Cycling UK Forum

What's the difference between "Ultrashift" and "Powershift"? ( I want to change my 9-speed set-up to 10-speed so that I can run a 30 tooth sprocket)

Internally there’s a massive difference in longevity and repairability, in use the main difference is the action of the thumb button. Externally there’s also a hood shape change involved along the way that conincides with the change and often gets touted as a defining factor but there are both shift variant in the old shape and new hood shape so it’s correlation only.

On ultrashift it’s like the old Campag I that you can go ClickClickClickClick through multiple gears but pushing the thumb button further with each shift. On powershift it’s one at a time Click, Click, Click with the ratchet/lever returning on each shift.

On the left hand side there’s differences too in that the left shifter is now indexed in one direction and ratchets in the other rather than ratcheting both ways which means there are now defined double and triple shifters for powershift and they’re consequently more picky about being mates to the right kind of front mech.

There are some other subtle differences too depending on which exact generation of lever you’re looking at but that’s the basics of it.
Whether or not that's a big deal to you is a personal thing. I personally can't stand the powershift models.

It's also worth noting that if you current 9 speed is 'new' 9 speed* then you can just get a 10 speed rear mech and it will be compatible, the cable pull ratio is the same (~1.5) for n9/10/11 speed Campag and will allow you to use the bigger sprockets. If however you have 'old' 9 speed then the pull ratio is slightly different (~1.4) and although you could just throw on a 10 speed mech and make it work it will likely not be quite as smooth shifting, especially at the extreme ends of the cassette. If you do have 'old' 9 speed then another potion open to you if you're not fussy about mixing and matching is to use a Shimano 11 speed road mech as they also have a ~1.4 cable pull ratio and work a treat with 8 and old 9 speed Campag shifters and some models allow the use of 32t(+) sprockets if you wish.

depending on your current rear mech it might be worth just giving it a go witht he bigger sprocket anyway, sometimes you can get away with it as it depends on the exact hanger position and geometry as to what a mech will do. Shimano mechs are normally very conservatively specced on paper and can handle 2-4 teeth more than the paperwork says with ease. Campag mechs are a bit more hit and miss, some are better than others but I've managed to squeeze and extra 2t out of many models, and 3-4t on some without any issue at all really, just add a bit of cage/pully tension and careful with chain length.

This can all end up being dictated by what cassettes you want to use and on what freehub type though, but there's various options from off-the-peg, to mix/match between manufacturers, all the way to custom spaced cassettes of your own building.

*old 9 speed is shifters with pointy hoods like the 8 speed ones, 'new' 9 speed has shifters with the rounded hoods

amediasatex wrote:*old 9 speed is shifters with pointy hoods like the 8 speed ones, 'new' 9 speed has shifters with the rounded hoods

Close but no cigar. Round top shifters were introduced in 1998. The cable pull changed in 2001.
New-pull round tops have the number of speeds written on the RH shifter; old-pull do not.

The simplest way to get lower gears is to swap to a smaller chainset (assuming you are already at 39T on the inner ring). A triple will go as small as 24T. I've happily run a Record double front derailleur even with a 42/29 chainset.

Close but no cigar. Round top shifters were introduced in 1998. The cable pull changed in 2001.
New-pull round tops have the number of speeds written on the RH shifter; old-pull do not.

I stand corrected, and that rings a bell now you mentioned it, that 9 speed can come in both hood versions

another possibility is that you encounter a set of shifters that have been converted from their original shift type, so that their appearance in no way gives a clue to their innards. Various permutations of this are possible, in both directions.

cheers

My Campag 9sp Mirage Ergos were converted - by me - into 10sp back in 2005.
Same internals, just needed 10sp ratchets supplied by Mercian.

I scraped off the 9sp logo from the RH lever.

Mick F wrote:
I scraped off the 9sp logo from the RH lever.

+1

Quick question as I am from "across the pond". You guys call it Campag? We call it Campy.

Woodtourer wrote:Quick question as I am from "across the pond". You guys call it Campag? We call it Campy.

Always been 'campag' over here. Unless you are used to talking to cyclists from your neck of the woods, 'campy' conjures up images of something entirely different...

cheers

[quote][/quote]
Now you have peaked my interest!!
Boot=truck
Trousers=pants
What does Campy=??

Woodtourer wrote: ... What does Campy=??

It's an alternative to the adjective "camp" although I think it's rarely used in that sense.

As Brucey points out it's Campag over here, but there's a trend - along similar lines to "fixie" - for its being used here instead of Campag. For those of a certain age it's a bit of a sign of somebody new to the sport. ie has only been cycling less than 50 years

Woodtourer wrote:Now you have peaked my interest!!
Boot=truck
Trousers=pants
What does Campy=??

well you could say 'Julian Clary has more campy bits than most other folk' and although it isn't terribly good english the average Brit would immediately understand that what you meant had nothing to do with bicycle parts. British cyclists would (unless they had spent time with American cyclists) naturally only ever say 'campag' not campy.

The origins of some other words are less obvious. Boot is British English for what anyone in North America would refer to as a trunk, but in the UK if you mention 'trunk' without context most folk would maybe think of the luggage item first, then the thing on an elephant, then one's torso or the main part of a tree perhaps, all before the storage area at the back of car (BTW 'automobile' is rarely used here either).

The weird thing is that no-one knows for sure why a car boot is called a boot in the UK. It appears to have been used from when extra seats at the back of horse-drawn carriages were common (which makes it slightly mysterious that it didn't go to North America with the english-speaking emigrants). It may have been from the shape of it, and perhaps that there was somewhere to put your feet, but it is anyone's guess really.

Pants comes via French ( I think) and 'pantaloons' which pretty clearly meant trousers (but then again maybe underwear was optional at the time, and a second layer could be over the top or underneath your pantaloons I suppose). Nonetheless how it ever came to exclusively be undergarments rather than trousers in British English is a mystery to me. Latterly if you say something (anything) is pants, anyone under thirty will understand immediately what you mean but old folk may be absolutely baffled.

English is used differently everywhere it is spoken. Most folk understand other terms for the same thing (often by context alone) but may or may not choose to use them themselves.

Australians have all kinds of odd words for things for example. They would understand and use British English 'pants' but they would also use 'dacks', 'grundys' and more besides.

cheers

Well that cleared that up Brucey, poor bugger will be even more confused wondering who Julian Clarey is

Camp is another word for effeminate usually in a contrived way ergo (not as in shifter) campy means being camp.