Campag Super Record rear derailleur shifting woes

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 3938
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

The horse's mouth is campagnolo. Always best to get it from the source.

Really the op is going in circles. A campag shop would have used your derailleur and fitted it to a test bike. I keep a new undidden framesets for this purpose. If the shifting is good on that I know it's not a warranty but something wrong with setup.

Bluntly c60rider your going about this the wrong way. Wiggle have not tested it and they won't so yes it will be a struggle. If wiggle are giving you no joy send it to a pro shop and ask them to mock iylt up on a test frame. I'd use a EC re300 shifter body I think that's the one a known good undidden frame and the rear mech plus a test wheel. It takes what 10 minutes to mock up. You'll know quickly.

by Weenie


User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 6466
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Yes, our horses are the same... Campagnolo. Sometimes even the horse isn’t sure I guess.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

XCProMD
Posts: 618
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 10:25 am
Location: Cantabria

by XCProMD

Bridgeman wrote:
XCProMD wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 5:10 pm
It would be polymer creep in this case, no elastomers in this component.

Pretty difficult at temperatures below 90 Celsius with the kind of epoxy used by Campag
Simply highlighting a potential material behavior, without going into specifics. I've dealt with this and its solutions in my profession and suggested this possibilty as the cage in my case appeared to have distorted increasingly over time. Polymers/elastomers are not perfect springs, and under load can distort over time.

What I would really like to know is whether Campy was shipping different parts for the same model derailleur. My SR derailleur cage has a twist and my Chorus derailleur cage of the same year does not.
Unless your bike or RD have been over 90 degrees Celsius it isn't creep.

The twist exists and it's visually more evident in carbon cages although the angling of the lower pulley is exactly the same.


Skickat från min iPhone med Tapatalk

c60rider
Posts: 320
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 11:12 pm

by c60rider

bm0p700f wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 10:35 pm
The horse's mouth is campagnolo. Always best to get it from the source.

Really the op is going in circles. A campag shop would have used your derailleur and fitted it to a test bike. I keep a new undidden framesets for this purpose. If the shifting is good on that I know it's not a warranty but something wrong with setup.

Bluntly c60rider your going about this the wrong way. Wiggle have not tested it and they won't so yes it will be a struggle. If wiggle are giving you no joy send it to a pro shop and ask them to mock iylt up on a test frame. I'd use a EC re300 shifter body I think that's the one a known good undidden frame and the rear mech plus a test wheel. It takes what 10 minutes to mock up. You'll know quickly.
Actually I'm doing it the right way as Graeme F-K recommended and as anyone should who is claiming a warranty issue. Send it to the retailer first. That's who MY warranty is with. That's Wiggle. They've sent it to their supplier. Eventually it will get back to someone at Campagnolo if no resolution is achieved. That's what I've recommended Wiggle to request to their supplier.

Digger90
Posts: 90
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 9:34 pm

by Digger90

As you're in the UK, if you paid for it with a credit card then call your card company, explain the issue to them and have them raise a claim (assuming Wiggle don't rectify the situation).

Under UK law (Consumer Credit Act, Section 75) your card issuer is jointly responsbile, alongside the retailer, for dealing with faulty goods. And they will likely have a lot more power with the retailer than you do as a private individual.

See here: https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopp ... -purchases

graeme_f_k
Shop Owner / Manufacturer
Posts: 331
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 12:21 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

by graeme_f_k

c60rider wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 2:50 pm
Graeme mentioned in his comment about them using a perfectly lined up steel hanger. There's no doubt this mech lines up badly. Graeme mentioned about degradation of O rings in the jockey wheel / body due to reassembly with mineral oil but this has never been taken apart. There's nothing else I've got left to adjust or do that can make any difference to it. It just looks and sounds rubbish.
The Upper Pivot Bolt Assembly (UPBA) can't be taken apart by the end user anyway - it's a SC only job.

The reason is that one of the tests on re-assembly is for mis-alignment of the derailleur relative to the pivot bolt, which can happen if the two-part bolt is over-tightened. In a 2015 or later mech, that won't be the case as the OE bolt fitted at the factory is a single-piece unit fitted with a double Seager clip ... but when we service these upper pivot assemblies, we use a two-part bolt similar to but not the same as the 2012-2015 unit.

The test needs a dead-square pillar with a perfectly perpendicular mech mounting bolt thread, set in a surface table, and a height gauge, not kit that most shops routinely have access to. This "planarity" test is done at the factory before RDs leave production. The pass/fail tolerances are very tight.

