Help Needed With Veloce Ergo

David White said:

Thanks in advance for your time and response.

A buddy just gave me a set of 9-speed Veloce Ergo Levers (nice, huh?). I have
read on the Branford Bike site that Campy changed their 9-speed stuff in 1999
or 2000 (not sure which) and that pre-switch levers/RDs are not compatible with
post-switch levers/RDs. I assume this is correct info. Can others confirm this?

You can use a pre/post whatever rear derailleur and shift a Campy 9sp
cassette.

I do it all wrong and get great results. I use a Record 8 rear
derailleur with 2003,5 x 10 sp Ergo levers to shift Shimano 9 or 10 or
Campy 10.

You'll get more variability due to the quality and lengths of your
housing and cables than you will with the pre/post stuff.

David White said:

Thanks in advance for your time and response.

A buddy just gave me a set of 9-speed Veloce Ergo Levers (nice, huh?). I have
read on the Branford Bike site that Campy changed their 9-speed stuff in 1999
or 2000 (not sure which) and that pre-switch levers/RDs are not compatible with
post-switch levers/RDs. I assume this is correct info. Can others confirm this?

IT IS NOT CORRECT!!!< I get so tired of this. maybe Breanford ought to
step away from their computer screens long enough to try this stuff. I
Just converted a 1999 lever set with a 1999 rear derailleur to 10s with
a 2005 shift disc and .......tada, it works perfectly!!!

Quoted message said:

If so, I think these are pre-switch levers. I think this because they ave the
pointy brake hood rubber (RE-500). I have looked through the spare parts
catalogs shown on the Campy web site and it looks like the last year Veloce had
these hoods was 1998. Can this be confirmed by anyone?

They are 1998 Veloce, 1999 saw them go to the round shape.

Quoted message said:

I understand from Branford that the chains and cassettes are compatible either
way. Can this be confirmed by anyone?

You can use any Campagnolo rear derailleur for this setup. You cannot
convert to 10s, that started in 1999, when ERGO brain was starting.

Quoted message said:

Finally, if I want to use these, I have to locate an approriate RD (or upgrade
the internal mechanisms,

NO, NO-Get a Campagnolo rear deraileur, even a 2005 10s one, put on a
Campag 9s cogset and chain, go ride.

I suppose - which I am disinclined to do). How can I

Quoted message said:

easily tell a pre-switch RD from a post-switch RD? Is there a model number (or
is that too easy)? Is there are compelling reason to use the post-switch items
(and change the internals) over using pre-switch?

Please do not change the innards, do not need to.

Quoted message said:

Thanks.

Thanks to all who have replied. It sounds much easier/more user-friendly than
I'd thought. Cheers.

David White said:

Thanks in advance for your time and response.

A buddy just gave me a set of 9-speed Veloce Ergo Levers (nice, huh?). I
have read on the Branford Bike site that Campy changed their 9-speed
stuff in 1999 or 2000 (not sure which) and that pre-switch levers/RDs
are not compatible with post-switch levers/RDs. I assume this is correct
info. Can others confirm this?

If so, I think these are pre-switch levers. I think this because they
ave the pointy brake hood rubber (RE-500). I have looked through the
spare parts catalogs shown on the Campy web site and it looks like the
last year Veloce had these hoods was 1998. Can this be confirmed by anyone?

I understand from Branford that the chains and cassettes are compatible
either way. Can this be confirmed by anyone?

Finally, if I want to use these, I have to locate an approriate RD (or
upgrade the internal mechanisms, I suppose - which I am disinclined to
do). How can I easily tell a pre-switch RD from a post-switch RD? Is
there a model number (or is that too easy)? Is there are compelling
reason to use the post-switch items (and change the internals) over
using pre-switch?

Thanks.

David White said:

A buddy just gave me a set of 9-speed Veloce Ergo Levers (nice,
huh?). I have read on the Branford Bike site that Campy changed their
9-speed stuff in 1999 or 2000 (not sure which) and that pre-switch
levers/RDs are not compatible with post-switch levers/RDs. I assume
this is correct info. Can others confirm this?

The year of change was 2001. You will be told that it doesn't matter but
there was an actual change in cable pull, so if you do want best indexing
possible, use pre 2001 rear derailleur with pre 2001 Ergo.

