Sante rder max teeth

jack said:

Would anyone here know the max cog size for a Shimano Sante short cage =

Quoted message said:

rder. I thought it was like 27t or 28t but someone told me it was 23t.

My recollection is that the Sant=E9 rear derailer was spec'ed for maximum=
=20
24 teeth (there was only a short cage version.) I remember it was weird=20 at the time, when Shimano
only had two 7-speed systems, Dura-Ace and=20 Sant=E9. Dura-Ace was targetted at pro racers, and was
rated up to 26=20 teeth in back, while Sant=E9 was targetted at fashion-concious yuppies,=20 but
only was rated to 24, as if the yuppies didn't need gearing as low=20 as the pro racers did!

Sant=E9 was primarily a styling exercise. Functionally, the Sant=E9 rear=
=20
derailer was probably the worst rear derailer Shimano has made in the=20 last 20 years. Very pretty,
but they don't work at all well by modern=20 standards.

Sheldon "Skin Deep" Brown +----------------------------------------------+
| My mind is aglow with whirling, transient | nodes of thought careening through a cosmic | vapor
| of invention! --Mel Brooks |
+----------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts Phone
617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 harriscyclery.comharriscyclery.comOpen ↗ Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
captainbike.comcaptainbike.comOpen ↗ sheldonbrown.comsheldonbrown.comOpen ↗

jack <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Would anyone here know the max cog size for a Shimano Sante short cage rder. I thought it was like
27t or 28t but someone told me it was 23t.

My wife's bike has that derailleur with 26T with no problem. I'm pretty sure it could handle 28.

JT

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:16:15 GMT, jack <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Would anyone here know the max cog size for a Shimano Sante short cage rder. I thought it was like
27t or 28t but someone told me it was 23t.

Thanks,

Jack

Little known, but there was a short cage Sante and medium cage. Sorry, don't remember the
cog ratings.

I wonder if distance between pulleys might be a rough guide? Compare to current Shimano
derailleurs...

...or just try it.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Sheldon Brown said:

jack said:

Would anyone here know the max cog size for a Shimano Sante short cage rder. I thought it was
like 27t or 28t but someone told me it was 23t.

My recollection is that the Santé rear derailer was spec'ed for maximum 24 teeth (there was only a
short cage version.) I remember it was weird at the time, when Shimano only had two 7-speed
systems, Dura-Ace and Santé. Dura-Ace was targetted at pro racers, and was rated up to 26 teeth in
back, while Santé was targetted at fashion-concious yuppies, but only was rated to 24, as if the
yuppies didn't need gearing as low as the pro racers did!

Santé was primarily a styling exercise. Functionally, the Santé rear derailer was probably the
worst rear derailer Shimano has made in the last 20 years. Very pretty, but they don't work at all
well by modern standards.

Sheldon "Skin Deep" Brown +----------------------------------------------+
| My mind is aglow with whirling, transient | nodes of thought careening through a cosmic | vapor
| of invention! --Mel Brooks |
+----------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts Phone
617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 harriscyclery.comharriscyclery.comOpen ↗ Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
captainbike.comcaptainbike.comOpen ↗ sheldonbrown.comsheldonbrown.comOpen ↗

Maybe it's a good thing I have a 105 9 speed here to replace it with? I have read in the groups
archives that even though Shimano states the max for the 105 to be 27 it can handle a 28.

This has got to be the best newsgroup. True experts take the time to answer the questions of
knotheads like myself, thank you for your expert advice.

Jack

Sheldon Brown <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

jack said:

Would anyone here know the max cog size for a Shimano Sante short cage

Quoted message said:

rder. I thought it was like 27t or 28t but someone told me it was 23t.

My recollection is that the Sant rear derailer was spec'ed for maximum

24 teeth (there was only a short cage version.) I remember it was weird at the time, when Shimano
only had two 7-speed systems, Dura-Ace and Sant . Dura-Ace was targetted at pro racers, and was
rated up to 26 teeth in back, while Sant was targetted at fashion-concious yuppies, but only was
rated to 24, as if the yuppies didn't need gearing as low as the pro racers did!

