Transmissions From Moonbase Alpha

There has been much written on the web and usenet regarding swapping a triple for a compact crankset. I've just gone through a conversion and thought I'd post my observations for the benefit of anyone who might be thinking about doing a swap themselves.

Background:

I purchased a Fuji Provence 2004 men's road bike in the Summer of 2005 from Performance Bicycle. The bike came equipped with Campagnolo Centaur drivetrain except for and FSA Gossamer triple crankset and FSA ISIS bottom bracket. While the drivetrain worked, it wasn't the precision of one would expect from Campagnolo. I used to own a bike outfitted with Campy Athena components back in the mid 90's. That bike's shifting was extremely precise and I was a bit surprised that the Provence would occasionally hiccup on some gear changes. Still, I was so enamored with the integrated braking/shifting mechanism of a modern bicycle, that I didn't spend too much time contemplating the intermittent pauses in shifting I was experiencing with my Provence.

My bike seemed to ride decently enough with the factory set up and I was mostly pleased with the configuration but something did start to bother me. Over time, I began to think that thirty gears was just a bit too many. First of all, there seemed to be a great deal of duplication across the gearing combinations and secondly, every now and then, I'd pop the chain off the crank entirely when down-shifting from the forty to thirty tooth chain ring. I began to entertain the idea of replacing the FSA triple with a Campy compact crankset. I had been eyeing the expensive Record & Chorus carbon compacts when I noticed that Excel Sports was selling an aluminum Centaur compact (50/34) crankset for $129.00. For this price, I figured I couldn't pass up the opportunity to try a compact out.

Finalizing the order:

The first vital detail I encountered was making sure I bought the correct bottom bracket. Initially, I tried to order a Record BB until careful reading of the Campagnolo web site clued me into the fact that Centaur cranksets use 111mm bottom brackets with a symmetrical spindle. This is markedly different to the configuration for a Chorus or Record compact crankset. Both of these versions require a 102mm bottom bracket with an asymmetrical spindle. In the end, my ONLY option was to buy a Centaur BB for this crankset. Unfortunately, this threw a monkey wrench into my master plan because ALL people who ride Campagnolo components secretly aspire owning Record equipped bike. I wanted to begin my assault on a Record-only bicycle with the BB. My plan for world domination had to be postponed until a later date when the monetary gods were shining more favorably upon me. :)

After reading the Campagnolo literature, I was also convinced that I needed to purchase a new front derailleur, however just before I placed an order for one, a bike shop mechanic told me that I might not need one after all. Several people he had known were using a standard front derailleur with a compact crankset without incident. Hence, I decided to save a few bucks and order a new front derailleur only if I found it necessary.

A Big and Nasty Surprise:

As I mentioned above, I bought my 2004 Fuji Provence at Performance Bicycle (Towson MD) in the Summer of 2005. Since this bike was last year's model, at the time I purchased it, I got a good deal.

I took my bike to a local mechanic to have the FSA cransket and bottom bracket removed for me before the installation of my new equipment. As the mechanic took the crankset apart, I stood by watching the process. I wasn't going to spend money on tools to remove these components because I never planned on using them ever again. I bought the tools for the Campy installation and wanted to watch the disassembly of the FSA equipment because I'd never actually done a bottom bracket replacement before. From what I'd read, it seemed like a simple process but watching it seemed prudent at the time.

Initially, all was going well. My mechanic removed the crank arms and slid the assembly off the bike easily. Then he began unwinding the bottom bracket covers and explaining to me about the directionality of these pieces. Eventually he removed the left side cover and pulled the spindle out of the frame. My mechanic paused as he looked at it the bottom bracket and then began to laugh. He handed it to me and said:

This is a little trick bike shops do to save money. Since 99.9% of people will never see the insides of their bottom bracket, bike shops will pull out the expensive one that's supposed to be in there and replace it with a cheap Chinese knock off. This is a cheap $15 bottom bracket and not an FSA ISIS.

If you look at the Fuji web site, you'll see the listed component group includes and FSA ISIS bottom bracket. I looked in disbelief at the hardware in my hands. Indeed, this what NOT an FSA ISIS at all. I was planning on putting the Gossamer crankset and bottom bracket on ebay and doing a $30 buy-it-now deal for someone to scoop up. I guess we can nix at least part of that idea.

Obviously, I was not pleased when the reality of my components were exposed to me. I wonder if my bike would have shifted better with the FSA bottom bracket? I wonder if the chain-line would have been better set by an FSA bottom bracket? Needless to say, I won't be buying anything from Performance Bicycles in the foreseeable future. Not sure what to really do about this though. It does say on the Fuji web site that components can change without notice, however I have a hard time believing that Fuji would have swapped out the bottom brackets on a bike with a $2150 list price and replaced them with $15 cheap Chinese knock-offs. I've got to believe that my mechanic was correct in his belief that the Performance retail location (Towson MD) was responsible for the old switcheroo.