Quoted message said:

If so, I think these are pre-switch levers. I think this because they
ave the pointy brake hood rubber (RE-500).

Correct. And 2001+ 9-speed Ergos are marked "9 SPEED" on the bodies.

2001+ rear derailleurs can be identified by the lack of a conventional
"b-tension" screw (in the usual place).

~PB

Pete Biggs said:

David White said:

A buddy just gave me a set of 9-speed Veloce Ergo Levers (nice,
huh?). I have read on the Branford Bike site that Campy changed their
9-speed stuff in 1999 or 2000 (not sure which) and that pre-switch
levers/RDs are not compatible with post-switch levers/RDs. I assume
this is correct info. Can others confirm this?

The year of change was 2001. You will be told that it doesn't matter but
there was an actual change in cable pull, so if you do want best indexing
possible, use pre 2001 rear derailleur with pre 2001 Ergo.

It does not matter in my experience of installing dozens of 'mixed
year' ERGO and rear derailleurs. If anything, the gent should try using
the 'older' Veloce with a new rear derailleur before just assuming that
it won't work. As a retail shop, we can't survive on 'pretty good' It
has to be perfect for the consumer, which is what I describe it as.

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

Pete Biggs said:

David White said:

A buddy just gave me a set of 9-speed Veloce Ergo Levers (nice,
huh?). I have read on the Branford Bike site that Campy changed
their 9-speed stuff in 1999 or 2000 (not sure which) and that
pre-switch levers/RDs are not compatible with post-switch
levers/RDs. I assume this is correct info. Can others confirm this?

The year of change was 2001. You will be told that it doesn't
matter but there was an actual change in cable pull, so if you do
want best indexing possible, use pre 2001 rear derailleur with pre
2001 Ergo.

It does not matter in my experience of installing dozens of 'mixed
year' ERGO and rear derailleurs.

You've said that already. And I will carry on posting the facts when
people ask for them. Then they can decide what to do for themselves. It
is a fact that the cable pull and derailleurs changed in 2001. At the
very least, we should get the year correct in case someone does think it
might matter. A lot of people think it's 2000.

Old 9-speed Ergo pulls 3.2mm of cable per gear, new pulls 3.0mm.

Quoted message said:

If anything, the gent should try
using the 'older' Veloce with a new rear derailleur before just
assuming that
it won't work. As a retail shop, we can't survive on 'pretty good' It
has to be perfect for the consumer, which is what I describe it as.

Wasn't perfect when I tried old geometry with new shifter. There's no
such thing as perfect indexing anyway.

~PB

Pete Biggs said:

Wasn't perfect when I tried old geometry with new shifter. There's no
such thing as perfect indexing anyway.

My '98ish 9sp. shift levers (brifters) work very well with a Chorus
('02) 10 speed rear deraileur, on Campy Veloce 9sp (loose) cogs (one
wheelset w/Veloce hub, another w/Record hub). I don't have any
experience with mixing 10sp (new) shift levers with other components,
but esp. when everything is fresh/new, clean, oiled, this Johnny Cash
Cadillac setup (CRec crank with original chainwheels, some other year
front deraileur)(and other non-drivetrain model year parts mixing)
works a notch better than my 8sp (all Record, new parts bought at the
same time) ever did. Meaning, a little quicker shift and a more
positive feel. BTW, that's with Campy-branded chains, and Record 8sp
cogs, and as it happens, both bikes are early 80's manufacture with
short horizontal dropouts. And that's not to call the 8sp shifting bad,
by any means, either, but the 9sp has a noticeable edge on the 8sp. I
understand there was a change in Campy cables, also; maybe my 9sp has
the newer/thicker style and that is the difference.

Not to argue against (doubt) your results, but-- perhaps another cause,
other than actual incompatibility? I'm struck by Peter C's reported
repeatability in getting excellent results, and with lots of different
owner/operators, too: IOW, lots of field testers "looking for" flaws.
Or are you also a mechanic/shop owner who has tried this mixing thing
more often than a "civilian" bike owner might? --TP

Pete Biggs said:

You've said that already. And I will carry on posting the facts when
people ask for them. Then they can decide what to do for themselves. It
is a fact that the cable pull and derailleurs changed in 2001. At the
very least, we should get the year correct in case someone does think it
might matter. A lot of people think it's 2000.

