What to buy first?

Are you sure the components can move from frame to frame? One of the things I run into is that some components don't fit on certain frames, different threads, different tube size, different hub spacing, braze-on, clamp-on, etc.

So, you might not be able to use the new wheels on the old bike, or the old components on the new frame, or the new components on the old frame or all of the above! This is a variety of corn-goose-fox problem that those little old Italian craftsmen and their Japanese successors took special delight in arranging, and not at all unlike the computer manufacturers who have arranged things so that upgrading one part involves upgrading dozens of others!

NativeTexan said:

Are you sure the components can move from frame to frame? One of the things I run into is that some components don't fit on certain frames, different threads, different tube size, different hub spacing, braze-on, clamp-on, etc.

So, you might not be able to use the new wheels on the old bike, or the old components on the new frame, or the new components on the old frame or all of the above! This is a variety of corn-goose-fox problem that those little old Italian craftsmen and their Japanese successors took special delight in arranging, and not at all unlike the computer manufacturers who have arranged things so that upgrading one part involves upgrading dozens of others!

Okay, I thought about that at first...
I'm pretty sure that the majority of the expensive stuff in the gruppo will cross over, although I know the wheels won't. That's why I've decided to get the wheels last (or at least after the group), because I know that the ones I want aren't compatible with what I'm currently running. I'll have to do some extra checking to make sure everything will work.

Thanks for the input.

My vote is to upgrade frame first. I'm assuming the cervelo frame is CF? Anyways, you're gonna be paying a bunch of money for this stuff. The CF frame will probably run you a good $2k. I just saw an R3 frame for sale on ebay that was $2200. The Record will run you $2k new and $1500 on ebay. It could end up running you around $4k+. Personally, I love my Chorus and would highly recommend it. It's plenty good enough. Some people even compare it to d/a. I think Record is going a little overboard.

So basically here's what I'd recommend.
-Buy a cheaper CF frame (I'm biased, but I'd buy a Trek CF frame) because $2k+ on a "pro" frame is overboard again in my opinion. An '04 CF Trek 5500 on ebay is about $1k.
-Get Chorus, it's light and very smooth. Chorus on ebay is about $1k, give or take a little bit. So your total runs to a little over $2k for my recommended setup.

Mr. Jones said:

That's why I've decided to get the wheels last (or at least after the group), because I know that the ones I want aren't compatible with what I'm currently running.

What size wheels does your current frame use which are different from what any future frame you are considering use which makes you think the Campagnolo/-compatible wheels will be incompatible?

There is some variation in thinking (for want of a nicer way to express it) as to whether a Campagnolo 9-speed cassette indexes with a 9-speed Shimano shifter, and vice-versa ... I am in the camp (along with Sheldon Brown, as I recall), who says that they can be interchanged; but, some people have a problem BECAUSE (as I reckon it) they think the wheels can be hot-swapped ... they cannot ... the derailleur stops have to be changed & indexing adjusted to utilize one or the other.

In the past, the common-support wheels provided by MAVIC at the TdF where all Shimano compatible ...

alfeng said:

What size wheels does your current frame use which are different from what any future frame you are considering use which makes you think the Campagnolo/-compatible wheels will be incompatible?

There is some variation in thinking (for want of a nicer way to express it) as to whether a Campagnolo 9-speed cassette indexes with a 9-speed Shimano shifter, and vice-versa ... I am in the camp (along with Sheldon Brown, as I recall), who says that they can be interchanged; but, some people have a problem BECAUSE (as I reckon it) they think the wheels can be hot-swapped ... they cannot ... the derailleur stops have to be changed & indexing adjusted to utilize one or the other.

In the past, the common-support wheels provided by MAVIC at the TdF were all Shimano compatible ...

I currently have the older 105 (9 speed variety), and from my understanding, when you pick wheels, you get either a Campagnolo compatible hub or a Shimano compatible hub. Now, there's probably ways to get around that, as people seem to have suggested, but I doubt that the performance is truly optimum. Perhaps not, and if anyone has firsthand experience with that, it would be appreciated.
Now, I also imagine that there might be some trouble trying to use something designed for Campy ten speed with Shimano nine speed. Once again, I could very easily be wrong, but imagine that it would at least take some effort to make it work.

