# Dumb Campagnolo ideas



## RussellS (Feb 1, 2010)

My list of dumb engineering things Campagnolo has done.

1. 135mm bcd for standard cranks. Campagnolo invented this spacing in the mid 1980s I think. Up till then they were 144mm bcd. Why couldn't they just use 130mm bcd like Shimano had been using for Dura Ace since the early 1970s. Why invent a new standard? Finding replacement rings for Campagnolo cranks is harder than it needs to be due to the 135mm bcd. Everyone else uses 130mm bcd. And you can put down to a 38 tooth ring on the 130mm bcd crank.

2. 110/112mm bcd for compact cranks. Four bolts are 110mm bcd. But the one on the back of the crankarm is 112mm bcd. Why? I think only TA and Stronglight make replacement rings to fit this oddball spacing. All normal 110mm bcd rings don't fit the Campagnolo spacing. Why create a new compact standard?

3. Different freehub body spline pattern. Not the same as Shimano/SRAM. So you cannot put the other's cassette onto each other's wheels. You have to have different wheels if you have both Campagnolo and Shimano bikes. I know some wheel companies now offer interchangeable freehub bodies so you can switch. But for those of us who prefer to use only high quality Campagnolo or high quality Shimano hubs, there is no switching.

4. Different cog spacing from Shimano/SRAM. 10, 9, 8, 7. Campagnolo has different cog spacing than Shimano. So you cannot shift a 10 speed Shimano cassette with Ergo. Or a 10 speed Campagnolo cassette with STI. Why? There is nothing magical about the cog to cog spacing for Campagnolo. They changed it every time they went from 7 to 8 to 9 to 10 to 11. So obviously the rear derailleur and Ergo can handle whatever is needed. Why not make it identical to Shimano? Then you could use whatever shifter you have on whatever wheels you have.


----------



## fast ferd (Jan 30, 2009)

Hmmm...I thought they went to 135 bcd before Shimano. But what do I know.

I never liked the downshift lever on ergo. Nor the brake quick release on the lever. Both seem a tad tacky.

Their strategy was likely to make their products unique and proprietary, so as to force you to buy from them. They're like the Apple computer of cycling components.


----------



## David Loving (Jun 13, 2008)

Campagnolo just wanted to keep its customers in the fold, and also maybe thought some of the designs performed better. I am of the school that holds Campagnolo does not do any dumb engineering. That said, I am riding my square taper cranks until they wear out. Campagnolo engineering being what it is, they won't wear out.


----------



## Mapei (Feb 3, 2004)

All your gripes involve incompatibility with Shimano (and now SRAM), not with anything inherent with Campagnolo ideas in terms of performance. Why not just reverse the argument? Why not lay into Shimano for not standardizing itself to Campy?


----------



## ericjacobsen3 (Apr 27, 2007)

RussellS said:


> My list of dumb engineering things Campagnolo has done.
> 
> 1. 135mm bcd for standard cranks. Campagnolo invented this spacing in the mid 1980s I think. Up till then they were 144mm bcd. Why couldn't they just use 130mm bcd like Shimano had been using for Dura Ace since the early 1970s. Why invent a new standard? Finding replacement rings for Campagnolo cranks is harder than it needs to be due to the 135mm bcd. Everyone else uses 130mm bcd. And you can put down to a 38 tooth ring on the 130mm bcd crank.
> PURELY CAMPY WANTING TO ASSERT THEIR DIFFERENTNESS. SHIMANO BCD DATES TO MID-'70'S
> ...


CAMPY CAN ARGUABLY CLAIM THEY WERE FIRST W/ 9 & 10 SPD, SO SHIMANO IS THE ONE THAT FAILED TO FOLLOW THE LEAD STANDARD (THOUGH AT SOME POINT THEY WOULD HAVE HAD TO MOVE SPOKES ON 9, 10 SP, WHICH WOULD HAVE LOST THEIR BACK COMPATIBILITY TO 8SP.


----------



## David Loving (Jun 13, 2008)

Campagnolo is the standard that others try (in vain, imo) to meet. Using Campagnolo parts with other manufacturers' parts just does not compute. Frankly the only sensible use of Campagnolo gear is with other Campagnolo parts. Riding with full Campagnolo results in a quiet geartrain, sharp, accurate shifts, smooth power transfer, and a quality experience. The best and most elegant cycling. The idea of using brand X with any Campagnolo set-up is nonsense. If one is mixing groups and pulling parts out of a grab-bag using just whatever you find on the shop floor, don't use Campagnolo equipment, stick with the brand Xs of cycling. They mix and match, but then one misses out on the best cycling experience on the planet.


