Cyclopédia - Contributions [fr]

The aerodynamics of the last century

2026-01-09T17:16:43Z

Louison : /* Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone cared about or believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

= Experimentations (1972-1980) =

Nevertheless, we can find a few examples of bikes that tended to try something new, something that pushed boundaries that were not always considered before then.

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' It was used in the 1978 track world championships in Munich, in combination with the Assos skinsuit. The Assos skinsuit is a fundamental part of the development of the aerodynamics of cycling because before they brought together the cyclist and the bicycle as the system to think about when thinking about aerodynamics in cycling<ref>''[https://www.condorcycles.com/blogs/journal/53701633-design-icons-the-assos-skinsuit Design Icons : The Assos Skinsuit]'', condorcycles.com , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>. Before they became the norm riders were still wearing wool jerseys, the jerseys and cyclist would created enormous drag when, all things considered, the average race bicycle didn't create that much drag. In Munich in 1978, it was Daniel Gisiger that rode with both the Assos skinsuit and the Tony Maier-Moussa prototype bicycle, as seen below (unsure about the exact date).

[[Fichier:|500px|frameless|center|]]
<ref>''[https://www.letemps.ch/sport/cyclisme/daniel-gisiger-nos-coureurs-ont-besoin-d-une-equipe-suisse-pour-devenir-des-gagneurs Daniel Gisiger: «Nos coureurs ont besoin d’une équipe suisse pour devenir des gagneurs»]'', letemps.ch , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came around the same time. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front brake and the dropped handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller. Such a choice had been made so that the riders would be closer to one another when they were riding in a line. This in turn would make slipstreaming more efficient and would help the riders conserve their energy better when they weren't at the front. The front wheel would have been 650c at the time.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. The bike was completely unbranded but it was a Textima<ref>Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. One of the prominent members of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team. He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.</ref>. This bike featured two 700c wheels, a short head tube, a downwards slopping top tube and "bullhorn" handlebars that were mounted on the fork. It is very reminiscent of the bike Tony Meier-Moussa had built with the exception of the top tube and the head tube.

In 1981, Antonio Columbus and Andrea Pesenti started drawing sketches that would end up becoming the Cinelli Laser.

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km. Moser rode what could be called a spaceship at the time. The frame was fully chromed and was TIG-welded. The top tube and seat tube were heavily curved to achieve a never-seen-before frame. The seat tube was curved only from around the half-way point upwards, this is done to be able to achieve a position much further back than a traditional road bike (and all bikes mentioned previously, for that matter) while keeping the back wheel close to bottom bracket.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

In the 1984 World Championship, Hans-Henrik Ørsted rode in the individual pursuit a Cinelli Laser, he won the discipline's event, earning the title of World Championship in the process. This was one of the first instances of the Cinelli Laser being used to win an even. It wouldn't be the last one.

= Ban of most of what made these bikes (1997-2000) =

To tie all of this together, I will end this page with the first UCI-compliant Hour Record after the ban. In october 2000, Chris Boardman rode 49,441km in an hour. This ride beat Merckx's by a mere 10m. It came three years after the ban and at the very end of Boardman's career. The bike Boardman rode was Look-branded and featured very racy geometry : very long and very low. The stem alone was 160mm.

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

=== Chris Boardman's Look (2000) ===

Chris Boardman's Look was only a Look because it said so on the downtube. In reality, it was made by hand by none other than Terry Dolan and was made out of Columbus Foco steel. It featured two wheels of the same 622 size, with shallow rims laced with 16 spokes in the front and 20 spokes in the back. If long and low hadn't been emphasised enough, this bike was very long, and very low. Boardman was 175cm, but this bike supposedly featured a 61cm top tube with a 49cm seat tube. Not only that but the stem was a monstruous 160mm long<ref>''[https://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_recordsHour.html Bike Cult : World Hour Records]'', bikecult.com, last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2026-01-09T17:16:07Z

Louison : /* The craze (1984-1997) */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone cared about or believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

= Experimentations (1972-1980) =

Nevertheless, we can find a few examples of bikes that tended to try something new, something that pushed boundaries that were not always considered before then.

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' It was used in the 1978 track world championships in Munich, in combination with the Assos skinsuit. The Assos skinsuit is a fundamental part of the development of the aerodynamics of cycling because before they brought together the cyclist and the bicycle as the system to think about when thinking about aerodynamics in cycling<ref>''[https://www.condorcycles.com/blogs/journal/53701633-design-icons-the-assos-skinsuit Design Icons : The Assos Skinsuit]'', condorcycles.com , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>. Before they became the norm riders were still wearing wool jerseys, the jerseys and cyclist would created enormous drag when, all things considered, the average race bicycle didn't create that much drag. In Munich in 1978, it was Daniel Gisiger that rode with both the Assos skinsuit and the Tony Maier-Moussa prototype bicycle, as seen below (unsure about the exact date).

