Can anyone here give details on the difference between Campy and Fulcrum products? Are the Fulcrum products built with the same quality standards that the Campy products are? Specifically the Campy Record and Fulcrum Torq RS cranks.

Can anyone here give details on the difference between Campy and Fulcrum products? Are the Fulcrum products built with the same quality standards that the Campy products are? Specifically the Campy Record and Fulcrum Torq RS cranks.

At the same price point, there's essentially no difference. The goal of Fulcrum products is to allow people who like Shimano to actually ride Campy without admitting that they are riding Campy :)

is as good as Campy. Campy Neutrons I owned were bullet-proof for hundreds and hundreds of miles. Fulcrum 3s I got...within 200 miles the rear wheel was completely out of alignment...will see if it happens again.

I don't know if lyleseven got the bad ones or I got the good ones, but my Fulcrum 3s have like 2500 miles on 'em and they're as straight as the day I got 'em. I weigh in at 185 in case that matters.

I don't know if lyleseven got the bad ones or I got the good ones, but my Fulcrum 3s have like 2500 miles on 'em and they're as straight as the day I got 'em. I weigh in at 185 in case that matters.

these are obviously not wheels for the over 200 lbs rider...but I have had zero problems with the Neutrons and my Mavic SLs........

these are obviously not wheels for the over 200 lbs rider...but I have had zero problems with the Neutrons and my Mavic SLs........

You need to compare like for like for useful information. Even at 215 lbs fragile wheels should last more than 200 miles. I suspect you got a bad pair.

Well can anyone here, distributor, LBS, give a definitive answer about the two product lines? I'd like to purchase the new Fulcrum Torq RS crank, but at 6'2", 245lbs I'm hesitant of purchasing a newly released product. Any advice or help would be beneficial.

Lyleseven- That just doesn't make sense. Nobody sells a wheel that can't hold the weight of a 200 lb man. A solidly built (not super light) all aluminum wheel should not have problems like that. I think you got a dud.

As for the cranks... if you are running campy, don't bother with the Fulcrums. If you are running shimano the comparison is irrelevant and you'd probably be be better off with plain shimano cranks.

if you are running campy, don't bother with the Fulcrums. If you are running shimano the comparison is irrelevant and you'd probably be be better off with plain shimano cranks.

And "why" to both of these statements? I'm not saying Fulcrums are better, but it seems that on a price point basis, they are pretty much rebranded Campy. If you like the look, why not use them? And why would you be better off with Shimano? You seem pretty definite about this, but it's not the least clear to my why you are.

My thinking was that both Campy and shimano make good products, few people will argue with that. As Campy makes a carbon crankset, it seems silly to me to risk buying an inferior product and break the uniform look of a full gruppo (thats obviously just my opinion). With Shimano I wouldn't buy a carbon crank to begin with, but if I did, I can think of a whole bunch of equally good carbon cranks from companies that have been making cranks longer and are well known. I don't know if Fulcrum is just rebranded Campy, I don't think thats right because they don't really look the same.

Obviously, if you are basing a decision on looks, all bets are off.

PigmyRacer,
That was my main concern, are the Fulcrum cranks relabeled Campy Record cranks. Although they look very similar, I was mainly concerned with the overall build and parts quality of the Fulcrums as compared to Campy. I have also been looking at the Zipp VumaQuad and SRAM Red cranks.

Let me put it this way. If it were me... I wouldn't bother. Too many unknowns, and there are plenty of well reputed and equally or less expensive companies.

. I don't know if Fulcrum is just rebranded Campy, I don't think thats right because they don't really look the same. . They may not be "rebranded" Campy, but they are made by Campy.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech.php?id=tech/2005/reviews/fulcrum_racing_1

PigmyRacer,
That was my main concern, are the Fulcrum cranks relabeled Campy Record cranks. Although they look very similar, I was mainly concerned with the overall build and parts quality of the Fulcrums as compared to Campy. I have also been looking at the Zipp VumaQuad and SRAM Red cranks.

Personally, I'd go with the Fulcrum cranks over the SRAM or Zipp cranks. The Zipps are new and untested, and the SRAM....well....at least in the past their BBs have had dodgy goings on.

The Fulcrum cranks are not rebadged Campy. While the company is owned by Campy, the cranks do not use the proprietary Campy BCD. Fulcrum standards have a 130mm BCD, while the compacts have a 110 BCD.