----------



## Drew Eckhardt (Nov 11, 2009)

I'm much more annoyed by small parts getting discontinued.

You have components that would last a lifetime but required parts which wear out discontinued in 15 years, like pre-1998 ergopower lever return springs, right shifter G-spring carriers, and 8 speed cassettes with an 18 cog.

You can't even buy replacement freehub bodies for 12 year old first generation 9 speed hubs and good luck even finding one for the original old over-sized axle design used 1999-2006.

Campagnolo nearly pulled a Shimano with the current generation shift levers, requiring $100 sub-assembly replacement when anything wears out or gets crashed.


----------



## 19surf74 (Feb 1, 2009)

fast ferd said:


> Hmmm...I thought they went to 135 bcd before Shimano. But what do I know.
> 
> I never liked the downshift lever on ergo. Nor the brake quick release on the lever. Both seem a tad tacky.
> 
> Their strategy was likely to make their products unique and proprietary, so as to force you to buy from them. They're like the Apple computer of cycling components.



And since they are the Apple computer of cycling, I will continue to buy them. My Mac has been running strong for a year now, without any viruses. Can't say that for the last HP, Dell, etc..... that I had! Campy all the way!


----------



## RussellS (Feb 1, 2010)

Mapei said:


> All your gripes involve incompatibility with Shimano (and now SRAM), not with anything inherent with Campagnolo ideas in terms of performance. Why not just reverse the argument? Why not lay into Shimano for not standardizing itself to Campy?


Campagnolo invented its 135mm bcd crank standard in the early 1980s. They were 144mm bcd up until then. Only a 42 could fit on 144mm bcd. 10 years after Shimano came out with its 130mm bcd standard for Dura Ace in the early 1970s. 130mm bcd allowed down to a 38, although everyone ran 39 tooth. So what did Campagnolo do? Invent a new standard, 135mm, that allowed a 39, just like all the Shimano people used, but not allow a 38 ring. They were copying Shimano at that point, to get to the 39 ring, but did not want to copy Shimano completely. Thus goofy 135mm bcd instead of 130mm bcd.

And after the compact crankset rage took hold, what did Campagnolo do? Invent a new standard of four bolts at 110mm bcd, and one at 112mm bcd. Shimano or someone else created the 110mm bcd crankset long before Campagnolo got hold of it. But Campagnolo could not just make a regular 110mm bcd crankset.

In the above two examples Campagnolo was the follower. There was already a well accepted standard established. Campagnolo chose not to follow the standard.


----------



## SEK82089 (Dec 19, 2004)

Why should the big 3 companies make everything the same. Can you use Ferrari parts on a Honda? 

Your title says it all. These are dumb ideas you have a problem with. Some of them aren't even problems. I have never run into issues with finding replacement chain rings or really gave any thought to the standards. I have never seen a Campagnolo spline chewed up by a cassette. Seems like a design flaw to me. And I've even temp installed Shimano wheel/ cassette combo on a Campy equipped bike with minimal chatter and alright shifting. So whats the big deal?

Oh and from what I know Shimano copied FSA when it came to compact cranks and real didn't offer much of a choice in compact until recently. Sram just copied Shimano to align it self and take away from the larger market share that Shimano has over Campy.


----------



## LePatron (Jan 5, 2011)

Campagnolo's freehub design in particular is far superior to that used by Shimano and SRAM as it provides greater tangental surface area. SRAM's herd mentality in going with the Shimano profile is about as dumb as you can get.


----------



## malanb (Oct 26, 2009)

non sense post. shimana sram bla bla bla. why shimano doesnt make campagnolo comptible components, stick with your shimano I ll stick with my campagnolo, No problem changing wheels, I only use campagnolo. I find it superior than shimano, with a nicer design. Shimano is ugly


----------



## bigbill (Feb 15, 2005)

LePatron said:


> Campagnolo's freehub design in particular is far superior to that used by Shimano and SRAM as it provides greater tangental surface area. SRAM's herd mentality in going with the Shimano profile is about as dumb as you can get.


SRAM is dumb like a fox. They have taken a big chunk out of Shimano's OEM market share. With most bikes produced in Asia, it's cost effective to equip them with Asian parts. SRAM offers an alternative. 

All my bikes are Campy. Campy Record 9 on my commuter, Chorus 11 on my road bike, and I have a Record 11 group ready to go on my new custom steel when I receive it later this month. Campy levers fit my hand.