[[Fichier:|500px|frameless|center|]]
<ref>''[https://www.letemps.ch/sport/cyclisme/daniel-gisiger-nos-coureurs-ont-besoin-d-une-equipe-suisse-pour-devenir-des-gagneurs Daniel Gisiger: «Nos coureurs ont besoin d’une équipe suisse pour devenir des gagneurs»]'', letemps.ch , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came around the same time. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front brake and the dropped handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller. Such a choice had been made so that the riders would be closer to one another when they were riding in a line. This in turn would make slipstreaming more efficient and would help the riders conserve their energy better when they weren't at the front. The front wheel would have been 650c at the time.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. The bike was completely unbranded but it was a Textima<ref>Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. One of the prominent members of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team. He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.</ref>. This bike featured two 700c wheels, a short head tube, a downwards slopping top tube and "bullhorn" handlebars that were mounted on the fork. It is very reminiscent of the bike Tony Meier-Moussa had built with the exception of the top tube and the head tube.

In 1981,

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km. Moser rode what could be called a spaceship at the time. The frame was fully chromed and was TIG-welded. The top tube and seat tube were heavily curved to achieve a never-seen-before frame. The seat tube was curved only from around the half-way point upwards, this is done to be able to achieve a position much further back than a traditional road bike (and all bikes mentioned previously, for that matter) while keeping the back wheel close to bottom bracket.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

In the 1984 World Championship, Hans-Henrik Ørsted rode in the individual pursuit a Cinelli Laser, he won the discipline's event, earning the title of World Championship in the process. This was one of the first instances of the Cinelli Laser being used to win an even. It wouldn't be the last one.

= Ban of most of what made these bikes (1997-2000) =

To tie all of this together, I will end this page with the first UCI-compliant Hour Record after the ban. In october 2000, Chris Boardman rode 49,441km in an hour. This ride beat Merckx's by a mere 10m. It came three years after the ban and at the very end of Boardman's career. The bike Boardman rode was Look-branded and featured very racy geometry : very long and very low. The stem alone was 160mm.

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

=== Chris Boardman's Look (2000) ===

Chris Boardman's Look was only a Look because it said so on the downtube. In reality, it was made by hand by none other than Terry Dolan and was made out of Columbus Foco steel. It featured two wheels of the same 622 size, with shallow rims laced with 16 spokes in the front and 20 spokes in the back. If long and low hadn't been emphasised enough, this bike was very long, and very low. Boardman was 175cm, but this bike supposedly featured a 61cm top tube with a 49cm seat tube. Not only that but the stem was a monstruous 160mm long<ref>''[https://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_recordsHour.html Bike Cult : World Hour Records]'', bikecult.com, last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2026-01-09T16:26:37Z

Louison : /* Experimentations (1972-1980) */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone cared about or believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

= Experimentations (1972-1980) =

Nevertheless, we can find a few examples of bikes that tended to try something new, something that pushed boundaries that were not always considered before then.

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' It was used in the 1978 track world championships in Munich, in combination with the Assos skinsuit. The Assos skinsuit is a fundamental part of the development of the aerodynamics of cycling because before they brought together the cyclist and the bicycle as the system to think about when thinking about aerodynamics in cycling<ref>''[https://www.condorcycles.com/blogs/journal/53701633-design-icons-the-assos-skinsuit Design Icons : The Assos Skinsuit]'', condorcycles.com , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>. Before they became the norm riders were still wearing wool jerseys, the jerseys and cyclist would created enormous drag when, all things considered, the average race bicycle didn't create that much drag. In Munich in 1978, it was Daniel Gisiger that rode with both the Assos skinsuit and the Tony Maier-Moussa prototype bicycle, as seen below (unsure about the exact date).

[[Fichier:|500px|frameless|center|]]
<ref>''[https://www.letemps.ch/sport/cyclisme/daniel-gisiger-nos-coureurs-ont-besoin-d-une-equipe-suisse-pour-devenir-des-gagneurs Daniel Gisiger: «Nos coureurs ont besoin d’une équipe suisse pour devenir des gagneurs»]'', letemps.ch , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came around the same time. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front brake and the dropped handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller. Such a choice had been made so that the riders would be closer to one another when they were riding in a line. This in turn would make slipstreaming more efficient and would help the riders conserve their energy better when they weren't at the front. The front wheel would have been 650c at the time.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. The bike was completely unbranded but it was a Textima<ref>Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. One of the prominent members of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team. He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.</ref>. This bike featured two 700c wheels, a short head tube, a downwards slopping top tube and "bullhorn" handlebars that were mounted on the fork. It is very reminiscent of the bike Tony Meier-Moussa had built with the exception of the top tube and the head tube.

In 1981,

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km. Moser rode what could be called a spaceship at the time. The frame was fully chromed and was TIG-welded. The top tube and seat tube were heavily curved to achieve a never-seen-before frame. The seat tube was curved only from around the half-way point upwards, this is done to be able to achieve a position much further back than a traditional road bike (and all bikes mentioned previously, for that matter) while keeping the back wheel close to bottom bracket.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes (1997-2000) =

To tie all of this together, I will end this page with the first UCI-compliant Hour Record after the ban. In october 2000, Chris Boardman rode 49,441km in an hour. This ride beat Merckx's by a mere 10m. It came three years after the ban and at the very end of Boardman's career. The bike Boardman rode was Look-branded and featured very racy geometry : very long and very low. The stem alone was 160mm.

