# Newer Veloce 10s rear derailleur shifting 11 speed



## edjy (Mar 9, 2014)

Folks, FYI while I posted way back that an 11s derailleur shifts 10 speed great with the latest generation 10s levers, I can now confirm after 40 miles...

That the current 10s Veloce derailleur that has the folded over looking outer plate like 11 speed derailleurs, shifts 11 speed perfectly (better in fact than my 2 year old Athena derailleur or my 3 year old Chorus). Not just acceptably but perfectly across the cassette, shifts even if you click up or down before yet pedaling. Of course this is with 11s levers.

So, if you want to save a few bucks on a budget 11s setup, feel free to use a Veloce rear derailleur, regardless of what the upselling Campy site says.

All this makes complete sense as:

Campy advertises the latest 10s derailleurs and previous 10s derailleurs to be compatible with the same latest gen 10s levers.
Latest 10s derailleurs have the narrrower 11s pulley width, as reported right on the campy web site.
C40s old report of old 10s derailleurs needing the cable tweak for 11s to barely work still makes sense given those old 10s derailleurs have the wide pulleys causing the cage to hit the chain late even with the throws being the same.

Having said that, a close comparison between the Athena and Velcoe derailleurs does show most of the Athena derailleur to be finely crafted. I see the following differences:

Newer Athena has an alloy fixing bolt (my Athena is steel being the year before this change)
Athena has hollow pulley screws (nice touch) but Veloce are solid
Athena has the very thick but hollowed out forged cage that looks really beefy and must be stiffest of any Campy cage (perhaps nominally supporting Campy's logic to only promote the best hardware for 11s). In reality it doesn't seem to affect the quickness of Athena shifts. I am sure the Athena cage is stiffer than the thin Record carbon.
I cannot detect any different offset of the cable fixing bolt from the pivots that would result in a different throw/ cable pull.


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

All good stuff.

It's sometimes difficult to keep track of the unannounced running changes that Campy makes, but I suspect that the improvement in shifting with the new Veloce RD my be the result of a stronger spring in the RD's said to have been introduced a couple of years ago.


----------



## aa.mclaren (Jun 25, 2008)

I've only tried 11s shifters on 11s derailleurs, but this shouldn't be surprising. I recall some guy designed a disc to fit into the 10s ultrashift levers (pre-2009) which converted them to 11s, also using the older design 10s derailleurs. It was on some comment thread or another and he'd put his demo/spiel up on YouTube. That said, I prefer the newer lever shape and the oversize cage plates on the new rear mechs seem to be stiffer and lighter than the previous design as well. 

...though I suspect that any apparent 'improvement' in shifting quality with a new install also has a lot to do with using new cables and housing! I am currently retrofitting an old steel race frame with 11s Athena, I suppose I could have saved a few bucks using a 10s Veloce or Centaur rear derailleur, although it's nowhere near the price difference between the upgrades into Chorus and beyond. One thing to be said about Campy, they no longer make cheap rear derailleurs, relative to any other manufacturer.


----------



## headloss (Mar 3, 2013)

Thanks for the update. I still wish I had a pair of 2009-2010 and 2011+ 10 speeds to measure cable pull and eliminate that variable once and for all... but I'm not buying two sets of shifters (on top of the QS Chorus and Athena11 I already own) just for testing purposes.

Either way, good to know what works. Thanks for the detailed post!


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

headloss said:


> Thanks for the update. I still wish I had a pair of 2009-2010 and 2011+ 10 speeds to measure cable pull and eliminate that variable once and for all... but I'm not buying two sets of shifters (on top of the QS Chorus and Athena11 I already own) just for testing purposes.
> 
> Either way, good to know what works. Thanks for the detailed post!


10s shifter cable pull has been the same since early 2003 for both Ergopower and Ultrashifter aka newer design. 11s Ultrashifter cable pull is a bit less 2.6mm/click versus 2.8mm/click of 10s.
HTH.
Thanks OP for sharing your creativity.


