In a message dated 10/15/02 2:55:36 AM Pacific Daylight Time, sachs@erols.com writes:
<< I looked up to Campy from my first Sears with Campy Gran Sport in 1962. Until Frank Berto's tests, I never knew it was possible to design a derailleur that did not need to be overshifted and then brought back to the neutral point.>> So what? Remember that all the Japanese derailleurs shifted their best only when new. Performance then degraded AND they were impossible to rebuild so you got to buy a new one in about a year. So you have to overshift and then move the lever back? The motion quickly becomes second nature and the shift is instant and quiet if you get it right. The only "problem" as defined by Berto is that the Campy is a "late shifting" derailleur and doesn't work with index shifting, as that requires an early shifting derailleur.
<<Frankly, the first generation DuraAce shifts a whole bunch
nicer than the same vintage super record. Is Mojo loving something despite
its characteristics? >>
That is a debatable value judgment, not a fact. Despite some quirky products,
Tullio's contribution to cycling dwarfs Frank's. I have Berto's book and
appreciate it, but Frank is not the ultimate authority. He and a number of
his associates actively dislike Campagnolo products. I met them at the Velo
Sport 40th anniversary party and their dislike of Campagnolo products
approaches religious fervor. They are certainly allowed their preferences and
are free to not use Campagnolo parts, however, my own experience of over 30
years of using the stuff is the exact opposite of theirs. EVERY time I put
Japanese derailleurs on my bikes, I ended up putting the Campy ones back on.
I PREFER the way they shift, I prefer their ruggedness, and I prefer their
rebuildability.
Stevan Thomas
Alameda, CA