TA Cyclotourist Triple with Campag ergos

[eddie]

Hi only just seen this one, 9sp STI campag levers chain reaction cycles have them 74£ just seen them on there web site. Yes you can keep the same chainset, I run a stronglight triple with a 9sp block an gear mech and STI levers all campag. they all run sweet as a nut N/P

[niggle]

Hi only just seen this one, 9sp STI campag levers chain reaction cycles have them 74£ just seen them on there web site. Yes you can keep the same chainset, I run a stronglight triple with a 9sp block an gear mech and STI levers all campag. they all run sweet as a nut N/P

Yes but they are Xenon and not quite as good in their functioning I think, fewer cogs at time shifting with the thumb shifter I believe (someone please correct me if I am wrong) and I don't know about the LH shifter.

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Mode ... elID=54916

Also ten speed, same price:

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Mode ... elID=54855

[CJ]

Hi Chris, I am hoping that my Veloce 10 speed Ultrashift Ergos are the same as yours, I was told they were 2010 model when I bought them. However on another thread it was stated that Ultrashift may not be compatible with triples, either at all, or only if specified, I cannot quite understand what they are trying to say and I did not think that Campag had gone down the same route of double or triple specific LH brifters as Shimano: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=77274#p677666

Also I was under the impression that a Shimano MTB front mech would be OK with them, but then maybe the return spring will be too strong? I know I could just suck it and see, but if they are not going to work I would rather keep the Ergos and nice full set of Campag cables brand new in the box so I can sell them on for the best price and think again re shifting (probably bar ends will be the simplest solution).

A while ago I did attach a MTB/trekking mech to see what the Ultrashifts did with it. Also fitting a corresponding Shimano MTB/Trekking chainset was more time and trouble than I was prepared to spend on this (I like a closer chainline than those chainsets have or those mechs allow), but the mech did move a sufficient distance to and fro and did not appear likely to ghost shift.

Most recently I have fitted a Shimano SLX MTB double mech and swapped the Stronglight triple for a Middleburn Duo chainset with 42,22 rings. Fitted on a 123mm axle that chainset has a 43.5mm chainline, which that mech just allows, but only just. Anyway, the system works fine. I don't want the triple back. With an 11-34 9-speed cassette (hubbub modified cable routing on rear mech) I get gears from 17 to 103 inches. Who needs more range than that?

And the shifting is fine. The difference between 42 and 22 is huge admittedly, but with Ultrashift I can shift three sprockets at once, simultaneously with the front shift, putting me right in the next gear every time!

It's refreshingly simple compared to triples, of which I have been a keen exponent since 1972. Now we have 9 or more sprockets in back and genuinely compact doubles have returned to the scene, the complication of a third ring isn't really necessary. Is it?

The Duo came with inners of 26 and 24 to try also. But the 22 worked so I didn't see any point in restricting my range. I've just used this setup on a fortnight's tour in Austria. Very grateful for the bottom gear on the Rossfeld Panorama Strasse (several km of 10% to 14% gradient), the Koppenpass (14% to 23%) and Hirschbichl (two 30% pitches). I even engaged the top gear once or twice, but was freewheeling when I reached 79kmph near Ramsau am Dachstein.

[Brucey]

so 11-13-15-17-20-23-26-30-34 then?

I guess that gives you the 15T and the 17T for tapping along on a chainline that isn't too bad, and the double means fewer dropped chains (maybe?).

Come back alpine double, all is forgiven?

cheers

[tatanab]

It's refreshingly simple compared to triples, of which I have been a keen exponent since 1972. Now we have 9 or more sprockets in back and genuinely compact doubles have returned to the scene, the complication of a third ring isn't really necessary. Is it?

18 months ago I built a new machine with 40/24 and 14-28 10 speed on the back. Gears of 90 to 23 work nicely for me. The big advantage I find is that I have a range of 90 to 40 inches on the big ring with no overlaps and so rarely bother the little ring. As you say, with Ergo Ultrashift it is no bother to drop onto the little ring and change up a gear or 3 on the back at the same time. This is my main touring machine so I will keep it this way I think - the others have triples on them so I will not change them just for the sake of it since they are seldom used.

