What happened? Campy Veloce vs. Shamino 105

Discussion in 'Cycling Equipment' started by eddykow, Jan 24, 2010.

  1. eddykow

    eddykow New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    0
    I tried to do a search about campy vs. shamino and nothing came up but when I searched just campagnola, 16 threads came up and one of them had the title"Campy Veloce vs. Shamino 105", which is exactly what I wanted.What gives?
     
    Tags:


  2. dhk2

    dhk2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Messages:
    2,214
    Likes Received:
    39
    Could be your misspelling of Shimano? At any rate, the notion of "vs" is pretty general, and tends to generate the useless debate about which one is "better", as you'll see in the 16 threads. If you can describe what you really want to compare in more specific details, you'll likely get some decent replies.
     
  3. alfeng

    alfeng Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    6,723
    Likes Received:
    126
    What do you want to know?

    For the average rider, Shimano 105, Ultegra & Dura Ace are great ... particularly, if you are a Flatlander and/or your hills are less than a quarter mile long ...

    105 components are very good; but, Ultegra is only a little more expensive and generally worth the slight price premium ... and, Dura Ace is a lot more expensive.

    Except for the short-lived, QS generation of Campagnolo shifters which were based on Campagnolo's Xenon shifters, the internals of the lesser Campagnolo shifters (e.g., Veloce) are interchangeable with the most expensive Campagnolo shifters (e.g., Record), and you can therefore anticipate that a current, 2009/2010/(and, subsequent) are as good-or-bad as the high zoot, 2009+ Super Record Campagnolo shifters.

    I love Campagnolo shifters ... mine are the pre-2009 models.

    Based on the description of the Shimano Di2 shifters which OTHERS have written, it sounds as thought the Shimano Di2 electronic shifters have comparable downshifting capability when the drivetrain is under load as a pair of Campagnolo shifters. Maybe the Shimano Di2 shifters are better at shifting when the drivetrain is under load than Campagnolo shifters, but it doesn't sound like it to me.

    Now, supposedly, the newest generation of Campagnolo shifters is better than the earlier Campagnolo shifters which I have. I think that the jury is still out as to whether-or-not the latest-and-greatest are truly better ... but, if an 11-speed drivetrain fascinates you, then it's the only option at the moment.

    BTW. IMO, Shimano's derailleurs are marginally better than the pre-2009 Campagnolo derailleurs. I don't know how much better the current Campagnolo derailleurs are when compared with the previous design.

    So, I use my 10-speed Campagnolo shifters with 9-and-10-speed Shimano derailleurs & 9-speed Shimano cassettes. I also have several 10-speed Campagnolo cassettes, one 9-speed Campagnolo cassette, and an 8-speed Campagnolo cassette; but, at the current time I only have one, laced Campagnolo wheelset + one extra Campagnolo hub and the rest of my wheelsets are Shimano compatible (generally, Shimano or DT/Hugi hubs).

    I still have some 8-and-9-speed Campagnolo shifters, too. I consider the 10-speed shifters to be almost "universal" because they can be indexed with 8-/9-/10-speed drivetrains if the end user makes some accommodations.

    So, that's my long way of saying that you can mix and match some Shimano & Campagnolo components ... you should buy what your riding conditions dictate AND what your budget allows.
     
  4. Camilo

    Camilo New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Messages:
    391
    Likes Received:
    4
    I don't get it.
     
  5. alfeng

    alfeng Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    6,723
    Likes Received:
    126
    Well, I love Shimano derailleurs, hubs and cranksets ...

    But, I strongly recommend that ALMOST EVERYONE would be better off if they bought non-QS, 10-speed Campagnolo shifters BECAUSE the Campagnolo shifters shift better (IMO) + they can be used with almost any drivetrain.

    Having said that, if a person doesn't have to downshift with the drivetrain under load (e.g., short hills), then Shimano 105 shifters are fine.

    Shimano, IMO, has better chainrings than Campagnolo ... but, Campagnolo shifters work just fine with older, un-ramped & un-pinned chainrings ...

    My experience is that Shimano's mechanical shifters sometimes balk when shifting under load even with ramped & pinned chainrings (i.e., moving the chain from the inner to the outer chainring as one is cresting a hill rather than after) OR Shimano cassettes (i.e., moving the the chain to a larger cog when already going uphill) ... others say they don't have a problem.
     
  6. eddykow

    eddykow New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you for the info.that's what I wanted to know.
     
  7. Solanog

    Solanog New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2004
    Messages:
    302
    Likes Received:
    1
    I really have never had trouble shifting uphill with my old Shimano 105. The new Ultegras are even better.

    What sort of issues have you had with this shifting? What is the problem with the Shimano shifters I don't see any. What would need to be improved?
     
