Trying to build a great carbon climbing bike with Campag etc

Lexman17

Hi,

I'm thinking about trying to build a really nice carbon bike for my rides around S. Wales where the roads can be bad and the climbs tough. I have an alu framed Bianchi with 105 already and I'm after something a little bit more special so I can use the Bianchi 105 on wet/muddy days. I want to build around a carbon frame like a De Rosa, Bianchi or maybe even a Condor. I know that I should be looking at a 50/34 chainset and 28 tooth cassette or thereabouts for climbing. I don't think I want a triple. I've been looking online at Campag groupsets as I fancy a change from Shimano, and Probikekit have great prices on Campag Record.

My questions about the groupset are as follows: I'm tall and big and would a 172.5mm or 175mm chainset be better for me in the light of intended climbing etc? Which bottom bracket should I go for, the BB30 46mm? They offer a 12-27 11 speed cassette, is this near as dammit as good as a 28 tooth cassette for climbing? Which front derailleur clamp, 35 or 32?

Wheels: I need nice light wheels but they've got to be tough and durable around here, any suggestions?

All info gratefully received,

thanks
Alex

JamesB

if you live in / near S Wales maybe think about visiting Epic Cycles at Ludlow, Bianchi and de Rosa dealers who could answer your questions, set you up for best position and sell you stuff. sorry blatant plug for my LBS but I`ve had consistent good helpful advice from them

However my thoughts on your q; probably 172.5 cranks (at 6ft tall that`s what I use); BB30 / clamp diameter can`t comment; largest sprocket depends on your strength, climbing style etc but 27, 28 very similar. Wheels depends on your budget, but give serious thought to a handbuilt 28 or 32 spoke pair; easier to get back home on if a spoke braeks, low spoke count factory built tend to go so out of true IF you break a spoke as to be unrideable home.
Think nice light rims eg DT Swiss 415, Mavic Open Pro, not fancy light but good and relaible. Maybe built onto campag hubs ?

Petromyzon

I think that you need to start from the frame and then work out the compatibility issues - that will tell you what front mech size, what type of BB etc. you need. You'll also need to get a reasonable idea of whether it will fit you.

If you aren't comfortable with checking compatibility, bike fit and assembling yourself a good bike shop would be the way forward. They are likely to be unimpressed if you rock up with a big box of Campag from Ribble or PBK and ask them to build it though, so you are in for a big wedge of cash if you want Italian carbon frame and Record kit.

Crank length doesn't really make a difference to performance it seems, just copy current bike. Compact and 28t sounds perfect for most people in the hills.

I second the handbuilts idea - I really like Velocity A23 rims as they give a bit more tire volume for the same weight. Could try 28f/32r on Record hubs? Factory-built wheels are likely to be faster if you are racing though.

Lexman17

Thanks, that's useful info... Climb on bikes in Hereford were great with building up my last bike but it's good to hear about the shop in Ludlow which isn't too far. I often find myself a long way from home in the hills so a wheel that won't get me home is worrying. Will check out the bespoke option(!)

cheers

Edward H

Gears, I ride 39x27. Apparently as a rule of thumb 1 tooth on the back = 3 teeth on the front.

mercia_man

JamesB gives good advice. Epic Cycles have an excellent reputation and are well worth visiting.

I bought a bike about eight years ago from Climb On Bikes when they were in Ludlow and I can recommend them as well for service and value. I had been planning to build up a bike myself - Principia RS6 Pro frame and Chorus groupset - but Climb On Bikes built it all up for me at a similar price to what I could have done myself.

I'd go for a 12-29 Campag 11-speed groupset with a 50-34 compact if you want a bike for climbing. Living in the south Shropshire hills, I really appreciate a low bottom gear, especially when I'm tired. As for climbing wheels, I can recommend from experience Campag Neutron or Neutron Ultra - reliable, strong, light, easily serviced and you can get some excellent online deals on them from people like Ribble.

For a 6ft guy, a 172.5 crank length would be suitable. But you wouldn't feel much difference from a 170 or 175. As for bottom bracket, it depends on the frame. I have to say I'm a bit dubious about press fit BB30 etc. I've read too many forum posts from people complaining about squeaks and play and having to replace frames under warranty because press fit bottom brackets have worked loose and worn away the carbon fibre.

Ron Stuart

Firstly if you are a tall/big guy then you will have experienced the effect gravity has on climbing hills. So don't listen to the advice about 39 inner rings you should be thinking towards not what the front of peloton are doing on hilly routes but how are the sprinters doing on the hilly routes. Best bit of kit around is a 50/34 with an 11 to 28 cassette for 90% of amateur riders that do the hills in South Wales. Crank length equates to leg length you need to check, I ride with a guy who is 6ft 5ins and his cranks are 180. I'm 5ft 7ins and use 170 this is an area of what seems a lot anomalies’
I ride a lot in Shropshire Hills/Wales (lumpy) this is my bike...