----------



## aa.mclaren (Jun 25, 2008)

roadworthy said:


> 10s shifter cable pull has been the same since early 2003 for both Ergopower and Ultrashifter aka newer design. 11s Ultrashifter cable pull is a bit less 2.6mm/click versus 2.8mm/click of 10s.
> HTH.
> Thanks OP for sharing your creativity.


Yes, matching the shifter and cassette is critical, but edjy has found that the derailleurs themselves can all be used either 10 or 11 speeds regardless. 

Here's somebody using an older pre-2009 Veloce derailleur with 11 speed Record shifters: Campagnolo Veloce on 11 Speed shifter - YouTube

Seems to work sort of okay in the bike stand at least.


----------



## headloss (Mar 3, 2013)

roadworthy said:


> 10s shifter cable pull has been the same since early 2003 for both Ergopower and Ultrashifter aka newer design. 11s Ultrashifter cable pull is a bit less 2.6mm/click versus 2.8mm/click of 10s.
> HTH.
> Thanks OP for sharing your creativity.


But the newer style 10sp RD has the same geo as 11sp as per OP? Or is it just the difference in spring tension? I'm just trying to determine what combos we know work for certain vs which don't work. There seems to be a lot of discrepancy across the web (but that could just be poor tuning). Reading through some of the old threads spins my right round baby, right round.


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

headloss said:


> But the newer style 10sp RD has the same geo as 11sp as per OP? Or is it just the difference in spring tension? I'm just trying to determine what combos we know work for certain vs which don't work. There seems to be a lot of discrepancy across the web (but that could just be poor tuning). Reading through some of the old threads spins my right round baby, right round.


Yes it's a puzzle that can be traced back to our old friend C40.

He was the one that decided that the RD geometry had changed. Could he have been wrong?

What RW was saying (except he meant to say 1999 ), was that the cable pull has changed between 10 and 11 (quell surprise!), but that the essential RD geometry has remained unchanged.

So we seem to have a conflict in that regard, between C40 and RW that requires someone hook up an 11-spd shifter to an older, pre 2009 10-spd RD and compare the movement to a new 10-spd RD.


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

bikerjulio said:


> Yes it's a puzzle that can be traced back to our old friend C40.
> 
> He was the one that decided that the RD geometry had changed. Could he have been wrong?
> 
> ...


To take a bit deeper dive. Three things determine shift performance:
1. How much the shifter pulls per each click.
2. How much the rear derailleur traverses per unit length cable pull aka pull 'ratio'. 
3. Spacing between cog centerlines typically referred to as cog pitch.

Edjy posits that the pull 'ratio' of 10s and 11s rear derailleurs is identical. In other words 10 and 11s derailleurs are the same except for paint job and maybe something like jockey wheel thickness or other small attributes. I believe this is quite possible.

So what separates shifting between 10s and 11s?
Items 1 & 3 above. Campy 11s RH shifter pulls 2.6mm per click versus 2.8mm per click for 10s. Cog spacing aka pitch between Campy 10s and 11s is slightly less for 11s of course because cogs are slightly closer together. Pitch is defined as cog spacing from center of cog to center of cog. 
Cassette pitch of Campy 10s is 4.15 versus 3.85 for Campy 11s.

So lets do some quick math comparing cable pull relative to cassette cog pitch presuming derailleurs have identical pull ratio for Campy 10 and 11 speed:
3.85/2.6 = 1.48 
4.15/2.8 = 1.48

So above more or less confirms that the pull ratio of the 10s and 11s rear derailleurs is the same of about 1.5:1 or so.

I have read reports that Campy did tweak the pull ratio of 11s rear derailleur versus 10s by .1, i.e. 11s = 1.5 and 10s = 1.4 but this doesn't comport with the quick math or the OP's findings. Dave aka C40 is a smart guy but he may have been incorrect in this instance, but he is usually right so not sure what to make of it. Suffice to say if the OP got it to work seamlessly...the simple arithmetic seems to confirm that if there was any tweak to pull ratio of Campy 11s rear derailleurs it was fractional and maybe close enough to not matter apparently based upon the OP's findings.