----------



## SEK82089 (Dec 19, 2004)

LePatron said:


> Campagnolo's freehub design in particular is far superior to that used by Shimano and SRAM as it provides greater tangental surface area. SRAM's herd mentality in going with the Shimano profile is about as dumb as you can get.


Yes, I reading it now, I just sound dumb. What I believe to be correct is that Sram, with its existing components, made the logical decision to align its road group with the current Shimano standards. After all their mountain group and the road components they produced before they released their road group were/ are Shimano compatible.

This is a war that will go on for ever. Even if all groups were compatible the discussion would be about witch one provides the best this and the lightest that.


----------



## orange_julius (Jan 24, 2003)

Drew Eckhardt said:


> I'm much more annoyed by small parts getting discontinued.
> 
> You have components that would last a lifetime but required parts which wear out discontinued in 15 years, like pre-1998 ergopower lever return springs, right shifter G-spring carriers, and 8 speed cassettes with an 18 cog.
> 
> ...


+1. 

I agree strongly with what you said. The happiest time as a Campag user, to me, was in the 10sp era (excepting the Escape mechanism). Or maybe when they started coming out with the early-generation Ultra-Torque. I really like this system. 

At that time, I felt that I had great performance, great price point even from US vendors, and a lot of re-build-ability. Oh, and no need for an expensive special chain tool. Not only was riding fun, the ownership experience was really great. 

Time will tell how things will be with the 11sp stuff and their expensive parts. I'd love to hear from a company who has been Campagn-centric for a long time, like Branford or AEBike, what their thoughts are on this issue.


----------



## RussellS (Feb 1, 2010)

SEK82089 said:


> Why should the big 3 companies make everything the same. Can you use Ferrari parts on a Honda?


Michelin, Continental, Veloflex, Vittoria, Panaracer, Schwalbe, etc. all make 700C tires. You can use these on any 700C wheel. Amazingly chains are interchangeable. Campagnolo even had to invent its own shifter cable head. Its shifter cables have a smaller head than Shimano. So you have to special order shifter cables for Campagnolo. You cannot just walk into your local bike shop and buy a cable that will fit. I ordered 10 or so shifter cables from one of the after market cable makers that makes a Campagnolo specific cable. So I am set. But why should it be so difficult to just get a new shift cable for your bike? What was Campagnolo's purpose in making the shifter cable head a tiny bit smaller than Shimano so the cables are not interchangeable?


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

Ride shimaNosram and stop bithcin'.


----------



## malanb (Oct 26, 2009)

I have shimano cables on my campag 10.


----------



## fast ferd (Jan 30, 2009)

*Might take a bigger chunk from Campy*



bigbill said:


> SRAM is dumb like a fox. They have taken a big chunk out of Shimano's OEM market share. With most bikes produced in Asia, it's cost effective to equip them with Asian parts. SRAM offers an alternative.
> 
> All my bikes are Campy. Campy Record 9 on my commuter, Chorus 11 on my road bike, and I have a Record 11 group ready to go on my new custom steel when I receive it later this month. Campy levers fit my hand.


You're fooling yourself if you think SRAM takes market share solely from Shimano. The compatibility between mfrs could further strengthen their share. Gives the gruppo buying public yet another reason to shy away from Campy uniqueness.


----------



## bigbill (Feb 15, 2005)

fast ferd said:


> You're fooling yourself if you think SRAM takes market share solely from Shimano. The compatibility between mfrs could further strengthen their share. Gives the gruppo buying public yet another reason to shy away from Campy uniqueness.


If you go to your LBS and check out the bikes in stock and what components they have you'll see that SRAM has taken part of Shimano's share. That's where SRAM and Shimano make their money. For every Red or DA groupo sold, hundreds of Rival, 105, Tiagra, etc groups are installed on Asian produced bikes before they get sent to the US. Campy OEM bikes are pretty much unheard of in bike shops. The bike enthusiast that buys a groupo to build up a bike is probably looking at higher end groups regardless of make. Campy guys buy more campy stuff, shimano guys are tempted by SRAM since they can use the same wheels.


----------



## Cruisinscoot (Feb 21, 2010)

Sacrilegious :lol:


----------



## RussellS (Feb 1, 2010)

malanb said:


> I have shimano cables on my campag 10.


You're going to have a fun time trying to get the cable head out of the shifter. Best of luck. That is the funny part. The bigger Shimano head goes into the Ergo body. But it does not come out.


