Patent patrol: Campy filed a patent to enable 10t small cogs

[weiwentg]

Courtesy of Bike Rumor (https://bikerumor.com/2019/11/11/patent-patrol-shimano-sram-campagnolo-all-file-major-drivetrain-updates/): Campagnolo filed a patent for a new freehub/driver design. Quoting from the article:

Next up is Campagnolo, who filed a patent covering an all-new cassette and cassette body for rear wheels. At first glance, this might appear to be a standard cassette with alloy cog carrier, mounted up to a standard freehub (a.k.a. cassette body). However, if you do some careful counting… [of the diagram of the cassette in their patent application] …you might notice that it has a 10-tooth small cog. Indeed, it appears that Campagnolo is finally jumping in to cogs smaller than 11… which may also suggest single chainring (1x) options in the future.

Campy even mentioned in the application that the first cog can be 10t or even smaller. The cassette secures to the freehub/driver by a threaded fastener. This doesn't seem like something anybody is calling for on a double drivetrain, so it really does seem like they are at least thinking of 1x.

Also discussed in the article: Shimano filed a patent for a gearbox. SRAM filed patents for some improvements to its shift ramps.

[Jaybee]

Can someone smarter than me explain why that's not just a SRAM XD cassette?

[mulp]

I think it would be similar to SRAM but campy needs to have its own patent in order to maintain its market share and drive up sales of its own campy cassettes.

This doesnt provide any real value add to the bike industry as a whole and probably is marginally better than what campy already has. This would likely necessitate the need to get a new camp freehub as well which would probably be bad news for current campy owners.

[Mark McM]

Can someone smarter than me explain why that's not just a SRAM XD cassette?

It's similar in a lot of ways. The main difference is: For the SRAM XD the cassette carrier (spider) is permanently attached the sprocket "dome", and engages a spline on the freehub body; For the new Campagnolo system, the cassette carrier (spider) is permanently attached to the freehub body, and connects to sprocket "dome" with some type of fastener (the freehub body has no splines).

Form the photos, it appears that existing rear hubs can be retrofitted with the new freehub body. But the drawings seem to indicate that the sprocket "dome" is attached from the back side. For standard spoked wheels, the spider attachment points might be accessed through the spokes from the non-drive side. But this wouldn't be possible if used on a disc wheel. Another concern is that permanently attaching the spider arms to the freehub body limits the range of sizes of sprocket "domes" that can be used. But this might not be of much concern to Campagnolo, as the range of gearing sizes available for each drive train is becoming more and more limited by the manufacturers.

[ultraman6970]

Fastener in a cassette?? Is that even durable? I dont know, the idea looks ok to me but the thing is... it is practical?

The other thing, to me looks a lot simpler just put that 10T cog and the 11 cog together in one block and make it work like the lock ring?? Just need a smaller lock ring tool but besides that looks a lot simpler than re invent the whole concept.

A lot of patents moving around which contain stuff that cant even be used in real world situations, this one looks like one of those.

[Mark McM]

Fastener in a cassette?? Is that even durable? I dont know, the idea looks ok to me but the thing is... it is practical?

The other thing, to me looks a lot simpler just put that 10T cog and the 11 cog together in one block and make it work like the lock ring?? Just need a smaller lock ring tool but besides that looks a lot simpler than re invent the whole concept.

Even if you could somehow jam a 10th sprocket on the end of the freehub body (you can't), there wouldn't be enough clearance around the freehub splines for the chain to seat down between the sprocket teeth. You'd either have to shave down the diameter of the freehub body at the end (like Shimano did to fit 11 tooth sprockets), or reduce the width of the freehub body (so the smaller sprockets could overhang the end of the freehub body). And even then, you'd probably need a smaller diameter lockring thread - the special lockring for 11 tooth sprockets already doesn't have much of a lip on it.

There's really no way to fit a 10 tooth sprocket onto a Campagnolo freehub without a substantial redesign.

[FlashUNC]

Looks like a workaround to avoid stepping on SRAMs XD/XDR toes.

[R3awak3n]

it sucks that at one point we could share cassettes btw all systems and now with 12 speed it is all going to crap

[ERK55]

it sucks that at one point we could share cassettes btw all systems and now with 12 speed it is all going to crap

Couldn't agree more.
Maybe a reason to stock up on 11 speed stuff.