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

=== Chris Boardman's Look (2000) ===

Chris Boardman's Look was only a Look because it said so on the downtube. In reality, it was made by hand by none other than Terry Dolan and was made out of Columbus Foco steel. It featured two wheels of the same 622 size, with shallow rims laced with 16 spokes in the front and 20 spokes in the back. If long and low hadn't been emphasised enough, this bike was very long, and very low. Boardman was 175cm, but this bike supposedly featured a 61cm top tube with a 49cm seat tube. Not only that but the stem was a monstruous 160mm long<ref>''[https://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_recordsHour.html Bike Cult : World Hour Records]'', bikecult.com, last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2026-01-09T16:14:01Z

Louison : /* Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone cared about or believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

= Experimentations (1972-1980) =

Nevertheless, we can find a few examples of bikes that tended to try something new, something that pushed boundaries that were not always considered before then.

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' It was used in the 1978 track world championships in Munich, in combination with the Assos skinsuit. The Assos skinsuit is a fundamental part of the development of the aerodynamics of cycling because before they brought together the cyclist and the bicycle as the system to think about when thinking about aerodynamics in cycling<ref>''[https://www.condorcycles.com/blogs/journal/53701633-design-icons-the-assos-skinsuit Design Icons : The Assos Skinsuit]'', condorcycles.com , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>. Before they became the norm riders were still wearing wool jerseys, the jerseys and cyclist would created enormous drag when, all things considered, the average race bicycle didn't create that much drag. In Munich in 1978, it was Daniel Gisiger that rode with both the Assos skinsuit and the Tony Maier-Moussa prototype bicycle, as seen below (unsure about the exact date).

<ref>''[https://www.letemps.ch/sport/cyclisme/daniel-gisiger-nos-coureurs-ont-besoin-d-une-equipe-suisse-pour-devenir-des-gagneurs Daniel Gisiger: «Nos coureurs ont besoin d’une équipe suisse pour devenir des gagneurs»]'', letemps.ch , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came around the same time. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front brake and the dropped handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller. Such a choice had been made so that the riders would be closer to one another when they were riding in a line. This in turn would make slipstreaming more efficient and would help the riders conserve their energy better when they weren't at the front. The front wheel would have been 650c at the time.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. The bike was completely unbranded but it was a Textima<ref>Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. One of the prominent members of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team. He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.</ref>. This bike featured two 700c wheels, a short head tube, a downwards slopping top tube and "bullhorn" handlebars that were mounted on the fork. It is very reminiscent of the bike Tony Meier-Moussa had built with the exception of the top tube and the head tube.

In 1981,

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km. Moser rode what could be called a spaceship at the time. The frame was fully chromed and was TIG-welded. The top tube and seat tube were heavily curved to achieve a never-seen-before frame. The seat tube was curved only from around the half-way point upwards, this is done to be able to achieve a position much further back than a traditional road bike (and all bikes mentioned previously, for that matter) while keeping the back wheel close to bottom bracket.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes (1997-2000) =

To tie all of this together, I will end this page with the first UCI-compliant Hour Record after the ban. In october 2000, Chris Boardman rode 49,441km in an hour. This ride beat Merckx's by a mere 10m. It came three years after the ban and at the very end of Boardman's career. The bike Boardman rode was Look-branded and featured very racy geometry : very long and very low. The stem alone was 160mm.

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

=== Chris Boardman's Look (2000) ===

Chris Boardman's Look was only a Look because it said so on the downtube. In reality, it was made by hand by none other than Terry Dolan and was made out of Columbus Foco steel. It featured two wheels of the same 622 size, with shallow rims laced with 16 spokes in the front and 20 spokes in the back. If long and low hadn't been emphasised enough, this bike was very long, and very low. Boardman was 175cm, but this bike supposedly featured a 61cm top tube with a 49cm seat tube. Not only that but the stem was a monstruous 160mm long<ref>''[https://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_recordsHour.html Bike Cult : World Hour Records]'', bikecult.com, last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2026-01-05T17:34:52Z

Louison : /* Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone cared about or believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

= Experimentations (1972-1980) =

Nevertheless, we can find a few examples of bikes that tended to try something new, something that pushed boundaries that were not always considered before then.

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' It was used in the 1978 track world championships in Munich, in combination with the Assos skinsuit. The Assos skinsuit is a fundamental part of the development of the aerodynamics of cycling because before they brought together the cyclist and the bicycle as the system to think about when thinking about aerodynamics in cycling<ref>''[https://www.condorcycles.com/blogs/journal/53701633-design-icons-the-assos-skinsuit Design Icons : The Assos Skinsuit]'', condorcycles.com , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>. Before they became the norm riders were still wearing wool jerseys, the jerseys and cyclist would created enormous drag when, all things considered, the average race bicycle didn't create that much drag. In Munich in 1978, it was Daniel Gisiger that rode with both the Assos skinsuit and the Tony Maier-Moussa prototype bicycle, as seen below (unsure about the exact date).

