Rumors Next Generation Campagnolo Road?

Back by popular demand, the general all-things Road forum!

Moderator: robbosmans

r_mutt
Posts: 412
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 6:33 pm

by r_mutt

gorkypl wrote:
Wed May 31, 2023 1:23 pm
Bobbyc123 wrote:
Wed May 31, 2023 1:22 pm
Also no titanium in the new cassette
No titanium in SR12 either. 11 speed was last cassette with Ti cogs.
Not sure why they would discontinue this unless it was becasue no one bought it? Personally,. I always used Chorus cassettes and Record groups. I didn't see the need for SR for my purposes.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



ParisCarbon
Posts: 1918
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 5:39 am
Location: Winnipeg Canada

by ParisCarbon

Butcher wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 4:49 pm
I have always wanted and wondered why they did not offer a tighter spacing with the older EPS12 cassettes. I was told they would never sell and it was wishful thinking.

Funny how they now have a cassette that would put a smile on my face. Maybe you all would not purchase one, but I would. Sadly, I would have to get a new hub to make use of that cassette.
Im all over putting the 10-25 block on my WTO Ultra wheel on my Venge if theres no issue with the wired EPS...

User avatar
ultimobici
in the industry
Posts: 4460
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Trento, Italia
Contact:

by ultimobici

r_mutt wrote:
gorkypl wrote:
Wed May 31, 2023 1:23 pm
Bobbyc123 wrote:
Wed May 31, 2023 1:22 pm
Also no titanium in the new cassette
No titanium in SR12 either. 11 speed was last cassette with Ti cogs.
Not sure why they would discontinue this unless it was becasue no one bought it? Personally,. I always used Chorus cassettes and Record groups. I didn't see the need for SR for my purposes.
I’m pretty sure the SR12 cassettes dispensed with Ti to drop the cost as well as improve wear. That did make it heavier by a bit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MarkMcM
Posts: 154
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 4:24 pm

by MarkMcM

usr wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 12:57 am
MarkMcM wrote:
Thu Jun 01, 2023 8:05 pm
On the other hand, chainring size does affect the size of the jumps when shifting the front derailleur. All the recent double cranks have a 16 tooth differential between chainrings (52/36, 50/34, 48/32, 45/29). But the smaller the chainrings, the bigger the ratio jumps when shifting between the chainrings - a 50/36 has a 39.9% ratio jump, a 50/34 has 47.1% ratio jump, a 48/32 has a 50.0% ratio jump, and a 45/29 has a 55.2% ratio jump.
But it's not wrong, within the choice of available cranksets, to give those opting for smaller rings a wider spread than those opting for larger rings: most riders attracted to 1:1 will consider overlap nothing but waste and would rather have wider total spread, whereas many of those who pick bigger rings will see benefit in overlap, better chainlines when desired and more opportunities to completely forego front shifting.
Then it's interesting that Campagnolo did not give us the widest total spread with this new drivetrain. The widest spread with this drivetrain is the 45/29 crank with 10-29 cassette, which has a low of 1:1 and a high of 4.5:1 (total spread of 4.5:1) whereas the previous 50/34 crank with an 11-34 cassette give a low of 1:1 and a high of 4.55:1 (total spread of 4.55:1). If it is low gears one wants, then the lowest previous Campagnolo gear is with a 48/32 crank with an 11-34 cassette for a ratio of 0.94:1 (vs. the SR WRL's of 1:1).

Basically, my argument is this: The new SR WRL group doesn't give a range of gears any wider or lower than what there was before, nor does it give smaller steps between gears than what was before. They just achieve the same effective gearing with smaller chainrings and sprockets. Which means that they have redesigned the crank, cassette, freehub, and derailleurs for no change in user features. So why go through all the effort? The bicycle industry is often accused of incompatibility for incompatibilitie's sake, and this is a prime example. Sometimes the bicycle industry will completely redesign their products around a small marginal gain. Is it worth it for just a small marginal gain? I guess that depends on who you ask. In this case though, the redesign actually results in a small marginal loss (through slight larger drivetrain friction and wear), so it is hard to argue that it was worth it.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 12455
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

Again the main change is where the 1t, 2t, 3t, etc. transitions occur. For the sake of argument, you have played down the fact that on a Shimano 11-30 the jump from cog 6->5 is 11.8% whereas on the Campy 10-27 it's 5.9%. Conversely the cog 12->11 jump on the Shimano cassette is 9.1% while on the Campy it's 10%.

If a 10% jump to the "overdrive" gear is too much for you, surely the 11.8% smack-dab in the middle of your somehow preferred configuration is even worse???

I'll take the small marginal losses at non-crucial moments if it means either increased range or smaller jumps where it matters.

e: changed numbering order to be less confusing.
Last edited by TobinHatesYou on Sat Jun 03, 2023 1:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

MarkMcM
Posts: 154
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 4:24 pm

by MarkMcM

TobinHatesYou wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 11:11 pm
Again the main change is where the 1t, 2t, 3t, etc. transitions occur. For the sake of argument,You you have played down the fact that on a Shimano 11-30 the jump from cog 5->6 is 11.8% whereas on the Campy 10-27 it's 5.9%. Conversely the cog 11->12 jump on the Shimano cassette is 9.1% while on the Campy it's 10%.

If a 10% jump to the "overdrive" gear is too much for you, surely the 11.8% smack-dab in the middle of your somehow preferred configuration is even worse???

I'll take the small marginal losses at non-crucial moments if it means either increased range or smaller jumps where it matters.

You talk about that 11.8% jump in the 11-30 cassette as if it doesn't exist in the 10-27 cassette, but it does. It can't be eliminated. Its just that Instead of being between the 5->6 sprockets, its between the 6->7th sprockets. When and how often a rider passes through that transition depends on chainring size(s), speed and cadence. Interestingly, the average gear jump size before the transition is smaller on the 11-30, and the average gear jump size after the transition is also smaller on the 11-30. You may prefer the 11.8% jump to be between the 5->6, but others may prefer it to be between the 6->7 (combined with smaller average jumps before and after the transition). SInce this is a personal choice, you can't definitely say one is better than the other.

Lina
Posts: 1060
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2018 9:09 pm

by Lina

MarkMcM wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 12:36 am
TobinHatesYou wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 11:11 pm
Again the main change is where the 1t, 2t, 3t, etc. transitions occur. For the sake of argument,You you have played down the fact that on a Shimano 11-30 the jump from cog 5->6 is 11.8% whereas on the Campy 10-27 it's 5.9%. Conversely the cog 11->12 jump on the Shimano cassette is 9.1% while on the Campy it's 10%.

If a 10% jump to the "overdrive" gear is too much for you, surely the 11.8% smack-dab in the middle of your somehow preferred configuration is even worse???

I'll take the small marginal losses at non-crucial moments if it means either increased range or smaller jumps where it matters.

You talk about that 11.8% jump in the 11-30 cassette as if it doesn't exist in the 10-27 cassette, but it does. It can't be eliminated. Its just that Instead of being between the 5->6 sprockets, its between the 6->7th sprockets. When and how often a rider passes through that transition depends on chainring size(s), speed and cadence. Interestingly, the average gear jump size before the transition is smaller on the 11-30, and the average gear jump size after the transition is also smaller on the 11-30. You may prefer the 11.8% jump to be between the 5->6, but others may prefer it to be between the 6->7 (combined with smaller average jumps before and after the transition). SInce this is a personal choice, you can't definitely say one is better than the other.
I've literally never heard anyone say they prefer an earlier 2t jump. If your chainrings are properly sized a later 2t jump is always going to be better.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 12455
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

MarkMcM wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 12:36 am
TobinHatesYou wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 11:11 pm
Again the main change is where the 1t, 2t, 3t, etc. transitions occur. For the sake of argument,You you have played down the fact that on a Shimano 11-30 the jump from cog 5->6 is 11.8% whereas on the Campy 10-27 it's 5.9%. Conversely the cog 11->12 jump on the Shimano cassette is 9.1% while on the Campy it's 10%.

If a 10% jump to the "overdrive" gear is too much for you, surely the 11.8% smack-dab in the middle of your somehow preferred configuration is even worse???

I'll take the small marginal losses at non-crucial moments if it means either increased range or smaller jumps where it matters.

You talk about that 11.8% jump in the 11-30 cassette as if it doesn't exist in the 10-27 cassette, but it does. It can't be eliminated. Its just that Instead of being between the 5->6 sprockets, its between the 6->7th sprockets. When and how often a rider passes through that transition depends on chainring size(s), speed and cadence. Interestingly, the average gear jump size before the transition is smaller on the 11-30, and the average gear jump size after the transition is also smaller on the 11-30. You may prefer the 11.8% jump to be between the 5->6, but others may prefer it to be between the 6->7 (combined with smaller average jumps before and after the transition). SInce this is a personal choice, you can't definitely say one is better than the other.

Just to clear up any confusion, I'm counting from the inside out... cog 1 = largest cog. On the Campy cassette the 2t jump would be from 5->4. This would seem clearly preferable to people who actually ride bikes, but perhaps not bike theorycrafters who talk about eFfiCiEnCy LoSsEs.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 12455
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

Lina wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 12:49 am

I've literally never heard anyone say they prefer an earlier 2t jump. If your chainrings are properly sized a later 2t jump is always going to be better.

To be fair there comes a point where a 1t jump is pretty pointless, but I think most will agree it's not between the 16t and 17t cogs.

graeme_f_k
Shop Owner / Manufacturer
Posts: 611
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 12:21 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

by graeme_f_k

ultimobici wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 7:01 pm
r_mutt wrote:
gorkypl wrote:
Wed May 31, 2023 1:23 pm
Bobbyc123 wrote:
Wed May 31, 2023 1:22 pm
Also no titanium in the new cassette
No titanium in SR12 either. 11 speed was last cassette with Ti cogs.
Not sure why they would discontinue this unless it was becasue no one bought it? Personally,. I always used Chorus cassettes and Record groups. I didn't see the need for SR for my purposes.
I’m pretty sure the SR12 cassettes dispensed with Ti to drop the cost as well as improve wear. That did make it heavier by a bit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I spoke at great length to a couple of materials scientists at Campagnolo. Some may know, Campagnolo have a whole department dedicated to this. It doesn't only serve Campagnolo, it also works widely outside of just the bicycle industry, in aerospace, medical and automotive too.

The main reason was / is around the well-understood problem of grain and crystal structure in metals.

Once a sprocket, especially a large sprocket carrying a very high torque loading in the context of it's gauge, gets to a certain point, the direction is which the crystal structure of the material lays becomes a significant factor in durability.

As a very broad statement, the most commonly-used (and industrially affordable) processes to produce sheet metal materials tend to cause a re-alignment and elongation of the crystal structure of the material along a common direction.

If that alignment is top-to-bottom in a sprocket tooth, it will be relatively resistant to lateral loads. On the other had, alignment across the tooth will lead to a propensity to shear under load.

Campagnolo have historically taken sheet material (be it steel or Ti) and stamped the basic form of the sprocket, then machined the finer detail, adding a degree of other surface processing to harden the material against wear - the surface processing has included both electro-chemical and mechanical processes. In the factory tours (when we did such things) we used to show the stamping process - it was (and is) quite impressive (if you will forgive the play on words).

Once the sprocket gauge came down to that needed for 12s, the likely shear loads, especially in the bigger sprockets that the material of the sprockets would be subject to, in proportion to that gauge, made this type of process non-viable. The strength could be acheived but the costs to do it (different types of sheet metal formation for example) meant that a better alternative with very small weight gain, was to machine clusters out of solid billet, in a suitable steel.

In billet, the basic crystal structure is less granulated and more omni-directional. Machining out of Ti billet would give a weight loss vs steel but the wear and tear on the tooling would be horrendous. Various non-mechanical erosion techniques, or cold forging of a blank, followed by smaller mechanical or even optical cutting could be done - but again, the costs would be prohibitive.

The additional advantage to machining from solid is precision and predictability - the Ekar 13 cassettes have two components machined from billet, with the greater having a barrel spacer built into the centre of the cassette, to limit the compression caused by the loads introduced by the lockring. The reason to do this is the very exact sprocket spacing that results, in excess of anything that can be reasonably acheived with seperate sprockets and spacers, at a lower weight.

The approach was originally used in SR12 and some of the lessons learned from that process were carried further in 13s. Campagnolo are not the only makers to do this - SRAM do it, EDCO did it and their flame has been carried forward by Prestacycle ...

There are also other reasons to take this manufacturing approach - removing the need to mate a Ti sprocket to an alloy carrier reduces manufacturing operations and removes a vulnerability to noise (occasionally the Ti sprockets would fret against the alloy carrier and produce a creak) for instance.

Always, a change in production technique and materials needs to be looked at in the round - is it a better engineering solution has to include answers to the long and short term questions of manufactured good cost against the investment required to acheive it and where the technology might be employed downstream in new product development - so when manufacturing process for the 12s project was being studied, it was understood within Campagnolo that 13s was also on the drawing board and that although a process (with relevant investment) could be considered to retain Ti in 12s, the viability of that process might not extend to the next product ... so the opportunity to defray investment over a longer period might be lost.
A Tech-Reps work is never done ...
Head Tech, Campagnolo main UK ASC
Pls contact via velotechcycling"at"aim"dot"com, not PM, for a quicker answer. Thanks!

graeme_f_k
Shop Owner / Manufacturer
Posts: 611
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 12:21 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

by graeme_f_k

graeme_f_k wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 11:37 am
ultimobici wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2023 7:01 pm
r_mutt wrote:
gorkypl wrote:
Wed May 31, 2023 1:23 pm

No titanium in SR12 either. 11 speed was last cassette with Ti cogs.
Not sure why they would discontinue this unless it was becasue no one bought it? Personally,. I always used Chorus cassettes and Record groups. I didn't see the need for SR for my purposes.
I’m pretty sure the SR12 cassettes dispensed with Ti to drop the cost as well as improve wear. That did make it heavier by a bit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I spoke at great length to a couple of materials scientists at Campagnolo. Some may know, Campagnolo have a whole department dedicated to this. It doesn't only serve Campagnolo, it also works widely outside of just the bicycle industry, in aerospace, medical and automotive too.

The main reason was / is around the well-understood problem of grain and crystal structure in metals.

Once a sprocket, especially a large sprocket carrying a very high torque loading in the context of it's gauge, gets to a certain point, the direction is which the crystal structure of the material lays becomes a significant factor in durability.

As a very broad statement, the most commonly-used (and industrially affordable) processes to produce sheet metal materials tend to cause a re-alignment and elongation of the crystal structure of the material along a common direction.

If that alignment is top-to-bottom in a sprocket tooth, it will be relatively resistant to lateral loads. On the other had, alignment across the tooth will lead to a propensity to shear under load.

Campagnolo have historically taken sheet material (be it steel or Ti) and stamped the basic form of the sprocket, then machined the finer detail, adding a degree of other surface processing to harden the material against wear - the surface processing has included both electro-chemical and mechanical processes. In the factory tours (when we did such things) we used to show the stamping process - it was (and is) quite impressive (if you will forgive the play on words).

Once the sprocket gauge came down to that needed for 12s, the likely shear loads, especially in the bigger sprockets that the material of the sprockets would be subject to, in proportion to that gauge, made this type of process non-viable. The strength could be acheived but the costs to do it (different types of sheet metal formation for example) meant that a better alternative with very small weight gain, was to machine clusters out of solid billet, in a suitable steel.

In billet, the basic crystal structure is less granulated and more omni-directional. Machining out of Ti billet would give a weight loss vs steel but the wear and tear on the tooling would be horrendous. Various non-mechanical erosion techniques, or cold forging of a blank, followed by smaller mechanical or even optical cutting could be done - but again, the costs would be prohibitive.

The additional advantage to machining from solid is precision and predictability - the Ekar 13 cassettes have two components machined from billet, with the greater having a barrel spacer built into the centre of the cassette, to limit the compression caused by the loads introduced by the lockring. The reason to do this is the very exact sprocket spacing that results, in excess of anything that can be reasonably acheived with seperate sprockets and spacers, at a lower weight.

The approach was originally used in SR12 and some of the lessons learned from that process were carried further in 13s. Campagnolo are not the only makers to do this - SRAM do it, EDCO did it and their flame has been carried forward by Prestacycle ...

There are also other reasons to take this manufacturing approach - removing the need to mate a Ti sprocket to an alloy carrier reduces manufacturing operations and removes a vulnerability to noise (occasionally the Ti sprockets would fret against the alloy carrier and produce a creak) for instance.