PS: I guess it is the curiosity of gearheads to try different combos. Timely this is being talked about. I want to try DA 9000 shifters on my Campy 10s bike. Talk about a cable pull difference between shifters. DA 9000 pulls only 1.6mm per click and Campy 10 shifters as stated above pull 2.8mm. I have an email into Shiftmate right now to see if they have a set up i.e. combination of pully diameters that will create the desired cable pull accommodating this difference.


----------



## headloss (Mar 3, 2013)

roadworthy said:


> PS: I guess it is the curiosity of gearheads to try different combos. Timely this is being talked about. I want to try DA 9000 shifters on my Campy 10s bike. Talk about a cable pull difference between shifters. DA 9000 pulls only 1.6mm per click and Campy 10 shifters as stated above pull 2.8mm. I have an email into Shiftmate right now to see if they have a set up i.e. combination of pully diameters that will create the desired cable pull accommodating this difference.


That's really what it comes down to. I've personally measured individual pulls on Shimano 8, 9, and 10 (dynasys only) and also Campy 11. I just took C40's word on the individual pulls for the Campy (old) 10. I was just reflecting that I'd love to have a definitive list of cable pulls all measured by the same person, but I can't afford to buy every shifter out there (maybe I need to start borrowing bikes from friends!!!). 

I'm really pleased with how my Athena11 shifter pulls a Shimano9. I've been dropping the chain more frequently though, so I might replace the 105 triple FD with the new Veloce triple FD and see if that helps.

I would prefer to use a ten speed set up on my touring bike and I want to use Campy shifters. Zinn suggests that Campy 10 driving SRAM will work but the net is filled with mixed results which has had me wondering if all 10 speed Campy is, in fact, equal. The apparent disagreement between what edjy reports and what c40 reported has me scratching my head... still thinking that might be the case. Just wish I had the resources to test it once and for all and confidently remove any doubt that their is a different ratio.

Of course, with my current gearing, I could just go 100% Campy on my Trek 520. That won't be the case if I ever decide to replace the 52/42/30 with a mtb 48/36/26. Shimergo definitely has its place, especially since Campy isn't concerned with the mtb market (or gearing). It sorta sucks that I have a preference for Campy Ergos...


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

headloss said:


> That's really what it comes down to. I've personally measured individual pulls on Shimano 8, 9, and 10 (dynasys only) and also Campy 11. I just took C40's word on the individual pulls for the Campy (old) 10. I was just reflecting that I'd love to have a definitive list of cable pulls all measured by the same person, but I can't afford to buy every shifter out there (maybe I need to start borrowing bikes from friends!!!).
> 
> I'm really pleased with how my Athena11 shifter pulls a Shimano9. I've been dropping the chain more frequently though, so I might replace the 105 triple FD with the new Veloce triple FD and see if that helps.
> 
> ...


Only other thing to add is I have run older aka 2005 10s Chorus rear derailleur with late model Utrashift 10s and it shifted perfectly. I personally don't think 10s rear derailleurs have changed in pull ratio...they have in plate width and possibly even spring rate however.
But again not sure if 11s and 10s rear derailleurs are identical in pull rate. But if they aren't they are very close and why the OP had the success he had.

This is nice resource if you haven't seen it:
Bicycles/Maintenance and Repair/Gear-changing Dimensions - Wikibooks, open books for an open world


----------



## headloss (Mar 3, 2013)

roadworthy said:


> This is nice resource if you haven't seen it:
> Bicycles/Maintenance and Repair/Gear-changing Dimensions - Wikibooks, open books for an open world


Yep! I've even contributed to it! Great page!


----------



## edjy (Mar 9, 2014)

*Just to clarify....*

I didn't change any cables when I put the 10s newer Veloce on my 2 year old 11s Athena bike. I did clean and grease the housing loop near the dropout.

