Sram red 22 VS Campagnolo Super Record VS Shimano 9100

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
Look595
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:55 am

by Look595

Curious on how can the Sram red 22 groupset be 200 grams lighter than the Campagnolo SR and Shimano Dura-ace 9100 groupset as a whole. How come the other 2 brands still cannot cut the total weight any further as to the same as Sram Red 22 :noidea:

guyc
Posts: 412
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:40 am
Location: Hampshire, England
Contact:

by guyc

Because they're a little more conservative and build their kit with longevity and durability in mind. Most would agree that SRAM kit, as great as it is, isn't as durable.

Mr.Gib
Posts: 3119
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: eh?

by Mr.Gib

guyc wrote:Because they're a little more conservative and build their kit with longevity and durability in mind. Most would agree that SRAM kit, as great as it is, isn't as durable.


I don't agree. I have extensive use of top groups from both Shimano and Sram (will be adding Campy soon) and I have settled on Red 22 mechanical as my favorite group for weight but also prefer its simplicity of mechanism and lack of maintenance. I still have never broken a cable on any Sram shifter. I have broken several on Shimano dating back to 9 speed. I also have first generation Sram Red groupsets on two bikes that have been through the wars. One is on my winter bike now and the other on my travel bike. Both groupsets perform as new. Out of 4 Sram groupsets, I have had only a single part failure - a broken RD spring on a first generation Red RD. The RD was instantly replaced by Sram despite being years out of warranty. I would be considered a heavy user. I ride all year round and average 5 days per week throughout the year. My typical ride ranges from 50 km to 120 km with some longer in the summer. I live surrounded by rolling terrain with some moderate hills that is a torture test for shifters - constant gear changes are required.

I am sure there are all sort of Sram failures, but I doubt the failure rate would be statistically different than any other brand. While my usage is only a single data point, over the years, I have had many more breakages and malfunctions (usually shifters) on my Shimano equipment despite it seeing far less usage.

Sram Red is lighter because it is better engineered, or at least engineered to favour low weight, not because it is compromised in some way. There certainly is no durability issue that should factor into a purchase decision. For most people the stuff will be obsolete before it wears out.
wheelsONfire wrote: When we ride disc brakes the whole deal of braking is just like a leaving a fart. It happens and then it's over. Nothing planned and nothing to get nervous for.

Look595
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:55 am

by Look595

Mr.Gib wrote:
Sram Red is lighter because it is better engineered, or at least engineered to favour low weight, not because it is compromised in some way.


This is my doubt on why the other 2 brands would have followed Sram Red and make their top tier group set equal but over the years they are still not doing that, i myself do believe that Campagnolo with all the Carbon parts should be able to follow Sram and make their SR groupset as light but it don't seemed to be doing so. :?

gewichtweenie
Posts: 152
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2015 3:12 pm

by gewichtweenie

why/how-come the sram is lighter than campag or shimano is probably not as good a question as where its lighter.

the big differences are in the shifters, calipers, and cassette.

shimano is recognized as having the best rim brakes of the bunch, so that explains that away.
dont know the details of the red-level cassette but dropping weight in cassette is pretty easy to do by swapping cog material to those less wear-friendly. (see ultegra-->da)
the rest of the stuff seems a big wash.

shimano and campagnolo can probably easily make lighter series-production-grade framesets. but where does it end?
like the race for one-upmanship in frame weight that trek, fuji, cervelo, etc engages in. if bmc or colnago or bh wanted to shave 20, 40, 60g they can.... but where would they stop?

User avatar
kkibbler
Posts: 829
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2014 9:30 am

by kkibbler

Good point on cassette. As far as I know the construction of the Red cassette is unique among the 3.

Shifters ought to be lighter, too purely on account of having 1 fewer axis of lever actuation than the other 2.

The biggest factor though, is that it's not they they can't, but that they don't bother. Pros don't care. WWs with deep pockets go to THM and others instead. There are few dollars to be gained from winning the "lightest complete groupset" crown.

User avatar
wheelbuilder
Posts: 431
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 2:10 am

by wheelbuilder

kkibbler wrote:Good point on cassette. As far as I know the construction of the Red cassette is unique among the 3.

Shifters ought to be lighter, too purely on account of having 1 fewer axis of lever actuation than the other 2.

The biggest factor though, is that it's not they they can't, but that they don't bother. Pros don't care. WWs with deep pockets go to THM and others instead. There are few dollars to be gained from winning the "lightest complete groupset" crown.



