Campagnolo FD for Triple vs FD FB for triple

[Artoi]

Reading through the Campagnolo IFU document 7225255 for front
derailleurs, I note that the company specifically bars the combination
use of Ergopower shifter with FD FB for triple. It goes on to state that
users should only pair Ergopower FB controls with FD FB for triple.

Anyone know the reason why? What's so special and different b/n the
standard FD and the FB version?

Thanks!
--

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Artoi wrote:
> Reading through the Campagnolo IFU document 7225255 for front
> derailleurs, I note that the company specifically bars the combination
> use of Ergopower shifter with FD FB for triple. It goes on to state that
> users should only pair Ergopower FB controls with FD FB for triple.
>
> Anyone know the reason why? What's so special and different b/n the
> standard FD and the FB version?
>
> Thanks!

Different dimension fo the FD. You CAN use the FB FD with ERGO, but
since the left FB shifter is indexed, you gotta use a FB FD. Campag,
like shimano, say certain things that in practice, are not necessarily
true.
> --

 

[Artoi]

In article <[email protected]>,
"Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Artoi wrote:
> > Reading through the Campagnolo IFU document 7225255 for front
> > derailleurs, I note that the company specifically bars the combination
> > use of Ergopower shifter with FD FB for triple. It goes on to state that
> > users should only pair Ergopower FB controls with FD FB for triple.
> >
> > Anyone know the reason why? What's so special and different b/n the
> > standard FD and the FB version?
> >
> > Thanks!
>
> Different dimension fo the FD. You CAN use the FB FD with ERGO, but
> since the left FB shifter is indexed, you gotta use a FB FD. Campag,
> like shimano, say certain things that in practice, are not necessarily
> true.

Thanks. So the FB FD is the universal unit that can work with all the
shifters. That makes sense.
--

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Artoi wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Artoi wrote:
> > > Reading through the Campagnolo IFU document 7225255 for front
> > > derailleurs, I note that the company specifically bars the combination
> > > use of Ergopower shifter with FD FB for triple. It goes on to state that
> > > users should only pair Ergopower FB controls with FD FB for triple.
> > >
> > > Anyone know the reason why? What's so special and different b/n the
> > > standard FD and the FB version?
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> >
> > Different dimension fo the FD. You CAN use the FB FD with ERGO, but
> > since the left FB shifter is indexed, you gotta use a FB FD. Campag,
> > like shimano, say certain things that in practice, are not necessarily
> > true.
>
> Thanks. So the FB FD is the universal unit that can work with all the
> shifters. That makes sense.
> --

yes, to include 2007 Centaur and below ergo, I understand all 2007 FDs
are FB FDs, now called 'QS', no more FB specific FDs.AND the QS Fds are
a weebit different than the old, non FB FDs of 2006..confused yet???

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Artoi wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Artoi wrote:
> > > In article <[email protected]>,
> > > "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Artoi wrote:
> > > > > Reading through the Campagnolo IFU document 7225255 for front
> > > > > derailleurs, I note that the company specifically bars the combination
> > > > > use of Ergopower shifter with FD FB for triple. It goes on to state that
> > > > > users should only pair Ergopower FB controls with FD FB for triple.
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyone know the reason why? What's so special and different b/n the
> > > > > standard FD and the FB version?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > Different dimension fo the FD. You CAN use the FB FD with ERGO, but
> > > > since the left FB shifter is indexed, you gotta use a FB FD. Campag,
> > > > like shimano, say certain things that in practice, are not necessarily
> > > > true.
> > >
> > > Thanks. So the FB FD is the universal unit that can work with all the
> > > shifters. That makes sense.
> > > --
> >
> > yes, to include 2007 Centaur and below ergo, I understand all 2007 FDs
> > are FB FDs, now called 'QS', no more FB specific FDs.AND the QS Fds are
> > a weebit different than the old, non FB FDs of 2006..confused yet???
>
> Yep, every bit as confused... But have been trying hard to understand
> the compatibility issue since I changed to a 2007 Chorus QS Ergo shifter.
>
> I note that some stores are selling 2004 Chorus triple FD (non-FB
> version) but have not seen any 2007 Chorus triple QS FD. Checking
> through Campag's 2007 catalogue, I don't see any Chorus triple QS FD
> (p42) but rather the triple FDs are grouped at the back (p44) under Race
> and Comp levels, and there's no mention of QS with these triple FDs.
>
> I wonder if 2004 was the last update for the triple FD?

