| |
Main
Date: 03 Jun 2007 20:55:22
From: DB4
Subject: Gearing Upgrade
|
Hi
I've been upgrading various components on my old 21 speed Orange C16 and
found it virtually impossible to source drive train equipment for a 7 speed
cog. The 8 and 9 cog shimano XT rear mechs work OK but the front mechs just
don't set up very well with the old wider IG chains. I'm coming to the
conclusion that with the money I've invested so far, I may as well change
the gear shifts, etc, to an 8 speed rig. My question is this
|
|
| |
Date: 04 Jun 2007 17:16:09
From: Nigel Cliffe
Subject: Re: Gearing Upgrade
|
DB4 wrote:
> Hi
> I've been upgrading various components on my old 21 speed Orange C16
> and found it virtually impossible to source drive train equipment for
> a 7 speed cog. The 8 and 9 cog shimano XT rear mechs work OK but the
> front mechs just don't set up very well with the old wider IG chains.
> I'm coming to the conclusion that with the money I've invested so
> far, I may as well change the gear shifts, etc, to an 8 speed rig.
> My question is this
|
| |
Date: 03 Jun 2007 14:21:32
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: Gearing Upgrade
|
On Jun 3, 1:55 pm, DB4 <kuba...@tiscali.co.uk > wrote:
> Hi
> I've been upgrading various components on my old 21 speed Orange C16 and
> found it virtually impossible to source drive train equipment for a 7 speed
> cog. The 8 and 9 cog shimano XT rear mechs work OK but the front mechs just
> don't set up very well with the old wider IG chains. I'm coming to the
> conclusion that with the money I've invested so far, I may as well change
> the gear shifts, etc, to an 8 speed rig. My question is this
|
| |
Date: 03 Jun 2007 20:47:17
From: Steve Gravrock
Subject: Re: Gearing Upgrade
|
On 2007-06-03, DB4 <kubaton@tiscali.co.uk > wrote:
> Hi
> I've been upgrading various components on my old 21 speed Orange C16 and
> found it virtually impossible to source drive train equipment for a 7 speed
> cog. The 8 and 9 cog shimano XT rear mechs work OK but the front mechs just
> don't set up very well with the old wider IG chains. I'm coming to the
> conclusion that with the money I've invested so far, I may as well change
> the gear shifts, etc, to an 8 speed rig. My question is this
|
| |
Date: 03 Jun 2007 20:03:09
From: Steve Gravrock
Subject: Re: Any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks
|
On 2007-06-03, John Thompson <john@vector.os2.dhs.org > wrote:
> On 2007-06-01, * * Chas <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
>
>> Is there any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks besides
>> the self extracting crank bolts in some Victory cranks?
>
> Victory has a nicer, polished and anodized finish than Triomphe. I have
> their official product brochures here:
>
> http://www.os2.dhs.org/~john/catalogs/victory.pdf
> http://www.os2.dhs.org/~john/catalogs/triomphe.pdf
For all their faults detailed elsewhere in this thread, those are very
attractive cranks. They look almost exactly like some SR cranks I had
from about that same period, except that the Campag cranks are much
more nicely finished.
|
| | |
Date: 05 Jun 2007 17:14:16
From: Donald Gillies
Subject: Re: Any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks
|
Steve Gravrock <usenet@sdg.users.panix.com > writes:
>For all their faults detailed elsewhere in this thread, those are very
>attractive cranks. They look almost exactly like some SR cranks I had
>from about that same period, except that the Campag cranks are much
>more nicely finished.
Actually, Campy got really weird about non-NR/SR stuff in the early
1980's.
- there is a 144 bcd gransport crank that looks like nuovo record
- there is a 144 bcd victory crank that looks like nuovo record
both of the above cranks are identical in shape/size.
- there is a gransport crank with 3 arms - first steel, then alloy.
- there is a geometric victory crank that's 116 bcd with 5 arms.
which is very close in size/shape to triomphe and uses similar rings.
