# Question on Ergo shift cable routing..



## Wildstar87 (Apr 5, 2005)

So I helped a friend build up a new bike with Record 10, and it is very nice. I use Shimano myself so wasn't as familiar with the shift cable routing, so I noticed straight off what I think is an issue. 

I am not flaming Campy here, I am just curious about the design choice they made. The shifter cables go in the bottom of the shifter, then straight up through the hood body. So the cable in essence is sticking straight up. Then you have the cable housing inserted into the hole where the cable comes out, and then BENT 90 degrees, which puts a lot of friction/binding into the cable housing. I understand that a lot of people like the cable routed underneath the bar tape, I have no qualms about that.

What I don't understand is why they didn't put in like a 90 degree radius, like a small trof, or metal tube to route the cable through, and then have the cable go in horizontally at the end, like how the brake cables are routed into the hood. It would be a much smoother cable pull, and wouldn't put the kink in the housing it does now, and you wouldn't have to bend the cable down so much to get it smooth under the bar tape. It seems that it has been this way since 1st generation Ergo.

With the tolerance on the 10 speed being so tight, it seems that this would be an obvious good design change. 

Any thoughts?


----------



## Number9 (Nov 28, 2004)

Wildstar87 said:


> The shifter cables go in the bottom of the shifter, then straight up through the hood body. So the cable in essence is sticking straight up. Then you have the cable housing inserted into the hole where the cable comes out, and then BENT 90 degrees, which puts a lot of friction/binding into the cable housing.


On mine (4 distinct campy record gruppos), the shifter cables route to the side of the (under) hood body into a conforming slot and there is no problem with excess friction/binding - indeed, shifting is quick and precise. So the last clause of the cited remarks is pragmatically wrong (i.e., the magnitude of the "friction/binding" is such that it is of no practical consequence). Within the "brifter" body, the gear shift cable is routed into a partial loop not unlike the case in an old school downtube shifter - neither of which causes excessive friction/binding or poor shifting. Did you perhaps route the cables incorrectly?


----------



## C-40 (Feb 4, 2004)

*two routings...*

The shift cables can be routed either of two ways. The method that routes the cable around the back of the bar does not require as much of a bend in the housing as it exits the ergo lever body, but some folks find this routing places the cable housing in an uncomfortable position.

Allegedly, it was Miguel Indurain who complained about the cable routing, which led to the optional routing over the top of the bar and along the front. I've used this optional routing for most of the 10 years that I've been using Campy. I also route the right cable housing to the left side cable stop on the frame and the left side to the right cable stop, crossing the cables under the down tube. This routing totally eliminates the chance of the cable housing rubbing on the head tube, but doesn't work on all frames, depending on the location of the framed mounted cable stops.

See page 19 of the PDF instructions.

http://www.campagnolo.com/pdf/ERGOPOWER.pdf


----------



## Wildstar87 (Apr 5, 2005)

Yes, I know that there were two ways to route the cable, one that makes it go around the back of the bar, and the other that makes it go around to the front of the bar, along with the brake cable. 

The bend I am referring to is just right before you make that decision, where the housing is inserted into the top of the hood. Whether you go left or right, you still have to bend the housing down 90 degrees to fit into either groove.

The shifting on my friends bike works fine, its just the tolerance seems really tight. When putting the shift cable through that bend, it just had a lot of friction. Maybe they just build that into the system, and I am not saying that it doesn't work, I just think with a small change that it could work that much better. Its along the same thinking of making sure you don't make your cable loop that goes to the derailleur too short, otherwise you put unecessary friction into the system by kinking the cable, you want a smooth radius.

If the cable could come up, and bend through a smooth 90 degree radius, then the cable housing is inserted horizontally, where you decide whether to go left or right, it seems to me that it would be much smoother, and not as much friction on the cable. Especially if you made the 90 degree radius out of metal, or maybe hard teflon surface, something slick for the cable to slide on.

I don't expect Campy to change this just because I think it could be better this way, but I am sort of surprised no one else had this comment before, just coming from a mechanical viewpoint.


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

I agree. It'd be an improvement if they used some sort of bushing to route a 90 deg. bend, instead of a cable kink. The current method works well enough however.


----------