I don't mean to argue that new Veloce is really better shifting than new anything 11s. I just wanted to make the point that there was nothing at all marginal about how the performance of the mix, convincing me beyond any doubt that there is no difference in the throw for a given cable pull in mm between 11s and 10s.

Also, the right on the Campy site they indicate that the newer 10s has the narrower 11s pulleys, but that just means to me that the newer 10s may shift a bit quicker without any different throw. lt is also interesting that the same 10s chain made the leap somehow to the narrower pulleys. Maybe the old 10s pulley width was sized by that old early 10s thick noisy chain. Otherwise I wonder why they didn't make the original 10s pulleys narrow for better shifting from the start.

Now I just need to get my new 10s veloce derailleur back on the 10s bike it was intended for. Just could not resist the temptation to check.




headloss said:


> Yep! I've even contributed to it! Great page!


----------



## cs1 (Sep 16, 2003)

Crazy question but here goes. I'm upgrading from a Veloce 9 sp triple to 10 sp. The only part I plan on keeping is the crankset. Would it make sense to just go 11? Has anyone ever done the swap on the old 9 sp chainrings? The new triple cranks, even Veloce, are not at all inexpensive.


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

cs1 said:


> Crazy question but here goes. I'm upgrading from a Veloce 9 sp triple to 10 sp. The only part I plan on keeping is the crankset. Would it make sense to just go 11? Has anyone ever done the swap on the old 9 sp chainrings? The new triple cranks, even Veloce, are not at all inexpensive.


I think it comes down to personal opinion or preference really. If you keep a triple in front...btw I am a fan of triples for mountain riding....then this takes some of the benefit away of 11s for another cog in back. True benefit of 11s versus 10s is tighter cog spacing for the same diversity of gearing. A triple keeps gear spacing nice and close together. So I believe you would be happy with 10s. 10s Campy tends to be a bit cheaper...cassettes in particular.
But there are other considerations as well, like multiple gear changes that are specific to Chorus level 11s only unless you have older 10s Centaur 10s shifters.

So we each have a different opinion on what is best based upon our strength and riding conditions.

I will say further, if you are considering a groupset change, consider changing your crank and going 11s X 2 chainrings in front. A compact with slightly larger small ring with a wide cassette in back is a great set up and will get you up most hills just fine. But if you climb a lot of steep stuff...and long steep stuff, few setups rival a triple for not only gear spacing but climbing and descending gear inches.

If you want good prices on Campy stuff, consider buying out of the UK.
Good luck


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

Some other issues to consider:

Whether or not the chainring spacing is going to work with both the chain and a modern left shifter on and old 9-spd triple. I don't know enough to answer.

The current triple shifters, ie Athena and Centaur, are the powershift types, so the fine adjustments are not there like they used to be.

Consider RW's suggestion of compact if your riding terrain allows. Bear in mind that Campy now offer 29T big sprockets, so a setup with 34-29 as the low gear is possible.

Since Ribble's mix and match pricing is the same as their group pricing, it makes sense to buy a mix of components like Chorus shifters, and Athena for the rest, or even some Veloce as this thread discusses.

If you really need a triple, then I'd be inclined to think you would much better off buying the complete matching setup of crankset, chain, FD and shifter. There have been a lot of little changes since the days of 9-speed.


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

OP,
As bikerjulio wrote, the big game changer for modern 2 chainring set ups with a lot of cogs in back, is the new more popular 28-32...(32 for Shimano) large cogs. This in combination with a 2 chainring compact in front is close to gearing of granny triple ring with smaller larger cog. More cogs in back makes a large cassette more rideable because spacing is closer together versus say 8-9 speed cassettes from yesterday.

I in fact ride on my Campy bike 50-38 with 29-13 because I live in flat country but 38-29 gets me up the little steep stuff I have. Easy to change cassette based upon where you ride...in my case both...paste on a 34t ring and a different cassette if I need it.

Gearing is largely personal really but the bigger cassettes with more cogs in back are more double crankset friendly then ever before.




bikerjulio said:


> Some other issues to consider:
> 
> Whether or not the chainring spacing is going to work with both the chain and a modern left shifter on and old 9-spd triple. I don't know enough to answer.
> 
> ...