We were talking (I think) about the geometric victory crank, that was
roundly hated by just about everyone for its lousy aesthetics. I
think you are talking about the rare 144 bcd victory 5-arm
nuovo-record type of cranks.
|
| | | |
Date: 07 Jun 2007 06:29:55
From: Steve Gravrock
Subject: Re: Any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks
|
On 2007-06-06, Donald Gillies <gillies@cs.ubc.ca > wrote:
> Steve Gravrock <usenet@sdg.users.panix.com> writes:
>
>>For all their faults detailed elsewhere in this thread, those are very
>>attractive cranks. They look almost exactly like some SR cranks I had
>>from about that same period, except that the Campag cranks are much
>>more nicely finished.
[...]
> We were talking (I think) about the geometric victory crank, that was
> roundly hated by just about everyone for its lousy aesthetics. I
> think you are talking about the rare 144 bcd victory 5-arm
> nuovo-record type of cranks.
If the geometric Victory crank is the one pictured in this PDF:
<http://www.os2.dhs.org/~john/catalogs/victory.pdf >
then I think the rings are ugly but the cranks themselves are quite
nice. My old cranks looked like that but were not so finely finished,
had a much more sensible bolt circle, and came with less odd-looking
rings. They were more or less the double version of these:
<http://www.firstflightbikes.com/LCrank71.JPG >
I should have known better than to use SR to mean anything other than
Super Record in a Campagnolo thread.
|
| | | | |
Date: 07 Jun 2007 01:04:51
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: Any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks
|
"Steve Gravrock" <usenet@sdg.users.panix.com > wrote in message
news:slrnf6f9f3.f5k.usenet@panix3.panix.com...
> On 2007-06-06, Donald Gillies <gillies@cs.ubc.ca> wrote:
> > Steve Gravrock <usenet@sdg.users.panix.com> writes:
> >
> >>For all their faults detailed elsewhere in this thread, those are very
> >>attractive cranks. They look almost exactly like some SR cranks I had
> >>from about that same period, except that the Campag cranks are much
> >>more nicely finished.
>
> [...]
>
> > We were talking (I think) about the geometric victory crank, that was
> > roundly hated by just about everyone for its lousy aesthetics. I
> > think you are talking about the rare 144 bcd victory 5-arm
> > nuovo-record type of cranks.
>
> If the geometric Victory crank is the one pictured in this PDF:
>
> <http://www.os2.dhs.org/~john/catalogs/victory.pdf>
>
> then I think the rings are ugly but the cranks themselves are quite
> nice. My old cranks looked like that but were not so finely finished,
> had a much more sensible bolt circle, and came with less odd-looking
> rings. They were more or less the double version of these:
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.....
Chas.
|
| | | |
Date: 05 Jun 2007 23:09:52
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: Any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks
|
"Donald Gillies" <gillies@cs.ubc.ca > wrote in message
news:f44u8o$88m$1@cascade.cs.ubc.ca...
> Steve Gravrock <usenet@sdg.users.panix.com> writes:
>
> >For all their faults detailed elsewhere in this thread, those are very
> >attractive cranks. They look almost exactly like some SR cranks I had
> >from about that same period, except that the Campag cranks are much
> >more nicely finished.
>
> Actually, Campy got really weird about non-NR/SR stuff in the early
> 1980's.
>
> - there is a 144 bcd gransport crank that looks like nuovo record
> - there is a 144 bcd victory crank that looks like nuovo record
> both of the above cranks are identical in shape/size.
>
> - there is a gransport crank with 3 arms - first steel, then alloy.
> - there is a geometric victory crank that's 116 bcd with 5 arms.
> which is very close in size/shape to triomphe and uses similar rings.
>
> We were talking (I think) about the geometric victory crank, that was
> roundly hated by just about everyone for its lousy aesthetics. I
> think you are talking about the rare 144 bcd victory 5-arm
> nuovo-record type of cranks.
I'm talking about the Victory cranks with 116mm BCD geometric shaped
chainrings.
The Gran Sport gruppo that Campy introduced was never very successful - IT
WAS UGLY.