Funny that in 1975 I went on tour to Yorkshire and so put a small ringed double on to give me low enough gears. That's right, 40/24 with a 14-26 5 speed block. So I've gone back to the future more or less.

[CJ]

Come back alpine double, all is forgiven?

When there were only 5 or 6 sprockets in back, a double could not provide a really wide range of gears without wide gaps between them. My 1970s half-step triple filled in those gaps where it mattered, in the mid to high range.

Fast-forward to 9 or 10-speed and those gaps have other sprockets in them. No need for a triple, just a very wide double and some way of quickly and accurately shifting several sprockets at the same time as you make that front shift. Campag Ergo delivers. And because it's simply a double one can set the cable tension so the shifter is not straining at the High limit as Mr Veloparts warns may eventually break it. With my SLX mech and good true Middleburn rings, no trimming is needed. I can use all 9 with the outer and 7 of them with the inner.

The setup needs a bit more work. The Middleburn Duo spider puts the two rings where the middle and inner of a triple would be, resulting in an unnecessarily wide pedal track (Quack-factor) and a gap between the outer ring catch pin and the back of the crank that an overshift chain can easily drop into. Which is does occasionally. The SLX mech is designed for use with a rough tough mountainbikey 'bash guard', which also stops a chain overshifting so the SLX cage doen't have to and isn't shaped to. On the stand it was easy to make it overshift, so I worried about this, making an extension to the catch pin so the chain couldn't get wedged behind the crank. But it didn't seem to happen on my road-test rides, so I risked taking it on tour. It overshifted only once the whole 400 miles in Austria, and I easily got it back whilst still pedalling (thanks to my extended catch pin).

I'm hoping Middleburn will make a differently shaped spider, bringing the rings closer to the crank, so a shorter axle can be used, resulting in a narrower pedal track. I also hope they'll add an optional lightweight chaincatcher to the outer ring (cyclo-cross style), to take the place of the bash-guard expected by MTB double mechs such as the SLX.

[niggle]

The double idea is sound, my folder has a 56/42T double with 8 speed 11-30 cassette which gives a nice enough range 28-101" range for that with 20" (451) wheels. With flat bar shifter the changes are reasonably OK, dead simple friction thumbie front and rapid fire for the rear, which just means a fair bit of button pushing on the right when changing down between the rings, but as you say a wide range compact double with Ergo shifting would be even nicer. However the Middleburn Duo is £300, so would add about 50% to the total build budget!

Potentially silly question, but could one (i.e. me the cheap skate) use a cheap suitable triple chainset, e.g. http://www.spacycles.co.uk/products.php ... 0s109p2657 and dispense with the middle ring, moving the outer one inboard and using a longer BB as necessary to restore chainline?

[tatanab]

Potentially silly question, but could one (i.e. me the cheap skate) use a cheap suitable triple chainset, e.g. http://www.spacycles.co.uk/products.php ... 0s109p2657 and dispense with the middle ring, moving the outer one inboard and using a longer BB as necessary to restore chainline?

Yes - but. You would have to replace the outer to middle bolts with shorter ones or add spacers. If you are fussy about appearances then it might also look scruffy. I fitted a cyclo cross bash guard in outer position to fill the gap and to my taste it looks ok. That is 40/24 in the picture.

[niggle]

Potentially silly question, but could one (i.e. me the cheap skate) use a cheap suitable triple chainset, e.g. http://www.spacycles.co.uk/products.php ... 0s109p2657 and dispense with the middle ring, moving the outer one inboard and using a longer BB as necessary to restore chainline?

Yes - but. You would have to replace the outer to middle bolts with shorter ones or add spacers. If you are fussy about appearances then it might also look scruffy. I fitted a cyclo cross bash guard in outer position to fill the gap and to my taste it looks ok. That is 40/24 in the picture.

I have a Suntour chainguard ring that should fit the 104 (from my old broken Carrera Subway 8 that I stripped for spares), came with a 44T ring but should be close enough to a 42. Also I have a 1990s Campag 9 speed front mech not dissimilar to that one pictured, though it is braze on so would need an adapter ring, I presume this would suffice: http://www.cyclestore.co.uk/productDeta ... tAoddg0AOQ looks a bit tight re cage length though...