Is Shimano still inferior to Campagnolo? (nt)



Status
Not open for further replies.
On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 10:10:55 -0400 (EDT), [email protected] (Chris Zacho "The Wheelman") wrote:

>[email protected] (KinkyCowboy) Wrote:
>
>>What time period did you thing Campag was better than Shimano? Or vice versa? Any of the quality
>>groupsets is an order of magnitude better than they were 10 years ago, regardless of which
>>manufacturer you choose, and the third rank groupsets are better than the top end ones were back
>>then, certainly in terms of functionality.
>>
>>Kinky Cowboy
>
>Ah, a newbie! LOL!
>
>I can remember when there was no Dura Ace (I actually bought one of the first cranksets in the
>line, it was actually designed with touring in mind, with a wide selection of rings available).
>When Shimano was thought of as a mid range group, suitable only for the recreational market. The
>shifters did not shift as well as campy (with notable exceptions, like the Rally). The hubs did not
>last as long, The headsets were tricky to adjust, etcetera, etcetera, etcetra.
>
>It wasn't until around the late seventy's early eighties that the japanese monster really took off.
>
>May you have the wind at your back. And a really low gear for the hills! Chris
>
>Chris'Z Corner "The Website for the Common Bicyclist": http://www.geocities.com/czcorner

I'm just a young 'un. Put first generation 105 on my bike in the mid '80s, before that the best
reasonably priced rear derailleur was the Suntou VX. It was probably the mid '90s before a Campag
Record rear derailleur shifted as slick as either of these cheap Japanese units. I've only got one
bike with multiple gears now, and it has SRAM 9.0. Never used STI/Ergo becasue I got tired of the
arms race about the time Dura-Ace went from 7 to 8 speed, so now I ride fixed on the road and
singlespeed off road most of the time, with the SRAM equipped MTB for hilly days. I've had various
105 and Dura-Ace parts, as well as Campag Record, and my little brother has run 105, Dura-Ace and
Campag Chorus, and the choice between S & C comes down to subjective preference and prejudice. This
side of the pond, I'd probably go for Campag, as Veloce is about the price of Tiagra, but I get the
impression US pricing puts Veloce up against 105, which is a closer race.

Kinky Cowboy

*Your milage may vary Batteries not included May contain traces of nuts.
 
On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 10:10:55 -0400 (EDT), [email protected] (Chris Zacho "The Wheelman") wrote:

>It wasn't until around the late seventy's early eighties that the japanese monster really took off.

Yeah, but surely anyone who was alive in the seventies has dropped dead of old age by now?

<grinning, ducking, rolling>

Jasper
 
On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 15:08:22 +0100, "Shaun Rimmer" <[email protected]> wrote:

>These were steel axles, possibly chromo. This was an MTB, though, and saw a few small drops
>(stairs, dirt/rock ledges etc. but nothing over 18 inches). I don't think aluminium axles would
>fare quite so well as these did, in the circumstances.

Freewheels are just bad in the axlebreaking department. It's inherent in the system and gets worse
for thicker cogsets. Broke a few of those in my time. It is in fact the Shimano freehubs and
licensees only that solve this by bringing the right bearing closer to the dropout, campagnolo still
have the main wheel bearings at the hubshell rather than at the end of the freehub body.

Slagging Shimano for this particular thing is not all that warranted, IMHO.

Jasper
 
Jasper Janssen <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 15:08:22 +0100, "Shaun Rimmer" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >These were steel axles, possibly chromo. This was an MTB, though, and saw
a
> >few small drops (stairs, dirt/rock ledges etc. but nothing over 18
inches).
> >I don't think aluminium axles would fare quite so well as these did, in
the
> >circumstances.
>
> Freewheels are just bad in the axlebreaking department.

I know, through experience and practical, mechanical common sense.

