Does Campagnolo fudge on its listed weights?

[Jim Rogers]

So I'm still debating on whether to use my old mid-'90's Chorus/Athena stuff and my main
consideration at this point is weight. Now I know I'm being a bit anal about this, but there are
some reasons I want to focus on weight for this bike, so bear with me. I know that as a percentage
of the whole bike (and rider) component weight is small, but, just for the sake of argument, let's
consider it for just a moment.

The old hubs I have (identified by this group are mid-'90's Chorus-- thanks!) weigh about 740g (with
skewers on an accurate scale). I see in the catalog that a new set of Chorus hubs weighs 506g. That
would be 1/2 pound difference JUST in the hubs! If there was a similar weight ratio for the whole
group, that could potentially add up to 2 or 3 pounds of extra weight!

One question I had was; are the listed weights for new stuff correct? I know in backpacking (another
hobby where weight is important), companies lie all the time about their product weights. It is a
very rare company indeed that lists the accurate weights of a sleeping bag or backpack. 10% fudging
would be considered pretty normal, 20-30% is not unheard of.

How about bike components? If I took a new set of Chorus hubs and weighed them, would they be the
listed 506g? Or would there be a similar fudge factor?

When I get them off the bike they're now on, I'm going to be comparing the weights of my old
Campy components to the listed weights of new Chorus stuff. If I opt to get new, I don't want a
nasty surprise that the new stuff is heavier than listed and not that much different from the old
stuff I have.

Thanks,

Jim

 

[Suzy Jackson]

"Jim Rogers" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> So I'm still debating on whether to use my old mid-'90's Chorus/Athena stuff and my main
> consideration at this point is weight. Now I know I'm being a bit anal about this, but there are
> some reasons I want to focus on weight for this bike, so bear with me. I know that as a percentage
> of the whole bike (and rider) component weight is small, but, just for the sake of argument, let's
> consider it for just a moment.
>
> The old hubs I have (identified by this group are mid-'90's Chorus-- thanks!) weigh about 740g
> (with skewers on an accurate scale). I see in the catalog that a new set of Chorus hubs weighs
> 506g. That would be 1/2 pound difference JUST in the hubs! If there was a similar weight ratio for
> the whole group, that could potentially add up to 2 or 3 pounds of extra weight!

I recently built a new set of race wheels, which I weighed after building. The old ones were
as follows:

1997 Campy Chorus hubs (but with newer 9 speed freehub) Mavic Open 4 CD rims 32 x 3 cross
14/15/14 DT spokes, with brass nipples. Campy loose cog 12-23 9 speed cassette Velox Fond du
Jante Michelin A1 service course tubes Michelin Axial Carbon 700x23C tyres.

The new ones are:

2003 Campy Chorus hubs (with OS axles) Mavic Open Pro silver rims 32 x 3 cross 14/15/14 DT
spokes, with brass nipples. Campy loose cog 12-23 9 speed cassette Michelin plastic Fond du
Jante Michelin A1 service course tubes Michelin Pro Race 700x23C tyres.

Unfortunately I didn't weigh all the components before I started, but the complete wheel weights
(with skewers and everything) are:

Old front: 1270 g Old rear: 1760 g

New front: 1195 g New rear: 1590 g

The total difference is 245 g.

The tyres on my new wheels are a tad lighter than the old (perhaps 20 g / wheel) but to offset this,
I understand the Open Pro rims are a tad heavier, so I'm confident that the difference is all in the
hubs, certainly within 10 or 20 g.

However I wouldn't go using the new hubs as an indicator of the weight of the whole group. These
hubs are really very special. They're a neat new design that gets rid of the small diameter, heavy
steel axle in favour of a larger diameter aluminium one. I don't think the differences in the rest
of the group are nearly as big, with the notable exception of the new Record Carbon crank, which is
staggeringly light.

Regards,

Suzy

 

[Pete Biggs]

Jim Rogers wrote:
> So I'm still debating on whether to use my old mid-'90's Chorus/Athena stuff and my main
> consideration at this point is weight.

It shouldn't be, if you don't mind me saying so - and I do like to save bike weight myself whenever
I can afford to. It's so much more sensible to put functionality first THEN look at the weights.

/snip
> The old hubs I have (identified by this group are mid-'90's Chorus-- thanks!) weigh about 740g
> (with skewers on an accurate scale). I see in the catalog that a new set of Chorus hubs weighs
> 506g. That would be 1/2 pound difference JUST in the hubs! If there was a similar weight ratio for
> the whole group, that could potentially add up to 2 or 3 pounds of extra weight!

There won't be. The hubs are exceptionally light because they use aluminium axles and skinny
threadless cones, etc. Can't really save that much in every other department. The new brake calipers
may actually be heavier, for example.

.........
> How about bike components? If I took a new set of Chorus hubs and weighed them, would they be the
> listed 506g? Or would there be a similar fudge factor?

I've weighed the following components with electronic kitchen scales: my measurement listed first
then Campag's brochure figure:

Racing Triple 2001 rear derailleur: 218g 214g Chorus 2001 Ergo levers: 368g 365g Daytona 2000 triple
braze-on front derailleur: 108g 107g AC-H 111 2001 bottom bracket: 300g 288g

...So, very close - except for the BB. Maybe Campagnolo don't include the grease!