no more triple FDs, except Comp, Race and Champ. Altho not marked 'QS',
they undoubtedly are same as QS, arm length and compatibility wise.
> --

 

[Artoi]

In article <[email protected]>,
"Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Artoi wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Artoi wrote:
> > > > Reading through the Campagnolo IFU document 7225255 for front
> > > > derailleurs, I note that the company specifically bars the combination
> > > > use of Ergopower shifter with FD FB for triple. It goes on to state that
> > > > users should only pair Ergopower FB controls with FD FB for triple.
> > > >
> > > > Anyone know the reason why? What's so special and different b/n the
> > > > standard FD and the FB version?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > Different dimension fo the FD. You CAN use the FB FD with ERGO, but
> > > since the left FB shifter is indexed, you gotta use a FB FD. Campag,
> > > like shimano, say certain things that in practice, are not necessarily
> > > true.
> >
> > Thanks. So the FB FD is the universal unit that can work with all the
> > shifters. That makes sense.
> > --
>
> yes, to include 2007 Centaur and below ergo, I understand all 2007 FDs
> are FB FDs, now called 'QS', no more FB specific FDs.AND the QS Fds are
> a weebit different than the old, non FB FDs of 2006..confused yet???

Yep, every bit as confused... But have been trying hard to understand
the compatibility issue since I changed to a 2007 Chorus QS Ergo shifter.

I note that some stores are selling 2004 Chorus triple FD (non-FB
version) but have not seen any 2007 Chorus triple QS FD. Checking
through Campag's 2007 catalogue, I don't see any Chorus triple QS FD
(p42) but rather the triple FDs are grouped at the back (p44) under Race
and Comp levels, and there's no mention of QS with these triple FDs.

I wonder if 2004 was the last update for the triple FD?
--

 

[Artoi]

In article <[email protected]>,
"Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Artoi wrote:

> > Yep, every bit as confused... But have been trying hard to understand
> > the compatibility issue since I changed to a 2007 Chorus QS Ergo shifter.
> >
> > I note that some stores are selling 2004 Chorus triple FD (non-FB
> > version) but have not seen any 2007 Chorus triple QS FD. Checking
> > through Campag's 2007 catalogue, I don't see any Chorus triple QS FD
> > (p42) but rather the triple FDs are grouped at the back (p44) under Race
> > and Comp levels, and there's no mention of QS with these triple FDs.
> >
> > I wonder if 2004 was the last update for the triple FD?
>
> no more triple FDs, except Comp, Race and Champ. Altho not marked 'QS',
> they undoubtedly are same as QS, arm length and compatibility wise.

Do you have confirmation from Campag that those new triple FDs are in
fact QS spec'ed? If it truly is, then why don't they put on the QS label
in their catalogue? So I am a little sceptical on this point. I also
note that their triple chainrings don't yet have the UD technology. I
wonder if this somehow affected product labeling of their 2007 triple
FD. Calling them Comp, Race and Champ seemed really odd.
--

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Artoi wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Artoi wrote:
>
> > > Yep, every bit as confused... But have been trying hard to understand
> > > the compatibility issue since I changed to a 2007 Chorus QS Ergo shifter.
> > >
> > > I note that some stores are selling 2004 Chorus triple FD (non-FB
> > > version) but have not seen any 2007 Chorus triple QS FD. Checking
> > > through Campag's 2007 catalogue, I don't see any Chorus triple QS FD
> > > (p42) but rather the triple FDs are grouped at the back (p44) under Race
> > > and Comp levels, and there's no mention of QS with these triple FDs.
> > >
> > > I wonder if 2004 was the last update for the triple FD?
> >
> > no more triple FDs, except Comp, Race and Champ. Altho not marked 'QS',
> > they undoubtedly are same as QS, arm length and compatibility wise.
>
> Do you have confirmation from Campag that those new triple FDs are in
> fact QS spec'ed? If it truly is, then why don't they put on the QS label
> in their catalogue? So I am a little sceptical on this point. I also
> note that their triple chainrings don't yet have the UD technology. I
> wonder if this somehow affected product labeling of their 2007 triple
> FD. Calling them Comp, Race and Champ seemed really odd.
> --