When Valentino Campagnolo took over the company after Tullio's death in
1983 he made a major effort to go after the mid range market that was
owned by the Japanese component makers.
He introduced both touring and racing versions of the Triomphe and Victory
gruppos.
Maybe Campy was trying to distance their mid-range gruppos from their top
of the line products,
I'd never seen a Triomphe or Victory crankset up close until last week and
I too thought that they were ugly. Up close the Victory is a nice looking
crank if you forget that it's a Campy product.
After seeing Campy Record, Nuovo Record and Super Record cranks plus a
slew of clones for 40+ years I think the geometric chainrings look
interestingly different.
I've never cared for the starfish looking cranks nor the current crop of
Darth Vader looking carbon fiber cranks.
Today I got to compare both an anodized and a polished Victory crankset
and an anodized Triomphe crankset, all with the geometric chainrings.
From what I found so far, the Victory and Triomphe cranks both used the
same 116mm BCD geometric chainrings and so did a rare Gran Sport crank.
The Campy Victory & Triomphe catalog supplements from that time list
chainrings in the following sizes:
35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 50, 51, 52, & 53 teeth.
Campy also made a true triple Victory crankset that used a 28T chainring
that attached to bosses behind the spiders.
Chas.
|
| | |
Date: 03 Jun 2007 20:46:53
From: John Thompson
Subject: Re: Any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks
|
On 2007-06-03, Steve Gravrock <usenet@sdg.users.panix.com > wrote:
> On 2007-06-03, John Thompson <john@vector.os2.dhs.org> wrote:
>> On 2007-06-01, * * Chas <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Is there any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks besides
>>> the self extracting crank bolts in some Victory cranks?
>>
>> Victory has a nicer, polished and anodized finish than Triomphe. I have
>> their official product brochures here:
>>
>> http://www.os2.dhs.org/~john/catalogs/victory.pdf
>> http://www.os2.dhs.org/~john/catalogs/triomphe.pdf
> For all their faults detailed elsewhere in this thread, those are very
> attractive cranks. They look almost exactly like some SR cranks I had
> from about that same period, except that the Campag cranks are much
> more nicely finished.
The biggest drawback to the cranks was the completely non-standard 116mm
BCD. This limited chainring availablity even when they were still in
production. Plus, the left-hand thread on the Victory crank's
self-extracting bolts could be problematic if you lost one.
--
John (john@os2.dhs.org)
|
| | | |
Date: 03 Jun 2007 21:56:56
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: Any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks
|
>>> * * Chas <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
>>>> Is there any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks besides
>>>> the self extracting crank bolts in some Victory cranks?
>> John Thompson <john@vector.os2.dhs.org> wrote:
>>> Victory has a nicer, polished and anodized finish than Triomphe. I have
>>> their official product brochures here:
>>> http://www.os2.dhs.org/~john/catalogs/victory.pdf
>>> http://www.os2.dhs.org/~john/catalogs/triomphe.pdf
>Steve Gravrock <usenet@sdg.users.panix.com> wrote:
>> For all their faults detailed elsewhere in this thread, those are very
>> attractive cranks. They look almost exactly like some SR cranks I had
>> from about that same period, except that the Campag cranks are much
>> more nicely finished.
John Thompson wrote:
> The biggest drawback to the cranks was the completely non-standard 116mm
> BCD. This limited chainring availablity even when they were still in
> production. Plus, the left-hand thread on the Victory crank's
> self-extracting bolts could be problematic if you lost one.
For as often as that operation's needed, a visit to your LBS for crank
removal with Campagnolo's LH puller isn't a big deal.
116mm rings mean you either like the gearing or you should pass on these
cranks.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | | |
Date: 04 Jun 2007 00:01:43
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: Any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks
|
"A Muzi" <am@yellowjersey.org > wrote in message
news:1366vrrip207nac@corp.supernews.com...
> >>> * * Chas <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com> wrote:
> >>>> Is there any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks
besides
> >>>> the self extracting crank bolts in some Victory cranks?