Sant was primarily a styling exercise. Functionally, the Sant rear

derailer was probably the worst rear derailer Shimano has made in the last 20 years. Very pretty,
but they don't work at all well by modern standards.

I think that might be a little extreme. I would say that it was better than just about everything
that came before it, and not as good as just about everything that came after it. At the time, it
was considerably lighter than the top of the line Campagnolo and I think DA also.

I used Sante briefly for racing on a mostly Campy bike before I quit for good and I didn't have any
problem shifting with it, and it definitely was better than the Campy and SunTour derailleurs I had
used for racing prior to that. I still have the derailleur on one of my bikes and I think the
shifting is still fine- you click, it shifts. What more do you want?

I wouldn't call it pretty, though. A painted finish doesn't make it pretty. Campagnolo is pretty.

JP

JP said:

I used Sante briefly for racing on a mostly Campy bike before I quit for good and I didn't have
any problem shifting with it, and it definitely was better than the Campy and SunTour derailleurs
I had used for racing prior to that. I still have the derailleur on one of my bikes and I think
the shifting is still fine- you click, it shifts. What more do you want?

The ability to work with a reasonable rang of sprocket sizes. Anything=20 will shift well on a
corncob, but the Sant=E9 was markedly inferior to=20 contemporary, less expensive Shimano rear
derailers such as 600EX,=20 105SC, even Light Action.

A modern sub $20 Tourney will shift better and handle a much wider=20 range, though it's heavier and
not so pretty.

Sheldon "A Votre Sant=E9" Brown +-----------------------------------------------+
| Earth is the cradle of the mind. | But one can not stay in the cradle forever. | -- Konstantin
| Tsiolkovsky |
+-----------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts Phone
617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 harriscyclery.comharriscyclery.comOpen ↗ Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
captainbike.comcaptainbike.comOpen ↗ sheldonbrown.comsheldonbrown.comOpen ↗

Sheldon Brown <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

JP said:

I used Sante briefly for racing on a mostly Campy bike before I quit for good and I didn't have
any problem shifting with it, and it definitely was better than the Campy and SunTour
derailleurs I had used for racing prior to that. I still have the derailleur on one of my bikes
and I think the shifting is still fine- you click, it shifts. What more do you want?

The ability to work with a reasonable rang of sprocket sizes.

If you wanted wide range gears, then you should indeed have gotten a different derailleur. However,
it did work very well with a reasonable range of sprocket sizes for racing. There are not many
courses where a 44x24 isn't sufficient. If you can't push that gear on a climb you will probably
(maybe not if it's extraordinarily steep) get dropped anyway.

Which brings up another point. Contrary to your claim that it was "yuppie", the fact is that it was
a racing derailleur. However, if you apply your tourist criterion for handling wide gear ratios to a
racing derailleur designed for close-ratio gears, it will and should come up short.

Quoted message said:

Anything will shift well on a corncob, but the Sant was markedly inferior to contemporary, less
expensive Shimano rear derailers such as 600EX, 105SC, even Light Action.

In what way? 6-speed, weren't they? How much did a 105 weigh? (A couple ounces here, a couple ounces
there, pretty soon you're talkin' real weight.) It happens that I recently acquired a 600 drivetrain
(with a 6s freewheel, BTW). Sometime when it gets warmer I'll have to take a couple of rides to
compare them on a 7s drivetrain (I'll have to use the Sante shifters); put them on the scales, too,
while I'm at it.

Quoted message said:

A modern sub $20 Tourney will shift better and handle a much wider range,

Big deal: so 15 years later there's a cheap derailleur that works better. I bet the Tourney works
better than my Nuovo Record derailleurs did, too. As I said, the Sante was not as good as most of
the derailleurs that came after it.

Quoted message said:

though it's heavier and not so pretty.

Your idea and mine of what is pretty sure are different. I would have preferred the Sante in a satin
metal finish with a less busy looking cage, but I chose 7s functionality with good performance,
light weight and reasonable cost over appearance. It was probably a cost effective mechanism because
it was cheaper to paint it than to give it a DA level natural finish.

