Differences in Campy Rings
02-09-21, 06:40 PM
#1
Youngman Grand
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 8,078
Bikes: roadsters, club bikes, fixed and classic
Mentioned: 118 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2039 Post(s)
Liked 1,326 Times
in
861 Posts
Differences in Campy Rings
Are their differences between the Nuovo Gran Sport and the Strada chainrings? I see the obvious crankarm differences and the rings look close, but something bugs me. Splain it to me Lucy.
NR
NGS
NR
NGS
02-10-21, 10:19 AM
#3
Used to be Conspiratemus
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hamilton ON Canada
Posts: 1,504
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 292 Post(s)
Liked 244 Times
in
163 Posts
Q: In a “V” of flying geese, why does one leg of the V look longer than the other?
A: The long leg has more geese in it.
Edit: in this case the goose count appears to be the same and I was fooled by an optical illusion. I can't read the tooth count engraved on the NR set to be sure it's the same as the 52 on the NGS but I get 26 teeth on 180 degrees of ring not hiding under the arm.
The two photos are different resolution and shot from different camera angles -- the B&W shot of the NGS is more elliptical than what I take to be the Velobase photo of the NR. The GS is magnified compared to the NR. But because the GS crank arm is pointing more toward the camera it is foreshortened and appears to be ~ the same length on the image as the NR crank (9.8 cm vs 10.0 cm on my monitor.) This fools you into thinking the images are the same size and the rings on the NR must therefore be smaller. They do look "different" but perhaps they are not. I know I would have to look at physical specimens of both, side by side, in order to tell differences, especially in finish.
The only difference I can see is that the "Campagnolo [blurred tooth count]" on the NR is engraved along the inner edge of the big ring, while the NGS photo shows "Campagnolo <52> " nearer the outer edge. The early catalogue photos (or whatever you call those lovely old etching-type illustrations) show Record rings engraved as in the Velobase shot. But the ?1982 catalogue shows the Record crankset part 1049 with outboard-engraved rings and the Gran Sport part 0304 with inboard engravings. https://www.disraeligears.co.uk/Site/...s_page_25.html , click ahead to p. 26 to see GS. Furthermore, the illustrations a page or two further on of the rings as individual spare parts, with different part numbers called out for Record vs. Gran Sport rings show the opposite: inboard on the Record and outboard on the GS -- like the OP's photos. Now, if the rings were all visually similar, the photographer might not have bothered to use the correct loose part for catalogue photos, as long as the company shipped the correct ring to fulfill an order. So I adduce this as evidence that the location of the engraving is not a "tell", at least not in catalogue photos, as to what the actual differences might be, if any, between NR and 5-hole GS rings.
If the "alloy" and the finish were different on the GS cf. NR, then the rings cannot be "the same."
My own Record crank dated 1983 bought used ~10 years ago came with out-board engraved rings, as per the ?1982 catalogue I am citing here.
A: The long leg has more geese in it.
Edit: in this case the goose count appears to be the same and I was fooled by an optical illusion. I can't read the tooth count engraved on the NR set to be sure it's the same as the 52 on the NGS but I get 26 teeth on 180 degrees of ring not hiding under the arm.
The two photos are different resolution and shot from different camera angles -- the B&W shot of the NGS is more elliptical than what I take to be the Velobase photo of the NR. The GS is magnified compared to the NR. But because the GS crank arm is pointing more toward the camera it is foreshortened and appears to be ~ the same length on the image as the NR crank (9.8 cm vs 10.0 cm on my monitor.) This fools you into thinking the images are the same size and the rings on the NR must therefore be smaller. They do look "different" but perhaps they are not. I know I would have to look at physical specimens of both, side by side, in order to tell differences, especially in finish.