While the Fulcrum cranks are new to the market, you can rest assured they'll be fine. Campy didn't just start another company and say, "Start designin' stuff." Look closely at the Fulcrum cranks and then at the Campy cranks, and you'll find little differentiating them, aside from the decals and BCD.

Forrest Root,
Thanks for your insight, and help... I hope to make a final decision later this week, although my LBS is recommending that I go with Dura-ace or SRAM.

Campy is just being "marketwise." Look how many otherwise Shimano equipped bikes have "non-Shimano" cranks and wheels - Eastons, Mavics, Truvatives, FSA's, Stronglights, etc. Even on some of the pro teams. Didn't a French team use Stronglight cranks on Campy equipped bikes?

But Campy wheels or cranks on a DuraAce or Ultegra bike...no, no,no. That is still the "unthinkable." But make some minor changes, label it "Fulcrum", and away they go.

I've yet to see a Fulcrum crank, but the wheels I've seen are very nice.

OK, this is a dumb question but can someone explain to me what is meant by 'ramps' on the chain ring? Are these the scalloped grooves on the teeth? Is 8 a good number of ramps to have? Please explain or help....

The 'functional' difference between a campag chainset and the fulcrum one is the BCD - 135 on campag, 130 on fulcrum (the same as shimano).

OK, this is a dumb question but can someone explain to me what is meant by 'ramps' on the chain ring? Are these the scalloped grooves on the teeth? Is 8 a good number of ramps to have?

Chainrings have ramps (scalloped grooves) and pins to help shifting. Cassette cogs have the same. Campy chainrings have 8 pins and 18 scallops (2 per pin and 2 others), though they used to have 6 pins and 16 scallops (2 per pin and 4 others). You can't arbitrarily say that X is the right number of scallops or pins. It's part of the total shifting system design.

The 'functional' difference between a campag chainset and the fulcrum one is the BCD - 135 on campag, 130 on fulcrum (the same as shimano).

A small update on this: Fulcrum cranks do share the campagnolo proprietary standards, despite the common belief that they use standard 110 and 130mm BCD. I purchased a Fulcrum R Torq R compact crank believing it to be ordinary 110mm BCD, but alas. They use the 110+112mm standard, and what's more, the R don't come with a 36t chainring, and isn't compatible with aftermarket chainrings made by fx TA Specialties, even if they are Campa and Fulcrum specific. I have heard this also applies to Campagnolo's own centaur compact crank, and has something to do with chainring distance and spider thickness. The standard double crank uses the 135mm BCD pattern.

Conclusion:
The Racing Torq R-crank is for all practical purposes a Campa Centaur that weighs 7 grams more, and (in Europe) costs basically the same, if not a few dimes more.
The racing Torq RS-crank is somewhere inbetween Chorus and Record: it weighs a few grams less than Chorus, but is a hollow construction (like Record), whereas the Chorus crankarms has a hardfoam-core. Price-wise the RS seems to be up there with the Record, but some e-shops oddly enough has it just slightly above Chorus. When comparing weights, bear in mind that the Campagnolo weight numbers don't include bottom bracket shell (+57grams), whereas Fulcrum's does.

Verdict:
Don't buy the Torq R if you need a 50/36-compact crankset. Otherwise it works as it should. If you can get the RS at a decent price, ie well cheaper than the Record, it's good. I have one on order now, btw.

Fulcrum cranks, as the poster above me stated use campy 135 and proprietary 110 BCDs. Any quick look at the technical info on the cranks will tell you that. The RS is a record crank, plain and simple, the R is a Centaur crank, all for less money. Those campy decals sure must cost a lot to produce. No difference in quality between the cranks either, they come off the same assembly line.

Well can anyone here, distributor, LBS, give a definitive answer about the two product lines? I'd like to purchase the new Fulcrum Torq RS crank, but at 6'2", 245lbs I'm hesitant of purchasing a newly released product. Any advice or help would be beneficial.

In the last 5 or 6 years Campy started offering Campy wheels that were Shimano compatible. Surprisingly enough, there was great support for the move but no sales numbers to support it. 3 years ago or so Campy launches Fulcrum, Idea being to offer a neutral branded line of Campy wheels. My suspicion is that Campy/Fulcrum product managers have only rebadged the like models which would lead to material and mfg savings. There is certainly room to split hairs, but in the marketing mfg world this makes clear sense.

Buy Campy and or Fulcrum and you should be equally happy.


Coup

Can you use the Campy BB cups with the Fulcrum cranks?

Yes, the Fulcrum cranks require Campy outboard cups.