JP

JP said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I used Sante briefly for racing on a mostly Campy bike before I quit for good and I didn't have
any problem shifting with it, and it definitely was better than the Campy and SunTour derailleurs
I had used for racing prior to that. I still have the derailleur on one of my bikes and I think
the shifting is still fine- you click, it shifts. What more do you want?

I said:

Quoted message said:

The ability to work with a reasonable range of sprocket sizes.

If you wanted wide range gears, then you should indeed have gotten a different derailleur.
However, it did work very well with a reasonable range of sprocket sizes for racing. There are not
many courses where a 44x24 isn't sufficient. If you can't push that gear on a climb you will
probably (maybe not if it's extraordinarily steep) get dropped anyway.

Which brings up another point. Contrary to your claim that it was "yuppie", the fact is that it
was a racing derailleur.

No, I distinctly recall our Shimano rep explaining that the Dura-Ace was the "racing" model, and he
specifically used the then-vogue term "yuppie" to describe Santé's target consumer.

Quoted message said:

However, if you apply your tourist criterion for handling wide gear ratios to a racing derailleur
designed for close-ratio gears, it will and should come up short.

I wasn't talking about wide-range touring gearing, I was talking about medium range gearing for
sporty recreational use.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Anything will shift well on a corncob, but the Sant was markedly inferior to contemporary, less
expensive Shimano rear derailers such as 600EX, 105SC, even Light Action.

In what way?

More versatile, capable of working with a range of gears suitable for more than just flatland or
racing use.

Quoted message said:

6-speed, weren't they?

Derailers don't care how many gears, that's marketing talk.

Quoted message said:

How much did a 105 weigh? (A couple ounces here, a couple ounces there, pretty soon you're talkin'
real weight.) It happens that I recently acquired a 600 drivetrain (with a 6s freewheel, BTW).
Sometime when it gets warmer I'll have to take a couple of rides to compare them on a 7s
drivetrain (I'll have to use the Sante shifters); put them on the scales, too, while I'm at it.

I don't dispute that the Santé rear derailer was light, I was speaking of function, not weight.

The Huret Jubilée was even lighter, shifted even worse.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

A modern sub $20 Tourney will shift better and handle a much wider range,

Big deal: so 15 years later there's a cheap derailleur that works better. I bet the Tourney works
better than my Nuovo Record derailleurs did, too. As I said, the Sante was not as good as most of
the derailleurs that came after it.

I don't agree.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

though it's heavier and not so pretty.

Your idea and mine of what is pretty sure are different. I would have preferred the Sante in a
satin metal finish with a less busy looking cage, but I chose 7s functionality with good
performance, light weight and reasonable cost over appearance. It was probably a cost effective
mechanism because it was cheaper to paint it than to give it a DA level natural finish.

The whole Santé grouplet was primarily a styling exercise, primarily aimed at an imagined "yuppie"
market. All of the parts were painted in the distinctive pearlescent color scheme. I particularly
liked the shift levers and the large flange hubs.

Sheldon "Replaced My Santé Rear Derailer With Something Cheaper And Better" Brown +------------------------------------------
+
| I think that God, in creating man, | somewhat overestimated his ability. | --Oscar Wilde |
+------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts Phone 617-244-
9772 FAX 617-244-1041 harriscyclery.comharriscyclery.comOpen ↗ Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
captainbike.comcaptainbike.comOpen ↗ sheldonbrown.comsheldonbrown.comOpen ↗

JP wrote: Sheldon Brown <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>... -snip discussion of Sante rear changer features/merits-

Sante 5000 seven speed was short only; 24 teeth max. Sante 5001 came in short (24t) and mid cage
(28t) models. Short 191 grams, no weight listed for mid cage. Current Ultegra 212g short 221g long.
Sante shifts similarly to all Shimano post-slant parallelogram changers; quite well. They are all
very similar in design and dimensions.
--
Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971