The addict frame is better than the current foil which has turned out to be a bit of a foil-up with its reverse aero logic.
Ex. sailor here!

http://www.drakescycles.co.uk/m1b66s6p2 ... RS_GB/8377
Stiff, light and responsive mine weighs in at 6.9kg with my kysrium SL premiums on but I love me cosmics :oops:

Petromyzon

Out of interest, what do you feel is wrong with the Foil?

JamesB

I ride a lot in Shropshire Hills/Wales (lumpy)

I wish the area wales / borders I live in --Knighton / Kington / L`dod--- looked like your area of Shropshire Hills as pictured

Ron Stuart

Petromyzon wrote:

Out of interest, what do you feel is wrong with the Foil?

The word Foil part definition:- To prevent from being successful; thwart. Strange name to adopt I think.

However the foil I think is an attempt to make something that looks different pretend to do things it can't. Regards aero bikes the most aero of bikes in a head wind or no wind (therefore creates it's own apparent wind are those that produce the lowest drag, largely this achieved by presenting the smallest profile to the air plus the ability to prevent flow separation. Cervelo have in recent years brought this principle into the arena with narrow long tapered section similar to those fast moving creatures found in nature (Peregrine Falcon in a stoop) for example.
The foil has a truncated effect at the rear of its sections this is the best way of producing follow separation and drag, in fact like being at the rear of a peloton it can produce a low pressure area which actually draws the foil in reverse! This low pressure effect is that which lifts a bird in flight in opposition to gravity. The fastest flat cycling speed records are held by guys with huge gears travelling in a rear hood at the back of a train this creates this low pressure which like the peloton but on a bigger scale literally sucking the rider along. You will notice like in nature the so called aero shape is tapered to a fine point. However the UCI has strict rules regarding the ratio of width to length regards frame sections.
The whole aero road bike business is a white elephant anyway because as soon as you get significant side winds the long narrow sections start to work in reverse and just become an additional air brake and creating even more flow separation and drag. In these conditions and in general the Foil would be as good or bad as most non-aero bikes.
The term Aero Road Bike is a marketing tool, even modern TT bikes with long profiles are not only creating more drag in some cross winds but are so much harder to ride in a straight line and therefore just ware out the rider sooner. This can be seen with wheel choices at times.
Some details to illustrate my points:- http://university.tri-sports.com/2011/0 ... road-bike/
I would also be interested to here if there is a water ingress issue with the seat post frame intersection.

Ron Stuart

JamesB wrote:

I ride a lot in Shropshire Hills/Wales (lumpy)

I wish the area wales / borders I live in --Knighton / Kington / L`dod--- looked like your area of Shropshire Hills as pictured

Ah! you caught me out :!:
Now and again I visit the Algarve, photo taken up the Malhao finish at this years Tour of the Algarve in February (note weather)approx 45mins before Richie Porte came tearing along to win the stage, take yellow and put the foundations down for a tour win 8)

cycleclinic

I would go with record 10 speed my self as the chains are cheaper. As for wheels I would get a set built. Ambrosio Zenith hub perhaps or maybe campag record. As for rims there is alot of choice and light wheel set can be built with 32 spokes. The 12-29 cassette has already been mentioned.

mercia_man

If you go for 10-speed you would have to use a 13-29 cassette for a really good climbing gear. This is what I use although the 13 cog limits your ability to pedal fast downhill. I'm happy to make the sacrifice because I like climbing.

If you go for 11-speed you can fit a 12-29 which gives you a decent overdrive top gear as well as the mountain goat bottom gear. That's the advantage of 11-speed - you can have a close ratio cassette as well as a couple of big sprockets for the hills. A 12-29 cassette will give you effectively two good climbing gears with the 29 sprocket and the next biggest sprocket (I assume it's a 26). If you go for a 12-27 you only really get one climbing gear, a 27 sprocket, which would be noticeably lower than a 29 sprocket. An 11-28 cassette as mentioned by Ron is not applicable for Campag. That's for Shimano systems.

I agree that 11-speed chains are more expensive but as you are looking at a Record groupset then that's the way to go as Campag has switched all its higher level groupsets to 11, although you can still get some higher level bits for 10-speed systems.

I know I recommended Campag Neutron but handbuilt wheels would also be a good option. I would go for Record hubs as they have easily adjusted and serviced cup and cone hubs (as do Shimano) and all metal internal cam quick releases (as do Shimano). Sealed bearing hubs have smaller and fewer balls and therefore less load-bearing capacity than traditional cup and cone ones. Inferior quick releases with an external curved plastic washer are much weaker than all metal ones and won't hold your wheels in place anywhere near so securely.

mercia_man

If you go for a 12-27 you only really get one climbing gear, a 27 sprocket, which would be noticeably lower than a 29 sprocket ..... I should have said noticeably HIGHER than a 20 sprocket. Whoops!