----------



## rhauft (Aug 8, 2006)

Race bike = SR11
Training bike = R11
Vintage bike = SR
Vintage bike 2 = C Record (2nd gen)
Vintage bike 3 = R10 (1st gen)
.
.
.
Rain bike = SRAM


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

RussellS said:


> Michelin, Continental, Veloflex, Vittoria, Panaracer, Schwalbe, etc. all make 700C tires. You can use these on any 700C wheel. Amazingly chains are interchangeable. Campagnolo even had to invent its own shifter cable head. Its shifter cables have a smaller head than Shimano. So you have to special order shifter cables for Campagnolo. You cannot just walk into your local bike shop and buy a cable that will fit. I ordered 10 or so shifter cables from one of the after market cable makers that makes a Campagnolo specific cable. So I am set. But why should it be so difficult to just get a new shift cable for your bike? What was Campagnolo's purpose in making the shifter cable head a tiny bit smaller than Shimano so the cables are not interchangeable?


1. Amazingly enough, car tires are also interchangeable.

2. Amazingly, wiper blades are interchangeable, as long as they're the right length. Ditto for drive belts.

3. Try putting Ford cylinder heads on a Chevy engine, though. Or VW Passat pistons in a Nissan 350Z.

4. SRAM cables seem to work fine in Campy shifters. I haven't had any trouble with mine, as far as removing them.

These aren't dumb Campagnolo ideas, these are dumb customer expectations/wants.


----------



## Topher (Jun 5, 2005)

"Nor the brake quick release on the lever." 

This is one of the best things about campy... and much more user friendly than the shimano design. The ability to pop the brake open while riding if wheels come slightly out of true is valuable, it eliminates the risk of accidentally leaving your brake open after you put your wheels on, and the brakes look much cleaner than the shimano design.


----------



## Drew Eckhardt (Nov 11, 2009)

Topher said:


> "Nor the brake quick release on the lever."
> 
> This is one of the best things about campy... and much more user friendly than the shimano design. The ability to pop the brake open while riding if wheels come slightly out of true is valuable, it eliminates the risk of accidentally leaving your brake open after you put your wheels on, and the brakes look much cleaner than the shimano design.


Right.

My usual front wheel was off-line so I could replace the bent rim, I was riding along on a spare front wheel some one else built, hit a rock, bounced sideways, and found the brake hitting once a revolution.

Hit the brake quick release without moving my hands off the brake hoods, that stopped it, and I finished my ride.

Turns out I broke a spoke.


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

Drew Eckhardt said:


> Right.
> 
> My usual front wheel was off-line so I could replace the bent rim, I was riding along on a spare front wheel some one else built, hit a rock, bounced sideways, and found the brake hitting once a revolution.
> 
> ...


Exactly.
Since Campagnolo is designed (primarily) for racing, it was determined that this was the best set-up. I tend to agree. If you break a spoke or whatever in a race, you can pop open your brake from the lever and not have to risk having your fingers littering the course after you reached back to open the Shimano brake, missed, and stuck your hand in the spokes.

That was the whole reason for that type of brake release.


----------



## RussellS (Feb 1, 2010)

PlatyPius said:


> 2. Amazingly, wiper blades are interchangeable, as long as they're the right length. Ditto for drive belts.
> 
> These aren't dumb Campagnolo ideas, these are dumb customer expectations/wants.


Wiper blades are not too interchangeable. You have narrow and standard width blades. Japanese cars used the narrow. PIAA makes blades that require their holders. I'm sure there are other exceptions too. You apparently have not changed blades on many cars.

So you think it was a smart idea of Campagnolo to put four bolts at 110mm bcd and one bolt at 112mm bcd on its compact cranks.


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

PlatyPius said:


> Exactly.
> Since Campagnolo is designed (primarily) for racing, it was determined that this was the best set-up. I tend to agree. If you break a spoke or whatever in a race, you can pop open your brake from the lever and not have to risk having your fingers littering the course after you reached back to open the Shimano brake, missed, and stuck your hand in the spokes.
> 
> That was the whole reason for that type of brake release.


Another benefit: The Campagnolo design does not make the brake cable longer, so the braking efficiency is not reduced when you open the QR.


----------



## Kai Winters (Aug 23, 2009)

Why try to be second best???


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

RussellS said:


> Wiper blades are not too interchangeable. You have narrow and standard width blades. Japanese cars used the narrow. PIAA makes blades that require their holders. I'm sure there are other exceptions too. * You apparently have not changed blades on many cars.*
> 
> So you think it was a smart idea of Campagnolo to put four bolts at 110mm bcd and one bolt at 112mm bcd on its compact cranks.