I think that there may indeed be dollars to be gained with that crown. Off the floor complete high end bikes? Usually Shimano all the way. Frame up builds where the Cat 5/4 guy with a lot of disposable income but aren't into it in the way you weightweenie guys are? Red mechanical all the way. They know what they want, and what is perceived as the "racy" group among the three.

Lukester
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 7:51 pm

by Lukester

guyc wrote:Because they're a little more conservative and build their kit with longevity and durability in mind. Most would agree that SRAM kit, as great as it is, isn't as durable.
Agree
Obviously Campy has the technologhy to reduce weight on their kits but chooses not to. Unlike most here, not all manufactures feel less weight is always best. I'll assume Colnago feels the same.
C59 PR99 SR EPS
Carbonissimo 00F
Vintage Fuso - Custom Criterium Build
Vintage Masi 3V Volumetrica
Vintage Masi Gran Criterium

User avatar
kkibbler
Posts: 829
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2014 9:30 am

by kkibbler

Off the floor complete high end bikes?

Frame up builds where the Cat 5/4 guy with a lot of disposable income but aren't into it in the way you weightweenie guys are?

Which do you think sells way more copies? ;)

User avatar
wheelbuilder
Posts: 431
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 2:10 am

by wheelbuilder

kkibbler wrote:
Off the floor complete high end bikes?

Frame up builds where the Cat 5/4 guy with a lot of disposable income but aren't into it in the way you weightweenie guys are?

Which do you think sells way more copies? ;)


Oh you are 100 percent right. The floor bikes far outsell the frame up builds. In my neck of the woods, and among the pretty large group of Masters Amateur Racers that reside in my area, Red Mechanical is a "thing" so to speak.

russianbear
Posts: 757
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 3:40 am

by russianbear

This is a bit old, but if you're not using a BB30 crank, Super Record and Red are about equal on weight with Red edging out. Also consider the pressfit cups/converters nowadays as well.

http://www.totalcycling.com/en/us/Compo ... /cc-8.aspx

User avatar
tommasini
Posts: 1297
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:48 am
Location: Central USA
Contact:

by tommasini

Good point as for the most part bb30 is an ok idea that caused more problems than solutions. Thus on the way out

RussellS
Posts: 720
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 1:31 am

by RussellS

kkibbler wrote:Good point on cassette. As far as I know the construction of the Red cassette is unique among the 3.
There are few dollars to be gained from winning the "lightest complete groupset" crown.


Agree. Red cassette is built differently than the others, therefore can get a lower weight. Might be patented.
Except for those whose only purpose in life is to build the lowest weight bike on earth, no one else cares much about weight. All of the upper end Trek, Specialized, Cannondale, etc. bikes all weigh 15-16-17-18-19 pounds or so. Not really a material difference even though people argue about grams here. Your bike weighs 16 pounds and mine weighs 18! Oh No. Dura Ace, Red, Record, they are all within 1/2, 3/4 pound of each other. Not enough to care about. Campagnolo because Eddy and Greg used it! Shimano is what those kids on 7-11 used to win the Olympics and ride through the snowstorm in Italy. I guess SRAM people dream up some reason for it. I have a few biking friends. On none of the rides do we talk about component weights. We mention frame weight occasionally. But not whose crank or brakes weigh the least.

And no bike makers post bike weights on their website. So weight must not be much of a selling point. Otherwise everyone would scream about weight. Shimano and SRAM do list weight on their websites.

MyM3Coupe
Posts: 137
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2016 10:32 pm

by MyM3Coupe

tommasini wrote:Good point as for the most part bb30 is an ok idea that caused more problems than solutions. Thus on the way out

Installed correctly, BB30 is fine 99% of the time, and builds up a light frame. It's only "going out" as it's expensive as hell to install it correctly (wicked tolerances). It's not good for mass produced frames. I have two Time frames with thousands of miles with BB30 and the cranks spin beautifully.
On the topic SCAM is light as it's crap. Several people in out riding groups have had issues with it. It's either Shimano or Campagnolo for long lasting components.

nemeseri
Posts: 674
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2015 5:40 pm

by nemeseri

RussellS wrote:And no bike makers post bike weights on their website. So weight must not be much of a selling point. Otherwise everyone would scream about weight. Shimano and SRAM do list weight on their websites.


Weight is a huge selling point and manufacturers don't publish weights because the stock bikes usually weigh more than desired. Also because weight is just one of many properties of a bike and people tend to overemphasize it. I do agree that differences between groupsets are very small and can be ignored at the top level.

If you check out canyon's website, they publish weight for everything. Probably because they know that their frame weights are very competitive.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post