Difference between small, medium, large Campy Derailleurs

Iand-<< I was wondering... what exactly is the difference
between the 3 sized campy derailleurs outside of shifting
capacity ? I mean besides the obvious size of the cage, what
is the real mechanical difference between all three ? Is it
the size of the derailleur body ? The amount of travel ?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

<BR><BR>

There is no mechanical difference between the three. No
difference in body or dimansions. The longer cage, like any
longer cage, is just a place to put the extra chain needed
so you may safely go to the big/big combo w/o breaking the
chain while still have the chain be tight enough for non
droopy small-small combos.

Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535 vecchios.comvecchios.comOpen ↗ "Ruote convenzionali
costruite eccezionalmente bene"

(IanD) said:

I was wondering... what exactly is the difference between
the 3 sized campy derailleurs outside of shifting capacity
? I mean besides the obvious size of the cage, what is the
real mechanical difference between all three ? Is it the
size of the derailleur body ? The amount of travel ?

Just the length of the cage. In 2004, the Medium and Long
Cage Record models use a different type of carbon fiber
construction than the standard cage that is supposed to
be stronger.

"Qui si parla Campagnolo " <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de :
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Iand-<< I was wondering... what exactly is the difference
between the 3

sized

Quoted message said:

campy derailleurs outside of shifting capacity ? I mean
besides the obvious size of the cage, what is the real
mechanical difference between all three ? Is it the size
of the derailleur body ? The amount of travel ? >><BR><BR>

There is no mechanical difference between the three. No
difference in body

or

Quoted message said:

dimansions. The longer cage, like any longer cage, is just
a place to put

the

Quoted message said:

extra chain needed so you may safely go to the big/big
combo w/o breaking

the

Quoted message said:

chain while still have the chain be tight enough for
non droopy

small-small

Quoted message said:

combos.

Peter Chisholm

If you were buying new, for a 13x29 and 53x39 setup, would
you recommend any one of these in particular ?
--
Bonne route,

Sandy Paris FR

I am in the process of converting from Racing Triple to an
FSA Compact, 50-34. I have a set of 23-11 cogs AND a set
of 26-13 cogs. Would I be just as well off staying with
the long cage of the RT, or would a medium (or short) be
less sloppy?

Thanks!

Quoted message said:

Iand-<< I was wondering... what exactly is the difference
between the 3 sized campy derailleurs outside of shifting
capacity ? I mean besides the obvious size of the cage,
what is the real mechanical difference between all three ?
Is it the size of the derailleur body ? The amount of
travel ? >><BR><BR>

There is no mechanical difference between the three. No
difference in body or dimansions. The longer cage, like
any longer cage, is just a place to put the extra chain
needed so you may safely go to the big/big combo w/o
breaking the chain while still have the chain be tight
enough for non droopy small-small combos.

SMMB said:

If you were buying new, for a 13x29 and 53x39 setup, would
you recommend any one of these in particular ?

My LBS offered the Chorus medium cage (just about 74mm
pulley spacing) for that gearing. It's worked well, but I
wonder if the shorter variety might work, if one stayed out
of big/big (or small/small) combos? As I understand the long
cage is intended to be used for triples.

Phil

On 16 Mar 2004 14:26:36 GMT, [email hidden] (Qui si parla

Campagnolo ) said:

Medium cage...also for 50/34 and 13-29...If you went to a
smaller cogset, say a 12-25, the medium cage would work
also as does the short cage for 13-29 and
53/39 but chain length is a little easier to figure out.

The newer standard cage rear derailleurs are a bit longer
than the older ones. I used 50/34 and 13/29 this weekend
with a Record standard rear derailleur. Caryl's bike had a
53/39 and 13/30 and it shifted with a regular Mirage
derailleur. The tandem uses 48/34 and
12/34 with a medium cage. Should I go to a 50t, it would
need the longer cage model.

You are correct about sizing the chain. Lately, I've been
using an old chain and finding the optimum length. I push
out and put in links with a chain tool. When the size is
perfect, I cut the new chain. The chain has to be able to do
the big/big and not drag the bottom of the rear derailleur
with the small small.

On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 00:34:36 GMT, richard <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I am in the process of converting from Racing Triple to an
FSA Compact, 50-34. I have a set of 23-11 cogs AND a set
of 26-13 cogs. Would I be just as well off staying with
the long cage of the RT, or would a medium (or short) be
less sloppy?

I think that the term sloppy for the longer cage is
overrated. The distance of the top pulley to the cog is the
same in all models. Longer cages bend easier when you crash.

Aesthetically, I like short cage derailleurs.