Mr. Jones said:

I currently have the older 105 (9 speed variety), and from my understanding, when you pick wheels, you get either a Campagnolo compatible hub or a Shimano compatible hub. Now, there's probably ways to get around that, as people seem to have suggested, but I doubt that the performance is truly optimum. Perhaps not, and if anyone has firsthand experience with that, it would be appreciated.
Now, I also imagine that there might be some trouble trying to use something designed for Campy ten speed with Shimano nine speed. Once again, I could very easily be wrong, but imagine that it would at least take some effort to make it work.

I was hoping to suggest that Campagnolo users can use Shimano wheels AND Shimano users can use Campagnolo wheels ... with their respective cassettes in 9-speed & 8-speed configurations ...

IMO, changing the current wheels for BETTER (vs. more expensive) wheels will probably be the most signficant way you can spend your cycling dollars (other than a cycling tour for R&R) which might change the performance of your riding ...

The problem that SOME people have with interchanging Campagnolo wheels with Shimano wheels, and vice-versa, is that they "hear" someone say that the so-called non-compatible wheels can be interchanged; BUT, hearing that they think the wheelsets can be hot-swapped ... they cannot.

The Campagnolo freehub body is more inboard than the Shimano freehub body. This means that to use a Shimano wheel with a Campagnolo drivetrain, the rear derailleur stops have to be adjusted AND the indexing tweaked (i.e., the cable will have to be adjusted which will probably result in needing to CHECK the indexing). Similarly, if you want to use a Campagnolo wheel with a Shimano drivetrain, you have to make similar adjustments. NO HOT-SWAPPING.

I don't think the cogs have to be respaced, but there ARE respacing "kits"; so, others feel that respacing optimizes the performance.

Wheels Manufacturing & American Classic make Shimano-to-Campagnolo conversion cassettes ...

A couple of years ago, I bought a 10-speed Wheels Manufacturing cassette (11-27 ... Ultegra-based cogs) just to see how good/bad it would mate with my 10-speed Campagnolo shifters (vs. the 12-23 Campagnolo cassette on a Campagnolo-compatible hubbed wheel) AND because the ready-to-use Campagnolo option was either a 13-29 or 13-26 -- the Wheels Manufacturing cassette was/is good enough (currently, I'm not using it only because I've reverted to running 9-speed drivetrains) ... but, others may disagree. I installed it, made the adjustments ... good enough. The "problem" is, as you might surmise, that the smallest cog (11t) is a lot closer to the dropout ... if adjustments are bad and/or you are in a hurry when installing/removing the wheel, I suppose there can be problems with the chain scratching the stays/etc.

Currently, AFAIK, it is only with the 10-speed Shimano drivetrain that you need wheels with a Shimano-compatible freehub.

No doubt, before you learn to dial-in the indexing, it can be finicky ... but, some components (wheels, in particular) aren't as exclusive as the marketing people would like to make you think (well, future shifters AND the SRAM components may be a different story). There was a time when (presumably) well intentioned people would suggest that you couldn't even mix 105 with non-105 components ... if you wanted to upgrade, it was all or nothing.

When push comes to shove, I would prefer a SHIMANO-compatible wheel ... no question. The main reason is the wider variety of cassettes that are available ... I've got a wussy 11-34 XT cassette on one road bike -- a road bike with Campy shifters.

FWIW. Some people may suggest that Campagnolo cassettes last longer ... I have no reason to doubt that; but, it is probably because the cogs are slightly thicker (from my observation) rather than a quality of the steel or alloy used ... presumably, more material takes longer to wear down if all other things are equal.

So, I was just trying to infer that you didn't have to worry about potential, future Campagnolo-compatibility if you wanted to move down that path.

FWIW2. I "love" Shimano components, but I think changing the shifters to Campagnolo (any level) will be a greater benefit unless you were to upgrade to Dura Ace ...