  8. alfeng

    alfeng Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    6,723
    Likes Received:
    126
    I am not alone ... others have remarked about having balky shifting with their Shimano shifters in occasional threads in this Forum.

    I have been behind some people who use Shimano shifters, and I have seen them have balky shifting from time to time ... it could be that our inclines are steeper than the ones you are riding on.

    I've also seen people drop their chain when shifting onto the inner chainring ...

    One time, a guy who was easily going twice as fast as I was when going up hill dropped his chain when he finally downshifted onto the inner ring when he was probably about 100+ yards ahead of me ... he was having just enough trouble putting the chain back on that it was taking more than a few seconds to get the chain back in place and that is probably the only reason I was able to catch up & to "assist" him before he had fixed the problem & had remounted. I don't know if he was having trouble putting the chain back on because of the frustration of dropping the chain OR because of the minimum amount of chain he was running with the tight 12-21 cassette OR because he didn't know the easiest way to do it (I simply put index finger on the small L-bend on the rear of the DA rear derailleur's cage to take the tension off the chain -- I don't know if he ever realized that there was no way he was going to efficiently get the chain back on the way he was doing it). His riding buddies must have been at least a 200 yards behind him since they were just approaching as I was heading off.

    I know that someone I used to ride with who has downtube shifters on one bike AND a full, 9-speed Dura Ace 7700 group on another bike -- he prefers to ride the bike which has downtube shifters AND when asked, he has admitted that once-in-a-while, the shifting is balky on his DA equipped bike.

    The only time I have had a "problem" shifting to a larger cog (OR, larger chainring) when using Campagnolo shifters is when there wasn't another cog to shift the chain on to.

    After determining the apparent superiority of the Campagnolo shifters to handle downshifting when under a fairly extreme load (I made downshifts on progressively steeper inclines), a few years ago, I also decided to test the efficiency of front shifting by installing an older, relatively THIN, un-ramped and un-pinned chainring on the crankset (Dura Ace Octalink, if it matters). I had no problem shifting from the inner to the outer chainring AND I would say that the shifting was better than with the Ultegra 6500 shifters when the crank had a ramped & pinned outer chainring.

    On mountain roads, it is often necessary to shift on the rear more than once ...

    If I were a Flatlander, then I probably wouldn't be concerned with how/when a Shimano shifter does-or-doesn't work efficiently. So, I say "More power to you if you haven't experienced balky shifting with your Shimano shifters."

    BTW. While only my older, pointy hooded Campagnolo shifters are as heavy as most Shimano shifters, one aspect of Shimano shifters which isn't a deal breaker is their relatively porky weight ...

    I love Shimano, and if I felt that their mechanical shifters were comparable, then I would use them.

    As it is, I still believe that Shimano's derailleurs are marginally better than Campagnolo's ... and so, because cosmetic continuity isn't important to me, Shimano derailleurs are what I use with my Campagnolo shifters.

    N.B. The description by "professional" reviewers + Di2 owners in threads in this Forum describes the shifting of the Di2 as being better than the mechanical Shimano shifters yet in a way which makes the shifting with the Shimano Di2 shifters/derailleurs sound no different than what almost any pair of Campagnolo shifters is capable of when the drivetrain is under load ...

    THAT begs the question: "Why would Shimano users marvel at the Di2's same-as-Campagnolo shifting if it weren't different than the typical experience of a pair of Shimano mechanical shifters?"
     
  9. dhk2

    dhk2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Messages:
    2,214
    Likes Received:
    39
    alfeng, it's obvious how much you prefer Campy to Shimano, but your anecdotal accounts of people dropping their chains or being unable to shift on steep hills seem a bit over the top to me and really prove nothing. We have steep hills here too, and since 90% of the riders are on Shimano, the vast majority of chain drop problems occur to them. When it happens at the base of a steep climb or in the middle of the climb, it's often with inexperienced riders who mostly learn quickly not to attempt to shift at high load/slow cadence.

    I rarely drop the chain on my DA/FSA triple set up, but when I do, I consider it operator error, ie, too much pressure/not enough speed. Do you believe that these occurances are a function of the design of the DA 9 sp shifters, the FSA chainrings, or perhaps the chain itself? Are you claiming it will never happen with Campy? If so, what special design features do you feel Campy has that Shimano hasn't been able to equal?
     