> It's inherent in the system and gets worse for thicker cogsets. Broke a few of those in my time.
> It is in fact the Shimano freehubs and licensees only that solve this by bringing the right
> bearing closer to the dropout, campagnolo still have the main wheel bearings at the hubshell
> rather than at the end of the freehub body.
>
> Slagging Shimano for this particular thing is not all that warranted, IMHO.
>
> Jasper

The Shimano ones _I have seen_ had the bearings at the end of the hub itself. Besides, I just like
taking shots at Shimano, heheheh......

Shaun aRe
 
On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 16:51:28 +0100, "Shaun Rimmer" <[email protected]> wrote:

>The Shimano ones _I have seen_ had the bearings at the end of the hub itself. Besides, I just like
>taking shots at Shimano, heheheh......

Yes, it's free*hubs* that solve this problem. The end of a Shimano freehub body is essentially the
right side cup. I think that was the main impetus for moving to freehubs in the first place,
especially given that cogsets were getting thicker and thicker, and the unsupported axle thus
longer. There's also the benefit of not throwing out a perfectly functioning ratchet mechanism every
time your cogs are worn out, but that's less of a big deal IMHO.

Jasper
 
"Jasper Janssen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 21:46:09 +0200, "Martin Borsje" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >So you state that by just simply being more expensive it must be better?
>
> Yes, I did.
>
> Now whether I actually *meant* that statement might be a different matter.
>
> Jasper

I think that something was lost in the translation between Dutch and English. ;-)

Dashii
 
Sheldon Brown <[email protected]> wrote

> Chalo Colina
>
> > There's a man who's never ridden a bike with Shimano "Lark" derailleurs and Shimano "turkey
> > wing" auxiliary brake levers.
>
> Ooooh...I really didn't want to get into this, but this comment can't be
>
> allowed to go unchallenged. Evidently Chalo never rode a bike with a Lark derailer.
>
> When the Lark derailer was a current model it shifted better than ANY other derailer money
> could buy!

I have used both the Lark and the Eagle with other drivetrain components of similar vintage, and my
results were generally as follows:

Properly adjusted, high gear could easily be had. Thanks to the marvel of the preselector spring,
low gear could easily be had, even from a dead stop. In between, there was a zone in which the
drivetrain went, "rattle rattle rattle click rattle rattle" as the chain made feeble attempts to
climb to the next larger sprocket. If any attempt was made to adjust out the rattling, the result
was that the chain obligingly clunked down to the next smaller sprocket and resumed its rattling.
After fighting with the damn thing for a few miles, one learned to use either the 14 or the 28 and
not bother with those other gears.

Admittedly this was probably not the worst shifting the era had to offer (after all, you could shift
to a quiet low gear *and* a quiet high gear at will), but it is easily a category worse than any
results I've had from the Suntour VGT derailleur, which itself is a category worse than most up-to
date derailleurs. I do like the preselector spring feature, but that alone does not retrieve the
Shimano derailleurs of those days from being among those things that function better as
ballast/landfill than as what they were designed to be.

I put a Shimano Eagle derailleur on my buddy Dookie's tallbike T-001:
http://www.geocities.com/deadbabybikes/tallpix.htm On this cycle is that derailleur truly in
its element.

Chalo Colina
 
"Jasper Janssen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> There's also the benefit of not throwing out a perfectly functioning ratchet mechanism every time
> your cogs are worn out, but that's less of a big deal IMHO.

Indeed -- note that many current freewheels are priced around $20.00, while cassettes are usually
much more.

Matt O.
 
On 23 Jun 2003 05:57:27 GMT, [email protected] (Acrosound) wrote:

>Would I be wasting my money on buying a bike with Shimano junk on it? Or have they improved over
>the years?

No, their junk is still junk. Buying a bike with junk would be a waste of money. However, buying a
bike with the latest Shimano quality components would not be wasting money.

jeverett3<AT>earthlink<DOT>net http://home.earthlink.net/~jeverett3
 
"Sheldon Brown" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]... Matt O'Toole wrote
>
>>Improved compared to what? As far back as I can remember, Shimano
stuff has
>>been as "good" as any.