Anyway, be that as it may, the essential point is that the o-rings can be degraded by mineral oil getting into the UPBA - in my experience that comes from two sources - direct application from users thinking they are doing the right thing, lubricating a rotating part - but using the wrong material - or from the use of aerosol spray lubes or other types of material with a high mineral oil-base content. WD40 is one material that is widely used, especially before over-winter storage, which can contribute to this problem.

As NASA found out, temperature variations can also degrade o-rings as can simple old age or lots of mechanical movement.

Regardless of the reason that's caused the issue, if the hanger is very close to dead square and the cage of the mech has a significant inward "lean" as the OPs appears to have from these images, the likelihood is that the upper pivot has excessive play. The fix for that is a strip out, clean and re-instatement of the UPBA by a SC. They may need to use oversize o-rings if the bike has been extensively ridden with damaged o-rings as again, IME, this can casue wear of the bushing inside the UPBA that the o-rings run against.

I think the OP is in the UK - in which case we can carry out this operation. We will do a proper, operational check on the mech afterwards as well, as part of our QC process, as well as the "planarity" test I mentioned above.

Cage twist would have to be fairly extreme, hugely outside tolerances, to bring the cage into contact with the spokes as the sole cause - just do the trigonometry on a component approx 40mm "wide" to close a gap to the spoke which would normally be of the order of 2-4 mm (depending on wheel, cassette size, chainring in use). Discounting the reverse twist in the upper jockey, the lower jockey would have to be mis-aligned by ~4.5 deg in the horizontal plane, to bring the cage into contact with the spokes.
A Tech-Reps work is never done ...
Head Tech, Campagnolo main UK ASC

c60rider
Posts: 320
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 11:12 pm

by c60rider

graeme_f_k wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 10:28 pm
c60rider wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 2:50 pm
Graeme mentioned in his comment about them using a perfectly lined up steel hanger. There's no doubt this mech lines up badly. Graeme mentioned about degradation of O rings in the jockey wheel / body due to reassembly with mineral oil but this has never been taken apart. There's nothing else I've got left to adjust or do that can make any difference to it. It just looks and sounds rubbish.
The Upper Pivot Bolt Assembly (UPBA) can't be taken apart by the end user anyway - it's a SC only job.

The reason is that one of the tests on re-assembly is for mis-alignment of the derailleur relative to the pivot bolt, which can happen if the two-part bolt is over-tightened. In a 2015 or later mech, that won't be the case as the OE bolt fitted at the factory is a single-piece unit fitted with a double Seager clip ... but when we service these upper pivot assemblies, we use a two-part bolt similar to but not the same as the 2012-2015 unit.

The test needs a dead-square pillar with a perfectly perpendicular mech mounting bolt thread, set in a surface table, and a height gauge, not kit that most shops routinely have access to. This "planarity" test is done at the factory before RDs leave production. The pass/fail tolerances are very tight.

Anyway, be that as it may, the essential point is that the o-rings can be degraded by mineral oil getting into the UPBA - in my experience that comes from two sources - direct application from users thinking they are doing the right thing, lubricating a rotating part - but using the wrong material - or from the use of aerosol spray lubes or other types of material with a high mineral oil-base content. WD40 is one material that is widely used, especially before over-winter storage, which can contribute to this problem.

As NASA found out, temperature variations can also degrade o-rings as can simple old age or lots of mechanical movement.

Regardless of the reason that's caused the issue, if the hanger is very close to dead square and the cage of the mech has a significant inward "lean" as the OPs appears to have from these images, the likelihood is that the upper pivot has excessive play. The fix for that is a strip out, clean and re-instatement of the UPBA by a SC. They may need to use oversize o-rings if the bike has been extensively ridden with damaged o-rings as again, IME, this can casue wear of the bushing inside the UPBA that the o-rings run against.

I think the OP is in the UK - in which case we can carry out this operation. We will do a proper, operational check on the mech afterwards as well, as part of our QC process, as well as the "planarity" test I mentioned above.