Installation and Test Rides:

Eventually, all the components arrived and much to my amazement, I had successfully installed my new Centaur bottom bracket and crankset in less than a half hour. I quickly put the pedals back on the bike and took it out for an immediate evaluation. I didn't have time for a serious test and had to be content with riding immediately around my house. Much to my surprise, the entire system seemed to work flawlessly from the first shift. I hadn't even bothered to adjust the stop-limit screw on the front derailleur, so I had to be careful not to drop the chain off the thirty tooth inner chain ring. I really liked what I was feeling immediately. The drivetrain seemed to be running better than it ever had with the FSA crankset and while I hadn't noticed any real problems with my original set up, shifting with the Centaur crankset already seemed crisper to me. As I said, I didn't have time for a full test drive that day and would have to wait until the following day to do a proper evaluation of how my new drivetrain components were functioning.

The next day I went for a twenty five mile ride which included lots of rolling hills and several moderately steep and long (0.8 mile) climbs. It quickly became apparent to me that my initial positive impressions were absolutely correct: my bike was indeed performing better than it ever had using the old FSA Gossamer triple crankset. By this time, I had adjusted the front, inner stop-limit screw and the front shifts were flawless. I tried to push my chain off the crankset with a series of quick double pops (quickly dropping the chain from the larger to the smaller chain ring while simultaneously dropping down three to fours gears on the rear cassette in one coordinated motion) but the chain didn't miss a step. It stayed properly positioned on the bike and all shifts were executed without a single hiccup. Perhaps the weirdest thing was the improvement was not solely bound to front shifting. The rear derailleur was now shifting better too. My rear cassette is a 12-25 and every now and then, movements to and from the two spaced gears (e.g 17 to 19, 19 to 21...etc...etc) would slip for a brief second. Suddenly, all these shifts were now flawless. Five subsequent rides of greater than twenty miles have reconfirmed these findings: my bike is a superior machine with a Campagnolo Centaur compact crankset installed.

Questions:

Needless to say, I'm extremely pleased to the results of my $170 upgrade (for crankset and bottom bracket), however I'm slightly
perplexed by a couple of things:

Why didn't Fuji just put a Centaur crankset on the bike to begin with? When you look at the price of an FSA Gossamer triple versus a Centaur compact, the Campagnolo is actually cheaper. The price of the ISIS versus Centaur bottom brackets are approximately the same. Hence, it's hard for me to believe that Fuji saved much money by swapping out the Campy for the FSA.

Why is the rear derailleur/shifting functioning so much better? About the only explanation I could come up with is the fact that the chain line is better with the Campy bottom bracket and crankset. This once again leads me back to my first question...why would Fuji sacrifice superior performance and slap an ill-suited FSA crankset on these bikes?

Why do I need a compact front derailleur? Perhaps if I had one, I'd know the answer to this question?! :) As I mentioned at the outset, I was relatively pleased with the performance of my bicycle before I ever swapped out my crankset and hence, if I replaced the front derailleur, perhaps I'd find out that shifting could be even crisper than what I'm currently experiencing.

Conclusion:

Having ridden my compact crank for a while, I find that twenty gears does indeed suit my tastes better than thirty. I've quickly found my way around the chain rings/cassette and can easily anticipate which gears I need in most situations. A triple made my choices a little too confusing. The compact makes for simpler and more intuitive shifting...at least for me. While my gear range has been compressed slightly from both the top and bottom, I rarely would spin a 52/12 or a 30/25 and hence, I don't feel like I've sacrificed anything useful by making this switch.

Campagnolo parts like other Campagnolo parts! I've always heard that mixing and matching manufacturer's parts in a drivetrain was a bad idea, however there seem to be plenty of professional teams (CSC comes to mind immediately) which use cranksets made by FSA mated to Shimano drivetrains. Perhaps Shimano equipment takes to mixing and matching better than Campy equipment? I don't know for sure but when you read the material published on the FSA web site, they claim there cranksets should work very well with Campy drivetrains. Perhaps the bottom bracket fiasco is a vital part of the discontinuity I seemed to be experiencing?

Perhaps the only dilemma I now face is the fact that Campagnolo is going to do a major overhaul of their bottom brackets and cranksets for the 2007 season. As a result, I should be able to pick up one of those shiny, black Record compact cranks pretty cheaply near the end of the 2006 season. Hmm, but I've already spent a couple hundred dollars on a crankset which seems to be working perfectly for me. Is vanity (and my inherent need for world domination) enough to tempt me to shell out more money for some Record components? :)