Shimano cranks are probably a slightly better value for the dollar/pound/yen than Campagnolo cranks -- I have both Dura Ace and Record cranks (both types are pre-external bearing).

Think of it this way: all things being equal, a frame affects the feel of your ride EVERY SECOND that you're on the bike...whereas new shifters & derailleurs affect the feel of your bike ONLY when you're shifting gears. So it stands to reason that upgrading your frame would have a more profoundly perceptible difference.

Of course the flaw (or rather, one of the many flaws) in that reasoning is the presumption that a Cervelo R3 frame is going to feel/ride significantly and noticeably better than a Giant TCR. Seing as they're both carbon frames with a more-or-less conventional geometry, I'm not sure the minor differences in construction would really yield an overtly different ride. They might; but they might not.

But I would still upgrade the frame first.

(Unless your 105 stuff is falling apart.)

alfeng said:

IMO, changing the current wheels for BETTER (vs. more expensive) wheels will probably be the most signficant way you can spend your cycling dollars (other than a cycling tour for R&R) which might change the performance of your riding...

That's what I've heard other places as well. I definitely want to upgrade the wheels first, and regardless of the fact that it is possible to make Shimano compatible with Campagnolo, I'm no ace mechanic, and it would definitely take me a while to even get something passable. Even then, it wouldn't be perfect.

The reason I wanted to "upgrade" to campagnolo was for the shifting quality. I have heard the issue with the cranks before, but I don't believe that my 135 pound bulk was designed for flexing cranks with massive power. I try to pretend that I smoothly spin my cranks, and can actually fool some people when I say that (the fact that they are mountain bikers without clipless pedals is irrelevant). Even if the cranks prove too flexy, there's always aftermarket cranks.

Lest you think I am being argumentative, I think that all the suggestions that I have received have been valid, however some of them are beyond my mechanical expertise.

Bob Ross said:

Think of it this way: all things being equal, a frame affects the feel of your ride EVERY SECOND that you're on the bike...whereas new shifters & derailleurs affect the feel of your bike ONLY when you're shifting gears. So it stands to reason that upgrading your frame would have a more profoundly perceptible difference.

Of course the flaw (or rather, one of the many flaws) in that reasoning is the presumption that a Cervelo R3 frame is going to feel/ride significantly and noticeably better than a Giant TCR. Seing as they're both carbon frames with a more-or-less conventional geometry, I'm not sure the minor differences in construction would really yield an overtly different ride. They might; but they might not.

But I would still upgrade the frame first.

(Unless your 105 stuff is falling apart.)

Let me make a quick clarification. My Giant TCR is not a carbon frame, it is aluminum. I have never felt it flex under my power, and it doesn't beat me up too much because I'm young. All things considered, it's not too bad. However, there are times when I would like something that soaked up a little more vibration, and was maybe a little lighter (but I'm not going to go and buy AX lightness parts to achieve that end).

As of right now though, I've heard a lot of negative comments about the Cervelo frame. I'm looking at pursuing something somewhat similar in nature, but perhaps with a better reputation (not in the sense of race records or prestige, but rather track record in terms of frame failures). I'm currently leaning in the direction of a BMC, Merckx Carbon 3XM or Pinarello Prince Carbon. I know that each one of those frames is more expensive than the Cervelo, but less expensive than the Cervelo plus hospital bills if something fails going downhill.

However, something that might be in favor of shifting (as you yourself alluded to) is that the frame difference might not be as noticeable. However, I imagine that the difference between ergo levers with the button and sti levers with the two lever pivots would be very noticeable, even if the difference was noticeable less of the time. Just a consideration.

I would like to thank everyone for their feedback, for as much as I am playing devil's advocate, it is helping me reach a decision.

Mr. Jones said:

That's what I've heard other places as well. I definitely want to upgrade the wheels first, and regardless of the fact that it is possible to make Shimano compatible with Campagnolo, I'm no ace mechanic, and it would definitely take me a while to even get something passable. Even then, it wouldn't be perfect.

The reason I wanted to "upgrade" to campagnolo was for the shifting quality.

