Campy Compact Report

[Cat Dailey]

For those of you who are interested in how the Campy Record Compact with
compact front derailleur works:

I had an FSA bottom bracket and FSA compact crank with regular Record front
derailleur. As many others here experienced, the chain would often drop off
to the inside, despite many, many adjustments. Also, I could not use the
34-23 combination without having bad chainrub. FSA told me that my short
chainstays were to blame for the crappy chainline and that they didn't have
a solution.

I put on the new Record compact crank (34-50), bottom bracket, and compact
specific front derailleur. VOILA! Great chainline, perfect shifting across
all the gears without chainrub anywhere (even cross-chained), and I CANNOT
get the darned chain to fall off (I am curious to know if you can pick it
back up with the front derailleur, since I couldn't with the FSA setup...I'd
have to get off of the bike to do it).

While I think the FSA carbon crank is more aesthetically pleasing than the
Record one, I just had to have better performance.

Cat
who is thrilled that it was SIXTY DEGREES near Philly today after having
ridden tow or three times in the twenties in the last week ;>

 

[Paul Kopit]

On Sat, 1 Jan 2005 20:51:01 -0500, "Cat Dailey"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>I put on the new Record compact crank (34-50), bottom bracket, and compact
>specific front derailleur. VOILA! Great chainline, perfect shifting across
>all the gears without chainrub anywhere (even cross-chained), and I CANNOT
>get the darned chain to fall off (I am curious to know if you can pick it
>back up with the front derailleur, since I couldn't with the FSA setup...I'd
>have to get off of the bike to do it).

I'd like to guess that if you took the Campy 50t ring and put it on
the FSA cranks, that the chain would not drop either. I don't think
that the front derailleur would pick up the dropped chain either.
That's easy enough to test.

I'm guessing that the placement and length of the shift pins on the
FSA ring are the culprit in both the ring being rubbed when crossed
with the small ring and hanging onto the chain for a fraction of a
second too long.

 

[Cat Dailey]

"Paul Kopit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 1 Jan 2005 20:51:01 -0500, "Cat Dailey"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I put on the new Record compact crank (34-50), bottom bracket, and
compact
> >specific front derailleur. VOILA! Great chainline, perfect shifting
across
> >all the gears without chainrub anywhere (even cross-chained), and I
CANNOT
> >get the darned chain to fall off (I am curious to know if you can pick it
> >back up with the front derailleur, since I couldn't with the FSA
setup...I'd
> >have to get off of the bike to do it).
>
> I'd like to guess that if you took the Campy 50t ring and put it on
> the FSA cranks, that the chain would not drop either. I don't think
> that the front derailleur would pick up the dropped chain either.
> That's easy enough to test.
>
> I'm guessing that the placement and length of the shift pins on the
> FSA ring are the culprit in both the ring being rubbed when crossed
> with the small ring and hanging onto the chain for a fraction of a
> second too long.

Nope, it was the chainline. FSA acknowledged as much and said it was "a
problem" with short chainstay bikes like mine. For some reason, the drive
side crank sits too far away from the bb.

Cat

 

[Matt O'Toole]

Cat Dailey wrote:

> For those of you who are interested in how the Campy Record Compact
> with compact front derailleur works:
>
> I had an FSA bottom bracket and FSA compact crank with regular Record
> front derailleur. As many others here experienced, the chain would
> often drop off to the inside, despite many, many adjustments. Also,
> I could not use the 34-23 combination without having bad chainrub.
> FSA told me that my short chainstays were to blame for the crappy
> chainline and that they didn't have a solution.
>
> I put on the new Record compact crank (34-50), bottom bracket, and
> compact specific front derailleur. VOILA! Great chainline, perfect
> shifting across all the gears without chainrub anywhere (even
> cross-chained), and I CANNOT get the darned chain to fall off (I am
> curious to know if you can pick it back up with the front derailleur,
> since I couldn't with the FSA setup...I'd have to get off of the bike
> to do it).
>
> While I think the FSA carbon crank is more aesthetically pleasing
> than the Record one, I just had to have better performance.

I wonder if there's a difference in chainline between these two setups. Have
you measured it? Perhaps the FSA would have worked better with a different BB,
giving the same chainline as the Campy.

Matt O.

 

[Cat Dailey]

"Matt O'Toole" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Cat Dailey wrote:
>
> > For those of you who are interested in how the Campy Record Compact
> > with compact front derailleur works:
> >
> > I had an FSA bottom bracket and FSA compact crank with regular Record
> > front derailleur. As many others here experienced, the chain would
> > often drop off to the inside, despite many, many adjustments. Also,
> > I could not use the 34-23 combination without having bad chainrub.
> > FSA told me that my short chainstays were to blame for the crappy
> > chainline and that they didn't have a solution.
> >
> > I put on the new Record compact crank (34-50), bottom bracket, and
> > compact specific front derailleur. VOILA! Great chainline, perfect
> > shifting across all the gears without chainrub anywhere (even
> > cross-chained), and I CANNOT get the darned chain to fall off (I am
> > curious to know if you can pick it back up with the front derailleur,
> > since I couldn't with the FSA setup...I'd have to get off of the bike
> > to do it).
> >
> > While I think the FSA carbon crank is more aesthetically pleasing
> > than the Record one, I just had to have better performance.
>
> I wonder if there's a difference in chainline between these two setups.
Have
> you measured it? Perhaps the FSA would have worked better with a
different BB,
> giving the same chainline as the Campy.
>
> Matt O.
>
Maybe, but I used the FSA bb that was supposed to go with the FSA crank.
Some people have suggested that the chainline is supposed to be identical,
but even I could see that the drive side crank sat further away from the
frame on the FSA cranks than the campy cranks.