----------



## DuviVr6 (Feb 9, 2012)

Bringing this back from the dead.

Any one know if there is any difference in the front derailleurs? Athena vs Veloce.


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

DuviVr6 said:


> Bringing this back from the dead.
> 
> Any one know if there is any difference in the front derailleurs? Athena vs Veloce.


I don't have both to measure, but to answer indirectly I can say that a 10-spd FD works just fine on an 11-spd setup. I have a Chorus 11 and Athena 11 on different bikes, both with 10-spd FD's. Work great.


----------



## DuviVr6 (Feb 9, 2012)

Sweet that's what I needed. Have a set of newer Veloce derailleurs and wanted to run Athena shifters.


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

Well, because I was practically forced into it over on another forum, I got around to installing an older Centaur 10-spd RD on my Chorus 11 bike. My conclusion is that the ratios are identical, and that the Centaur will index with the big and small cogs perfectly, and all steps in between.

Here's the condensed version of those posts.

Test mule has Chorus shifters, 12-29 cassette, 52/36 rings, KMC chain. Neutron Ultra wheels.

Centaur RD came off a 10-spd bike with Campy hubs.

Hanger alignment was checked and was spot on.

Installed, and had it shifting perfectly on the stand after a couple of minutes. Only adjustment was to the inner stop as the 11 speed big cog is a little closer to the wheel that on the 10 speed bike that the RD was borrowed from. Obviously, if one forgot to adjust the inner stop, the RD wouldn't travel enough.

Shifts perfectly and quietly across the cassette on both the small and big ring.

Checked travel without chain which I should have done first. Stops out. Upper pulley indexed perfectly to the 12 and 29 T cogs.

I can only think that Campy marketing use of the phrase "Parallelogram with 11s geometry" in relation to it's RD's was deliberately intended to make us believe there had been a ratio change, to lure us into buying 11-speed RD's. It worked with me for one.


----------



## headloss (Mar 3, 2013)

thanks for the update! (can't give rep)


----------



## DrSmile (Jul 22, 2006)

If it helps that Centaur is just a rebadged Chorus one from prior years... So technically your components still match!


----------



## CheapSkate (Feb 26, 2012)

*RD springs*



bikerjulio said:


> All good stuff.
> 
> It's sometimes difficult to keep track of the unannounced running changes that Campy makes, but I suspect that the improvement in shifting with the new Veloce RD my be the result of a stronger spring in the RD's said to have been introduced a couple of years ago.


If it's of any interest, I have always used the "old style" Centaur RDs with the narrow parallelogram [from the early 2000s up to around 2010 (?)]. But I have now also got a mid-cage "wraparound" parallelogram Veloce as well, not sure if it's 2014 or 2015 model year.

1. Indexing is identical to the "old style" RDs. 

2. With the H-screw backed out it does lift a little higher than the "old style" RD. My "old style" RD will clear a 29t cog OK, the "wraparound" could take a few more teeth. It doesn't actually shift any better with a 29t, the "old style" shifts just fine, even with a compact chainset.

3. It has 10 tooth wheels, the same wheels as my "old style" Centaurs.

4. It has a _substantially_ stronger parallelogram spring - the spring which pulls cable through when you shift with the thumb button.

Last item might explain why I could never pass the Campag "1 kg lift test"??? My old style RDs, aged from about 2002 up to 2010 or so, will only pull about 0.6 kg. I haven't tested my "wraparound" RD but I bet it pulls 1 kg - so its spring might be nearly twice as strong??

I remember Velotech saying that some frames with internal routing had problems with cable friction, maybe the stronger spring is to solve that problem??

I can feel the difference when shifting - it takes significantly more effort on the finger paddle to make a shift. I don't like it, but it's purely personal preference. On the other hand, my winter bike frame has poor cable routing and it's always been marginal for shift quality, the "wraparound" RD does seem to take away the marginality.

Cheers now


----------