Some more actual weights are listed here: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/rinard/weights.htm - Compare
to those on the Campag website.

~PB

 

[Ronald]

> One question I had was; are the listed weights for new stuff correct?

My experience with Campagnolo is that their listings are pretty accurate, some parts i check are a
bit heavier and some are lighter. For some recent actual weights see:
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/

"Jim Rogers" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> So I'm still debating on whether to use my old mid-'90's Chorus/Athena stuff and my main
> consideration at this point is weight. Now I know I'm being a bit anal about this, but there are
> some reasons I want to focus on weight for this bike, so bear with me. I know that as a percentage
> of the whole bike (and rider) component weight is small, but, just for the sake of argument, let's
> consider it for just a moment.
>
> The old hubs I have (identified by this group are mid-'90's Chorus-- thanks!) weigh about 740g
> (with skewers on an accurate scale). I see in the catalog that a new set of Chorus hubs weighs
> 506g. That would be 1/2 pound difference JUST in the hubs! If there was a similar weight ratio for
> the whole group, that could potentially add up to 2 or 3 pounds of extra weight!
>
> One question I had was; are the listed weights for new stuff correct? I know in backpacking
> (another hobby where weight is important), companies lie all the time about their product weights.
> It is a very rare company indeed that lists the accurate weights of a sleeping bag or backpack.
> 10% fudging would be considered pretty normal, 20-30% is not unheard of.
>
> How about bike components? If I took a new set of Chorus hubs and weighed them, would they be the
> listed 506g? Or would there be a similar fudge factor?
>
> When I get them off the bike they're now on, I'm going to be comparing the weights of my old
> Campy components to the listed weights of new Chorus stuff. If I opt to get new, I don't want a
> nasty surprise that the new stuff is heavier than listed and not that much different from the old
> stuff I have.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jim

 

[Pete Biggs]

I wrote:
> AC-H 111 2001 bottom bracket: 300g 288g
>
> ...So, very close - except for the BB. Maybe Campagnolo don't include the grease!

I've just realised that I must have been sold the AC-S by mistake - which is listed at 299g :-(

~PB

 

[Konstantin Shem]

> I know in backpacking (another hobby where weight is important), companies lie all the time
> about their product weights. It is a very rare company indeed that lists the accurate weights
> of a sleeping bag or backpack. 10% fudging would be considered pretty normal, 20-30% is not
> unheard of.

Not being expert in the field of your original question (Campy groups weights), I have a note on
backpacking gear. The humidity in the air makes a big difference there. Especially with sleeping
bags. If you dry one *very* thoroughly, it may lose these 20-30%. And this effect should not be
significant with bike components

Konstantin

 

[Qui Si Parla Ca]

irene-<< The old hubs I have (identified by this group are mid-'90's Chorus-- thanks!) weigh about
740g (with skewers on an accurate scale). I see in the catalog that a new set of Chorus hubs weighs
506g. That would be 1/2 pound difference JUST in the hubs! If there was a similar weight ratio for
the whole group, that could potentially add up to 2 or 3 pounds of extra weight!

One question I had was; are the listed weights for new stuff correct? I know in backpacking (another
hobby where weight is important), companies lie all the time about their product weights. It is a
very rare company indeed that lists the accurate weights of a sleeping bag or backpack. 10% fudging
would be considered pretty normal, 20-30% is not unheard of.
>><BR><BR>

Weights are pretty reliable. Hubs and crank/BB are mush lighter these days. brakes are too, rear
ders are lighter. Doubt you will save 3 pounds but you will save some. small amount.

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

 

[Mike Krueger]

<< The old hubs I have (identified by this group are mid-'90's Chorus-- thanks!) weigh about
740g (with skewers on an accurate scale). I see in the catalog that a new set of Chorus hubs
weighs 506g. >>

Advertised weights of hubs generally do not include skewers.

 

[Ronald]

> Advertised weights of hubs generally do not include skewers.

Campy listed weight includes skewers. Maybe they shouldn't do this, i guess their weight is often
compared to manufacturers who don't include skewers. They already changed this for their wheelsets.

"Mike Krueger" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> << The old hubs I have (identified by this group are mid-'90's Chorus-- thanks!) weigh about 740g
> (with skewers on an accurate scale). I see in the catalog that a new set of Chorus hubs weighs
> 506g. >>
>
> Advertised weights of hubs generally do not include skewers.

 

[Jim Rogers]

Thanks for the input, everyone. It looks like the consensus is that Campy is pretty accurate about
their listed weights.

To those who cautioned me about fretting too much about weight, I understand what you are talking
about. I am not really a weight weenie. I'm a long-time (and multiple) Bridgestone owner and ascribe
to much of the BOB philosophy. For example, I generally only ride lugged steel frames.

On the other hand, I do not totally disregard weight either. To me, weight is just one of several
factors to be considered. However, to consider weight as even one factor among many, you have to
talk about it sometimes. That's where I'm at right now.

Thanks to this list, I believe I've gotten my bearings as to the weight issues of both the frame and
components I'm now considering. Now my next concern is geometry, so I'll be making some posts on
that topic soon.

Jim