<ref>''[https://www.letemps.ch/sport/cyclisme/daniel-gisiger-nos-coureurs-ont-besoin-d-une-equipe-suisse-pour-devenir-des-gagneurs Daniel Gisiger: «Nos coureurs ont besoin d’une équipe suisse pour devenir des gagneurs»]'', letemps.ch , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came around the same time. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front brake and the dropped handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller. Such a choice had been made so that the riders would be closer to one another when they were riding in a line. This in turn would make slipstreaming more efficient and would help the riders conserve their energy better when they weren't at the front. The front wheel would have been 650c at the time.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. The bike was completely unbranded but it was a Textima<ref>Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. One of the prominent members of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team. He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.</ref>. This bike featured two 700c wheels, a short head tube, a downwards slopping top tube and "bullhorn" handlebars that were mounted on the fork. It is very reminiscent of the bike Tony Meier-Moussa had built with the exception of the top tube and the head tube.

In 1981,

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km. Moser rode what could be called a spaceship at the time. The frame was branded full chromed and was TIG-welded. The top tube and seat tube were heavily curved to achieve a never-seen-before frame. The seat tube was curved only from around the half-way point upwards, this is done to be able to achieve a position much further back than a traditional road bike (and all bikes mentioned previously, for that matter) while keeping the back wheel close to bottom bracket.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes (1997-2000) =

To tie all of this together, I will end this page with the first UCI-compliant Hour Record after the ban. In october 2000, Chris Boardman rode 49,441km in an hour. This ride beat Merckx's by a mere 10m. It came three years after the ban and at the very end of Boardman's career. The bike Boardman rode was Look-branded and featured very racy geometry : very long and very low. The stem alone was 160mm.

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

=== Chris Boardman's Look (2000) ===

Chris Boardman's Look was only a Look because it said so on the downtube. In reality, it was made by hand by none other than Terry Dolan and was made out of Columbus Foco steel. It featured two wheels of the same 622 size, with shallow rims laced with 16 spokes in the front and 20 spokes in the back. If long and low hadn't been emphasised enough, this bike was very long, and very low. Boardman was 175cm, but this bike supposedly featured a 61cm top tube with a 49cm seat tube. Not only that but the stem was a monstruous 160mm long<ref>''[https://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_recordsHour.html Bike Cult : World Hour Records]'', bikecult.com, last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2026-01-05T16:30:22Z

Louison : /* Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone cared about or believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

= Experimentations (1972-1980) =

Nevertheless, we can find a few examples of bikes that tended to try something new, something that pushed boundaries that were not always considered before then.

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' It was used in the 1978 track world championships in Munich, in combination with the Assos skinsuit. The Assos skinsuit is a fundamental part of the development of the aerodynamics of cycling because before they brought together the cyclist and the bicycle as the system to think about when thinking about aerodynamics in cycling<ref>''[https://www.condorcycles.com/blogs/journal/53701633-design-icons-the-assos-skinsuit Design Icons : The Assos Skinsuit]'', condorcycles.com , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>. Before they became the norm riders were still wearing wool jerseys, the jerseys and cyclist would created enormous drag when, all things considered, the average race bicycle didn't create that much drag. In Munich in 1978, it was Daniel Gisiger that rode with both the Assos skinsuit and the Tony Maier-Moussa prototype bicycle, as seen below (unsure about the exact date).

<ref>''[https://www.letemps.ch/sport/cyclisme/daniel-gisiger-nos-coureurs-ont-besoin-d-une-equipe-suisse-pour-devenir-des-gagneurs Daniel Gisiger: «Nos coureurs ont besoin d’une équipe suisse pour devenir des gagneurs»]'', letemps.ch , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came around the same time. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front brake and the dropped handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller. Such a choice had been made so that the riders would be closer to one another when they were riding in a line. This in turn would make slipstreaming more efficient and would help the riders conserve their energy better when they weren't at the front. The front wheel would have been 650c at the time.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. The bike was completely unbranded but it was a Textima<ref>Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. One of the prominent members of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team. He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.</ref>. This bike featured two 700c wheels, a short head tube, a downwards slopping top tube and "bullhorn" handlebars that were mounted on the fork. It is very reminiscent of the bike Tony Meier-Moussa had built with the exception of the top tube and the head tube.

In 1981,

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes (1997-2000) =

To tie all of this together, I will end this page with the first UCI-compliant Hour Record after the ban. In october 2000, Chris Boardman rode 49,441km in an hour. This ride beat Merckx's by a mere 10m. It came three years after the ban and at the very end of Boardman's career. The bike Boardman rode was Look-branded and featured very racy geometry : very long and very low. The stem alone was 160mm.