Cat

 

[Matt O'Toole]

Cat Dailey wrote:

> Maybe, but I used the FSA bb that was supposed to go with the FSA
> crank. Some people have suggested that the chainline is supposed to
> be identical, but even I could see that the drive side crank sat
> further away from the frame on the FSA cranks than the campy cranks.

So they're trying to blame it on your frame, when they've moved the chainline
further out. They need to revise their BB axle length. Their fault.

Matt O.

 

[[email protected]]

Matt O'Toole wrote:
> Cat Dailey wrote:
>
> > Maybe, but I used the FSA bb that was supposed to go with the FSA
> > crank. Some people have suggested that the chainline is supposed to
> > be identical, but even I could see that the drive side crank sat
> > further away from the frame on the FSA cranks than the campy
cranks.
>
> So they're trying to blame it on your frame, when they've moved the
chainline
> further out. They need to revise their BB axle length. Their fault.
>
> Matt O.

I'm pretty sure that the FSA cranks mentioned by Cat are designed
around the ISIS standard - 108mm BB. If I understand the ISIS
licensing agreement correctly, in order to comply, you need to conform
- redesigning the BB is not an option. Curiously, ISTR that the
chainline is also part of the standard (but I am very likely mistaken
in this).

SYJ

 

[rosco]

"Cat Dailey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> For those of you who are interested in how the Campy Record Compact with
> compact front derailleur works:
>
> I had an FSA bottom bracket and FSA compact crank with regular Record
front
> derailleur. As many others here experienced, the chain would often drop
off
> to the inside, despite many, many adjustments. Also, I could not use the
> 34-23 combination without having bad chainrub. FSA told me that my short
> chainstays were to blame for the crappy chainline and that they didn't
have
> a solution.
>
> I put on the new Record compact crank (34-50), bottom bracket, and compact
> specific front derailleur. VOILA! Great chainline, perfect shifting
across
> all the gears without chainrub anywhere (even cross-chained), and I CANNOT
> get the darned chain to fall off (I am curious to know if you can pick it
> back up with the front derailleur, since I couldn't with the FSA
setup...I'd
> have to get off of the bike to do it).
>
> While I think the FSA carbon crank is more aesthetically pleasing than the
> Record one, I just had to have better performance.
>
> Cat
> who is thrilled that it was SIXTY DEGREES near Philly today after having
> ridden tow or three times in the twenties in the last week ;>
>
>

I'm looking to get a Campy setup but using the FSA Compact Cranks instead of
the Campy ones because of lower cost that FSA adheres to the 110 BCD
standard. I was speaking with the guy from www.GVHbikes.com and he told me
they have tried the new Campy compact front deraileur with the FSA SL-K
Compact Megaexo, and it didn't work well at all. They were strongly
recommending using the regular Campy front derailuer. I believe the Megaexo
is an entirely different setup than ISIS, so that may create a difference as
well.

 

[Paul Kopit]

On 3 Jan 2005 02:34:10 -0800, [email protected] wrote:

>I'm pretty sure that the FSA cranks mentioned by Cat are designed
>around the ISIS standard - 108mm BB. If I understand the ISIS
>licensing agreement correctly, in order to comply, you need to conform
>- redesigning the BB is not an option. Curiously, ISTR that the
>chainline is also part of the standard (but I am very likely mistaken
>in this).

I'm a bit suspect of FSA. Their square taper crank needed a "103" bb.
People were searching around for the Shimano 103 JIS, which became
almost unobtainium, and used 107 JIS. At the crank hole on the back
of the crank were the letters, ISO. Turns out a Campy 102 bb was a
perfect match. The cranks were 130 bolt pattern but I think they came
in 135 also.

I wonder how much retooling that they did when they went for a 108
ISIS fitting?

 

[Jim P]

Cat Dailey wrote:
> "Paul Kopit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>On Sat, 1 Jan 2005 20:51:01 -0500, "Cat Dailey"
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I put on the new Record compact crank (34-50), bottom bracket, and
>
> compact
>
>>>specific front derailleur. VOILA! Great chainline, perfect shifting
>
> across
>
>>>all the gears without chainrub anywhere (even cross-chained), and I
>
> CANNOT
>
>>>get the darned chain to fall off (I am curious to know if you can pick it
>>>back up with the front derailleur, since I couldn't with the FSA
>
> setup...I'd
>
>>>have to get off of the bike to do it).
>>
>>I'd like to guess that if you took the Campy 50t ring and put it on
>>the FSA cranks, that the chain would not drop either. I don't think
>>that the front derailleur would pick up the dropped chain either.
>>That's easy enough to test.
>>
>>I'm guessing that the placement and length of the shift pins on the
>>FSA ring are the culprit in both the ring being rubbed when crossed
>>with the small ring and hanging onto the chain for a fraction of a
>>second too long.
>
>
> Nope, it was the chainline. FSA acknowledged as much and said it was "a
> problem" with short chainstay bikes like mine. For some reason, the drive
> side crank sits too far away from the bb.
>
> Cat
>
>
Thanks for the posting... I have had the problem w/ the chain dropping
off the inside as well. I am running the FSA carbon compact crank w/ the
FSA Platinum BB (108)on a meduim Giant TCR frame (short chainstay). I
just put the Campy compact specific front derraileur on and the shifting
appears to be much better and the chain has yet to drop. I will be
making a longer ride over the weekend to make sure. The trimming of the
derraileur when on the large chain ring appears to be a bit more
finicky, but I may need to make an adjustment here.