Chalo Colina

> There's a man who's never ridden a bike with Shimano "Lark" derailleurs and Shimano "turkey wing"
> auxiliary brake levers.

Ooooh...I really didn't want to get into this, but this comment can't be allowed to go unchallenged.
Evidently Chalo never rode a bike with a Lark derailer.

When the Lark derailer was a current model it shifted better than ANY other derailer money could
buy! That's why I put them on both of my tandems (I only owned two tandems back then.)

The only thing that came close was the SunTour VGT. None of the contemporary Euro stuff was anywhere
near these two in performance.

The Lark also had a really neat feature, the cable anchor was hooked up to an otherwise unused end
of one of the springs, providing an overload/preselector feature. You could stop in high gear, then
yank the shift lever all the way back, then pedal away and it would shift right down to low gear. If
you tried this with any other derailer, you'd just snap the cable. When these were being installed
on wheelie bikes with big stick shifts, this was a major plus.

A variant on the Lark was the Eagle, same basic derailer with a heavy duty adaptor claw and a
built-in bumper. This was the ruggedest derailer ever, made the Hurét Alvit look wimpy.

And look at Campagnolo's low-end derailleurs at the time: Valentino and the Gran Tourismo -- which
looked like failed metal shop projects. Everybody forgets the Campagnolo junk, including the years
of dead-end and expensive attempts at modernizaton like Synchro and the Delta brake. For the price
of a Delta brake set, you could buy an entire AX group! -- Jay Beattie.
 
On 24 Jun 2003 11:35:25 -0700, [email protected] (Chalo) wrote:

>Sheldon Brown <[email protected]> wrote
>
>> Chalo Colina
>>
>> > There's a man who's never ridden a bike with Shimano "Lark" derailleurs and Shimano "turkey
>> > wing" auxiliary brake levers.
>>
>> Ooooh...I really didn't want to get into this, but this comment can't be
>>
>> allowed to go unchallenged. Evidently Chalo never rode a bike with a Lark derailer.
>>
>> When the Lark derailer was a current model it shifted better than ANY other derailer money
>> could buy!
>
>I have used both the Lark and the Eagle with other drivetrain components of similar vintage, and my
>results were generally as follows:
>
>Properly adjusted, high gear could easily be had. Thanks to the marvel of the preselector spring,
>low gear could easily be had, even from a dead stop. In between, there was a zone in which the
>drivetrain went, "rattle rattle rattle click rattle rattle" as the chain made feeble attempts to
>climb to the next larger sprocket. If any attempt was made to adjust out the rattling, the result
>was that the chain obligingly clunked down to the next smaller sprocket and resumed its rattling.
>After fighting with the damn thing for a few miles, one learned to use either the 14 or the 28 and
>not bother with those other gears.
>
>Admittedly this was probably not the worst shifting the era had to offer (after all, you could
>shift to a quiet low gear *and* a quiet high gear at will), but it is easily a category worse than
>any results I've had from the Suntour VGT derailleur, which itself is a category worse than most
>up-to date derailleurs. I do like the preselector spring feature, but that alone does not retrieve
>the Shimano derailleurs of those days from being among those things that function better as
>ballast/landfill than as what they were designed to be.

Hehe, I had a Eagle rder on a bike of my youth. Terrible, imprecise thing. Certainly not the worst
of that time period, tho.

>
>I put a Shimano Eagle derailleur on my buddy Dookie's tallbike T-001:
>http://www.geocities.com/deadbabybikes/tallpix.htm On this cycle is that derailleur truly in
>its element.
>
>Chalo Colina

Wow, what a monstrosity.

- --
Anthony Leverock
 
On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 18:13:08 GMT, "Matt O'Toole" <[email protected]> wrote:
>"Jasper Janssen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>> There's also the benefit of not throwing out a perfectly functioning ratchet mechanism every time
>> your cogs are worn out, but that's less of a big deal IMHO.
>
>Indeed -- note that many current freewheels are priced around $20.00, while cassettes are usually
>much more.