Cage twist would have to be fairly extreme, hugely outside tolerances, to bring the cage into contact with the spokes as the sole cause - just do the trigonometry on a component approx 40mm "wide" to close a gap to the spoke which would normally be of the order of 2-4 mm (depending on wheel, cassette size, chainring in use). Discounting the reverse twist in the upper jockey, the lower jockey would have to be mis-aligned by ~4.5 deg in the horizontal plane, to bring the cage into contact with the spokes.
Thanks for an excellent reply on this Graeme. This could explain why, for seemingly no reason, the inner cage of the rollers was suddenly brushing against the spokes after being unridden for 6 months during winter. It had just degraded a bit more but then I've never used WD40. The only product that's anywhere destructive was Finish Line ecotec degreaser which I've used on all my bikes. There definitely appears to be more play at the upper pivot bolt than I remember. There was a thread on here somewhere last year (just found it here I haven't re-read it all now https://weightweenies.starbike.com/foru ... 3&t=138988) that someone was asking about excessive play on the upper mount and I checked mine and there was a tiny amount. My old R and SR mechs (2011 and 2009) had a tiny amount more play which would be expected for the amount of use they'd had. There did seem a lot more play there when I was trying to work out what was wrong in the past few weeks but obviously I don't have it now. I do think the twist may be irrelevant and just a red herring but thanks again for your reply I am waiting for further feedback from Wiggle and I will refer them to your reply here. :beerchug:

Bridgeman
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 6:04 am
Location: USA
Contact:

by Bridgeman

graeme_f_k wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 10:28 pm
c60rider wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 2:50 pm
Graeme mentioned in his comment about them using a perfectly lined up steel hanger. There's no doubt this mech lines up badly. Graeme mentioned about degradation of O rings in the jockey wheel / body due to reassembly with mineral oil but this has never been taken apart. There's nothing else I've got left to adjust or do that can make any difference to it. It just looks and sounds rubbish.
The Upper Pivot Bolt Assembly (UPBA) can't be taken apart by the end user anyway - it's a SC only job.

The reason is that one of the tests on re-assembly is for mis-alignment of the derailleur relative to the pivot bolt, which can happen if the two-part bolt is over-tightened. In a 2015 or later mech, that won't be the case as the OE bolt fitted at the factory is a single-piece unit fitted with a double Seager clip ... but when we service these upper pivot assemblies, we use a two-part bolt similar to but not the same as the 2012-2015 unit.

The test needs a dead-square pillar with a perfectly perpendicular mech mounting bolt thread, set in a surface table, and a height gauge, not kit that most shops routinely have access to. This "planarity" test is done at the factory before RDs leave production. The pass/fail tolerances are very tight.

Anyway, be that as it may, the essential point is that the o-rings can be degraded by mineral oil getting into the UPBA - in my experience that comes from two sources - direct application from users thinking they are doing the right thing, lubricating a rotating part - but using the wrong material - or from the use of aerosol spray lubes or other types of material with a high mineral oil-base content. WD40 is one material that is widely used, especially before over-winter storage, which can contribute to this problem.

As NASA found out, temperature variations can also degrade o-rings as can simple old age or lots of mechanical movement.

Regardless of the reason that's caused the issue, if the hanger is very close to dead square and the cage of the mech has a significant inward "lean" as the OPs appears to have from these images, the likelihood is that the upper pivot has excessive play. The fix for that is a strip out, clean and re-instatement of the UPBA by a SC. They may need to use oversize o-rings if the bike has been extensively ridden with damaged o-rings as again, IME, this can casue wear of the bushing inside the UPBA that the o-rings run against.

I think the OP is in the UK - in which case we can carry out this operation. We will do a proper, operational check on the mech afterwards as well, as part of our QC process, as well as the "planarity" test I mentioned above.

Cage twist would have to be fairly extreme, hugely outside tolerances, to bring the cage into contact with the spokes as the sole cause - just do the trigonometry on a component approx 40mm "wide" to close a gap to the spoke which would normally be of the order of 2-4 mm (depending on wheel, cassette size, chainring in use). Discounting the reverse twist in the upper jockey, the lower jockey would have to be mis-aligned by ~4.5 deg in the horizontal plane, to bring the cage into contact with the spokes.
Greame, your expertise is greatly appreciated!

Question; Is the upper pivot relying on the o-rings to minimize excessive play? I'm surprised that the tolerance between the bolt and the housing isn't at least a running slip fit. (<.0004"/.01mm.)

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 6466
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Ive never experienced the upper pivot problem being discussed but that certainly would make more sense as a possible cause for the rear derailleur running into the spokes than the “twisted cage” where the hanger is perfectly aligned. As has been said, the twisted cage problem seems very rare. In my case, it was apparent and evident on a brand new derailleur, brand new install, and was clearly a problem as soon as you mounted the chain. Just took a bit to verify it was the actual cage. But even though the chain would derail from the lower pulley, the cage itself was never coming close to touching the spokes.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 3938
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

some light is now being shed. lets hope wiggle sort this out for you.

graeme_f_k
Shop Owner / Manufacturer
Posts: 331
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 12:21 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

by graeme_f_k

Bridgeman wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 2:17 am
Greame, your expertise is greatly appreciated!

