Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

TECH NEWS

Campagnolo announce Over-Torque bottom bracket/chainset system

New system uses 30mm chainset axle

Campagnolo are introducing a new Over-Torque chainset and bottom bracket system with wide stance bearings and a 30mm axle. Campag reckon that this, along with a redesigned crankarm, results in a 5% increase in rigidity over their current top-level Super Record chainset. There’s also a reduction in weight, so they say that the weight-to-rigidity relationship is 10% higher than before.

The idea is, according to Campag, “Not only to push the limits of both rigidity and weight but also to come in a format that adapts in a more efficient manner to frames with oversized bottom bracket designs.”

And there are plenty of those out there these days.

In terms of weight, Campag say, “The new design in the Comp Ultra version weighs in at nearly 54g less the previous lightweight offering from Campagnolo. At 563g the Comp Ultra represents a new low-weight benchmark for its class and when considering its rigidity and capability to transfer power efficiently is perhaps the new quality standard for oversized bottom bracket cranksets.”

Campag are keen to point out that they’ve not sacrificed durability here. They say that they Over-Torque chainsets were tested and validated at fatigue levels more than 10 times higher than required by regulations. They also say that they’ve corrosion tested the components beyond the standards used in the automotive industry, and that they’ve developed and patented new production processes and treatments to guarantee the quality and structural reliability over time.

The new Over-Torque technology will be available in two different chainset versions: the Comp Ultra 11s with a weight of 563g and the Comp One 11s that weigh 605g.

Both versions are available in 53x39, 52x39, 52x36 and 50x34 chainring configurations, with the option of crank lengths of 170, 172.5 and 175mm in each configuration.

Both chainsets are designed to work with 68 (width) x 42 (shell inner diameter), 68x46 and 86.5x46 standards and have corresponding bottom brackets for each version - so, pressed in versions are available and an outboard threaded version.

Mat has been in cycling media since 1996, on titles including BikeRadar, Total Bike, Total Mountain Bike, What Mountain Bike and Mountain Biking UK, and he has been editor of 220 Triathlon and Cycling Plus. Mat has been road.cc technical editor for over a decade, testing bikes, fettling the latest kit, and trying out the most up-to-the-minute clothing. He has won his category in Ironman UK 70.3 and finished on the podium in both marathons he has run. Mat is a Cambridge graduate who did a post-grad in magazine journalism, and he is a winner of the Cycling Media Award for Specialist Online Writer. Now over 50, he's riding road and gravel bikes most days for fun and fitness rather than training for competitions.

Add new comment

16 comments

Avatar
jackp30 | 11 years ago
0 likes

if you know how to pedal a bicycle you don't need more than 24 millimeter cranks

Avatar
jackp30 | 11 years ago
0 likes

my guess the DuraAce 7800 will continue to be the standard-bearer in cranks

Avatar
jackp30 | 11 years ago
0 likes

Why No 177.5 Length ????  39

Avatar
Nick T | 11 years ago
0 likes

"Well mate, it looks to me like you've under torqued your Over Torque innit."

Eh what you torquing about?

Avatar
step-hent | 11 years ago
0 likes

Over torque? Great name - makes it sound like it is supposed to be badly adjusted...

Avatar
sorebones replied to step-hent | 11 years ago
0 likes
step-hent wrote:

Over torque? Great name - makes it sound like it is supposed to be badly adjusted...

sounds a bit 'smashy and nicey' radio 1 DJ to me!

Avatar
Nick T | 11 years ago
0 likes

Nah, it's just a crank that will fit frames with a press fit standard that Campagnolo didn't previously support, like 386evo or whatever. They haven't dropped Ultra Torque just added this to their offerings.

Avatar
crazy-legs | 11 years ago
0 likes

Hang on, is this ANOTHER new standard?
Yeah cos we really need one of those, making everything that came before it totally incompatible!

Avatar
VeloPeo replied to crazy-legs | 11 years ago
0 likes
crazy-legs wrote:

Hang on, is this ANOTHER new standard?
Yeah cos we really need one of those, making everything that came before it totally incompatible!

Slightly geeky but....

http://xkcd.com/927/

Avatar
Roberj4 | 11 years ago
0 likes

Sure Campag will do a superb job. If it's close to Cannondale's BB30 set up good luck to any body purchasing. I've had BB30 for 5 years and over all long term I'm not impressed. Nobody seems to manufacturer a quality set of BB30 bearings FSA certainly don't. My Cannon Dealer admits this to. I'm now considering a cartridge system fit (Rotar cranks) with a move back to 24mm axle chainset, chuck my BB30 chainset in the bin.

Avatar
thebungle replied to Roberj4 | 11 years ago
0 likes
Roberj4 wrote:

Sure Campag will do a superb job. If it's close to Cannondale's BB30 set up good luck to any body purchasing. I've had BB30 for 5 years and over all long term I'm not impressed. Nobody seems to manufacturer a quality set of BB30 bearings FSA certainly don't. My Cannon Dealer admits this to. I'm now considering a cartridge system fit (Rotar cranks) with a move back to 24mm axle chainset, chuck my BB30 chainset in the bin.

Interesting.

Have you tried taking the bearings to a local bearings supplier?

When I had my Yeti 575 the Yeti replacement set was £100, I took them down to the local supplier and managed to get cheaper and higher quality.

Avatar
Roberj4 replied to thebungle | 11 years ago
0 likes

A valid point. Deffo worth considering thanks for the prompt.

Avatar
mad_scot_rider | 11 years ago
0 likes

"... weighs in at nearly 54g less ..."

I'll just cancel my diet then - pass the doughnuts!

Avatar
Nick T | 11 years ago
0 likes

Couldn't find a picture of the Over-Torque then?

Avatar
Mat Brett replied to Nick T | 11 years ago
0 likes
Nick T wrote:

Couldn't find a picture of the Over-Torque then?

My fault entirely. Was in a hurry to get into a meeting and clicked on the wrong pics. Sorted now.

Latest Comments