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

=== Chris Boardman's Look (2000) ===

Chris Boardman's Look was only a Look because it said so on the downtube. In reality, it was made by hand by none other than Terry Dolan and was made out of Columbus Foco steel. It featured two wheels of the same 622 size, with shallow rims laced with 16 spokes in the front and 20 spokes in the back. If long and low hadn't been emphasised enough, this bike was very long, and very low. Boardman was 175cm, but this bike supposedly featured a 61cm top tube with a 49cm seat tube. Not only that but the stem was a monstruous 160mm long<ref>''[https://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_recordsHour.html Bike Cult : World Hour Records]'', bikecult.com, last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2026-01-05T16:15:11Z

Louison : /* Experimentations (1972-1980) */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone cared about or believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

= Experimentations (1972-1980) =

Nevertheless, we can find a few examples of bikes that tended to try something new, something that pushed boundaries that were not always considered before then.

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' It was used in the 1978 track world championships in Munich, in combination with the Assos skinsuit. The Assos skinsuit is a fundamental part of the development of the aerodynamics of cycling because before they brought together the cyclist and the bicycle as the system to think about when thinking about aerodynamics in cycling<ref>''[https://www.condorcycles.com/blogs/journal/53701633-design-icons-the-assos-skinsuit Design Icons : The Assos Skinsuit]'', condorcycles.com , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>. Before they became the norm riders were still wearing wool jerseys, the jerseys and cyclist would created enormous drag when, all things considered, the average race bicycle didn't create that much drag. In Munich in 1978, it was Daniel Gisiger that rode with both the Assos skinsuit and the Tony Maier-Moussa prototype bicycle, as seen below (unsure about the exact date).

<ref>''[https://www.letemps.ch/sport/cyclisme/daniel-gisiger-nos-coureurs-ont-besoin-d-une-equipe-suisse-pour-devenir-des-gagneurs Daniel Gisiger: «Nos coureurs ont besoin d’une équipe suisse pour devenir des gagneurs»]'', letemps.ch , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came around the same time. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front brake and the dropped handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller. Such a choice had been made so that the riders would be closer to one another when they were riding in a line. This in turn would make slipstreaming more efficient and would help the riders conserve their energy better when they weren't at the front. The front wheel would have been 650c at the time.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. Not much information is available about the bike but what is known is that it was a Textima<ref>Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. One of the prominent members of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team. He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.</ref>. This bike featured two 700c wheels, a short head tube, a downwards slopping top tube and "bullhorn" handlebars that were mounted on the fork. It is very reminiscent of the bike Tony Meier-Moussa had built with the exception of the top tube and the head tube.

In 1981,

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes (1997-2000) =

To tie all of this together, I will end this page with the first UCI-compliant Hour Record after the ban. In october 2000, Chris Boardman rode 49,441km in an hour. This ride beat Merckx's by a mere 10m. It came three years after the ban and at the very end of Boardman's career. The bike Boardman rode was Look-branded and featured very racy geometry : very long and very low. The stem alone was 160mm.

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

=== Chris Boardman's Look (2000) ===

Chris Boardman's Look was only a Look because it said so on the downtube. In reality, it was made by hand by none other than Terry Dolan and was made out of Columbus Foco steel. It featured two wheels of the same 622 size, with shallow rims laced with 16 spokes in the front and 20 spokes in the back. If long and low hadn't been emphasised enough, this bike was very long, and very low. Boardman was 175cm, but this bike supposedly featured a 61cm top tube with a 49cm seat tube. Not only that but the stem was a monstruous 160mm long<ref>''[https://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_recordsHour.html Bike Cult : World Hour Records]'', bikecult.com, last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2026-01-05T16:05:04Z

Louison : /* Experimentations (1972-1980) */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone cared about or believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

= Experimentations (1972-1980) =

Nevertheless, we can find a few examples of bikes that tended to try something new, something that pushed boundaries that were not always considered before then.

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' It was used in the 1978 track world championships in Munich, in combination with the Assos skinsuit. The Assos skinsuit is a fundamental part of the development of the aerodynamics of cycling because before they became the norm riders were still wearing wool jerseys, it tremendeously helped alleviate the rider part of aerodynamic drag. The rider equipped with those items in 1978 was Daniel Gisiger <ref>''[https://www.condorcycles.com/blogs/journal/53701633-design-icons-the-assos-skinsuit Design Icons : The Assos Skinsuit]'', condorcycles.com , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>.

<ref>''[https://www.letemps.ch/sport/cyclisme/daniel-gisiger-nos-coureurs-ont-besoin-d-une-equipe-suisse-pour-devenir-des-gagneurs Daniel Gisiger: «Nos coureurs ont besoin d’une équipe suisse pour devenir des gagneurs»]'', letemps.ch , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came around the same time. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front brake and the dropping handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller. Such a choice had been made so that the riders would be closer to one another when they were riding in a line. This in turn would make slipstreaming more efficient and would help the riders conserve their energy better when they weren't at the front. The front wheel would have been 650c at the time.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. Not much information is available about the bike but what is known is that it was a Textima<ref>Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. One of the prominent members of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team. He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.</ref>. This bike featured two 700c wheels, a short head tube, a downwards slopping top tube and "bullhorn" handlebars that were mounted on the fork. It is very reminiscent of the bike Tony Meier-Moussa had built with the exception of the top tube and the head tube.