Wasn't perfect when I tried old geometry with new shifter. There's no
such thing as perfect indexing anyway.

~PB

No need to get huffy. The 'facts' as printed by Campagnolo are not
accurate from my experience. Remember they also said you couldn't
convert a 1999 9s lever to 10s, when 10s first came out. They also say
you cannot use a short cage rear deraileur with a 13-29 cogset, they
also say you cannot use a 11-23 with a long cage rear der, or use a
compact crank with a 'standard' front der...etc.

I don't know why your equipment didn't work. As you say, no such thing
as perfect indexing anyway, something else I disagree with. Pushing
lever, in any situation, loaded, coasting, chain goes to next
cog...stays there w/o noise, what else is there?

AS Andy Muzi says, bicycle systems and derailleurs just aren't that
precise and great shifting can be had with lots of combinations that
are not concerned with .2mm cable pull differences.

Quoted message said:

Not to argue against (doubt) your results, but-- perhaps another
cause, other than actual incompatibility?

I think I eliminated other causes. In any case, there is an actual
difference in cable pull and ratio. It's not purely a figment of
Campagnolo's marketing.

Quoted message said:

I'm struck by Peter C's
reported repeatability in getting excellent results,

Frankly, I'd have to personally ride and listen to those bikes to be sure
the indexing is what I would call excellent. Some subjectivity is
involved. It doesn't help that all Ergos have some play from new: partly
deliberate (the overshifting feature) when shifting to larger sprockets,
and partly some slop in the works when shifting to smaller sprockets.
This makes *perfect* and noise-free setup tricky even with properly
matched stuff.

Please note that I usually merely say that new levers should be used with
new derailleurs (and vice versa) "for best indexing" -- and that has to be
true. I don't say it's not going to work.

Quoted message said:

and with lots of
different owner/operators, too.

We don't hear from all those directly.

~PB

Pete Biggs wrote:
(I wrote):

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

and with lots of
different owner/operators [mixed Campy Ergo], too.

(P. Biggs replied):

Quoted message said:

We don't hear from all those directly.

The idea is that Peter does, and has reported his results.

The last little cruise, new chain and cogs on a new wheel, was quiet in
all gears, but I'd defer (as always) to someone riding next to me.
True, the bike world has become a lot noisier since you held up one
finger for six speed and five for five. --TP

On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 01:25:32 +0100, "Pete Biggs"

p@honeydewbiggs{remove_melon}.tc said:

Frankly, I'd have to personally ride and listen to those bikes to be sure
the indexing is what I would call excellent. Some subjectivity is
involved. It doesn't help that all Ergos have some play from new: partly
deliberate (the overshifting feature) when shifting to larger sprockets,
and partly some slop in the works when shifting to smaller sprockets.
This makes *perfect* and noise-free setup tricky even with properly
matched stuff.

Again, I believe that there is much variability caused by the
installation of the system. Quality of cables and housing, lengths or
loops of housing and how tight those loops are, chainline, chain
length, chain brand, and length of chainstays all cause shifting
variability. Cassette range is a factor too. Shifts for an 11/23
seem more difficult than those for a 13/29.

Define a perfect shift. When you move a lever or push a button, you
hear a click and there is a positive shift without chain noise during
and after the shift. People are more tolerant of a poor shift to a
smaller cog than to a larger cog. Is a perfect shift when the click
and shift happen at the same time?

I've had the opportunity to setup systems for singles and tandems with
Ergo 9 and 10. I can get mixes to work. Sometimes the range of error
in adjustment is very fine. Too fine for an average owner. Examples:

My hookups of Campy 10 with Hubub hookup to XT/XTR rear derailleurs is
positive. The cable will need to be readjusted when the bend sets in.

SHIMANO CASSETTES: I got an early 10 sp Shimano wheel in 2004 and
put it briefly into my Campy post 2001 x 10 sp bike. It seemed to
work ok in stand. This year, I bought one of the first 12/27 Shimano
cassettes for my Record 2003 system. I think it ideal cassette with
my 50/34. I could not make the cassette work to my standard and
promptly sold it. Later, I read that post 2001 shifters and a pre
2001 derailleur will shift the Shimano shifting perfectly. I bought
the cassette again and installed it using an 8sp Record rear
derailleur. It works aOK. I then put my Shimano 10 sp wheel into my
wife's post 2001 matched bicycle and it worked fine too! I don't
know.

