Chorus or Centaur

[Wm]

Okay Campy experts, what is the perceptible difference between the chorus and centaur groups? Apart
from a few grammes in weight, they are both high-quality all-aluminium 10-speed groups (yes I know
the 2004 chorus has some carbon options). Is it a reasonable option for a non-professional rider to
go for the centaur and spend the exra on something else (wheels, whatever)?

 

[Antti Salonen]

WM <[email protected]> wrote:

> Okay Campy experts, what is the perceptible difference between the chorus and centaur groups?
> Apart from a few grammes in weight, they are both high-quality all-aluminium 10-speed groups (yes
> I know the 2004 chorus has some carbon options). Is it a reasonable option for a non-professional
> rider to go for the centaur and spend the exra on something else (wheels, whatever)?

Centaur has a cheap bottom bracket which supposedly isn't as durable as the Chorus bottom bracket.
It's also 70 g heavier than the Chorus bottom bracket. I know some people who use this as an excuse
to get Centaur with Chorus BB and cranks, as it doesn't raise the price much.

Other than that, I don't think there are any real differences, other than weight and price. For 2004
Veloce seems to be very close to Centaur, too, hubs excluded.

-as

 

[Nick Payne]

All the Campagnolo spare parts catalogues are available as PDF files from www.campagnolo.com. You
can have a look and see exactly what parts are common between the two groups and what parts are
different.

Nick

"WM" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:250920032035308835%[email protected]...
> Okay Campy experts, what is the perceptible difference between the chorus and centaur groups?
> Apart from a few grammes in weight, they are both high-quality all-aluminium 10-speed groups (yes
> I know the 2004 chorus has some carbon options). Is it a reasonable option for a non-professional
> rider to go for the centaur and spend the exra on something else (wheels, whatever)?

 

[Suzy Jackson]

"WM" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:250920032035308835%[email protected]...
> Okay Campy experts, what is the perceptible difference between the chorus and centaur groups?
> Apart from a few grammes in weight, they are both high-quality all-aluminium 10-speed groups (yes
> I know the 2004 chorus has some carbon options).

Chorus has a much better bottom bracket than Centaur. Chorus has the option

Chorus seatpost is titanium, so won't rust like the steel Centaur one.

> Is it a reasonable option for a non-professional rider to go for the centaur and spend the exra on
> something else (wheels, whatever)?

Sure. Many people (including myself) mix and match from the different groups, to get a setup they
like. For example, I use Chorus, except for the shifters, seatpost, and bottom bracket, which are
all Record, and the cassette, which is Veloce.

One could equally use mainly Centaur, but with a Chorus crank and BB, and perhaps calipers
and seatpost.

Regards,

Suzy

 

[Sheldon Brown]

WM wrote:

> ... what is the perceptible difference between the chorus and centaur groups? Apart from a few
> grammes in weight, they are both high-quality all-aluminium 10-speed groups (yes I know the 2004
> chorus has some carbon options). Is it a reasonable option for a non-professional rider to go for
> the centaur and spend the exra on something else (wheels, whatever)?

The Chorus STI shifters have ball bearings, Centaurs don't.

Sheldon "'Centaur' Is A Great Name For Bicycle Parts" Brown
+---------------------------------------------------------+
| Patriotism is your conviction that this country is | superior to all others because you were
| born in it. | -- George Bernard Shaw |
+---------------------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton,
Massachusetts Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 http://harriscyclery.com Hard-to-find parts
shipped Worldwide http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com

 

[Tom Ace]

Sheldon Brown wrote:

> The Chorus STI shifters have ball bearings, Centaurs don't.

"Chorus STI"... [amused grin]

> Sheldon "'Centaur' Is A Great Name For Bicycle Parts" Brown

Isn't it though.

Tom Ace

 

[Pete Biggs]

WM wrote:
> Okay Campy experts, what is the perceptible difference between the chorus and centaur groups?
> Apart from a few grammes in weight, they are both high-quality all-aluminium 10-speed groups (yes
> I know the 2004 chorus has some carbon options).

Chorus cranks require a shorter BB, the combination should be stiffer.

> Is it a reasonable option for a non-professional rider to go for the centaur and spend the exra on
> something else (wheels, whatever)?

Yes or a mixture of Chorus, Centaur and Veloce.

~PB

 

[Qui Si Parla Ca]

WM-<< Okay Campy experts, what is the perceptible difference between the chorus and centaur groups?
>><BR><BR>

'Perceptible"-none-zero.