In 1981,

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes (1997-2000) =

To tie all of this together, I will end this page with the first UCI-compliant Hour Record after the ban. In october 2000, Chris Boardman rode 49,441km in an hour. This ride beat Merckx's by a mere 10m. It came three years after the ban and at the very end of Boardman's career. The bike Boardman rode was Look-branded and featured very racy geometry : very long and very low. The stem alone was 160mm.

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

=== Chris Boardman's Look (2000) ===

Chris Boardman's Look was only a Look because it said so on the downtube. In reality, it was made by hand by none other than Terry Dolan and was made out of Columbus Foco steel. It featured two wheels of the same 622 size, with shallow rims laced with 16 spokes in the front and 20 spokes in the back. If long and low hadn't been emphasised enough, this bike was very long, and very low. Boardman was 175cm, but this bike supposedly featured a 61cm top tube with a 49cm seat tube. Not only that but the stem was a monstruous 160mm long<ref>''[https://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_recordsHour.html Bike Cult : World Hour Records]'', bikecult.com, last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2026-01-05T15:59:52Z

Louison : /* When did this happen and why did it happen */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone cared about or believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

= Experimentations (1972-1980) =

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' It was used in the 1978 track world championships in Munich, in combination with the Assos skinsuit. The Assos skinsuit is a fundamental part of the development of the aerodynamics of cycling because before they became the norm riders were still wearing wool jerseys, it tremendeously helped alleviate the rider part of aerodynamic drag. The rider equipped with those items in 1978 was Daniel Gisiger <ref>''[https://www.condorcycles.com/blogs/journal/53701633-design-icons-the-assos-skinsuit Design Icons : The Assos Skinsuit]'', condorcycles.com , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>.

<ref>''[https://www.letemps.ch/sport/cyclisme/daniel-gisiger-nos-coureurs-ont-besoin-d-une-equipe-suisse-pour-devenir-des-gagneurs Daniel Gisiger: «Nos coureurs ont besoin d’une équipe suisse pour devenir des gagneurs»]'', letemps.ch , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came around the same time. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front brake and the dropping handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller. Such a choice had been made so that the riders would be closer to one another when they were riding in a line. This in turn would make slipstreaming more efficient and would help the riders conserve their energy better when they weren't at the front. The front wheel would have been 650c at the time.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. Not much information is available about the bike but what is known is that it was a Textima<ref>Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. One of the prominent members of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team. He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.</ref>. This bike featured two 700c wheels, a short head tube, a downwards slopping top tube and "bullhorn" handlebars that were mounted on the fork. It is very reminiscent of the bike Tony Meier-Moussa had built with the exception of the top tube and the head tube.

In 1981,

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes (1997-2000) =

To tie all of this together, I will end this page with the first UCI-compliant Hour Record after the ban. In october 2000, Chris Boardman rode 49,441km in an hour. This ride beat Merckx's by a mere 10m. It came three years after the ban and at the very end of Boardman's career. The bike Boardman rode was Look-branded and featured very racy geometry : very long and very low. The stem alone was 160mm.

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

=== Chris Boardman's Look (2000) ===

Chris Boardman's Look was only a Look because it said so on the downtube. In reality, it was made by hand by none other than Terry Dolan and was made out of Columbus Foco steel. It featured two wheels of the same 622 size, with shallow rims laced with 16 spokes in the front and 20 spokes in the back. If long and low hadn't been emphasised enough, this bike was very long, and very low. Boardman was 175cm, but this bike supposedly featured a 61cm top tube with a 49cm seat tube. Not only that but the stem was a monstruous 160mm long<ref>''[https://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_recordsHour.html Bike Cult : World Hour Records]'', bikecult.com, last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2026-01-05T15:56:05Z

Louison : /* When did this happen and why did it happen */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

= Experimentations (1972-1980) =

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' It was used in the 1978 track world championships in Munich, in combination with the Assos skinsuit. The Assos skinsuit is a fundamental part of the development of the aerodynamics of cycling because before they became the norm riders were still wearing wool jerseys, it tremendeously helped alleviate the rider part of aerodynamic drag. The rider equipped with those items in 1978 was Daniel Gisiger <ref>''[https://www.condorcycles.com/blogs/journal/53701633-design-icons-the-assos-skinsuit Design Icons : The Assos Skinsuit]'', condorcycles.com , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>.

<ref>''[https://www.letemps.ch/sport/cyclisme/daniel-gisiger-nos-coureurs-ont-besoin-d-une-equipe-suisse-pour-devenir-des-gagneurs Daniel Gisiger: «Nos coureurs ont besoin d’une équipe suisse pour devenir des gagneurs»]'', letemps.ch , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came around the same time. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front brake and the dropping handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller. Such a choice had been made so that the riders would be closer to one another when they were riding in a line. This in turn would make slipstreaming more efficient and would help the riders conserve their energy better when they weren't at the front. The front wheel would have been 650c at the time.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. Not much information is available about the bike but what is known is that it was a Textima<ref>Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. One of the prominent members of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team. He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.</ref>. This bike featured two 700c wheels, a short head tube, a downwards slopping top tube and "bullhorn" handlebars that were mounted on the fork. It is very reminiscent of the bike Tony Meier-Moussa had built with the exception of the top tube and the head tube.