  10. Solanog

    Solanog New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2004
    Messages:
    302
    Likes Received:
    1
    In my case i have steep hills, for example I can go from 1400m above sea level to 2200 or more in less than 10km and continue climbing, if I have the strengh that sadly I don't, to more than 3800m in about 25 - 30kms more. So I don't think this is the issue.
    I've dropped the chain with my Ultegras but it was a matter of adjusting the front derailleur after that I have never experienced this problem again.
    I would really like to understand what is the issue with the Shimano shifters that need to be improved. It seems to me that some of this dropping chain issues is more fine tunning than shifters issues, but that's my point of view. BTW I like Campy eventhough my bikes are equiped with Shimano. In the past I had some Campy components which never gave trouble.
     
  11. alienator

    alienator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    Messages:
    12,596
    Likes Received:
    160
    It's a non-existent problem turned into a problem by saying it's a problem.
     
  12. biker jk

    biker jk New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2005
    Messages:
    123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Too true. I have no problem shifting to a larger cog while climbing. No hesitation at all and that includes going from the 24-tooth cog to the 27. Dropping the chain when shifting from the big to small chainring is almost exclusively due to incorrect low limit adjustment. Campy will drop chains if incorrectly adjusted as well.
     
  13. alfeng

    alfeng Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    6,723
    Likes Received:
    126
    OMG! Do you even read what you have written?

    I don't know which should be considered more troubling -- your denial that a problem exists while you cite occurrences which suggest otherwise or a flippant remark by someone who doesn't use Shimano shifters who dismisses the problem.

    Certainly, some can say they don't have a problem with Shimano shifters because they take care to avoid using the shifters in certain situations AND that it is an inexperienced rider's problem for not realizing that s/he shouldn't shift "at the base of a steep climb or in the middle of the climb, "

    Well, that's the point ... a Campagnolo shifter can shift anytime on the ascent regardless of how high the load or slow the cadence without the rider doing anything other than shift while continuing to pedal at whatever cadence s/he chooses. Surging prior to unweighting the drivetrain is not required.

    Is it a princess-and-the-pea situation? I think not.

    Now, is it a problem that Shimano can remedy? Absolutely! Shimano is MORE THAN CAPABLE of correcting the problem. If I were a machinist, I could fabricate a replacement 'piece' which should correct the problem with the shifters.

    The problem is due to the design legacy which Shimano has chosen not to abandon ... yet.

    To correct the problem, all Shimano's engineering department has to do is to ADMIT that the same design philosophy which brought the World the Biopace chainrings and which makes pushing an STI lever seem light creates a mechanical disadvantage for the shifter at the critical moment when the chain is mounting the sprockets of the chainring or cog.

    There are two obvious solutions.
    The first would be to simply make the pulley ROUND & concentric rather than some ovoid shape which is intended to equalize the tension on the lever through the entire arc of the hand stroke. Using a ROUND PULLEY will eliminate the "dwell" and make it possible to shift under any load and at a slow cadence.

    The other way to work around this is to avoid the "dwell" by allowing a mechanical spring which is not hampered by an ovoid pulley to move the chain -- i.e., by using a "Rapid Rise" rear derailleur.
    Now, I honestly thought that the 7900/6700 generation of shifters would exorcise the problem ...

    I had also presumed that the 7900 would utilize a SHADOW-based, "Rapid Rise" rear derailleur. They obviously didn't.

    Unfortunately, while I have deduced that using a Rapid Rise rear derailleur should be a valid work-around, using a Rapid Rise rear derailleur would only be half-a-solution because implementing a Rapid Rise rear derailleur doesn't solve the problem of occasionally balky up shifts onto a larger chainring at inopportune times.
    Yes, BTW, as I've mentioned before, I've dedicated one of my road frames to testing a Rapid Rise XT rear derailleur mated to a pair of Shimano STI shifters ... I just haven't the taken the bike for a road test on a mountain road to confirm that the Rapid Rise rear derailleur will make "down" shifting as efficient with Shimano's current-and-past STI shifters as the shifting is with Campagnlo's shifters because it is not a high priority to prove my hypothesis that half of the "problem" is easily resolved without creating a problem on the up shifts to smaller cogs.
    I would suggest that if the bean counters hadn't belatedly forced the Di2 onto the market with it's 7800-style levers and 7900-style rear derailleur rather than 7900-style levers indicates that either the 7900 levers were brought forward ahead of schedule OR the sale of the Di2 was delayed OR an after-thought to justify all the R&D.

    History indicates that Shimano remains loathe to abandon what someone perceives to be a good (or, a good enough) idea or product. You may-or-may-not recall that Shimano's Octalink BBs were preceded by more than a decade by the splined Shimano Selecta BB & crank. Unfortunately, as in the past, so it may be in the future.

    While "reviewers" have marveled at the shifting capability of the Di2, I would suggest that were it not for the R&D expended in the Di2 that the mechanical 7900/6700 shifters would probably have had a dwell-free mechanism OR minimally the drivetrains would use a Rapid Rise (probably, SHADOW-based) rear derailleur ... but, why buy a Di2 if an updated mechanical shifter will work as efficiently for a fraction of the cost?