Okay ... just to bore everyone one more time, the attached picture is my "Winter" bike -- a Peugeot PH501 from the mid-80s ... the rear was re-spaced to 130mm and the original fork was replaced with a carbon fiber fork.

It has a SHIMANO Dura Ace 7700 crankset on a 112.5 XTR BB ... the XTR BB allowed me to use either the double OR a triple with minimal derailleur/etc. adjustments.

The wheels are older, 8-speed SHIMANO Dura Ace SIS hubbed wheels with an 11-32 XT 9-speed cassette.

The rear derailleur is a SHIMANO XTR 950.

The front derailleur is a SHIMANO Ultegra 6503.

The shifters are 9-speed CAMPAGNOLO Mirage. Mirage is the second from the bottom in Campagnolo's line-up ... they work as well as Centaur (same internals) ... almost as good as pre-Ultra Record after about 400+ miles to break-in the mechanism). The rear derailleur cable anchoring is straight-up and unmodified by any gizmos (e.g., JTEK shiftmate).

The chain is currently a SHIMANO HG73 (9-speed).

My experience is that the Campagnolo shifters work fine with Shimano derailleurs ... better, IMO, than the 6500 9-speed Ultegra shifters!

In fact, the Campagnolo shifters work so much better that the chainrings happen to be 8-speed (!) chainrings because I had them and I found out that the Campagnolo shifters don't need ramped-and-pinned chainrings, so I figured I may as well use them ... I'm not racing ... and, of course, the shifting IS marginally better with ramped-and-pinned chainrings. As they say, your results may vary ...

As you can see, I have used Campagnolo shifters with a variety of Shimano drivetrain components ... no doubt, you should be able to simply swap a pair of Campagnolo 9-speed shifters with your current 105 9-speed shifters AND still use the rest of your current 105 components.

Once I figured out that the Campagnolo shifters would index properly with the Shimano components, the most difficult thing I had to do was to decide whether the derailleur cable housing should be lashed to the handlebar in front with the brake cable housing or behind ... front is better, IMO.

BTW. The only other Campagnolo component on the bike is the headset!

I'd wait until I could afford everything. Brand new everything. Can't beat brand new everything. It's worth the wait. Plus, then everything wears together.

helmutRoole2 said:

I'd wait until I could afford everything. Brand new everything. Can't beat brand new everything. It's worth the wait. Plus, then everything wears together.

I thought about that as well. However, that may just take to long for me. I'm usually not too much of an instant gratification person, but this could be over a year of waiting. Actually, at this point, I'm thinking about forgetting the Cervelo due to the bad history of that brand's carbon (too much negative feedback), and just buying a complete bike, like a Six13. Nothing exotic, but probably pretty cost efficient (at least, for road cycling).

Mr. Jones said:

I thought about that as well. However, that may just take to long for me. I'm usually not too much of an instant gratification person, but this could be over a year of waiting. Actually, at this point, I'm thinking about forgetting the Cervelo due to the bad history of that brand's carbon (too much negative feedback), and just buying a complete bike, like a Six13. Nothing exotic, but probably pretty cost efficient (at least, for road cycling).

Check this company out: http://origin-8.com/

Pretty nice stuff. Full frame, fork, seat colar and headset goes for $1,100.

They're distributed by J&B Importers. The quality is very good. The Latic Acid has very cool carbon drop outs. Nice design. Bars and stem are nice too.

Mr. Jones said:

I am relatively new to cycling, but have approached it rather passionately, and have lately been riding many of the climbs that are rated as the hardest in my area. I want to make some upgrades to my bike, but I'm not sure in what order I want to make them.
My bike is an almost stock 2005 Giant TCR 2. You can look up the specs on Giant's website.
I want to eventually get a campy record equipped bike (yes, I know, it's a big step up), upgrade the frame, and upgrade the wheels.
I'm currently thinking about getting a Cervelo R3 and putting Record on it.
In any case, the reason I am posting is to determine what order I should perform all of these upgrades. If I buy the frame first, then I can switch my old components over, and then run those until I get enough money to buy what I really want. Either way, there is some advantage to getting one or the other first. Wheels come after the component upgrade because they are group specific. I would hate to have a pair of nice wheels laying around that I coudn't use.
I would like some recommendations as to what I should upgrade first, group or frame. At this point, I have the money to buy a new group, but not the frame.
What I would not like is recommendations to get a different frame, get Shimano instead of Campy, etc. Thanks to anyone that answers.