>
> >> John Thompson <john@vector.os2.dhs.org> wrote:
> >>> Victory has a nicer, polished and anodized finish than Triomphe. I
have
> >>> their official product brochures here:
> >>> http://www.os2.dhs.org/~john/catalogs/victory.pdf
> >>> http://www.os2.dhs.org/~john/catalogs/triomphe.pdf
>
> >Steve Gravrock <usenet@sdg.users.panix.com> wrote:
> >> For all their faults detailed elsewhere in this thread, those are
very
> >> attractive cranks. They look almost exactly like some SR cranks I had
> >> from about that same period, except that the Campag cranks are much
> >> more nicely finished.
>
> John Thompson wrote:
> > The biggest drawback to the cranks was the completely non-standard
116mm
> > BCD. This limited chainring availablity even when they were still in
> > production. Plus, the left-hand thread on the Victory crank's
> > self-extracting bolts could be problematic if you lost one.
>
> For as often as that operation's needed, a visit to your LBS for crank
> removal with Campagnolo's LH puller isn't a big deal.
>
> 116mm rings mean you either like the gearing or you should pass on these
> cranks.
> --
> Andrew Muzi
Thanks, too late...
I picked up a rare Italian vintage frame from a local seller earlier this
year. He offered me a deal on a vintage grupo of my choice. Last week was
the first time we were able to get together to work out a deal on the
components.
He had a box full of recent Campy acquisitions. In the mix was an almost
new Victory crankset with self extractor crank bolts. I'd never seen one
of these cranks up close and after looking at R/NR/SR cranks and clones
for 40+ years I figured it might look good on one of my bikes.
52/42 is not my cup of tea. I'd seen some 116mm chainrings at several LBSs
in the past so I figured I would be able to get smaller rings without a
problem. So far I've drawn a blank on finding a 50T and under 40T 116mm
chainrings.
Chas.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 05 Jun 2007 17:16:25
From: Donald Gillies
Subject: Re: Any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks
|
I have seen the following victory/triomphe chainrings on the internet
:
52T, 53T
42T, 35T, 36T
As far as I know, no other sizes were made. wwcyclery on ebay, and
www.bicycleclassics.com, and www.loosescrews.com are some places you
might look for chainrings.
One good thing is that you can triplize these cranks with 15mm
chainring bolts that are available today.
- Don Gillies
San Diego, CA
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 05 Jun 2007 21:57:15
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: Any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks
|
"Donald Gillies" <gillies@cs.ubc.ca > wrote in message
news:f44ucp$8be$1@cascade.cs.ubc.ca...
> I have seen the following victory/triomphe chainrings on the internet
> :
>
> 52T, 53T
>
> 42T, 35T, 36T
>
> As far as I know, no other sizes were made. wwcyclery on ebay, and
> www.bicycleclassics.com, and www.loosescrews.com are some places you
> might look for chainrings.
>
> One good thing is that you can triplize these cranks with 15mm
> chainring bolts that are available today.
>
> - Don Gillies
> San Diego, CA
Thanks for the feedback.
The Campy Victory & Triomphe catalog supplements from that time list
chainrings in the following sizes:
35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 50, 51, 52, & 53 teeth.
Campy also made a true triple Victory crankset that used a 28T chainring
that attached to bosses behind the spiders.
Chas.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 05 Jun 2007 20:43:48
From: David L. Johnson
Subject: Re: Any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks
|
Donald Gillies wrote:
> I have seen the following victory/triomphe chainrings on the internet
> :
>
> 52T, 53T
>
> 42T, 35T, 36T
>
> As far as I know, no other sizes were made.
A quibble, but I used to have a 50/35 Victory crankset, and those were
original Campy chainrings.
--
David L. Johnson
If all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach a
conclusion.