Well, us auto mechanics usually let the service writer or service manager put those on. Wiper blades aren't something a real mechanic should deal with.

You point, however, is moot. I said wiper BLADES; not wiper REFILLS. The car doesn't care what width, colour, style of blade you put on it, as long as it's the right length.

I just think it was Campy's idea. I don't know if it was smart or not. Does it require people to buy Campy chainrings? Yes? Then yeah...it's probably a smart idea.


----------



## malanb (Oct 26, 2009)

hahahah you are bit obsesive with campagnolo. They do come out. Still dont see what is your problem, just buy campagnolo cables. or just shove a group up your culo


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

PlatyPius said:


> I just think it was Campy's idea. I don't know if it was smart or not. Does it require people to buy Campy chainrings? Yes? Then yeah...it's probably a smart idea.


Campagnolo claim to be the first company to market complete groupsets, and it seems to me that this is still important to them, alas the proprietary chainring bolt patterns. Anybody remember the special tools needed for the classic Super Record? No standard socket wrenches would fit, for example.
Must admit that I had qualms about going for an non-Campagnolo wheelset with DT Swiss hubs just recently... 

BTW: Those Fulcrum cranks, do they come with Campagnolo bolt patterns or more "universal" ones?


----------



## chas0039 (Jun 26, 2007)

I have built up 4 of my bikes with Campy in the last 5 years so I was able to stock up a bit for back up parts before Escape took over and trashed the repairability of affordable Campy shifters. Even with Campy's specifics for fit, the only thing I have had trouble finding was more basic wheels. FSA phased them out and I had to go to GB for Miche and Fulcrum. Even then, I couldn't get the spoke count I wanted. Otherwise, cassettes, chains, front gears, shifters; all these were available at decent prices. Especially on Ebay. 

The people I feel for are those who start looking at Campy today. When I first became interested, Campy had a reputation for serviceable shifters and a product series that did not relegate quality only to the upper levels. Sadly, that is no longer the case with their shifters, although the quality seems to still be there from Veloce on up with other parts.


----------



## C-40 (Feb 4, 2004)

*well...*

The majority of Campy cranks have one bolt that goes into the back of the crankarm, so just changing the BCD would not make the chainrings compatible with other brands. That one hole is still made differently, so it can be bolted from the back side.

Campy splines are deeper and far superior to the flawed Shimano design. Campy cassette bodies can be made of aluminum and not be damaged. Campy made that change in 2000. Shimano tried to do that with the 7800 hubs in 2007 (IIRC), then backpedaled two years later, with the 7850, changing back to the shallow splines, made of Ti. Both hubs are heavier and more expensive than a Record hub.

Campy came out with 10 speed four years ahead of Shimano, so it's Shimao who should have matched Campy, not the other way around.

The larger 10 speed spacing allowed for thicker cogs that should last longer. The new 11 speed cogs are the same thickness as Shimano 10.


----------



## FrenchNago (Jan 1, 2011)

*I hate Shimanonono*



malanb said:


> I have shimano cables on my campag 10.


I did too thanks to a f*$##g bike mech at some LBS (unknown to me at the time because I bought the C40 off a friend who failed to mention that detail)........I spent the better part of an afternoon getting those back *gently* out from the shifter and brake heads when wanted to go back to full new Campag cables (that are miles ahead of Shim by the way check out the build of the cable end caps and you'll understand......)

If you want do yourself a favor pull the Shimanonono out as fast as possible and go back to Campy


----------



## malanb (Oct 26, 2009)

those are on my second bike and at the moment I had no more cables in my possesion. Unfortunately I'm living in a semi-communist, country right now. I have to bring all my stuff form other countries, specially US where we got a house and I send all my stuff there and wait for someone to bring them, every time I travel or my family travels. But I had no problems taking them out. I leave them there Im changing to 11 speed anyways. I have 11 speed cables in Stock


----------



## imitsus (Aug 16, 2010)

Mapei said:


> All your gripes involve incompatibility with Shimano (and now SRAM), not with anything inherent with Campagnolo ideas in terms of performance. Why not just reverse the argument? *Why not lay into Shimano for not standardizing itself to Campy?*


 ......


----------



## flatlander_48 (Nov 16, 2005)

fast ferd said:


> You're fooling yourself if you think SRAM takes market share solely from Shimano. The compatibility between mfrs could further strengthen their share. Gives the gruppo buying public *yet another reason to shy away from Campy uniqueness*.


While many others are drawn to it...

Some people buy Chevys, Hondas and Toyotas. Others buy Audis, Mazdas and MINIs...


----------