WM<< Is it a reasonable option for a non-professional rider to go for the centaur and spend the exra
on something else (wheels, whatever)? >><BR><BR>

You bet, Record and Chorus performance for less $ and a wee bit more weight. Centaur is a
GREAT value.

Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St. Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535 http://www.vecchios.com "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

 

[Qui Si Parla Ca]

Antti-<< Centaur has a cheap bottom bracket which supposedly isn't as durable as the Chorus bottom
bracket. >><BR><BR>

'Supposedly' is right, more misinformation about Campagnolo. We install dozens and do not have a
problem with these(AC-H) BBs.....

Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St. Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535 http://www.vecchios.com "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

 

[Qui Si Parla Ca]

Pete-<< Chorus cranks require a shorter BB, the combination should be stiffer.
>><BR><BR>

Please, if you can tell the difference in stiffness when comparing a steel BB spindle and aluminum
crank arms..No rider can.

Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St. Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535 http://www.vecchios.com "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

 

[Appkiller]

Antti Salonen <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> WM <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Okay Campy experts, what is the perceptible difference between the chorus and centaur groups?
> > Apart from a few grammes in weight, they are both high-quality all-aluminium 10-speed groups
> > (yes I know the 2004 chorus has some carbon options). Is it a reasonable option for a
> > non-professional rider to go for the centaur and spend the exra on something else (wheels,
> > whatever)?
>
> Centaur has a cheap bottom bracket which supposedly isn't as durable as the Chorus bottom bracket.
> It's also 70 g heavier than the Chorus bottom bracket. I know some people who use this as an
> excuse to get Centaur with Chorus BB and cranks, as it doesn't raise the price much.
>
> Other than that, I don't think there are any real differences, other than weight and price. For
> 2004 Veloce seems to be very close to Centaur, too, hubs excluded.
>
> -as

It is interesting to note that the Centaur double crank is actually lighter than the Chorus - but it
doesn't have the reduced Q-factor. I have a mix of parts on my main bike - Record crank, chorus BB,
headset, brakes, Ergos, rear hub,rear der, daytona front hub, cassette and front der.

Backup bike has Athena Crank, and daytona/centaur everything else.

I am extremely pleased with the backup bike's component's performance
- the ACH BB is smooth (we'll see about the durability, but for $20 it has been worth it so far) and
the Athena (same as Centaur) crankset, while not nearly as nicely finished as the Record/Chorus,
is still sufficient to my needs.

The Chorus BB is quite durable - I weigh between 200 - 225 (depending on the month). I have been
torturing it for four years now and it is still smooth as the day it was installed.

You really can't go wrong with either groupo or a mix as I have done.

App

 

[Pete Biggs]

Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> Pete-<< Chorus cranks require a shorter BB, the combination should be stiffer. >>
>
> Please, if you can tell the difference in stiffness when comparing a steel BB spindle and aluminum
> crank arms..No rider can.

Is that a fact? We have to wonder why Campagnolo bothered then. Or was it just to save the weight of
9mm of axle? No rider could tell the difference with that alone either. So why doesn't everyone use
Mirage cranks? The answer must be that those who can afford Chorus and Record want the best, no
matter how slight each individual improvement is.

I pointed out the cranks difference because I thought it was more major than some of the others:
like ball bearings in brake calipers and Ergos, or allen key bearing adjuster in hubs vs
screwdriver, or slightly lighter derailleurs. This might help when choosing a mixture.

~PB

 

[Pete Biggs]

Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> Pete-<< It is interesting to note that the Centaur double crank is actually lighter than the
> Chorus - but it doesn't have the reduced Q-factor. >><BR><BR>

"Appkiller" wrote the above (unless he's another Pete), not me!

> The distance between crankarms for Centaur and Chorus is the same-118mm. A shorter BB spindle does
> not a reduced q factor make.

 

[Russell Seaton]

I have the groups you are comparing. Or at least the functional parts of both. Older models though.
I have full 9 speed 1998 Chorus on one bike, double crank. And 2002/2003 9 speed Centaur triple
crank, bottom bracket, and derailleurs to use when riding in the mountains. They all work fine
together. Even the older Chorus Ergo lever shifts the redesigned Centaur rear derailleur good
enough. I have the Centaur Ergo levers but have not gotten them installed on a new frame yet so I
cannot comment on how much nicer the ball bearing Chorus Ergo levers are than the bushing Centaur
Ergo levers.