Since they say all 2007 ERGO left levers are triple and double
compatible and there are no triple specific levers and these are the
only ones offered for 2007, I'm guessing the FDs are 'QS' compatible,
compatible with all ERGO, ever made. Left Centaur and below are more
indexed than before, so require a 2007 FD, including 2007 triples also.
But remember, I am still waiting for Centaur from my supplier. I have
seen the diagrams of the levers and Centaur and below are indeed a
derivative of Xenon levers. I predict that in 2008, all ERGO will be
this design, with materials differences for Record and Chorus. MUCH
simplier lever, with no springs to wear or spring carriers to split.
More simple than even Sram levers, which are pretty simple. Cheaper and
lighter as well. Centaur levers seem really slick and at about $175,
1/3 the $ of Sram Force.

 

[Artoi]

In article <[email protected]>,
"Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Since they say all 2007 ERGO left levers are triple and double
> compatible and there are no triple specific levers and these are the
> only ones offered for 2007, I'm guessing the FDs are 'QS' compatible,
> compatible with all ERGO, ever made. Left Centaur and below are more
> indexed than before, so require a 2007 FD, including 2007 triples also.
> But remember, I am still waiting for Centaur from my supplier. I have
> seen the diagrams of the levers and Centaur and below are indeed a
> derivative of Xenon levers. I predict that in 2008, all ERGO will be
> this design, with materials differences for Record and Chorus. MUCH
> simplier lever, with no springs to wear or spring carriers to split.
> More simple than even Sram levers, which are pretty simple. Cheaper and
> lighter as well. Centaur levers seem really slick and at about $175,
> 1/3 the $ of Sram Force.

Thanks again.

on the new 2007 Ergo mechanism, I thought that Centaur and below groups
can no longer do multiple shifts whereas Record and Chorus still can. If
true, is the simplicity worth it? Or did I miss something. Either way, I
understand there's some functional difference b/n the two designs.
--

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Artoi wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Since they say all 2007 ERGO left levers are triple and double
> > compatible and there are no triple specific levers and these are the
> > only ones offered for 2007, I'm guessing the FDs are 'QS' compatible,
> > compatible with all ERGO, ever made. Left Centaur and below are more
> > indexed than before, so require a 2007 FD, including 2007 triples also.
> > But remember, I am still waiting for Centaur from my supplier. I have
> > seen the diagrams of the levers and Centaur and below are indeed a
> > derivative of Xenon levers. I predict that in 2008, all ERGO will be
> > this design, with materials differences for Record and Chorus. MUCH
> > simplier lever, with no springs to wear or spring carriers to split.
> > More simple than even Sram levers, which are pretty simple. Cheaper and
> > lighter as well. Centaur levers seem really slick and at about $175,
> > 1/3 the $ of Sram Force.
>
> Thanks again.
>
> on the new 2007 Ergo mechanism, I thought that Centaur and below groups
> can no longer do multiple shifts whereas Record and Chorus still can. If
> true, is the simplicity worth it? Or did I miss something. Either way, I
> understand there's some functional difference b/n the two designs.
> --

Still multiple shifts going to larger(lower) cogs, but one at a time
going to smaller(higher) cogs, for Centaur and below. Inaards a
derivative of Xenon lever guts. Same as ever for Record/Chorus but I
suspect for 2008, innards like Centaur.

Some Euro racer(Simioni?) has been using relabeled Centaur levers this
year in Euro-racing ...so I guess they work OK.

 

[Mark Hickey]

"Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Still multiple shifts going to larger(lower) cogs, but one at a time
>going to smaller(higher) cogs, for Centaur and below.

I dream of the day when my acceleration is limited by how fast I can
upshift one cog at a time, just like I dream of the day when my top
speed will be limited by an 11 tooth cog. ;-)

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

 

[Pat Lamb]

Mark Hickey wrote:
> "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Still multiple shifts going to larger(lower) cogs, but one at a time
>> going to smaller(higher) cogs, for Centaur and below.
>
> I dream of the day when my acceleration is limited by how fast I can
> upshift one cog at a time, just like I dream of the day when my top
> speed will be limited by an 11 tooth cog. ;-)

I think it's more of an issue in rolling terrain. Slog up a hill, crest
it and start down, and you may have a 15-20 mph difference in just a few
seconds. More than three clicks, and I start wondering, "Are we there yet?"

