# Look 695 and campy compact Input needed please



## goud (Jul 30, 2007)

I am looking for some input please.

I purchased a LOOK 695 in the spring, while I love the ride it has been problematic. Not to go into everything but my biggest issue is that I put Campy SR compact and never could get the shifting right. 

Long story but I am now in possession of a brand new 695 with LOOK chainrings and its is perfect, smooth and clean shifting, a dream. My problem is it is a Super Ridgid, and I am not a racer, I find the ride to be very stiff and unforgiving, which to be fair is exactly what the SR is suppose to be, no flex and 100% power transfer.

I now have to make a decision;
Keep the SR 
Trade the SR for standard frame 
get my money back and try again next year 

My concern is once again the SR versus standard frame and the Campy compact. I have had such a bad personal experience with Campy compact on this frame that I am worried that if I go back to the standard frame I will go back to having issues. I have heard all sorts of comments about the 695 and Campy compact. I have heard LOOK agreed there was a problem, then that LOOK says there is not a problem, then I heard that LOOK redesigned the front derailer hanger as this was the problem, then that the Campy front derailer hanger is weak and you need to use Shimano hardware, etc etc. 

All I know is this SR I have now is perfect but too stiff, I want the standard but I want it to be perfect and am afraid a new standard frame won't have an upgraded hanger or simply will be like my first standard....

Should I keep the SR, ouch...
Trade the SR for a new standard and hope it is ok....
Get my money back and try something different next spring....
????
I really want to speak to a LOOK tech who will take a few minutes and walk me through where things are from LOOK's perspective.......


----------



## smankow (Jul 24, 2011)

it's tough to provide any input when you haven't given any insight at to the problems that you have experienced with Campy. In fact, if you're looking to decide on keeping the frame, maybe this would be better posted in the Look forum.

That said, if the frame is too rigid, get one that is better suited to you.


----------



## goud (Jul 30, 2007)

*Thread*



smankow said:


> it's tough to provide any input when you haven't given any insight at to the problems that you have experienced with Campy. In fact, if you're looking to decide on keeping the frame, maybe this would be better posted in the Look forum.
> 
> That said, if the frame is too rigid, get one that is better suited to you.


There is a thread right in this forum titled "Help!!!" that is 4 pages of the issues with Campy SR compact and the LOOK 695. Bottom line, ruff shifts, noise, missed shifts, etc. however in LOOKS defense if you read the manual for the crank on the 695 it clearly states to use LOOK chainrings, I have done this on the SR and it is shifting beautifully! I just am worried that if I ask for the standard frame and I go back to having issues that my opportunity to get my money back may go away. I think I will basically tell Look and my LBS that it is up to them, they can bring in a standard frame and if it is perfect(as it should be on a 10k$ bicycle) then I will keep it but if there are any issues I will want my money back. My guess is that since they are already willing to refund my money they will tell me to take my money now rather than risk further issues with the standard frame.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Other than trying to sell you on a LOOK crankset, I don't see why using the Campy compact crank is causing problems, especially the ones you've indicated.


----------



## Cinelli 82220 (Dec 2, 2010)

The 695 has its own crankset, I think his problems stemmed from not using the Look rings. The spider is unique, both rings attach from the back, so maybe regular/non-Look rings will not work.
I know a guy on a 695 with Dura Ace and compact Look rings, it works flawlessly.
The derailleur hanger was changed from carbon to steel, but not redesigned.


----------



## Chris Keller (May 19, 2008)

The problem is NOT the rings! The problem is that the Look crankset has not been manufactured to the correct chainline... Shimano and Campagnolo require a chainline of approx. 43.5 mm. Sram requires a 44.5 mm chaninline. The chainline measurement on the 695s I have seen (only in the U.S.) is approx. 48-50mm!!! The Look rings do "assist" with shifting due to severe ramping and pinning. There is a re-designed front hanger that is thicker and much stiffer than the original...that helps with shifting too. 

If the chainline were correct, there would be NO issues with shifting and you could use any 110 or 130 bcd chainrings on the market. 

I currently have my chainrings shimmed to the correct chainline and ...lo and behold...shifting is great. I am waiting for Look to correct this very obvious flaw in their design. I do not see how they could have designed a crankset with NO regard to chainline measurements??? It appears Shimano and Sram are more tolerant (maybe the riders are too) of a sloppy, chainline. 

There are some owners that have no issues with their 695 and Campy...Tumppi (a forum member) and Cofidis are some that come to mind. 

I really like my 695...the ride is great but I would LOVE IT once Look fixes the chainline issue!! 
?
Now on to Goud's question... Have you tried the softest elastomer on the E-Post (i think it's the grey one)? Is the SR set up with Campy? How did you get an SR when you started out with a standard version? I originally wanted an SR version (I'm a clydesdale rider...210lbs) but after I ordered it, Look USA changed their mind and decided NOT to bring in the gloss black SR, only a matte black. I had to get a standard version because I dislike matte finishes on my bikes. I must say, my whole ordeal with this 695 has been very, very, frustrating!!! I waited for my bike (trying to get the shifting sorted out) for nearly 7 months!!! And I still don't have the correct stem that I ordered! 