The bottom bracket on the Centaur isn't nearly as easy to install or remove as the Chorus bottom
bracket. But if you don't change cranksets then its a one time job to put it in. Can't comment on
its durability but its only $25 so if it wears out in 20,000 miles, that's not too bad.

The Centaur is not as shiny as the Chorus. It looks cheaper. May not affect performance but it may
be important to you.

Back in 1998 I had the choice of Record, Chorus, and Athena. Athena being Campagnolo's original name
for the Daytona/Centaur group. I chose Chorus. But then I only buy nice bikes once a decade or so.
If you are similar to the people who buy new cars every other year, then you might choose Centaur to
reduce the loss when getting rid of the older bike.

WM <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<250920032035308835%[email protected]>...
> Okay Campy experts, what is the perceptible difference between the chorus and centaur groups?
> Apart from a few grammes in weight, they are both high-quality all-aluminium 10-speed groups (yes
> I know the 2004 chorus has some carbon options). Is it a reasonable option for a non-professional
> rider to go for the centaur and spend the exra on something else (wheels, whatever)?

 

[Roy Zipris]

Sheldon Brown <[email protected]> wrote
> The Chorus STI shifters have ball bearings, Centaurs don't.

This may have been answered elsewhere or is obvious to the techno-adepts here (I am
techno-challenged), but what is the advantage of ball bearings over whatever system Centaur uses?
--Roy Zipris

 

[Wm]

Wow, thanks for all the detailed and useful info everyone. The answer is not obvious but at least I
am better informed.

In article <250920032035308835%[email protected]>, WM <[email protected]> wrote:

> Okay Campy experts, what is the perceptible difference between the chorus and centaur groups?
> Apart from a few grammes in weight, they are both high-quality all-aluminium 10-speed groups (yes
> I know the 2004 chorus has some carbon options). Is it a reasonable option for a non-professional
> rider to go for the centaur and spend the exra on something else (wheels, whatever)?

 

[Appkiller]

"Pete Biggs" <pmelon{remove fruit}@biggs.tc> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> > Pete-<< It is interesting to note that the Centaur double crank is actually lighter than the
> > Chorus - but it doesn't have the reduced Q-factor. >><BR><BR>
>
> "Appkiller" wrote the above (unless he's another Pete), not me!
>
> > The distance between crankarms for Centaur and Chorus is the same-118mm. A shorter BB spindle
> > does not a reduced q factor make.

He is! and his wife's name is Gail; hence the email address petengail.

(the rest of this is directed to Mr. Chisholm)

To ask a further question - the chainrings on my Chorus crankset (replaced with the Record) are
significantly closer to the frame than the Athena/Daytona/Centaur. Are you saying that the splay on
the crankarm is wider on the Chorus?

A lot wider as the Centaur takes a 111(?) BB and the Chorus a 102? Just looking at them on the bikes
makes me question your assertion.

App

 

[A Muzi]

> Sheldon Brown <[email protected]> wrote
>>The Chorus STI shifters have ball bearings, Centaurs don't.

Roy Zipris wrote:
> This may have been answered elsewhere or is obvious to the techno-adepts here (I am
> techno-challenged), but what is the advantage of ball bearings over whatever system Centaur uses?

A steel shaft in a bronze sleeve. They do not feel any different to me. The bronze sleeve could
theoretically get sloppy over time. But I see lots of old pointy-top Ergos for rebuild that work
perfectly after changing the springs and a clean/lube. So maybe like the Record carbon lever the
difference may be "pride of ownership", i.e., "I've got one and you don't".
--
Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971

 

[Appkiller]

A Muzi <[email protected]> wrote in message <snip>
> They do not feel any different to me.
<snip>

FWIW: I have both Chorus and Centaur 10 Ergos and the Centaur shifters feel significantly stiffer.
It has been stated in other threads that they break in (I only have about 400 miles on them) but
currently they do feel different. Still like them, but they take a bit more push to actuate then the
Chorus. We'll see about the breaking in.

App

 

[Gene]

[email protected] (Qui si parla Campagnolo) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Antti-<< Centaur has a cheap bottom bracket which supposedly isn't as durable as the Chorus bottom
> bracket. >><BR><BR>
>
> 'Supposedly' is right, more misinformation about Campagnolo. We install dozens and do not have a
> problem with these(AC-H) BBs.....
>

The Chorus BB is not so durable in the first place. Mine failed at three years ( ~5000 miles ).
Campy BB's do not have such a good reputation. As noted in an old(-er) posting (different thread),
for a few $$ more a Phil Wood is a great option.