John:
I'm beginning to understand where you're coming from ... but I disagree on most points:
1. "spanish manufacturer using copies of Campy molds"
- Everybody copies everybody, especially if the design is good
But Zeus did not copy the molds because
- their designs were very close, but not identical. - companies don't give their competitors access to their molds (unless they are related) - companies have non-competitive understandings with strategic partners such as die-makers
2. "Campy eventually sued them out of existence" ...... really? send me a link to the source of this info
3. "Never popular in the pro peleton" ... not touching this one ... see archives
4. "Brittle alloys" ... don't know, never saw any statistics, doubt they were ever published
5. Shimano never was able to duplicate Campy alloy specs
- Shimano didn't need to copy anybody's alloys ... study them, yes ... copy, no - Shimano needed to make the best of what they had
6. "The castings were crude at all price points" ... no argument here
- my point was functionality, reliability, repeatability ... slant parallelogram designs were better than the competition in all respects right off the drawing board (but I agree, they were never as pretty as Campy designs)
7. "If you don't haves experience with the product, What's the point of posting?"
- I rode with all these product over many, many years. But as I'm not a very aggressive rider, all worked fine for me. only thing I ever broke were spokes and helmets. - shimano & suntour outshifted Campy ... otherwise why would campy have changed to slant parallelogram designs?
8. There's no need to call names on the list. Shimano may not have made the best parts in the world, but they were good enough for them to survive, prosper and become the world's biggest component maker.
As for George's comments:
Zeus had basically three lines of products: Alfa, Criterium, and 2000 ... I rode Criterium parts
Amir Avitzur Ramat-Gan, Israel
On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 10:50 PM, Synergy Cycling Services <
synergy@belizemail.net> wrote:
> Zeus was a spanish manufacturer using copies of Campy molds under extremely
> lax Spanish patent laws. Campy eventually sued the out of existence. The
> materials were never up to Campy levels ( or even Shitmano or Suntour).
> Notorious for voids or brittle alloys cast to Campy dimensions. Never
> popular in the pro peloton, they were for your wannabees that could not
> afford the real thing. Shimano never was able to duplicate Campy alloy
> specs ( I am a former Shitmano employee) especially chainrings. It drove
> the Japanese crazy! Giggle all you want . Your archive comparisons were not
> made by pro mechanics that had to work with the struff! The castings were
> crude at all price points. They were somewhat less than pretty. You usually
> had to remove flashing waste before you could install threaded parts. If
> you don't haves experience with the product, What's the point of posting?
> John Lands
> Synergy cycling Technical Services
> ( Former Olympic Team, National Team, Shimano Technical Support, Mavic Race
> Service mechanic)
>
> --- walawalaoxenfree@gmail.com wrote:
>
> From: Amir Avitzur <walawalaoxenfree@gmail.com>
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Subject: [CR] headset thread help - Zeus
> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 13:33:54 +0200
>
> Somebody at Synergy Cycling Tech Services, I don't know who, said:
>
> "NOTHING Zeus ever made was superior to Campy."
>
> Unsigned, absolute statements, like this one make me giggle.
> (they remind me of all the racer wannabees in the 70's who laughed at
> Shimano & SunTour)
>
> The archives are full of Campy/Zeus comparisons.
> Read them, they're interesting.
>
> Never having used a Zeus headset, all I can say about them is that they are
> mighty pretty, to my eyes.
> Having used them for years and years I can say that Zeus cranks, bottom
> brackets and hubs are mighty pretty and quite reliable.
>
> YMMV
>
>
> Amir Avitzur
> Ramat-Gan, Israel