    Possibly, to a lesser extent; but, only because Shimano's past-and-current STI design is unforgiving.

    I believe that the unnecessary, self-inflicted STI flaw spawned ramping-and-pinning, BTW ...

    Ramping-and-pinning are generally a good thing; but, as I've stated before, ramping-and-pinning are not necessary for Campagnolo shifters to function efficiently ...

    I don't even think that YOU would be willing to take a test ride along one of your regular circuits with older unramped-and-unpinned chainrings with your current DA shifters/etc.


    Never happen? No.

    Rarely or infrequently? Yes.

    Because I'm not using a Triple, I can't speak to the frequency of dropping a chain when using Campagnolo shifters on a Triple crank.
     
  14. alienator

    alienator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    Messages:
    12,596
    Likes Received:
    160
    Lots of opinion. A paucity of facts. There is no evidence that inexperienced riders have issues shifting Shimano going uphill any more than inexperienced Campy users or inexperienced SRAM users. No evidence at all.
     
  15. alfeng

    alfeng Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    6,723
    Likes Received:
    126
    So, why don't YOU use Shimano STI shifters if you truly believe that they are as good as Campagnolo's shifters?

    BTW. Perhaps you want to re-read dhk2's comment that he had observed (in your words) "that inexperienced riders have issues shifting Shimano going uphill" vs. "inexperienced Campy users or inexperienced SRAM users."
     
  16. alienator

    alienator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    Messages:
    12,596
    Likes Received:
    160
    Wow. You put words in my mouth, and then imply that the only metric by which to judge shifters is yours. FWIW, the big reason I use Campy shifters is because ergonomically they work much better for me than Shimano. Simple

    [/quote]BTW. Perhaps you want to re-read dhk2's comment that he had observed (in your words) "that inexperienced riders have issues shifting Shimano going uphill" vs. "inexperienced Campy users or inexperienced SRAM users."[/QUOTE]

    I did read what he said. He also said that the vast majority of users in his area are Shimano users, and he did not say that he didn't see chain drops with other systems.

    A sampling of N=1......or even N=2......observers does not a fact make. You're free to express your opinion as to what's going on, as you've obviously done.
     
  17. alfeng

    alfeng Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    6,723
    Likes Received:
    126
    REALLY? That's your reply?

    Weak. Really weak.

    I can sense that you are failing your arms ... but, you don't seem to be saying anything intelligent!

    Why don't you borrow a few bikes which are equipped with some Shimano STI shifters from that shop which you say lends you bikes/wheels/whatever to try out for a few rides and head up to the summit-or-however-far-you-normally-ride of Mt. Lemmon AND THEN your comments about how good-or-bad Shimano shifters are might have some credibility ...
    No cheating ... shift the-way-and-when you normally do with your current bike!
    YOU, too, "are free to express your opinion" ... but, until you actually use some STI shifters on non-Flatlander roadways then, you're just a flapping lip who is still spewing piss with many of your posts.
     
  18. alienator

    alienator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    Messages:
    12,596
    Likes Received:
    160
    Wow. That certainly makes your argument.

    Well, my experience is only mine, but it was on '07 Dura Ace and a hill with a grade at 20+%. There really wasn't the opportunity to ease up on the pedals to shift, but I'll be darned if that Shimano kit didn't shift just find under load, my 175 lb load, at that.

    Thanks for playing, and feel free in the future to digress into more ad hominem comments. They certainly help put your arguments in perspective.
     
  19. alfeng

    alfeng Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    6,723
    Likes Received:
    126
    REALLY? That's your reply?

    Nice attempt at avoidance ...

    But, tsk-tsk, one successful shift doesn't count for much ...

    As you like to put it:
    A sampling of N=1......or even N=2......observers does not a fact make.
    Now, go borrow those Shimano equipped bikes and give us a report after some real rides which will involve more than one shift.

    If your conclusion is the same, then you can report it being so with some credibility.
     
  20. alienator

    alienator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    Messages:
    12,596
    Likes Received:
    160
    I guess you can't be constructive. Do you think your tack is really helping your position?

    I know my ride with Shimano was an N=1 sampling. You were the one that said, "...until you use some STI shifters...ad hominem....ad hominem...", so I reported my experience. I didn't say or imply that it was statistically significant. I rode Shimano long enough that day to understand it shifted well, but the ergonomics didn't suit me. Also, I really missed the mechanical feel of Campy shifting.

    Your personal attacks are unlikely to improve whatever credibility you have. People have fairly raised questions. You reply with insults. What exactly do you think you're offering in this thread?
     
Loading...
Loading...