Pat

 

[Solvang Cyclist]

Pat Lamb <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> I think it's more of an issue in rolling terrain. Slog up a hill,
> crest it and start down, and you may have a 15-20 mph difference in
> just a few seconds. More than three clicks, and I start wondering,
> "Are we there yet?"
>

I just recently got a new bike and went from an old "half step" gearing
setup with friction bar-end shifters to a conventional ErgoPower drive
train.

It's not so much that I need to shift through lots of gears quickly in
order to maximize my power. (I'm just not that powerful to begin with.
<grin>)

In the old setup, I could change one gear by using the front derailleur
(alone or perhaps needing to also shift once in the rear), or get a
couple of gear steps by using the rear alone.

With the new setup, the gears tend to run consecutively in the rear alone
until I get to the point where I need to switch the front and then run
the rear up or down by 3-4 cogs. For example, say I've gone from 39/15 to
39/14, the next shift would be 53/17 (or if I'm comfortable in the 39/14,
but anticipate I will spin out soon, I might want to shift to 53/19 which
gives me the same ratio as before, but leaves me with more options.) With
the ErgoPower, it's easy to press in on both handles simultaneously to
make the shift in one smooth move. The same is true going back from 53/19
to a lower gear: a long press of both the side buttons and I'm there.

Sure it wouldn't be THAT big a deal if I had to press the button multiple
times, but I like the way it works.

Cheers,
David

 

[Artoi]

In article <[email protected]>,
Solvang Cyclist <[email protected]> wrote:

> Pat Lamb <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
> > I think it's more of an issue in rolling terrain. Slog up a hill,
> > crest it and start down, and you may have a 15-20 mph difference in
> > just a few seconds. More than three clicks, and I start wondering,
> > "Are we there yet?"
> >
>
> I just recently got a new bike and went from an old "half step" gearing
> setup with friction bar-end shifters to a conventional ErgoPower drive
> train.
>
> It's not so much that I need to shift through lots of gears quickly in
> order to maximize my power. (I'm just not that powerful to begin with.
> <grin>)
>
> In the old setup, I could change one gear by using the front derailleur
> (alone or perhaps needing to also shift once in the rear), or get a
> couple of gear steps by using the rear alone.
>
> With the new setup, the gears tend to run consecutively in the rear alone
> until I get to the point where I need to switch the front and then run
> the rear up or down by 3-4 cogs. For example, say I've gone from 39/15 to
> 39/14, the next shift would be 53/17 (or if I'm comfortable in the 39/14,
> but anticipate I will spin out soon, I might want to shift to 53/19 which
> gives me the same ratio as before, but leaves me with more options.) With
> the ErgoPower, it's easy to press in on both handles simultaneously to
> make the shift in one smooth move. The same is true going back from 53/19
> to a lower gear: a long press of both the side buttons and I'm there.
>
> Sure it wouldn't be THAT big a deal if I had to press the button multiple
> times, but I like the way it works.

Yes, I have similar experience.

It's a 3 click button press on the left and 2 clicks on the right to get
down shift to the next gear. All very easy to manage and quickly done
during a climb. Going the other way up the gears tend to be less
critical in terms of time and ease of operating. I like it.

Relating back to the new shifter mechanism for 2007 Centaur and down,
the fact that they still allow a max of 2 clicks may just be adequate
for the non-comp riders.
--

