[CR]Re: Campy vs. Suntour - less caffeine, dude!

(Example: Framebuilding:Restoration)

From: <GPVB1@cs.com>
Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 14:46:29 EDT
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: [CR]Re: Campy vs. Suntour - less caffeine, dude!


Whoa, chill out a little. Doctor saying that too much caffeine makes you jittery?

A) The old Record front derailleur (the best in the friggin' world ever, IM not-at-all-objective O) was rated at and designed for a max. chainring difference of nine teeth. Racing bike commonly used 49/52 when this part debuted.

B) The NR rear der. shifts best with zero tooth difference between cogs. Ain't nothin' new about that. Then, as now, any two-bit Shimano or Suntour derailleur would out-perform it. That's not the issue at all. Campy NR/SR stuff is nearly bullet-proof when compared to its contemporary competitors (early D-A rear der. for example - very short lifespan - too much pivot slop too soon, not rebuildable). The old Campy stuff is also nice to look at in an Industrial Art sort of way. What's wrong with that?

Lighten up a little; go out and smell the Spring flowers!

Greg "give me NR/SR or give me nothing" Parker


Glen J. wrote in response to Stevan T. (in part):

> Perhaps our impressions differ because of our usage habits. I used pretty
> wide freewheels back in those days, because I lived in the mountains of NC
> riding around in quite hilly stuff and front shifters (not even Campy's
> excellent front shifter) did not handle large ring changes well back then.
> I also thought triples were for wimps (oh, well, I'm a wimp now). Perhaps
> the NR derailers were designed for tight (corncob) clusters only ?
> Glenn Jordan - Durham, NC