Although a big part of that is that all currently made freewheels are low-end, and even if they're
good quality they offer far less gears than is current. A 7 speed low-end cassette should go for
well under $20, given that there are in fact 9s available at the $25 point.

Jasper
 
"Acrosound" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> The Shimano groups are perhaps a bit less expensive but I've had good
success
> with Campy for over 25 years...
>
> the last "gruppo" purchase in 98 or 99... a Chorus 8 speed group. Still
works
> like a charm.
>
> i had just bought a new frame and was debating whether to save some bucks
and
> go DuraAce or stick with the tried and true and go Record.
>
> Another deciding factor for me was the Campy wheelsets.
>

Another one rescued from the dark side :)

If you've used Campy for over 25 years, there is no choice <grin>

I retired a custom Condor racing bike 3 years ago with Campy Nuovo Record parts that were over 20
years old. I kinda like the new indexed shifting...when'd they come up with that? Certainly nicer
than my barcons.

Guess it was about time, huh?

Went with Record 9 speed on my replacement bike, a Colnago Spiral Conic, and on two other bikes I'm
now building up, a Colnago Crystal for racing, and a Brian Rourke cyclocross special. I know Record
9 is SILLY for cyclocross, but this will also be my winter bike.

Did I think about ShimaNO? No. Shoot, I even have a pair of Campy cantis for the cross bike.

Lee
 
> << for derailleurs, brakes, and integrated shifters/brake levers, I would
take
> campy any day of the week. Everything else I would go third party for: bottom bracket, seatpost,
> cranks. Campy stuff also looks nicer and has better resale value. You could buy a used campy
> record derailleur on ebay for $150, use it for a year, then sell it for $150 on ebay. >>

"Mike Krueger" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> If Campy looks nicer and has better "resale value", why not put Campy
cranks on
> instead of 3rd party?

Because the 130/135 bolt circles (promulgated by Shimano/Campagnolo) are less useful to many riders'
taste than a 110mm bolt circle.

--
Andrew Muzi http://www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April 1971
 
Maybe you should ask, Is Campagnolo still inferior to Shimano?

Campy had a really bad 80's and has been playing catchup to Shimano since. It started with indexed
shifting. Campy's first take, Synchro, was so bad, mechanics called it Stinkro. The list is long
where Shimano came out with new advancements and led the market: indexed shifting,
freehub/cassettes, ramped cogs, brake lever shifting, increased number of gears, dual pivot brakes,
etc. Yes, it's true that Shimano didn't invent this stuff, but they did a great job popularizing it
and using it to drive competitive advantage.

The current Campy stuff is excellent, and the answer to the question is No, Campy is not still
inferior to Shimano. Some will argue that Campy's ahead -- they have 10 speeds (Shimano's will be
coming out shortly), Ergo works at least as well (though differently) as STI, it's more compatible
than Shimano, etc.

The current stuff from both companies is great and both are a joy to ride. You can make an argument
of one over the other, but really it's just personal preference and the subject of lots of
entertaining debates on this newsgroup.
 
"Eagle Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Maybe you should ask, Is Campagnolo still inferior to Shimano?
>
> Campy had a really bad 80's and has been playing catchup to Shimano since. It started with indexed
> shifting. Campy's first take, Synchro, was so bad, mechanics called it Stinkro. The list is long
> where Shimano came out with new advancements and led the market: indexed shifting,
> freehub/cassettes, ramped cogs, brake lever shifting, increased number of gears, dual pivot
> brakes, etc. Yes, it's true that Shimano didn't invent this stuff, but they did a great job
> popularizing it and using it to drive competitive advantage.
>
> The current Campy stuff is excellent, and the answer to the question is No, Campy is not still
> inferior to Shimano. Some will argue that Campy's ahead -- they have 10 speeds (Shimano's will be
> coming out shortly), Ergo works at least as well (though differently) as STI, it's more compatible
> than Shimano, etc.
>
> The current stuff from both companies is great and both are a joy to ride. You can make an
> argument of one over the other, but really it's just personal preference and the subject of lots
> of entertaining debates on this newsgroup.

The funny thing about this debate is that most (if not all) of us don't ride the components to the
limits that they were designed to be ridden to. Mind you, there's a difference between WANT and
NEED. I WANT D/A (or Record if you're running Campy), but I could probably race and train as
effectively on Ultegra or 105 (Chorus/Veloce) with the amount of mileage I'm actually putting in.

Ain't it great living in a society that allows you the opportunity to spend great gobs of money on
what is essentially basic transportation in the rest of the world? And to think how seriously we all
take this riding thing...

Mike
 
[email protected] (Acrosound) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

> Would I be wasting my money on buying a bike with ShimaNO junk on it? Or have they improved over
> the years?

You may have missed this commentary:

The Raven Revisited
(c) 2003 Mark Freedman

Once upon a bikeride dreary While I pedalled weak and weary Heading towards a nearby shore With
just one pannier. Nothing more. There came a rapping on my noggin From a bird whose head was
bobbin' Perched upon my leeward shoulder Words which made my heart grow colder Quoth that raven,
"hmmph. Deore."

It spread its wings, a meter wide Inspired thoughts of ornicide. Then fluttered to my forward rack
And perched there so it could look back. It fixed upon my front derailleur Glare which hinted
pending failure. A look which chilled me to the core So many miles from any store. Quoth that Raven,
"hmmmph. Deore."

How I longed for Campagnolo When out riding, riding solo. But my bike came with Shimano. It's not
even "Italiano." Still, you do the best you can. It's not the grupo, it's the man. I touched the
brakes, I slowed my pace. I held on harder, just in case. Quoth that Raven, "hmmmph. Deore."

I shifted to the middle chainring Spun those pedals like a mad thing Gave my bike a sudden lurch The
bird fell from its forward perch Its head caught in a front wheel spoke I heard the snap as its neck
broke I managed to avoid a crash I'd had enough of pavement rash.

It will suffice, my "hmmmph, Deore."
 
[email protected] (Acrosound) wrote:

> i had just bought a new frame and was debating whether to save some bucks and go DuraAce or stick
> with the tried and true and go Record.

Chorus is nicer now, being made with fewer plastic components than Record.

Chalo Colina
 
In article <OFlKa.169766$eJ2.23549@fed1read07>, "Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> wrote:

> "Eagle Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Maybe you should ask, Is Campagnolo still inferior to Shimano?

> > The current stuff from both companies is great and both are a joy to ride. You can make an
> > argument of one over the other, but really it's just personal preference and the subject of lots
> > of entertaining debates on this newsgroup.
>
> The funny thing about this debate is that most (if not all) of us don't ride the components to the
> limits that they were designed to be ridden to. Mind you, there's a difference between WANT and
> NEED. I WANT D/A (or Record if you're running Campy), but I could probably race and train as
> effectively on Ultegra or 105 (Chorus/Veloce) with the amount of mileage I'm actually putting in.

I'll let y'all know when my 105/Sora bike becomes the major impediment to my schedule of training,
commuting and racing.

I made a deliberate decision that I needed a bike with STI because I wanted to race criteriums
(right decision, BTW).

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email protected] http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
Shimano still making it??
Replies
7
Views
158
Cycling Equipment
Orin
O
C
Re: Shimano Ultegra 9-speed Still Available New?
Replies
1
Views
297
Cycling Equipment
Wasatch5k
W
P
Re: Shimano Ultegra 9-speed Still Available New?
Replies
0
Views
238
Cycling Equipment
Paul Kopit
P
J
Re: Shimano Ultegra 9-speed Still Available New?
Replies
0
Views
214
Cycling Equipment
Jeff Starr
J
D
Re: Shimano Ultegra 9-speed Still Available New?
Replies
11
Views
360
Cycling Equipment
JeffWills
J
Top Bottom Back