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Artoi wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Solvang Cyclist <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Pat Lamb <[email protected]> wrote in
> > news:[email protected]:
> >
> > > I think it's more of an issue in rolling terrain. Slog up a hill,
> > > crest it and start down, and you may have a 15-20 mph difference in
> > > just a few seconds. More than three clicks, and I start wondering,
> > > "Are we there yet?"
> > >
> >
> > I just recently got a new bike and went from an old "half step" gearing
> > setup with friction bar-end shifters to a conventional ErgoPower drive
> > train.
> >
> > It's not so much that I need to shift through lots of gears quickly in
> > order to maximize my power. (I'm just not that powerful to begin with.
> > <grin>)
> >
> > In the old setup, I could change one gear by using the front derailleur
> > (alone or perhaps needing to also shift once in the rear), or get a
> > couple of gear steps by using the rear alone.
> >
> > With the new setup, the gears tend to run consecutively in the rear alone
> > until I get to the point where I need to switch the front and then run
> > the rear up or down by 3-4 cogs. For example, say I've gone from 39/15 to
> > 39/14, the next shift would be 53/17 (or if I'm comfortable in the 39/14,
> > but anticipate I will spin out soon, I might want to shift to 53/19 which
> > gives me the same ratio as before, but leaves me with more options.) With
> > the ErgoPower, it's easy to press in on both handles simultaneously to
> > make the shift in one smooth move. The same is true going back from 53/19
> > to a lower gear: a long press of both the side buttons and I'm there.
> >
> > Sure it wouldn't be THAT big a deal if I had to press the button multiple
> > times, but I like the way it works.
>
> Yes, I have similar experience.
>
> It's a 3 click button press on the left and 2 clicks on the right to get
> down shift to the next gear. All very easy to manage and quickly done
> during a climb. Going the other way up the gears tend to be less
> critical in terms of time and ease of operating. I like it.
>
> Relating back to the new shifter mechanism for 2007 Centaur and down,
> the fact that they still allow a max of 2 clicks may just be adequate
> for the non-comp riders.
> --

Clicking lever mounted shifters are 'essential' for 'comp' roders only
because everybody else has them. Racing with friction(or 1-2 cogs) is
not only possible, it happened for about 8 decades before the
fascination with lever mounted, clicking shifters.

Remember it's about the ride, the bicycle should 'disappear' beneath
you. It is there to get you there, not the object of the ride.

 

[Artoi]

In article <[email protected]>,
"Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote:

> BUT way too much emphasis on equipment these days..not enough on the
> 'ride', IMHO, of course.

Equipments are toys for the big boys and girls, and discussing tech is
natural for the computer/tech savvy. Whereas talking about rides, I am
not sure too many are interested in my morning 20km ride... Yes, I am
still waiting for a magpie to strike.
--

 

[Solvang Cyclist]

"Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> some will use Record and a
> $5000 carbon frame. And by golly, that's just fine!!
>

Especially if they buy it from you! <LOL>

> BUT way too much emphasis on equipment these days..not enough on the
> 'ride', IMHO, of course.
>

Yes, I can't argue with that. But, while I could certainly ride a lesser
bike, the new one is getting me out there more often and for greater
distances these days. Remember, I'm "middle age" now. My days of enjoying
a manual transmission in stop-and-go traffic are behind me and I'm much
more into "comfortable performance". I drive a midsize "sports sedan"
(BMW 525i) with an automatic transmission, and I ride a bike with
ErgoPower shifters. <grin>

But it's almost 4:30PM here, so it's time to get off the computer and
onto the bike for a quick evening ride.

Cheers!
David

 

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Solvang Cyclist wrote:
> "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
> > some will use Record and a
> > $5000 carbon frame. And by golly, that's just fine!!
> >
>
> Especially if they buy it from you! <LOL>
>
> > BUT way too much emphasis on equipment these days..not enough on the
> > 'ride', IMHO, of course.
> >
>
> Yes, I can't argue with that. But, while I could certainly ride a lesser
> bike, the new one is getting me out there more often and for greater
> distances these days. Remember, I'm "middle age" now. My days of enjoying
> a manual transmission in stop-and-go traffic are behind me and I'm much
> more into "comfortable performance". I drive a midsize "sports sedan"
> (BMW 525i) with an automatic transmission, and I ride a bike with
> ErgoPower shifters. <grin>

This horse is almost dead, but I am 55, and I tend toward the older,
not newer in lots of things. I will not own a plastic frame with any
ERGO/STI/Sram shifter....nor will I own a car with a automatic
tranny...
>
> But it's almost 4:30PM here, so it's time to get off the computer and
> onto the bike for a quick evening ride.
>
> Cheers!
> David

 

[Mark Hickey]

"Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote:

>This horse is almost dead, but I am 55, and I tend toward the older,
>not newer in lots of things. I will not own a plastic frame with any
>ERGO/STI/Sram shifter....nor will I own a car with a automatic
>tranny...

Hear, hear! I'm five or six years behind you, but feel the same. I'm
all about adopting bona fide improvements instantly, but avoid being
sucked into trends that don't add value. I've got one automatic
transmission in my fleet, but that's only because that model was never
built with a 5-speed. Heck, my own road and TT bikes still have
threaded forks.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame