Re: [CR]RE: 52 Sport derailleur and Gran Sport Stupid?

(Example: Production Builders:Cinelli:Laser)

In-Reply-To: <101620061305.1439.45338397000A65C20000059F2200751090020E000A9C9D0A08@comcast.net>
References: <101620061305.1439.45338397000A65C20000059F2200751090020E000A9C9D0A08@comcast.net>
From: "Chuck Schmidt" <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [CR]RE: 52 Sport derailleur and Gran Sport Stupid?
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 11:18:38 -0700
To: Classic Rendezvous Bike List <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>


On Oct 16, 2006, at 6:05 AM, hersefan@comcast.net wrote:
> But maybe we should save some scorn for Campy's top model the Gran
> Sport as well. Had the lower pivot been in line with the upper
> pulley wheel, a unit with much better shifting could have
> resulted. The mistake Campy made plagued the company for years.
> Our beloved NR/SR units always had to be teased onto the small cog
> in the rear (when on the big ring) because Campy never got the
> chain gap thing right.
>
> Sure, for straight blocks or half step arrangements it works - but
> it could have been so much better.
>
> At least the sport model was a budget unit for different
> applications as Chuck mentions. The Gran Sport design was just off.
>
> Mike Kone in Boulder CO

I've never have experienced the problem shifting a Nuovo Record or Super Record derailleur as you described... guess I've been fortunate so far. Even my 1950s Gran Sport derailleurs shifted fine onto the small cog, but you're right, there isn't anything that can't be improved upon with some hindsight.

Chuck Schmidt
South Pasadena, Southern California
United States of America
http://www.velo-retro.com (reprints, t-shirts & timelines)