# CYCLING+ Comparison: Centaur, Apex & 105...



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

The March 2011 issues of CYCLING+ from the UK did a comparison between the 3 groups and their results were quite interesting.

They rode the 3 groups for close to 6 months and evaluated them on subjective qualities, time to upshift and downshift front and rear with a dual synchronized camera setup at 300fps, weight and cost.

The results were:

No group shifted (front or rear) faster than Centaur. Some individual times ranged from close (.02 sec) to as much as almost .5 sec slower (Apex front derailleur downshift)
Price was competitive:
Apex=588.94GBP
Centaur=600.93GBP
105=609.93GBP

Centaur was the lightest:
Centaur=2017g
Apex=2089g
105=2606g

In spite of the slow FD downshifts and a large chainring that could use more stiffness, they chose the Apex *ONLY* because SRAM has 11x32 and 12x32 cassette.


----------



## RussellS (Feb 1, 2010)

Are you sure your weights are right? 105 is listed as over a pound heavier. That seems like quite a bit. Campagnolo makes a 13-29 10 speed cassette. 29 isn't too far from 32. Shimano makes a 11-32 and/or 11-34 10 speed cassette in its XTR line. Not 105, but its Shimano 10 speed mountain cassette. And of course the 10 speed SRAM cassette will work with Shimano. Seems as if Cycling+ picked the stupidest way they could to pick a winner. Not surprisig.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

RussellS said:


> Are you sure our weights are right?


Surprised me also. I have not had a chance to check the Shimano site. Maybe tonight.



RussellS said:


> 105 is listed as over a pound heavier.


I believe 105 is the oldest, since the last redesign. Both Apex and Centaur are new for 2011.



RussellS said:


> That seems like quite a bit. Campagnolo makes a 13-29 1 speed cassette. 29 isn't too far from 32. Shimano makes a 11-32 and/or 11-34 10 speed cassette in its XTR line. No105, but its Shimano 10 speed mountain cassette. And of course the 10 speed SRAM cassette will work with Shimano.


It didn't say in the text, but no cross pollination as ground rule would make sense. Saves a lot of arguments that way.



RussellS said:


> Seems as if Cycling+ picked the stupidest way they could to pick a winner. Not surprisig.


Yes, I thought that was sort of weird. To me, the only possible negative for Centaur was what was mentioned in the text: no upgrade path. Or, put another way, there was no way to do an upgrade piecemeal if that's what you wanted/needed to do. If you wanted to go to Athena or Chorus, you would have to start over. I can see why Campagnolo needed to split their line. They wanted to advance the technology with 11sp, but didn't want to outright shut off their 10sp base. After all, 10sp has been around for about 7 years now.


----------



## skleins (May 19, 2010)

flatlander_48 said:


> Yes, I thought that was sort of weird. To me, the only possible negative for Centaur was what was mentioned in the text: no upgrade path. Or, put another way, there was no way to do an upgrade piecemeal if that's what you wanted/needed to do. If you wanted to go to Athena or Chorus, you would have to start over. I can see why Campagnolo needed to split their line. They wanted to advance the technology with 11sp, but didn't want to outright shut off their 10sp base. After all, 10sp has been around for about 7 years now.


But isn't this also incorrect - I understood that 11 speed rear mechs, cranks & brakes can be used on 10 speed systems.......therefore allowing upgrades


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

I thought I read that the spacing between sprockets was slightly smaller on 11sp. After all, you have to get 11 cogs in the cassette in the space of 10. That suggests that the rear derailleur would be different as well as the shifter. Maybe you could get away with the front derailleur and chainwheels. However, 11sp chain is different so I imagine that the pins and ramps on the chainwheels would also be different.

Anyway, that's my speculation. Hopefully someone will respond who has direct experience with both systems.

_NOTE: I checked the Shimano site and didn't see any weight information. However, the site made a point of saying that 105 was new for 2011 and that the group was 30g lighter than before. However, CYCLING+ started testing last July. Maybe that was with the pre-2011 system?_


----------



## J24 (Oct 8, 2003)

Don't know why but over the years the group comparisons I've read in Cycling+ mag tend to be biased towards Shimano and more lately to SRAM.


----------



## jpdigital (Dec 1, 2006)

*Works fine for me...*



flatlander_48 said:


> I thought I read that the spacing between sprockets was slightly smaller on 11sp. After all, you have to get 11 cogs in the cassette in the space of 10. That suggests that the rear derailleur would be different as well as the shifter. Maybe you could get away with the front derailleur and chainwheels. However, 11sp chain is different so I imagine that the pins and ramps on the chainwheels would also be different.
> 
> Anyway, that's my speculation. Hopefully someone will respond who has direct experience with both systems.


I put an 11speed Athena rear derailleur on my otherwise 10-speed drive train. It works flawless.


----------



## Bobbin-Man (Oct 1, 2008)

I subscribe to Cycling+ and read the article when it first came out - I concluded fom their summary that they'd done the testing with a group of folks that were more at home on MTBs than road bikes and weren't concerned with such big steps that would exist in an 11-32 cassette!


----------



## Drew Eckhardt (Nov 11, 2009)

flatlander_48 said:


> In spite of the slow FD downshifts and a large chainring that could use more stiffness, they chose the Apex *ONLY* because SRAM has 11x32 and 12x32 cassette.


SRAM should be dead last because they don't make an 18 cog.

Or because they don't make triple shifters which would allow the same range with a more enjoyable 53-39-28x12-13-14-15-16-17-18-19-21-23-26 instead of 50-34x11-12-13-15-17-19-22-25-28-32.


----------



## Argentius (Aug 26, 2004)

*Price competitive?*

Interesting stuff.

In the UK, I might just pick Campagnolo, as well.

In the US, it is a little different,

Using esteemed site sponsor Competitivecyclist.com, a SRAM APEX group is $780, and Rival is $928. 

Shimano 105 is not sold there, but if I recall it costs roughly $900.

Campagnolo Centaur is $1,572...


----------



## Drew Eckhardt (Nov 11, 2009)

Argentius said:


> Interesting stuff.
> 
> In the UK, I might just pick Campagnolo, as well.
> 
> In the US, it is a little different,


Yup. Our prices are even lower because we don't have to pay VAT when we order from the UK.



> Using esteemed site sponsor Competitivecyclist.com, a SRAM APEX group is $780, and Rival is $928. =
> 
> Shimano 105 is not sold there, but if I recall it costs roughly $900.
> 
> Campagnolo Centaur is $1,572...


Using RIbble from which shipping takes only a couple days longer (my last UK shipment from Shiny Bikes did take 4 days to get to the US West coast) Apex is $577, Rival $694, 105 $557, and Centaur alloy $591.

Credit card currency change fees increase those by 3% so the Centaur would be $608, but that's still a $950+ savings over the US price and comparable to what you'd pay for Apex/105.

Shipping prices aren't too different within the US and from the UK to US.


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

Argentius said:


> Interesting stuff.
> 
> In the UK, I might just pick Campagnolo, as well.
> 
> ...


Check that price again. That is for Chorus 11, *NOT* Centaur...


----------



## ultraman6970 (Aug 1, 2010)

Centaur is solid!!! I have a bike with record and another with centaur and centaur is a pretty solid group.


----------

