In article
<fb9bb9e5-d3bb-4fcb-ad3d-15fe6bb8b539@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
Scott Gordo <
[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jun 21, 8:07 am, Qui si parla Campagnolo <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > On Jun 20, 3:20 pm, Scott Gordo <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Jun 18, 4:48 am, Derk <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > >http://www.guidorubino.com/technews/2008/06/18/campagnolo-2009-ergopo...
> >
> > > > Derk
> >
> > > I unfortunately don't have experience with modern brifter Campy, but
> > > anyone else found 9 speed Shimano is reliable and easy to tune while
> > > 10 speed is fiddly? It may be just my experience, and somebody
> > > certainly was going to do it (and Campy has been overshadowed by SRAM
> > > lately) but I'm not looking forward to skinnier, more expensive
> > > chains.
> >
> > > Sure, I don't have to buy....
> >
> > As for Campagnolo being 'overshadowed' by Sram, I don't get this.
> > Campagnolo does little to no OEM at any level, shimano does gobs. Many
> > bikes that were spec'ed with shimano 105/ultegra/DA came out in 2008
> > with Rival/Force/Red..who lost market share was shimano, not
> > Campagnolo. In our little microcosm of a bike shop where we start with
> > a frame, where we have all three shifter types on demo bikes, most
> > still opt for Campagnolo(85%), followed by shimano, Zero so far for
> > Sram this year.
>
> I don't have bicycle retaler-type info, but by "overshadowed" I just
> mean that, perception-wise, SRAM is seen as bold and new and exciting
> while Campy is staid. Riders are excited to try the SRAM stuff, right?
> I don't see how it's a better system, but that's not what I'm
> questioning here. I'm talking about interest and hype and how they
> likely correspond with sales.
Well, speaking for myself, I just really like the action of Campy
brifters, and prefer them (not greatly, but enough to seek them out)
over Shimano.
For me (admittedly, hardly the definition of a market-making parts
consumer), the long run that SRAM has is to show some obvious
superiority, most preferably in something like shifting performance or
"feel." Given the apparently absurd one-way mechanism SRAM uses for
shifting, I think I'll need a pretty convincing test ride before I even
consider it.
Conversely, the SRAM PowerDome is so obviously the way to build a
super-light cassette (at a steep price!) that if I cared about cassette
weights, it would be the only choice on my list.
> In turn, I'm starting to see more and more bikes in the NYC area
> outfitted with SRAM. Not saying it's better or worse, and maybe
> they're taking some of Shimano's market too, but I would think that
> since Campy sells less OEM (compared to Shimano) that they're probably
> suffering more from SRAM's entries into the market. Plus, SRAM sells a
> good deal of OEM MTB and department store Grip Shift stuff too, areas
> where, for better or worse and AFAIK, Campy has no offerings.
SRAM and Shimano pursue similar means to their goals of global
domination, but never underestimate how expensive it can be to make
cheap things, and how valuable the top of the market is.
To belabor an already cliche example from another industry, VW/Audi
(VAG, along with several subsidary marques) is a diversified automaker
that sells one of everything from subcompact cheapness to supercars.
Porsche is a niche builder that basically sells expensive sportscars,
very expensive sportscars, and very expensive and fast SUVs.
It is astoundingly-profitable Porsche that is currently contemplating
buying diversified VAG, and perhaps largely to absorb their American
CAFE liabilities.
> The number of Campy bikes with, say, FSA cranks, can't be helping
> either.
The idea of Total Integration is a concept that has waxed and waned.
"All Campy" used to be the phrase that pays, and when they said "all,"
they meant the seatpost, too.
> I'm not rooting against Campy by any means, just a few observations. I
> suspect that they may have been anxious that SRAM might come out with
> 11 speed and reinforce my first point that Campy hasn't done anything
> very exciting lately.
At the risk of being cynical, SRAM hasn't done anything very exciting
lately, either.
I agree that going to 11 dives deeply into "it's for selling" territory,
but as far as I can tell the three road group players are currently
trying to compete on weight and differentiate on shifter feel, with
occasional indeterminate forays into claiming superior shifting
performance, which is a rather more hazy argument.
Going to 11 is a simple (simplistic?) differentiator. I think that
electronic groups, for better or for worse, promise to be a much more
important sort of change.
Meanwhile, not to be left behind, Shimano is changing its pull ratio,
which is good because it probably will improve shifting quality, but bad
because it lets us play the Incompatability Game again.
--
Ryan Cousineau
[email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."