My '99 Daytona 9 shifters with 2003 Centaur derailleur shift my tandem
perfectly.

All the 10 sp Ergo systems seem to shift Shimano 9 fine, especially
with Shimano HG chain.

Paul Kopit said:

Again, I believe that there is much variability caused by the
installation of the system. Quality of cables and housing, lengths or
loops of housing and how tight those loops are, chainline, chain
length, chain brand, and length of chainstays all cause shifting
variability. Cassette range is a factor too. Shifts for an 11/23
seem more difficult than those for a 13/29.

Agreed, but I've done enough experimentation to conclude that there is
something common with all Ergos...........

Quoted message said:

Define a perfect shift. When you move a lever or push a button, you
hear a click and there is a positive shift without chain noise during
and after the shift. People are more tolerant of a poor shift to a
smaller cog than to a larger cog. Is a perfect shift when the click
and shift happen at the same time?

All that. Too tight a gear cable and Ergo's overshift feature will be
annoying when shifting to larger sprockets (and the lever will feel stiff
whilst shifting too). But cable too slack and the chain rubs against the
next smallest sprocket when pedalling normally (particularly after a shift
to smaller sprocket). I find the the range of adjustment for good
noise-free performance is extremely fine even with all "correct"
components. In fact I've never got it truly perfect with the two sets of
Mirage Ergos and two sets of Chorus 9-speed Ergos that I have used, from
new, on three bikes, with all the other components being the same at one
point.

To deliberately add an extra error (eg. mismatched Ergo & derailleur) into
the tricky mix when you don't have to, particularly any one that
effectively makes the derailleur shift less far per click, or places the
sprockets closer together, is a bad idea, IMHO.

Quoted message said:

I've had the opportunity to setup systems for singles and tandems with
Ergo 9 and 10. I can get mixes to work. Sometimes the range of error
in adjustment is very fine.

I appreciate that you may be referring to other things there, but for the
record, 10-speed rear derailleurs are basically the same as 2001+ 9-speed
derailleurs so they are naturally compatible with 2001+ 9-speed Ergos.

~PB

Pete Biggs said:

David White said:

A buddy just gave me a set of 9-speed Veloce Ergo Levers (nice,
huh?). I have read on the Branford Bike site that Campy changed their
9-speed stuff in 1999 or 2000 (not sure which) and that pre-switch
levers/RDs are not compatible with post-switch levers/RDs. I assume
this is correct info. Can others confirm this?

The year of change was 2001. You will be told that it doesn't matter but
there was an actual change in cable pull, so if you do want best indexing
possible, use pre 2001 rear derailleur with pre 2001 Ergo.

Quoted message said:

If so, I think these are pre-switch levers. I think this because they
ave the pointy brake hood rubber (RE-500).

Correct. And 2001+ 9-speed Ergos are marked "9 SPEED" on the bodies.

2001+ rear derailleurs can be identified by the lack of a conventional
"b-tension" screw (in the usual place).

~PB

I agree the shifting is not as perfect when mixing pre 2001
derailleurs/shifters with post 2001 shifters/derailleurs. I used a
1998 Chorus Ergo shifters with 2003 Centaur medium cage rear derailleur
for a week in the mountains. I could tell there was a slight
hesitation in the shifts compared to what it was when things matched.

The only things different when converting from all 1998 Chorus to the
2003 Centaur was different derailleurs, crank and bottom bracket. Same
cables and housing and same wheels and same cassette and same chain.
The hesitation was not enough to worry about and was not noticeable
unless I was thinking about it. The hesitation was only in the middle
cogs. When it was tuned out of the upper and lower cogs, it was there
in the middle cogs. No way to adjust the rear derailleur cable
adjuster to get it perfect in all cogs. When using my 2003 Centaur
Ergo shifters with the 2003 Centaur rear derailleur it shifts perfectly
in all cogs. And when using my 1998 Chorus Ergo shifters with the 1998
Chorus short cage rear derailleur it shifts perfectly in all cogs. I
have two bikes, Chorus and Centaur.