimano. :)

I will say again because you have represented my position so poorly, Shimano and Sram are catching up to Campy. Its getting closer to a jump ball than it ever has and we are all the better for it.

Man, I'm with you. I really have grown to love barend shifting and always liked the simplicity of downtube shifting. I have never had an issue with either throwing a chain and the setups have never got in the way of a good ride. Of course, I'm riding around on a couple of rivendells, but whatever.

Poor horsey...oh the misery...

As I previously stated in this thread, I have Shimano 5600 and don't like the ergonomics of the shifters, though it all works flawlessly and is like new. Campagnolo ergonomics comes up quite frequently I've noticed. I just wish I could find a LBS that carries Campy equipped bikes that I could try out. I've seriously considered ditching the 5600 simply for the ergonomics of it, those narrow hoods just don't work well for me, and I'd like to try Campagnolo before committing the $$ to it.

To me, the ergos of any groupset are transcendent. In other words, the shift performance between brands is closer than how they feel under your hands.
So we are alike. To others that don't have the hands of a concert pianist like we do...aka the plow boys on the 41 ;) it doesn't matter what they ride and why the outcry against Campy...they don't get it. :)

It isn't easy to find a Campy bike in some parts of the country. If you have a riding club, hopefully somebody has a bike you could try.
I will tell you that it is worth getting a second job if necessary to purchase one Campy Record groupset for your favorite bike.
Best.

I haven't tried them, but supposedly the newer 10 speed shimano (7900,6700,5700) are all improved. You might just be able to upgrade shifters. And maybe brakes.

I understood you position and I think represented it perfectly. You give Shimano and SRAM some credit for individual achievements but no matter how close they get to what you perceive as the Campy position of superiority, it is never better than almost. And that would be fair if you were saying that is just your perception. But the zingers like the comment about technically clueless cyclists tells a different story. While you maintain that Shimano and SRAM are getting really close, you make it quite clear they are not close enough to be the choice of a discerning cyclist. That is very different from what a lot of other folks say, that all three are essentially interchangeable. Sure one company sticks its nose ahead of the others with a new development, but as you yourself pointed out, that doesn't last for long.

I am convinced you have no idea how much like the story of the emperor's new clothes your argument sounds. To wit, if we were only knowledgeable and discerning enough, we would agree with you. (I.e. only the cycling cognoscenti can appreciate Campy.) The fact that we don't shows our shortcomings, not Campy's. It is amusing how such a manipulative rhetorical form has survived the centuries. In this case I would never say the emperor has no clothes, but it is obvious to me that the ones he does have are more or less the same as everyone else's.

I have 5700 on my other bike, and yes, it is much better, ergonomically. That thought has crossed my mind more than once.

If you only had a modicum of technical detail to accompany the 'prose' you write with, I maybe inclined to listen to you. But it only qualitative drivel.
If my technical descriptions went over your head, then we are talking past one another anyway. Some guys can drive a car down the road and not tell if the tailpipe is dragging. I am not saying you are this person...lol. Now please, write me more poetry. I may be inclined to comment on its meter at least.

A good suggestion. Night and day.

C4L you are just repeating the same manipulation: if I disagree with you, it must be because I have no technical understanding or am unable to discriminate. My arguments are only qualitative, and so on. But you have presented nothing technical or even objective. All you have said is that your delicate digits like the Campy ergonomics so they must be superior. How much like qualitative drivel is that?

I mention again the interesting discrepancy between your reliance upon "crowd consensus" with regard to frame stiffness but your disinterest in it as far as group performance is concerned. Why is the majority which prefers stiffer frames an accurate indicator of superior bicycle design, but the global majority which prefers Shimano or SRAM to Campy too ignorant or indiscriminate to matter?

I just thought that I would post these as a reminder that it was you that was waiting, and baiting, for an argument about Campagnolo vs all others. My obviously playful comment triggered your anti-Campy rant, and then others chimed in. By count, there are equal numbers bashing as giving props.

I repeat:


Lighten up Francis. :thumb:

Oh, and after 3 years of riding Microshift, SRAM, Shimano, and Campagnolo, I primarily ride a single speed now. Smoothest shifting I have found.

No argument. You've got it just about right. I just think it is best to be prepared for whatever onslaughts you know are coming. I swear I had no idea your comment was playful. Sounded like all the rest to me. BUT most important is this question: Who is Francis?