In 1981,

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes (1997-2000) =

To tie all of this together, I will end this page with the first UCI-compliant Hour Record after the ban. In october 2000, Chris Boardman rode 49,441km in an hour. This ride beat Merckx's by a mere 10m. It came three years after the ban and at the very end of Boardman's career. The bike Boardman rode was Look-branded and featured very racy geometry : very long and very low. The stem alone was 160mm.

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

=== Chris Boardman's Look (2000) ===

Chris Boardman's Look was only a Look because it said so on the downtube. In reality, it was made by hand by none other than Terry Dolan and was made out of Columbus Foco steel. It featured two wheels of the same 622 size, with shallow rims laced with 16 spokes in the front and 20 spokes in the back. If long and low hadn't been emphasised enough, this bike was very long, and very low. Boardman was 175cm, but this bike supposedly featured a 61cm top tube with a 49cm seat tube. Not only that but the stem was a monstruous 160mm long<ref>''[https://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_recordsHour.html Bike Cult : World Hour Records]'', bikecult.com, last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2026-01-05T15:55:11Z

Louison : /* When did this happen and why did it happen */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref> : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

= Experimentations (1972-1980) =

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' It was used in the 1978 track world championships in Munich, in combination with the Assos skinsuit. The Assos skinsuit is a fundamental part of the development of the aerodynamics of cycling because before they became the norm riders were still wearing wool jerseys, it tremendeously helped alleviate the rider part of aerodynamic drag. The rider equipped with those items in 1978 was Daniel Gisiger <ref>''[https://www.condorcycles.com/blogs/journal/53701633-design-icons-the-assos-skinsuit Design Icons : The Assos Skinsuit]'', condorcycles.com , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>.

<ref>''[https://www.letemps.ch/sport/cyclisme/daniel-gisiger-nos-coureurs-ont-besoin-d-une-equipe-suisse-pour-devenir-des-gagneurs Daniel Gisiger: «Nos coureurs ont besoin d’une équipe suisse pour devenir des gagneurs»]'', letemps.ch , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came around the same time. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front brake and the dropping handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller. Such a choice had been made so that the riders would be closer to one another when they were riding in a line. This in turn would make slipstreaming more efficient and would help the riders conserve their energy better when they weren't at the front. The front wheel would have been 650c at the time.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. Not much information is available about the bike but what is known is that it was a Textima<ref>Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. One of the prominent members of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team. He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.</ref>. This bike featured two 700c wheels, a short head tube, a downwards slopping top tube and "bullhorn" handlebars that were mounted on the fork. It is very reminiscent of the bike Tony Meier-Moussa had built with the exception of the top tube and the head tube.

In 1981,

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes (1997-2000) =

To tie all of this together, I will end this page with the first UCI-compliant Hour Record after the ban. In october 2000, Chris Boardman rode 49,441km in an hour. This ride beat Merckx's by a mere 10m. It came three years after the ban and at the very end of Boardman's career. The bike Boardman rode was Look-branded and featured very racy geometry : very long and very low. The stem alone was 160mm.

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

=== Chris Boardman's Look (2000) ===

Chris Boardman's Look was only a Look because it said so on the downtube. In reality, it was made by hand by none other than Terry Dolan and was made out of Columbus Foco steel. It featured two wheels of the same 622 size, with shallow rims laced with 16 spokes in the front and 20 spokes in the back. If long and low hadn't been emphasised enough, this bike was very long, and very low. Boardman was 175cm, but this bike supposedly featured a 61cm top tube with a 49cm seat tube. Not only that but the stem was a monstruous 160mm long<ref>''[https://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_recordsHour.html Bike Cult : World Hour Records]'', bikecult.com, last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

Accueil

2025-12-29T20:46:20Z

Louison :

Welcome to Cyclopedia, this is a blog-turned-wiki made from my research, documentation, ideas and just sparks of thought. It aims at regrouping information that is located in the four corners of the Internet and sometimes hidden by some, eager to keep the information to themselves. For now it is centered around Track Bicycle Parts and Frames, but I hope to expend the wiki towards more Road Bicycles, Parts and Frames from now and yestertimes.

== Pages I've made so far ==
* [[Track-specific Groups]]
* [[Shimano Dura-Ace Track]]
* [[Campagnolo Record Pista]]
* [[Campagnolo Track-orientated wheels and rims]]
* [[Advanced Double Crankset Conversion]]
* [[Mavic Track-orientated components]]
* [[Mavic Track-orientated wheels and rims]]
* [[Cinelli Vigorelli]]
* [[Cinelli and Mash collaboration frames]]
* [[Décathlon Cobra]]
* [[A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios]]
* [[The aerodynamics of the last century]]
* [[Cadreurs Français]]

The aerodynamics of the last century

2025-12-17T15:04:33Z

Louison : /* Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref> : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

= Experimentations (1972-1980) =

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' It was used in the 1978 track world championships in Munich, in combination with the Assos skinsuit. The Assos skinsuit is a fundamental part of the development of the aerodynamics of cycling because before they became the norm riders were still wearing wool jerseys, it tremendeously helped alleviate the rider part of aerodynamic drag. The rider equipped with those items in 1978 was Daniel Gisiger <ref>''[https://www.condorcycles.com/blogs/journal/53701633-design-icons-the-assos-skinsuit Design Icons : The Assos Skinsuit]'', condorcycles.com , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>.