-- George Bernard Shaw
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Jun 2007 21:25:08
From: Mark
Subject: Re: Any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks
|
David L. Johnson wrote:
> Donald Gillies wrote:
>> I have seen the following victory/triomphe chainrings on the internet
>> :
>>
>> 52T, 53T
>>
>> 42T, 35T, 36T
>>
>> As far as I know, no other sizes were made.
>
> A quibble, but I used to have a 50/35 Victory crankset, and those were
> original Campy chainrings.
There's a guy on Ebay selling 28/38/50 Victory triples, which appear to
be factory new. (No, it's not me). Item #320080653205
http://cgi.ebay.com/Campagnolo-Victory-triple-crankset-175mm-28-38-50t_W0QQitemZ320080653205QQihZ011QQcategoryZ56195QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
(Sorry, too lazy to learn how to use those shortlink services)
Mark J.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Jun 2007 23:16:00
From: * * Chas
Subject: Re: Any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks
|
"Mark" <remove.mandmlj.this@remove.comcast.this.net > wrote in message
news:hpqdnebI9OS5qvvbnZ2dnUVZ_hninZ2d@comcast.com...
> David L. Johnson wrote:
> > Donald Gillies wrote:
> >> I have seen the following victory/triomphe chainrings on the internet
> >> :
> >>
> >> 52T, 53T
> >>
> >> 42T, 35T, 36T
> >>
> >> As far as I know, no other sizes were made.
> >
> > A quibble, but I used to have a 50/35 Victory crankset, and those were
> > original Campy chainrings.
>
> There's a guy on Ebay selling 28/38/50 Victory triples, which appear to
> be factory new. (No, it's not me). Item #320080653205
>
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/Campagnolo-Victory-triple-crankset-175mm-28-38-50t_W0QQitemZ320080653205QQihZ011QQcategoryZ56195QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
>
> (Sorry, too lazy to learn how to use those shortlink services)
>
> Mark J.
There's also someone selling a 53/42/35 Victory triple.
Chas.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 04 Jun 2007 19:13:54
From: Steve Gravrock
Subject: Re: Any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks
|
On 2007-06-04, * * Chas <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com > wrote:
> 52/42 is not my cup of tea. I'd seen some 116mm chainrings at several LBSs
> in the past so I figured I would be able to get smaller rings without a
> problem. So far I've drawn a blank on finding a 50T and under 40T 116mm
> chainrings.
Been there, done that. 52/42 was too high for me even when I was 19
years old and had good knees. Fortunately, in my case the rings were
110mm so finding a triple crank that they'd fit on was trivial.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 04 Jun 2007 17:35:49
From: Booker C. Bense
Subject: Re: Any difference between Campy Victory and Triomphe cranks
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In article <-o2dnSNBgub1Jf7bnZ2dnUVZ_tqnnZ2d@comcast.com >,
* * Chas <verktygjunk@aol.spamski.com > wrote:
>
>
>52/42 is not my cup of tea. I'd seen some 116mm chainrings at several LBSs
>in the past so I figured I would be able to get smaller rings without a
>problem. So far I've drawn a blank on finding a 50T and under 40T 116mm
>chainrings.
>
_ I think 50t is pretty unlikely. You might get lucky and find a
36t on Ebay, there was a guy selling them fairly regularly for a
while. I won't sell you mine...
_ You might try these guys
http://www.bicycleclassics.com/
There web page claims to have some 116 BCD rings, but I was never
successful in actually contacting them. Looks like they are all
out of 36t...
_ It makes a great fixed gear crank.
http://www.fixedgeargallery.com/2006/sept/BookerBense.htm
_ Booker C. Bense
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBRmRNdGTWTAjn5N/lAQEntAQAtlOvaqmkbw0gfnwElmFCemZvB5AS+pPb
lDbt7ugZDhDSYwJY8c5m4lIpwLOyE2oSE+sm+Vjdf26VWaoUuRVwvs3KZJhfLi/k
eg/evwBxm2C/SAHgBqjBXxHkwDBkTddSgIr8VoipX4bMbWIm/FcGFsGkdU6s3BdZ
Mcxh0PDrC9I=
=ZE8u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