[echappist]

Fastener in a cassette?? Is that even durable? I dont know, the idea looks ok to me but the thing is... it is practical?

The other thing, to me looks a lot simpler just put that 10T cog and the 11 cog together in one block and make it work like the lock ring?? Just need a smaller lock ring tool but besides that looks a lot simpler than re invent the whole concept.

A lot of patents moving around which contain stuff that cant even be used in real world situations, this one looks like one of those.

most granted patents aren't worth much more than the paper on which they are printed

the small numbers that are worth quite a few orders of magnitude more

will anything in this application even mature into an actual patentable claim? your guess is as good as mine

even the premise behind this so called Patent Patrol is misguided. At best, it's a round-up of the latest applications made public available, not actual grants that confer government sanctioned monopolies...

not everything contained in a patent application is actually patentable, and sometimes, the intention might not even be to secure a patentable claim

this is nothing but navel gazing; at least they could have done a round up of actually issued patents...

[bigbill]

I love Campagnolo but they sure seem to thrive on complexity. I was going to get a concealed carry permit, but I think a set of SGR pedals in a sock would be just as effective.

[robertbb]

Couldn't agree more.
Maybe a reason to stock up on 11 speed stuff.

Absolutely!

[bicimechanic]

This could be related to the Campagnolo gravel group coming out in the near future...

[robertbb]

This could be related to the Campagnolo gravel group coming out in the near future...

The Chorus 12 crankset has four extra bolts that seem to do nothing... I wonder if they're there as a placeholder for a 1x chainring.

[oldpotatoe]

it sucks that at one point we could share cassettes btw all systems and now with 12 speed it is all going to crap

Kinda, sorta..I'll bet 12s are cross compatible like 11s. At least with one manufacturer, a new freehub body wasn't needed for 12s...And no doubt shimano will (finally) get into the 12s road gig.

Remember tho, patent doesn't equal production. Shimano famously patented a 14s cogset and chain, what, 15 years ago?

[Blue Jays]

Curious how this potentially impacts chain clearance over the chainstay, too?

[weiwentg]

Kinda, sorta..I'll bet 12s are cross compatible like 11s. At least with one manufacturer, a new freehub body wasn't needed for 12s...And no doubt shimano will (finally) get into the 12s road gig.

Remember tho, patent doesn't equal production. Shimano famously patented a 14s cogset and chain, what, 15 years ago?

I changed some lines in the original post to reflect that all of these are filed patents, not granted ones. And you are absolutely correct that even a granted patent might not end up in production. I think it’s safe to say that Campy is probably thinking about 1x drivetrains, though. They might not go into that space, of course.

[Dave]

it sucks that at one point we could share cassettes btw all systems and now with 12 speed it is all going to crap

Everything I've read so far says that SRAM and Campy 12 cog spacing is nearly the same - closer than 11 speed.

I've also read of an ESP 12 user testing a SRAM 12 wheel on his bike, with a Campy chain - no problem. I've used the new AXS chain on my Campy 12 bike with no problem. To be safe, I am switching back and forth with Campy chains too, so I don't have a cassette worn-in to just one chain type.

Campy wheels can be converted to use an XDR driver, so SRAM or Campy 12 cassettes can be used.

[Mark McM]

Kinda, sorta..I'll bet 12s are cross compatible like 11s. At least with one manufacturer, a new freehub body wasn't needed for 12s...And no doubt shimano will (finally) get into the 12s road gig.

The new freehub body wasn't required for 12spd, it was required to fit 10 tooth sprockets. To fit 10 tooth sprockets, SRAM developed their XD body for road/gravel/MTB, and Shimano developed their Microspline body for MTB. So far Campagnolo hasn't gone below 11 tooth sprockets, so they can continue to use their 9/10/11spd freehub - but if they want to go to 10 tooth sprockets, they'll have to develop a new freehub as well (such as the one of the patents mentioned).

For those who like to mix-and-match drivetrains, hopefully all 3 will use similar spacing for 12spd. Unless any of them decides to change axle lengths/flange spacing/chain lines, then they'll have to squeeze the 12 sprockets into the same space, so there is little wiggle room to use different sprocket spacing.