I say get get a standard if you really want it and are unhappy with the SR version. If you own other bikes, I would think about getting a refund then get a 695 in a year or so unless you find something better.


----------



## goud (Jul 30, 2007)

*see this is what I am talking about*

In this short thread we have two different versions of the same fix, the front derailleur hanger has been changed, one post says its now steel, the other says its just stiffer, where is the truth?? From what I remember the hanger on this SR looks much beefier than my old standard but I did not take a picture to compare, it is carbon though...

Also I want to be clear on my current bike, 695 SR, Campy SR on LOOK front CR's, 34/50, back cassette 12/27 and the shifting is now flawless.

My problem is that I have absolutely no confidence that this flawless shifting will be the case on a new standard frame, too many variables, was the front hanger changed on the SR and not the Standard? My LBS just changed master mechanic's and perhaps the old tech did something special that the new tech doesn't know about? perhaps there is chain-line variance between SR and standard that will yield a standard that once again has shifting issues...???

I do LOVE the 695, I have team replica colors and it looks fantastic, I always loved the ride but I do find the SR to be too stiff, its not the seat post, its the bottom bracket, no flex at all (which is good on a SR) but it beats my legs up and leaves them sore.

I should just take the money and run but I love the bike, I will ask LOOK and my LBS to guarantee that the standard be as silky as the SR or they honor my money back offer, if they won't do this I am going to cut and run, try again in the spring......





Chris Keller said:


> The problem is NOT the rings! The problem is that the Look crankset has not been manufactured to the correct chainline... Shimano and Campagnolo require a chainline of approx. 43.5 mm. Sram requires a 44.5 mm chaninline. The chainline measurement on the 695s I have seen (only in the U.S.) is approx. 48-50mm!!! The Look rings do "assist" with shifting due to severe ramping and pinning. There is a re-designed front hanger that is thicker and much stiffer than the original...that helps with shifting too.
> 
> If the chainline were correct, there would be NO issues with shifting and you could use any 110 or 130 bcd chainrings on the market.
> 
> ...


----------



## Chris Keller (May 19, 2008)

Goud, 
Look USA offered me a replacement front deraileur hanger. They had a metal version but the "footprint" was not identical to the original...and they had a Look carbon version that was beefier and the footprint was identical to the original. I chose the Look carbon one and Look USA did a nice job. I cannot tell it was even replaced. I believe new 695s have this front der. hanger as standard now since the original was not stiff enough. 

Because of the stiffer hanger and the Look rings with severe ramping and pinning to assist shifting, you should have little trouble regardless of SR frame or standard frame. You can always get an adapter from Look to use a Campagnolo crankset, then shifting would be perfect! But, that is not why I bought a 695....I want to use their crankset...my shifting is ok...but perfect when I installed the spacers to correct the chainline. A $5,500 frameset should not need any spacers!! Now if Look corrects the chainline so I can eliminate the spacers....I will be a very happy Look owner!! 

Please have your mechanics measure the chainline...check out this link to sheldon Brown's site: All About Bicycle Chainline or check out Park Tool's site: Park Tool Co. » ParkTool Blog » Chainline Concepts


----------



## gvargasmx (Nov 3, 2011)

Hello Chris,

I am a new member of this forum, and I have a Look 695 SR, whit the same issue in my FSA chainrings (53-39 Campy 11)

What is the size of each spacers that you use to correct the chainline?

Best regards
Guillermo


----------



## goud (Jul 30, 2007)

gvargasmx said:


> Hello Chris,
> 
> I am a new member of this forum, and I have a Look 695 SR, whit the same issue in my FSA chainrings (53-39 Campy 11)
> 
> ...


No spacers made a difference, I simply went with the LOOK brand chainrings and it worked perfect. I do have the redesigned front derailleur hanger which also helped I believe. Even if you have the original hanger LOOK USA can modify it and replace it with the new hanger. The new hanger is much beefier, no flex.

As an update my bike is perfect, no issues, 100% satisfied, I kept the SR, I simply couldn't put it down once I got on it, too perfect, too fast, too good, too perfect....have I mentioned I really like my bike and think it's perfect....


----------



## gvargasmx (Nov 3, 2011)

Thank You..


----------



## Chris Keller (May 19, 2008)

I have the upgraded front hanger and I'm currently running with 2mm of spacers and the Look (Praxis) 50-34 chainrings. Shifting is quite smooth and quick. I am really pleased and amazed by the 695. It is an awesome machine! I still don't like the fact that I need to run with spacers on the crank but I forget about them totally once on the bike. They are simply a minor annoyance. I will check with LookUSA later to see if there were modifications made to the Zed crankset that would allow me to run without the spacers. I currently have over 1,200 miles on my 695 and I abosolutely love it!! I would have more miles on it but I have 2 other road bikes that need love too (a custom titanium Gangl with 2001 Record 10spd and a Look KX Light with 2010 Chorus 11spd).


----------



## gvargasmx (Nov 3, 2011)

Thank You Chris..


----------