Question; Is the upper pivot relying on the o-rings to minimize excessive play? I'm surprised that the tolerance between the bolt and the housing isn't at least a running slip fit. (<.0004"/.01mm.)
[/quote]

The honest answer is that I don't know why o-rings are used but I can surmise that they are used to control a deliberate amount of movement built into the UPB to allow the derailleur to shift slightly on it's bolt, in both the axial and the lateral plane relative to the wheel, whilst not allowing metal-to-metal wear.

That's a guess, based on the fact that in other Campagnolo RDs, if one goes back enough years, a slip fit was regularly used in the UPB area - but at that time, cassettes / freewheels were narrower and spaces between sprockets / tooth profiles / expectations of shift performance were all rather different ...

I will see if I can find a definitive answer.
A Tech-Reps work is never done ...
Head Tech, Campagnolo main UK ASC

graeme_f_k
Shop Owner / Manufacturer
Posts: 331
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 12:21 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

by graeme_f_k

c60rider wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 11:25 pm
graeme_f_k wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 10:28 pm
c60rider wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 2:50 pm
Graeme mentioned in his comment about them using a perfectly lined up steel hanger. There's no doubt this mech lines up badly. Graeme mentioned about degradation of O rings in the jockey wheel / body due to reassembly with mineral oil but this has never been taken apart. There's nothing else I've got left to adjust or do that can make any difference to it. It just looks and sounds rubbish.
The Upper Pivot Bolt Assembly (UPBA) can't be taken apart by the end user anyway - it's a SC only job.

The reason is that one of the tests on re-assembly is for mis-alignment of the derailleur relative to the pivot bolt, which can happen if the two-part bolt is over-tightened. In a 2015 or later mech, that won't be the case as the OE bolt fitted at the factory is a single-piece unit fitted with a double Seager clip ... but when we service these upper pivot assemblies, we use a two-part bolt similar to but not the same as the 2012-2015 unit.

The test needs a dead-square pillar with a perfectly perpendicular mech mounting bolt thread, set in a surface table, and a height gauge, not kit that most shops routinely have access to. This "planarity" test is done at the factory before RDs leave production. The pass/fail tolerances are very tight.

Anyway, be that as it may, the essential point is that the o-rings can be degraded by mineral oil getting into the UPBA - in my experience that comes from two sources - direct application from users thinking they are doing the right thing, lubricating a rotating part - but using the wrong material - or from the use of aerosol spray lubes or other types of material with a high mineral oil-base content. WD40 is one material that is widely used, especially before over-winter storage, which can contribute to this problem.

As NASA found out, temperature variations can also degrade o-rings as can simple old age or lots of mechanical movement.

Regardless of the reason that's caused the issue, if the hanger is very close to dead square and the cage of the mech has a significant inward "lean" as the OPs appears to have from these images, the likelihood is that the upper pivot has excessive play. The fix for that is a strip out, clean and re-instatement of the UPBA by a SC. They may need to use oversize o-rings if the bike has been extensively ridden with damaged o-rings as again, IME, this can casue wear of the bushing inside the UPBA that the o-rings run against.

I think the OP is in the UK - in which case we can carry out this operation. We will do a proper, operational check on the mech afterwards as well, as part of our QC process, as well as the "planarity" test I mentioned above.

Cage twist would have to be fairly extreme, hugely outside tolerances, to bring the cage into contact with the spokes as the sole cause - just do the trigonometry on a component approx 40mm "wide" to close a gap to the spoke which would normally be of the order of 2-4 mm (depending on wheel, cassette size, chainring in use). Discounting the reverse twist in the upper jockey, the lower jockey would have to be mis-aligned by ~4.5 deg in the horizontal plane, to bring the cage into contact with the spokes.
Thanks for an excellent reply on this Graeme. This could explain why, for seemingly no reason, the inner cage of the rollers was suddenly brushing against the spokes after being unridden for 6 months during winter. It had just degraded a bit more but then I've never used WD40. The only product that's anywhere destructive was Finish Line ecotec degreaser which I've used on all my bikes. There definitely appears to be more play at the upper pivot bolt than I remember. There was a thread on here somewhere last year (just found it here I haven't re-read it all now https://weightweenies.starbike.com/foru ... 3&t=138988) that someone was asking about excessive play on the upper mount and I checked mine and there was a tiny amount. My old R and SR mechs (2011 and 2009) had a tiny amount more play which would be expected for the amount of use they'd had. There did seem a lot more play there when I was trying to work out what was wrong in the past few weeks but obviously I don't have it now. I do think the twist may be irrelevant and just a red herring but thanks again for your reply I am waiting for further feedback from Wiggle and I will refer them to your reply here. :beerchug:
As it happens, I was with the SC concerned on Friday afternoon - they asked me if I was aware of this case.