I was in the same dilema years back. I bought the group first but didnt migrate the the parts on the old bike. Just be patient, keep the record parts boxed and admire them while saving enuf cash for the frame. The wheels go last.

alfeng said:

Okay ... just to bore everyone one more time, the attached picture is my "Winter" bike -- a Peugeot PH501 from the mid-80s ... the rear was re-spaced to 130mm and the original fork was replaced with a carbon fiber fork.

Very generous chainstays on that Pug.

hd reynolds said:

Very generous chainstays on that Pug.

Yup ... LOoong stays by modern standards ... "sports touring" frame ... main triangle has the exact-same dimensions as my Colnago, but those Peugeot stays are long enough to allow fenders ... 16 1/4" as shown ... not quite as long as on a "true" touring frame.

The original fork also could accommodate fenders ... the ride did NOT change when I changed to the LOOK fork; but, the bike's weight was reduced by about a pound ...

hd reynolds said:

I was in the same dilema years back. I bought the group first but didnt migrate the the parts on the old bike. Just be patient, keep the record parts boxed and admire them while saving enuf cash for the frame. The wheels go last.

I disagree with this logic. The biggest impact in terms of upgrading would be frame, wheels, group, rest.

A quality frame and wheels will still ride well no matter what gears are attached to it. People pay too much importance to groupsets as even a well set up lower end group will shift precisely whereas frame and wheels have a much more direct impact on riding. IMHO

alfeng said:

Yup ... LOoong stays by modern standards ... "sports touring" frame ... main triangle has the exact-same dimensions as my Colnago, but those Peugeot stays are long enough to allow fenders ... 16 1/4" as shown ... not quite as long as on a "true" touring frame.

The original fork also could accommodate fenders ... the ride did NOT change when I changed to the LOOK fork; but, the bike's weight was reduced by about a pound ...

Wait... What does this have to do with anything? Did you guys read any of what came before this? Did you look at the title of this thread?

Mr. Jones said:

Wait... What does this have to do with anything? Did you guys read any of what came before this? Did you look at the title of this thread?

The thread has strayed a bit because the answers are in, for the most part.

I am in the camp that thinks that the components are more important ... hence, the "laundry list" in one of the prior listings. Wheels first (though, clearly, others disagree on the importance of the wheels).

Others are in the camp that thinks the frame is more important -- they may be right.

MY inference is that a quality carbon fiber fork did NOT provide a different RIDE than a fairly good (but, not great) steel fork.

You may, if you choose, extrapolate (as I have) that ALL frame builders attempt to recreate the ride of a steel framed bike AT A LIGHTER WEIGHT ... and, even the particular Peugeot with its Reynolds 501 tubing is trying to replicate the ride of a gas-pipe steel tubed bike. Some do a better job than others; and, apparently MOST of the frames I have ridden have had a better ride (though, NOT a higher cost) than what others have allowed themselves to ride.

Yes, I have ridden a CARBON FIBER (C40) Colnago, and the ride was essentially the SAME when descending on a familiar non-switchbacked, relatively high speed, mountain roadway!?! That was a slightly distressing experience because it means that the money for a high-zoot frame really goes for the R&D to effect weight reduction. Undoubtedly, with the RIGHT rider, s/he might be able to dive into a 90º turn at a higher speed with the Colnago than with the Peugeot ... but, perhaps, not IF all other things are equal.

BUYING a nice frame, if it is well engineered, is as much for show as for go since a reasonably good, vintage steel frame will provide the same ride ... or, better.

COMPONENTS, FIRST. If the frame has good geometry AND fits, then the frame is an incidental object to holding the components, IMO.