[Jaybee]

Captain Obvious here, but 11 speed is "compatible" across brands because there's a limited amount of space to fit 11 cogs. There are differences in spacing, but they're so small as to not matter in practice. I wouldn't expect that to change with 12 cogs in the back.


EDIT: Mark McM said pretty much the same thing - should have read the whole thread.

[oldpotatoe]

Everything I've read so far says that SRAM and Campy 12 cog spacing is nearly the same - closer than 11 speed.

I've also read of an ESP 12 user testing a SRAM 12 wheel on his bike, with a Campy chain - no problem. I've used the new AXS chain on my Campy 12 bike with no problem. To be safe, I am switching back and forth with Campy chains too, so I don't have a cassette worn-in to just one chain type.

Campy wheels can be converted to use an XDR driver, so SRAM or Campy 12 cassettes can be used.

Tough to do research on my phone but don’t think Campagnolo makes a Xd driver for their wheels or hubs. Shimano and sram 11s but not 12s sram...AFAIK.

[FlashUNC]

Tough to do research on my phone but don’t think Campagnolo makes a Xd driver for their wheels or hubs. Shimano and sram 11s but not 12s sram...AFAIK.

Fulcrum makes it.

[Mark McM]

Tough to do research on my phone but don’t think Campagnolo makes a Xd driver for their wheels or hubs. Shimano and sram 11s but not 12s sram...AFAIK.

There is an XD driver shown in the Campagnolo 2020 spare parts catalog.

[oldpotatoe]

Fulcrum makes it.

Ah..and Fulcrum is Campagnolo, so....

[oldpotatoe]

There is an XD driver shown in the Campagnolo 2020 spare parts catalog.

Yup, gonna check that next...too hard on phone.

[palincss]

There's really no way to fit a 10 tooth sprocket onto a Campagnolo freehub without a substantial redesign.

There are a number of Moulton models with Campagnolo drive trains (i.e., that use Campagnolo derailleurs and shifters) that use special Moulton 10-32 cassettes on a Moulton custom rear hubs. (For example: http://www.moultonbicycles.co.uk/models/NSDOUBLEPYLON.html)

https://live.staticflickr.com/7865/32425969937_daea3651a1_b.jpg

Any idea how that's possible?

[Mark McM]

If it's anything like Moulton's other small sprocket cassettes, the freehub is narrower than standard (only 10 of 11 sprockets fit onto the splines) and the smallest sprocket screws onto the 2nd smallest sprocket.

[Dave]

This link to info from SRAM lists a large number of hub brands, compatible with XD and XDR, including Campy and fulcrum. You can also download drawings and their licensing agreement.

https://www.sram.com/en/service/articles/sram-xd-and-xdr-driver-body-explained

https://www.xddriverbody.com/apply.php

[weiwentg]

A tangential thought is that we know that smaller cogs (and chainrings and pulley wheels) mean more drivetrain friction. 10t cogs are pretty small. I wonder why manufacturers aren't sticking with 11t or 12t small cogs and just making bigger chainrings. Is it a frame clearance issue?

[palincss]

A tangential thought is that we know that smaller cogs (and chainrings and pulley wheels) mean more drivetrain friction. 10t cogs are pretty small. I wonder why manufacturers aren't sticking with 11t or 12t small cogs and just making bigger chainrings. Is it a frame clearance issue?

In the case of Moulton, the issue is small wheels. The AM Moulton, with 17" wheels, originally had a 9-tooth small sprocket. With a 39-53 crank and the Capreo cassette (with its 9-tooth small sprocket) a 17" wheel bike has a top gear of around 100".

[Mark McM]

A tangential thought is that we know that smaller cogs (and chainrings and pulley wheels) mean more drivetrain friction. 10t cogs are pretty small. I wonder why manufacturers aren't sticking with 11t or 12t small cogs and just making bigger chainrings. Is it a frame clearance issue?

It's not about the chainring size, it's about the cassette size - or more specifically, the cassette size differential (and the ability to shift across it). To get a wide range of gearing with a single chainring, you either need to use very large sprockets at the bottom end, or very small sprockets at the top end. A 10-50 cassette has the same range of gearing as a 12-60 cassette, but for the 10-50 cassette the derailleur only has to work over a 40 tooth differential, not the 48 tooth differential of the 12-60. Efficiency is a likely a secondary concern for the people who use these gearing ranges.

Edit: Upon further reflection, it is probably partially about the chainring size. To build a frame with wide tires, there's less space available for chainrings. This has been partially mitigated by the dropped chainstay design, but you can only go so far with this.

[oldpotatoe]

A tangential thought is that we know that smaller cogs (and chainrings and pulley wheels) mean more drivetrain friction. 10t cogs are pretty small. I wonder why manufacturers aren't sticking with 11t or 12t small cogs and just making bigger chainrings. Is it a frame clearance issue?

I think it's to preserve some sort of high end gearing, with a 10t cog, but still have the chainring be small enough to have an uber low gear. Trying to get away from the gig of having gearing to go up hill OR downhill but not both. 12s helps, I guess.BUT, With excellent front ders from all 3 manufacturers, I don't get 1by....for any application. :confused:

[Jimborello]

This could be related to the Campagnolo gravel group coming out in the near future...

The Gravel trend is really strong and Im guessing they dont want to miss out this time like they did at first with discs

[oldpotatoe]

The Gravel trend is really strong and Im guessing they dont want to miss out this time like they did at first with discs

Don't think they missed anything but wanted to make sure when they DiD introduce them, they would be industry leading...unlike 'one' road disc intro that almost instantly resulted in a huge, expensive recall. Same for electronic. First isn't necessarily 'best' if not ready.
As has been mentioned, Campagnolo has a sub compact crank, mid cage rear dear, disc brakes......etc...

I don't think 1by is an essential except that marketed by one manufacturer.

Cross racing, I can see it but GRoad bikes, 'gravel grinders', dirt road enthusiasts?
Don't see it as essential, 1by...what about riding on dirt roads makes 1by essential vs a great working double with closer ratio rear cluster..same lower gear, higher high gear?

[colker]

Don't think they missed anything but wanted to make sure when they DiD introduce them, they would be industry leading...unlike 'one' road disc intro that almost instantly resulted in a huge, expensive recall. Same for electronic. First isn't necessarily 'best' if not ready.
As has been mentioned, Campagnolo has a sub compact crank, mid cage rear dear, disc brakes......etc...

I don't think 1by is an essential except that marketed by one manufacturer.

Cross racing, I can see it but GRoad bikes, 'gravel grinders', dirt road enthusiasts?
Don't see it as essential, 1by...what about riding on dirt roads makes 1by essential vs a great working double with closer ratio rear cluster..same lower gear, higher high gear?

How many people live next to networks of gravel roads? What´s the size of the gravel market? I may be wrong but most of buying public, including the high end, want an all around bicycle. 1x is tempting because most of these people are afraid of the bicycle going wrong under their tuch. I would even risk saying droppers will be a huge success because "i can put my feet down if i need to stop". Disc brakes are adopted for the same reason: perceived function, not real. Carbon is good for it´s mass production possibilities. And then all this stuff is sold to performance cyclists as "progress".
I believe the commuter, non informed cyclist, is the right target for all the industry. A bicycle is a transportation vehicle. The best there is. The future belongs to bicycles. I am ok w/ the mass audience... just don´t sell me mass production angles as performance enhancing technology. It´s BS. By the way... gravel bikes are the new mountain bikes: same angles and capability. A 650B wheeled, disc brake, late 80s mountain bike. Have a good day.

[Davist]

Don't think they missed anything but wanted to make sure when they DiD introduce them, they would be industry leading...

Early adopters didn't care/have recovered and "leading from behind" is a tough way to market (my employers philosophy, so we're a bit behind all the time, but the stuff works better, customers view the one who was first as "innovative" and we're a follower). Every manufacturer has issues, it's how you respond (to your further point!) that makes the difference..

[oldpotatoe]

believe the commuter, non informed cyclist, is the right target for all the industry. A bicycle is a transportation vehicle. The best there is. The future belongs to bicycles.

Well, unless the infrastructure changes dramatically, I don't see this in the US. Even where weather isn't an issue, traveling by bike, using a bike for things like buying groceries, is a teeny, tiny percentage. Throw in a family, of say four, in their daily chores and destinations, a bike isn't the best there is at all, again, because of infrastructure and distances involved. Here in the republic, getting a family of four to the theater to see Frozen Two in Westminster, would be really hard....an all day exercise.

I think a family mover will always be a part of Americana, again unless the very structure of the US, cities, towns, roads, highways, living, working, recreating, that have been in development for decades, fundamentally change. That family mover may be electric, but a family mover, nonetheless. If the 350 some million depend on a bike....well, the US will have other problems...like food, water, medicine......

[colker]

Well, unless the infrastructure changes dramatically, I don't see this in the US. Even where weather isn't an issue, traveling by bike, using a bike for things like buying groceries, is a teeny, tiny percentage. Throw in a family, of say four, in their daily chores and destinations, a bike isn't the best there is at all, again, because of infrastructure and distances involved. Here in the republic, getting a family of four to the theater to see Frozen Two in Westminster, would be really hard....an lol day exercise.

I think a family mover will always be a part of Americana, again unless the very structure of the US, cities, towns, roads, highways, living, working, recreating, that have been in development for decades, fundamentally change. That family mover may be electric, but a family mover, nonetheless. If the 350 some million depend on a bike....well, the US will have other problems...like food, water, medicine......

I don´t live in the US but i hear there is a lot of commuting already in the east coast. Where i live, a lot of people gave up owning a car. They either uber, take a subway, bus, cab... or ride a bike. If traveling, rental. The city will do anything for you to give up driving inside the urban perimeter. Europe and Asia have the same thing going on.

[bigbill]

Cross racing, I can see it but GRoad bikes, 'gravel grinders', dirt road enthusiasts?
Don't see it as essential, 1by...what about riding on dirt roads makes 1by essential vs a great working double with closer ratio rear cluster..same lower gear, higher high gear?

I considered a 1X when Garro built my gravel bike, it would have given me some more tire clearance. I don't regret going 2X with a 36/46 and 11-32, the only thing I might change is a 34 for the 36. MTB is 1X, 32 with an 11-46.

[Jaybee]

I don´t live in the US but i hear there is a lot of commuting already in the east coast. Where i live, a lot of people gave up owning a car. They either uber, take a subway, bus, cab... or ride a bike. If traveling, rental. The city will do anything for you to give up driving inside the urban perimeter. Europe and Asia have the same thing going on.

This is a personal ideal of mine, but a trip to almost any major American city will show you why there are tremendous hurdles to this. No one is cycling from Sugarland to downtown Houston or El Segundo to Santa Monica on a daily transportation basis. Plenty of people will sit in traffic 2 hours each way to make that drive though.

We decided that autos were king- in fact the spiritual embodiment of American independence during the Post-War era- and marginalized the idea of density, local living, and even marginal inconvenience. We sold the idea that you can live/work/play in a 50 mile radius instead of a 5-10 mile radius, and built our cities accordingly. Any bicycle infrastructure that's available in this environment is an afterthought, a band-aid, a small concession to the idea of a bicycle as recreation, but almost never for a bicycle as transportation.

[Jaybee]

Don't think they missed anything but wanted to make sure when they DiD introduce them, they would be industry leading...unlike 'one' road disc intro that almost instantly resulted in a huge, expensive recall. Same for electronic. First isn't necessarily 'best' if not ready.
As has been mentioned, Campagnolo has a sub compact crank, mid cage rear dear, disc brakes......etc...

I don't think 1by is an essential except that marketed by one manufacturer.

Cross racing, I can see it but GRoad bikes, 'gravel grinders', dirt road enthusiasts?
Don't see it as essential, 1by...what about riding on dirt roads makes 1by essential vs a great working double with closer ratio rear cluster..same lower gear, higher high gear?

The 1x "advantage" is rear geometry - if you're trying to fit a tire as big as 700x50 or 650x2.2" and keep the chainstays less than a mile long and maintain a road Q-factor, something has to give. Maybe it's a yoke instead of a tube for the driveside, or a dropped chainstay ala Open or a raised chainstay ala Alfa. Or maybe you just say this is 1x only, no rings bigger than 44t. Some of the carbon frames don't even have mounts for an FD nor could you fit a clamp around the tube shape.

My gravel bike is still 2x, because I think it offers me the most range and versatility for a bike I intend to ride everywhere.

[oldpotatoe]

I don´t live in the US but i hear there is a lot of commuting already in the east coast. Where i live, a lot of people gave up owning a car. They either uber, take a subway, bus, cab... or ride a bike. If traveling, rental. The city will do anything for you to give up driving inside the urban perimeter. Europe and Asia have the same thing going on.

Where do you live?
YES, a lot of younger people have given up on the idea of owning a car..LOTZ do the bus, train, Uber/Lyft gig..and some ride a bike but again, that number is low. A lot of the above it's the expense of living in an urban center and owning a car..parking $, etc..PLUS lotsa single people..add in kids..and again, just doing the daily stuff gets really hard..and then it snows..

Europe and Asia, by comparison, have not had the 'bedroom community/interstate highway' 'phenomenon' that the US saw starting after WW2...Their areas/cities were largely destroyed by the war, along with no cars/fuel..it was all about survival in most cases and the ONLY way to get around was either by foot, by bike or by horse(altho a lot of people couldn't afford to feed it..and lack of food..etc..you get it)...Their urban centers were redesigned to support those ways of transportation..PLUS many family members of various generations living in one place.

NOT trying to be ben downer here..I like bikes a lot too but 'bikes gonna save the world'....gotta disagree with that one. :)

For Jaybee right above..I get the bigger tire gig but for the person 'Gravel Grinding'..riding on dirt roads for whatever reason..how many opt for or 'need' a 2 inch PLUS size set of tires...'Seems' like the 32-35-38 size would be the sweet spot..particularly since cross racing is at the 32mm level(Yes, I know that is mandated)..but the weight of a 2 inch plus tire? 2 of them?...makes a difference..

and:)

[Jaybee]

Where do you live?
...snip...
For Jaybee right above..I get the bigger tire gig but for the person 'Gravel Grinding'..riding on dirt roads for whatever reason..how many opt for or 'need' a 2 inch PLUS size set of tires...'Seems' like the 32-35-38 size would be the sweet spot..particularly since cross racing is at the 32mm level(Yes, I know that is mandated)..but the weight of a 2 inch plus tire? 2 of them?...makes a difference..

and:)

I think the key is the combination of road Q factor, short chainstays for snappy handling, and big tires. If you're doing all that, something has to give, and some manufacturers have decided that's going to be the FD. The Pugsley you have a picture of there has mile-long chainstays, an offset rear end and a huge Q-factor.

To keep it Boulder: 35s or smaller are fine for Magnolia Rd, but if you want to keep Marshall Mesa interesting, 650x2.0 on drop bars is a fun way to go. The same tires felt a little small coming down Rollins Pass earlier this summer.

[marciero]

At some point chain pitch might be a consideration. The rationale for more and more cogs on the back has always been tighter ratios, and more recently, wider range with reasonable ratios. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think 12 or 13t smallest cog was normal back in the days of 5,6,7 speeds. But with smaller
cogs come larger jumps for one-tooth difference. The jump from 11 to 10 is 10% compared to about 9% going from 12 to 11. It goes down to a little over 7% going from 15 to 14. This is independent of chainring size and also independent of chain pitch. But with smaller pitch you would have more teeth for a given cog radius and gear inches, so smaller one-tooth jumps.

[oldpotatoe]

I think the key is the combination of road Q factor, short chainstays for snappy handling, and big tires. If you're doing all that, something has to give, and some manufacturers have decided that's going to be the FD. The Pugsley you have a picture of there has mile-long chainstays, an offset rear end and a huge Q-factor.

To keep it Boulder: 35s or smaller are fine for Magnolia Rd, but if you want to keep Marshall Mesa interesting, 650x2.0 on drop bars is a fun way to go. The same tires felt a little small coming down Rollins Pass earlier this summer.

If I were to go to Marshall Mesa(I'm not)..I'll borrow Jim's steel hardtail Soulcraft and go bounce around...or his Moots Routt..:)