Wiggle have not yet sent them the RD because the SC are waiting on answers as to the combination of equipment being used / images etc.
You have to bear in mind, I may spend far more of my time than is healthy on this forum but the other SCs don't necessarily - so although you've posted very comprehensive info here, all the same info needs to go to Wiggle so that they can pass it on to the SC, so that the SC will know how best to handle the query.

A lot of returns are sent in from customers who don't have a great deal of technical knowledge so the SCs generally have to "filter" a bit. Sometimes the things that they are asked to look at are sent back simply because the end user has not understood the product they have bought. Years ago, we avoided that because remote selling was less common and real bike shops looked at actual product and said the equivalent of "no, it's like that because ..." or, "the reason that doesn't work is ..." These days, that filter is at least partially missing and most of the big online vendors just try to return items to the supplier because they often don't have the expertise in house to help ... so to avoid being overwhelmed, the wholesalers have to ask for enough information to know what the *actual* problem is.

Example - had you been running the old Proton or an original Neutron wheel, you would have needed to fit a 1 mm spacer between the cassette and cassette body - and even then, the clearance would be tight. Say you'd fitted a 0.5 mm spacer - big enough to allow the back of the cassette to clear the hub shell, the clearance would be still tighter - combine that with a relatively small bottom sprocket and the clearance to the spokes from the derailleur cage would have been a lot less - the normal flex in pedalling on some frames (combined frame and rear wheel) could have bought the RD and the wheel together.

That's part of the reason that what seem like slightly obscure questions coming back from the retailer need answers, before their suppliers will authorise a return ...

In this case, I have asked that the RD is returned to me (since I have all the info) and I will look at it.
A Tech-Reps work is never done ...
Head Tech, Campagnolo main UK ASC

c60rider
Posts: 320
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 11:12 pm

by c60rider

Thanks Graeme I have forwarded the relevant pictures and your earlier post to Wiggle but that was only on Thursday and Friday last week so I wouldn't necessarily have expected them to have actioned it as yet but it's great it's getting sorted thank you

c60rider
Posts: 320
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 11:12 pm

by c60rider

Finally able to post an update/conclusion to this thread for any others that come across an issue in future. There was such a long delay for the wait for spares (and of course Italy shutting down in the summer!!) It turned out the twist on the carbon jockey cage was at the extreme of tolerance so this was replaced. It's been on the bike over a week now and I've put a couple of hundred miles on it and it works perfectly. Better than it ever did. I don't think Graeme had to do anything with the upper pivot bolt assembly but overall an excellent outcome. Contrary to one or two posts, it's essential to go via the original retailer, in my case Wiggle, and I'm delighted how they handled it and of course Graeme's input was invaluable. It was just a shame the bike has missed the entire summer when we finally had a decent one in the UK this year!

The only thing I still can't work out is why, when the bike was unused over the winter, was the inner cage plate was catching the spokes on the inner sprocket. I had great difficultly dialing this out even though the gear hanger alignment and shift adjustment was spot on. It's nowhere near now, which is what you would expect, so that's a bit of a strange one unless there was something awry with the upper pivot bolt or another issue somewhere that's now cleared with the new part.

by Weenie


lone wheeler
Posts: 496
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 11:34 am
Location: Dubai, UAE
Contact:

by lone wheeler

Here's one that's slightly related. Went on holiday for a couple of weeks and left the (Chorus 11sp) rear mech on the 3rd or 4th sprocket rather than leaving in the 12 sprocket. I know, my bad!

Anyway, the rear mech now won't shift down as it should. It feels like it's hitting something and when the wheel is out, you have to push it by the cage to release. It feels like it's catching on something and clicks. I can't see what's causing it. Really wierd as it was perfect prior to holiday. I'll take it to the local shop tomorrow and see if they can figure it out.

Anbody else had this?

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post