Always, a change in production technique and materials needs to be looked at in the round - the question "is it a better engineering solution" in the context of production, rather than absolutes, has to include answers to the long and short term questions of manufactured good cost against the investment required to acheive it and where the technology might be employed downstream in new product development - so when manufacturing process for the 12s project was being studied, it was obviously known within Campagnolo that 13s was also on the drawing board and that although a process (with relevant investment) could be considered to retain Ti in 12s, the viability of that process might not extend to the next product ... so the opportunity to defray investment over a longer period might be lost.
A Tech-Reps work is never done ...
Head Tech, Campagnolo main UK ASC
Pls contact via velotechcycling"at"aim"dot"com, not PM, for a quicker answer. Thanks!

graeme_f_k
Shop Owner / Manufacturer
Posts: 611
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 12:21 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

by graeme_f_k

MarkMcM wrote:
Thu Jun 01, 2023 4:00 pm
morrisond wrote:
Thu Jun 01, 2023 2:46 pm
I'm with everyone else - ill take the tighter gearing over any minor loss in efficiency.
Well, that's just it - Super Record WRL doesn't actually have have tighter gearing than the previous Campagnolo 12spd (except for the 10-25 cassette, which is probably going to be the least popular). Super Record WRL has effectively the same range of gearing, with the same average jumps between gears, just done with smaller chainrings and sprockets (and their subsequent lower efficiency and faster wear).
Lower efficiency and faster wear pre-supposes no change in materials or design. We've been here a zillion times before, I am old and grey enough to remember the nay-sayers on Ultra 7 vs Standard width 7s blocks and chains. And, for that matter, 12T vs 13t, then 11T vs 12T ...
A Tech-Reps work is never done ...
Head Tech, Campagnolo main UK ASC
Pls contact via velotechcycling"at"aim"dot"com, not PM, for a quicker answer. Thanks!

graeme_f_k
Shop Owner / Manufacturer
Posts: 611
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 12:21 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

by graeme_f_k

hkatrib wrote:
Thu Jun 01, 2023 11:18 am
Does anyone know if the new C-link backward compatible with the EPS SR 12 speed chain?
Would really appreciate some insight from Campy Tech experts!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes, it is. The chain itself has not changed.
The quick link chain gets a different product code to identfy between the 114 link chain provided with a pin and the 113 link chain provided with the C-link:

Sales Cod. CN19-SR1214
Ind. Cod. 0113301
SUPER RECORD 12s chain - 114 links

vs

Sales Cod. CN23-SR12ML
Ind. Cod. 0113304
SR 12s C-Link chain 113 links+connecting link

The C-link itself is made in-house and so retains the accuracy of the pin-to-pin dimension, width tolerance etc. required, which could not be guaranteed from third party makers.
A Tech-Reps work is never done ...
Head Tech, Campagnolo main UK ASC
Pls contact via velotechcycling"at"aim"dot"com, not PM, for a quicker answer. Thanks!

rudye9mr
Posts: 498
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 12:01 pm

by rudye9mr

graeme_f_k wrote:
Sat Jun 03, 2023 11:56 am
hkatrib wrote:
Thu Jun 01, 2023 11:18 am
Does anyone know if the new C-link backward compatible with the EPS SR 12 speed chain?
Would really appreciate some insight from Campy Tech experts!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes, it is. The chain itself has not changed.
The quick link chain gets a different product code to identfy between the 114 link chain provided with a pin and the 113 link chain provided with the C-link:

Sales Cod. CN19-SR1214
Ind. Cod. 0113301
SUPER RECORD 12s chain - 114 links

vs

Sales Cod. CN23-SR12ML
Ind. Cod. 0113304
SR 12s C-Link chain 113 links+connecting link

The C-link itself is made in-house and so retains the accuracy of the pin-to-pin dimension, width tolerance etc. required, which could not be guaranteed from third party makers.
You are a Legend for this info !! - thanks!!

BigBoyND
Posts: 1347
Joined: Mon May 31, 2021 1:51 am
Location: Berlin, DE

by BigBoyND

MarkMcM wrote:
Thu Jun 01, 2023 8:05 pm
But the smaller the chainrings, the bigger the ratio jumps when shifting between the chainrings - a 50/36 has a 39.9% ratio jump, a 50/34 has 47.1% ratio jump, a 48/32 has a 50.0% ratio jump, and a 45/29 has a 55.2% ratio jump.
....
It appears Campagnolo is relying on their customers not understanding the basic math of fractions and ratios.
I understand math and PREFER this. I shift the rear 100x more often than the front. The bigger the jump in the front, the smaller the jumps can be in the back for the same total range. Compared to SRAM, Campy gives you smaller jumps on 90-99% of shifts.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



Post Reply