The only difference I can see is that the "Campagnolo [blurred tooth count]" on the NR is engraved along the inner edge of the big ring, while the NGS photo shows "Campagnolo <52> " nearer the outer edge. The early catalogue photos (or whatever you call those lovely old etching-type illustrations) show Record rings engraved as in the Velobase shot. But the ?1982 catalogue shows the Record crankset part 1049 with outboard-engraved rings and the Gran Sport part 0304 with inboard engravings. https://www.disraeligears.co.uk/Site/...s_page_25.html , click ahead to p. 26 to see GS. Furthermore, the illustrations a page or two further on of the rings as individual spare parts, with different part numbers called out for Record vs. Gran Sport rings show the opposite: inboard on the Record and outboard on the GS -- like the OP's photos. Now, if the rings were all visually similar, the photographer might not have bothered to use the correct loose part for catalogue photos, as long as the company shipped the correct ring to fulfill an order. So I adduce this as evidence that the location of the engraving is not a "tell", at least not in catalogue photos, as to what the actual differences might be, if any, between NR and 5-hole GS rings.
If the "alloy" and the finish were different on the GS cf. NR, then the rings cannot be "the same."
My own Record crank dated 1983 bought used ~10 years ago came with out-board engraved rings, as per the ?1982 catalogue I am citing here.
Last edited by conspiratemus1; 02-10-21 at 01:40 PM.
02-10-21, 10:36 AM
#4
Awaiting Parole
I am not a Campagnolo expert and the OP is asking a question that seems important to him.....any Campy experts care to weigh in on the topic?
Best, Ben
Best, Ben
__________________
"STAND UP FOR WHAT IS RIGHT EVEN IF YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE STANDING"
Voice recognition may sometimes create odd spelling and grammatical errors
"STAND UP FOR WHAT IS RIGHT EVEN IF YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE STANDING"
Voice recognition may sometimes create odd spelling and grammatical errors
02-10-21, 11:11 AM
#5
Edumacator
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Goose Creek, SC
Posts: 4,079
Bikes: '87 Crestdale, '87 Basso Gap, '92 Rossin Performance EL-OS, 1990 VanTuyl, 1980s Losa, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 1987 PX10, etc...
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1298 Post(s)
Liked 1,168 Times
in
823 Posts
I was under the impression that rings were the same, if not slightly different alloy and finish.
__________________
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1980s Vanni Losa Cassani thingy, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981? Faggin, Cannondale M500, etc...Need to do an N -1...
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1980s Vanni Losa Cassani thingy, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981? Faggin, Cannondale M500, etc...Need to do an N -1...
Likes For jdawginsc:
02-10-21, 11:12 AM
#6
If I own it, I ride it
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cardinal Country
Posts: 5,416
Bikes: Lejeune(14), Raleigh, Raysport, Jan De Reus, Gazelle, Masi, B. Carré(4), Springfield, Motobecane(2), Greg Lemond, Andre Bertin, Schwinn Paramount
Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 537 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 451 Times
in
222 Posts
A look at a catalog showed me that the part number for the rings differed only in the addition of GS and a BCD number to that of the NR crank. 753GS/144
Likes For CV-6:
02-10-21, 03:50 PM
#7
Youngman Grand
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 8,078
Bikes: roadsters, club bikes, fixed and classic
Mentioned: 118 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2039 Post(s)
Liked 1,326 Times
in
861 Posts
Thanks for the responses, for some reason I'm no longer getting notifications when I get replies to my posts. And I'm buried in work. I'm looking at each of these two cranksets at home and I vaguely remember someone commenting on NGS cranks...maybe @cudak888?
Sure I count, my 'no year' NGS is a 53/42 with Patent Campagnolo <53> on the inboard (smaller) web of the outside face. My 84 NR has a 52 ring with Brev Campagnolo on the outboard/larger web on the outside face.
They just look different and I can't take clean pics because one is on my bike on the trainer. Important? Maybe not, unless I want to sell either and want to be accurate with my descriptions. @CV-6, a different part number suggests a different part I figure.
The finished on the GS has been tarnished with shop storage but the alloy seems to be the same.
Sure I count, my 'no year' NGS is a 53/42 with Patent Campagnolo <53> on the inboard (smaller) web of the outside face. My 84 NR has a 52 ring with Brev Campagnolo on the outboard/larger web on the outside face.
They just look different and I can't take clean pics because one is on my bike on the trainer. Important? Maybe not, unless I want to sell either and want to be accurate with my descriptions. @CV-6, a different part number suggests a different part I figure.
The finished on the GS has been tarnished with shop storage but the alloy seems to be the same.
Likes For clubman:
