The completely new, radically redesigned new Campagnolo Super Record group was first spied at the Giro d’Italia’s early stages, but the concepts it uses were first introduced to team riders in the limited edition Super Record RS hot rod kit unveiled in March that offered enhanced shifting.

Just as surprising as the move to a four-pronged crankarm is that the new carbon design for it and the rear derailleur trickles all the way down to Chorus outta the gate. That’s right, three completely new groups, all claiming to offer absolute top level performance for those preferring mechanical shifting to electronic. And by top level, Campy means it – the idea behind the new design was to make mechanical shifting every bit as desirable and awesome as their EPS, making the decision for top riders one of preference, not performance.

Shift past the break for the full run down…


Unless noted otherwise, the tech features mentioned apply to all three groups. The front derailleurs all use an inner cage based on the Super Record RS unit, which shapes it to be stiff and allow the chain to move across the entire cassette without rubbing in the big ring. What about the small chainring? Keep reading…

Where the RS version used a full alloy cage, the new Super Record upgrades to a one-piece carbon fiber outer plate to save a few grams. They use a longer arm, moving the cable clamp point further out to create more leverage. This translates to smoother, easier shifter effort, but angled to also require less finger movement.


The rear derailleur was redesigned from the ground up. A new outer structure makes it stiffer, wrapping the big knuckle around the upper parallelogram pivot


The linkage angles were tweaked along with the internal facing pieces and cage. This moves the chain closer to the cassette, helping it wrap around more teeth for better grip. Campagnolo says this not only improves power transfer, but it should also keep things better aligned for improved component durability. The revised angles also decrease shift effort at the top of the cassette, making it more linear across all cogs so shifting across an 11-23 feels the same as an 11-29.


The new derailleurs required new shifters, but all functional changes were made without messing up their existing ergonomics. Lever and hood shape remain the same, but things work with the revamped derailleurs and add a no-drop shift feature to the front. The left shifter now uses a two-click downshift moves the front derailleur enough to carry the chain from big to little ring, but not so far that it could drop the chain off the inside. Then a third click is available to trim the derailleur when necessary. Going back up to the big ring takes three clicks with no trim offered or, they claim, needed thanks to the new front derailleur’s plate shaping.

The Ultra Shift system still works as usual for the rear, with up to five downshifts and three upshifts per full lever push.


The shape your manos already amore is unchanged, but they did tweak the insides to help the levers better fit modern handlebars. The hoods use a new, hypoallergenic silicone with a multi-density, grooved and shaped structure to improve comfort and grip.


The most visibly different part is the crankset. Purists can scream, but Campagnolo says the new four-arm is stiffer and allows for a single crankset to work with every iteration of chainring, from compact to standard. Yep, just one BCD, as asymmetrical as it may be, will handle 50/34, 52/36 and 53/39.

Convenience features aside, the real goal was improved performance. The backside uses eight bolts, four for each chainring, each helping to support the chainrings, not just hold them onto the arms. That support, plus the massively stiffer carbon crank arms, yields better power transfer and more precise, snappy shifting. They’ll be available in 170, 172.5 and 175mm lengths.





Click any image to enlarge, we’ve inquired about weights, pricing and availability and will update as soon as we hear back.



  1. I love how the switch to a 4 arm crank magic allows for fitting compact and standard. You know what used to fit compact and standard? Compact. (Whether or not chainrings were offered is another question)

  2. im glad that when they see a good idea that shimano came up with, theyre not afraid to admit it was a good idea and benefit from it. long arm front derailleur, no-drop front downshifting specifically…

  3. Decent. Crankset looks good BUT the surface flowing from the 2′ o-clock chainring bolt to the crankarm looks thrown in at the last minute. Aesthetically, it doesn’t work at all.

    Does this bother anyone else?

  4. “What about the small chainring? Keep reading…”
    Just wondering- was there another innovation related to avoiding inner ring rub, or was this a reference to the hybrid bolt circle size?

  5. A more italian, exotic, carbon-ified, shimano Dura-ace. Hater, come at me. Cranks are totally shimano…h8ers rejoice

  6. So uh… it’s Dura-Ace 9000 carbon edition?

    Also @mark if you think that front derailleurs should have barrel adjusters, please try to design one that doesn’t look incredibly stupid.

  7. IF they had one mold (design) for the outer parallelogram and levers they could probably shave a couple hundred bucks off this groupo. As if the carbon construction is any different aside from =/- vents. pure gimmick on that front and the ones without the vent holes are probably stiffer.

  8. @Goridebikes – Im with you, builders just need to put one on the frame. Then no funny looking derailleur.

  9. The cranks are not Shimano.

    Camapgnolo has it’s own solution to Shimano’s hollow forced 110 BCD super stiff chainrings. It supports the large chainring @135 BCD or whatever larger BCD they’re using now to increase big ring stiffness. The small chainring mounts on it’s own 110 BCD mounts.

    That being said, they’re probably the ugliest thing Campagnolo has ever produced. There is very little reason I would want this over older 11 speed stuff except the FD.

    I also have to wonder if they actually revised cable pull or not. The new Athena shifters will have a more EPS style button for better thumb clearance.

  10. I’m going to ignore this ever happening.
    The seemingly step less setup (5 up, 5 down) on my 2006 Record is the main reason to stick with Campagnolo. And then there is the beauty of those systems. The derailleurs are beautiful as always, but that’s not it. I’m going 2014 Chorus for my CX, and will wait for Campy to come back to reality for 2016.

  11. Everything fine, but the crankset.
    If the 4 arm design is best, it means Shimano was two years better than Campy ? At leats that is the meta-message.

    It is precieved as a piece of copycats work of Shimano. No matter if it is or not.
    If I had to buy a new 2015 Campy groupset, I would choose a Bora or Bullet crankset, even if it is heavier. Or a Sram Red crankset

    My second critic is, that the number of groups are too much. 9 groupsets are too many. Especially as the are multiplicated by certain options like CULT and Titanium Versions or red or black bolts or silver or black edition.
    Why don’t they reduce it to 6: 2 Entry (mechanical+EPS) , 2 upper level (mechanical+EPS) and to top level (mechanical+EPS).
    I believe to make the production more efficient is more clever, than copying the competitors crankset.

  12. I see very little to differentiate between SR and Chorus, besides cutouts, the carbon jockey cage, and the carbon outer plate to save a “few grams.” Like that they released all three groups at once. Now we need better distribution and cheaper prices in the States.

  13. So is Campagnolo trying to chase me to shimano? No 180 crankset? In the past Campagnolo told me they couldn’t do a 180 compact for engineering reasons. Now are they saying they can’t do a standard crankset for engineering reasons? Don’t tell me I can get an after market crank. I like full groups on my bikes.

  14. Shimano is always being criticized on for obsoleting older groups but Campy has them beaten by a mile. These groups completely obsolete everything before them. New and incompatible shifter’s, cable pull, derailleurs and chainrings.

    Also, Campy now has “Shimanofied” their front shifting with three clicks total. No “micro clicks”, no universal fd compatibility and certainly no triple crank compatibility.

    I agree with m68k that there are way too many groups and variations with too little except price to differentiate them. General Motors got into serious trouble with this approach having too many almost identical product lines and too many skus and Campy seems bound to follow this poor model.

  15. It seems that the X bolt pattern is wider than in the Shimano cranks. The reason might be that the hollow Shimano chaingrings are much stiffer and allow longer bolt disctance in the ring.
    After many years Shimano is the only one who can produce hollow chainrings. They have even developed it futher in the new XTR so that the ring is made both aluminium and titanium. In this way the ring lasts two times longer. Particularly important in single chainring installations.

    Now Campy has longer front dearailleur arm, but have they the support bolt also? I think it is very important factor in shifting performance. It might be that Shimano have patented it.

  16. Oh an asymmetrical bolt pattern that accepts all chain ring sizes? How original…wait no, Shimano did it first.

  17. Shimano usually gets some credit for engineering. Campagnolo ALWAYS gets credit for design. Few really talk about durability. In my experience, this is where Campy shines. For example, Campy Ultra 10 Record on my road bike. Several chains, a couple of chain rings, lots of miles and 7 years later, still shifts perfectly. I will always be a Campy fan.

  18. There has been a persistent rumour that Shimano owns Campagnolo – the rumour looks more believable in light of the new groupsets….

  19. The rear derailleur is wicked looking, really great! The crank will take some getting used to but in 2 years everyone will have gotten used to it and it won’t be an issue anymore (just like almost everything else that’s different than whats currently considered the normal). And when has it been a bad thing to admit that a design another manufacture comes up with is better than what was previously considered the best (like campy did with the Shimano like front derailleur and cranks)? I’d rather campy do what they find works best than to overlook better designs just to appease a bunch of haters that would never even consider buying the product in the first place!

  20. Ok I do agre with the coments re: The Cranks, I have and will always be a campy guy, but if those are what they are putting into production I will wait for the following generation.
    Time to stock up on ultra shift!

  21. 11-Speed groupsets? Oh, wait, Campy did it first.
    Brake Lever-Shifters with hidden cables? Oh, wait, Campy did it first.
    Multiple up and downshifts on a mechanical group? Oh, wait, Campy did it first.
    Comfortable & ergonomic hoods that don’t look hideous? Oh, wait, Campy did it first.
    Rebuildable shifters? Oh, wait Campy did it first.
    Brake Levers that people with small hands can actually reach? Oh, wait, Campy did it first.
    Cross-compatibility between different price-point groupsets? Oh, wait, Campy did it first.

    Not to mention quick releases – you want to talk about Shimano copying Campy…

    My four-year old Record 11 still shifts perfectly and with lighter action than any Shimano group I’ve ever ridden. Don’t get me wrong, DA 9000 is very very nice, but Campy 11 was shifting that well in 2009.

    And no one yet has gotten to the heart of the matter – where are the 2015 Campy seatposts?!?

  22. It was Shimano who invented indexed shifting and STI:s.
    Campy even didn’t recognized the need for STI:s until it was late.
    Theyd had to order engineering for the STI:s from SACHS, which is now part of SRAM.

    IMHO Campy is losing ground every year to both Shimano and SRAM.
    iIt is rumored that Rotor will be bring high end a grouppo to the market.
    Don’t look good for the Vicenza company.

    Technically EPS is outdated and does not make money for Campy.
    During the slow product development process the used technology became outdated.

  23. Well, I think it’s pretty cool and hope Campy does well with it. We need them in the mix. It’s great to have good choices…

    But… <>
    I heard thropugh the grapevine that this was no longer possible with their new set stuff from Vicenza. Confirm or deny anyone?

  24. Now all those outadated 11sp Campy groupsets and components should become a pile cheaper from all those online retailers.

    That is the best news I have heard all year.

  25. if it didn’t say campagnolo on this stuff, all you campy fan boys would be bitch’n and making fun of this “innovative” group.

  26. “if it didn’t say campagnolo on this stuff, all you campy fan boys would be bitch’n and making fun of this “innovative” group.”

    K11 doesn’t approve. That must mean something to somebody.

  27. Campy – because you’re not a moron.

    Sorry, I had to.
    In reality it’s opposite, it’s Shimano who are biggest (OEM) and peoples seems to like it, and SRAM got big quick.

    I wished that silver would come back, all that carbon crap is not pretty,
    but it seems that most peoples prefer black and carbon because it looks
    “expensive” and “prettier”?

    It seems that Campagnolo have forgotten their past, what made them proud,
    what made their true inner core,the engineering, design and art, it’s ironic that their twitterpage praises the older stuff, but not the newer stuff, that plastic crap everyone seems to prefer.

    My Veloce works awesome, looks awesome, brake and gear handle are in full silver
    I didn’t buy Chorus because it was gray.
    I didn’t buy Record because it was in carbon.

    Give us a silver seatpin and silver polished cup’n’cones hubs!

  28. I love it even though it looks like they’ve implemented some ideas from Shimano (need not mention what 😉
    What is more of a problem, may be that it is 500 euro (or more) expensive than the current Shimano DA 9000. About 1980 Euro for a mechanical groupset is quite steep.

What do you think?