limoneboy

i ride campagnolo record 11 on my Dedacciai super scuro i went for the 29 option but to be honset hardly ever use it even on the rock in frodsham. the only place i have used the 29 was on horse shoe pass on the cetre incline by i think you find yourself pedalling but going know were so i would rather drop down and stand up. i have moved over from sram red and i love the campy stuff , it does go out of sink a but and needs ajusting every 200-300 miles. deda is a great frame for climbing super stiff so no wasted energy but i would say the best climbing frame i have had was a trigon rqc29 it seemed to have that extra buzz . wheel wise i use campy shamal ultras light and stiff not much flex when out of the saddle.

dont get me wrong i am no hill flyer as i am 42 and only been back in the game 5 years but i know what helps me shift my weight up my training courses and this all works excellently.

bigmat

Think a lot depends on the legs but I have never felt the need for more than a 25 at the back riding a compact and have ridden various Alpine and Pyrennean cols. I managed on an 11-23 in the Alps, but didn't do many really long rides on that occasion - found the 25 helpful on last year's Marmotte. As has been mentioned above, the lower the gear the more you end up spinning. From my mountain bike days I recall that spinning a really low gear and barely moving wasn't a recipe for success on long climbs. Better to just get out of the saddle every know and push on and be prepared to slow your cadence a bit when in the saddle. This is just what works for me of course, point is the OP might not necessarily need a 27/28/29 as many don't.

Petromyzon

@ron
Don't wish to take this off topic w.r.t. aerodynamics but I don't think you give the designers of the foil much credit! Several manufacturers have used truncated aerofoils to gain some of the benefits of deeper tube sections within a sensible weight and the UCI rules. They also consider the range of crosswinds encountered when optimising the design. There is plenty of bullshit talked to sell bikes but given the fraction of rider energy expended on pushing air out of the way you ignore aerodynamics at your peril I think.

Ron Stuart

Petromyzon wrote:

@ron
Don't wish to take this off topic w.r.t. aerodynamics but I don't think you give the designers of the foil much credit! Several manufacturers have used truncated aerofoils to gain some of the benefits of deeper tube sections within a sensible weight and the UCI rules. They also consider the range of crosswinds encountered when optimising the design. There is plenty of bullshit talked to sell bikes but given the fraction of rider energy expended on pushing air out of the way you ignore aerodynamics at your peril I think.

It's not the designers that have produced the foil but the marketing department. Check out on my link the diagram of the computer animated view the only way the blue flow works is to add a series of long finely tapered red 'wedges' to 'cheat' the software, those red wedges if removed from the model would then produce the effect that I described in my previous post, flow separation and drag. It should also be noted that they have the apparent wind coming from dead ahead which only occurs in practise either when there is no wind, block head winds or a closed in velodrome. Check out the British Cycling Kask helmets they are not the long pointy jobs the pursuiters use but finish with stub bulb this they have found to be the best compromise between not separating flow and not being an air brake when the apparent wind arrives from the side somewhat or as the sprinters do turn their heads to look behind and therefore present the side profile.

Petromyzon

That's not what the red wedges represent according to the figure legend provided. Simon Smart was the aerodynamic consultant for the project and has a strong track record of making cyclists go faster. I would guess that he appreciates the impact of varying apparent wind angles and that the best shape is not always tapered as you note with the Kask Bambino helmets. The best test would be independent data demonstrating a drag benefit, however in the absence of that I guess we'll have to assume we are being conned as the wind tunnel contained within your eyeballs is clearly highly accurate;)

VeloPeo

No input on the original question but another recommendation for Epic - my wife got her Bianchi from them last year and they were excellent through the fitting sales and after sales process. Even sent her a new (shorter) stem this year (8 months after buying the bike) when she was having neck problems

Will almost certainly be paying them a visit when my next upgrade is due.

Ron Stuart

Petromyzon wrote:

That's not what the red wedges represent according to the figure legend provided. Simon Smart was the aerodynamic consultant for the project and has a strong track record of making cyclists go faster. I would guess that he appreciates the impact of varying apparent wind angles and that the best shape is not always tapered as you note with the Kask Bambino helmets. The best test would be independent data demonstrating a drag benefit, however in the absence of that I guess we'll have to assume we are being conned as the wind tunnel contained within your eyeballs is clearly highly accurate;)

You can add what you like to a legend but the forces of nature can't be ignored.

Also tapered is best but only when you can apply it in the same plain as the incoming airflow

Check this out http://www.up22.com/Aerodynamics.htm#Drag it's about drag and car design but the principles are the same. Check out under the title Drag. There are some aspects that are peculiar to cars but there are references that endorse my points.
Also check out 'Aerodynamic design tips' Special note of item3... "Converge Bodywork Slowly".
I spent nearly thirty years racing sailing dinghies to international standard and picked up quite a bit about what works in the water and through the air. Solid wing masts can propel a boat forward but they pivot to enable the airflow arriving to be met 'head on' by the mast and the mast is very tapered.