<ref>''[https://www.letemps.ch/sport/cyclisme/daniel-gisiger-nos-coureurs-ont-besoin-d-une-equipe-suisse-pour-devenir-des-gagneurs Daniel Gisiger: «Nos coureurs ont besoin d’une équipe suisse pour devenir des gagneurs»]'', letemps.ch , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came around the same time. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front brake and the dropping handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller. Such a choice had been made so that the riders would be closer to one another when they were riding in a line. This in turn would make slipstreaming more efficient and would help the riders conserve their energy better when they weren't at the front. The front wheel would have been 650c at the time.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. Not much information is available about the bike but what is known is that it was a Textima<ref>Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. One of the prominent members of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team. He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.</ref>. This bike featured two 700c wheels, a short head tube, a downwards slopping top tube and "bullhorn" handlebars that were mounted on the fork. It is very reminiscent of the bike Tony Meier-Moussa had built with the exception of the top tube and the head tube.

In 1981,

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes (1997-2000) =

To tie all of this together, I will end this page with the first UCI-compliant Hour Record after the ban. In october 2000, Chris Boardman rode 49,441km in an hour. This ride beat Merckx's by a mere 10m. It came three years after the ban and at the very end of Boardman's career. The bike Boardman rode was Look-branded and featured very racy geometry : very long and very low. The stem alone was 160mm.

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

=== Chris Boardman's Look (2000) ===

Chris Boardman's Look was only a Look because it said so on the downtube. In reality, it was made by hand by none other than Terry Dolan and was made out of Columbus Foco steel. It featured two wheels of the same 622 size, with shallow rims laced with 16 spokes in the front and 20 spokes in the back. If long and low hadn't been emphasised enough, this bike was very long, and very low. Boardman was 175cm, but this bike supposedly featured a 61cm top tube with a 49cm seat tube. Not only that but the stem was a monstruous 160mm long<ref>''[https://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_recordsHour.html Bike Cult : World Hour Records]'', bikecult.com, last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2025-12-17T14:40:05Z

Louison : /* Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref> : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

= Experimentations (1972-1980) =

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' It was used in the 1978 track world championships in Munich, in combination with the Assos skinsuit. The Assos skinsuit is a fundamental part of the development of the aerodynamics of cycling because before they became the norm riders were still wearing wool jerseys, it tremendeously helped alleviate the rider part of aerodynamic drag. The rider equipped with those items in 1978 was Daniel Gisiger <ref>''[https://www.condorcycles.com/blogs/journal/53701633-design-icons-the-assos-skinsuit Design Icons : The Assos Skinsuit]'', condorcycles.com , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>.

<ref>''[https://www.letemps.ch/sport/cyclisme/daniel-gisiger-nos-coureurs-ont-besoin-d-une-equipe-suisse-pour-devenir-des-gagneurs Daniel Gisiger: «Nos coureurs ont besoin d’une équipe suisse pour devenir des gagneurs»]'', letemps.ch , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came around the same time. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front brake and the dropping handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. Not much information is available about the bike but what is known is that it was a Textima<ref>Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. One of the prominent members of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team. He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.</ref>. This bike featured a short head tube, a downwards slopping top tube and "bullhorn" handlebars that were mounted on the fork. It is very reminiscent of the bike Tony Meier-Moussa had built with the exception of the top tube and the head tube.

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes (1997-2000) =

To tie all of this together, I will end this page with the first UCI-compliant Hour Record after the ban. In october 2000, Chris Boardman rode 49,441km in an hour. This ride beat Merckx's by a mere 10m. It came three years after the ban and at the very end of Boardman's career. The bike Boardman rode was Look-branded and featured very racy geometry : very long and very low. The stem alone was 160mm.

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

=== Chris Boardman's Look (2000) ===

Chris Boardman's Look was only a Look because it said so on the downtube. In reality, it was made by hand by none other than Terry Dolan and was made out of Columbus Foco steel. It featured two wheels of the same 622 size, with shallow rims laced with 16 spokes in the front and 20 spokes in the back. If long and low hadn't been emphasised enough, this bike was very long, and very low. Boardman was 175cm, but this bike supposedly featured a 61cm top tube with a 49cm seat tube. Not only that but the stem was a monstruous 160mm long<ref>''[https://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_recordsHour.html Bike Cult : World Hour Records]'', bikecult.com, last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2025-12-17T14:26:44Z

Louison : /* Notable Exemples */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref> : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

= Experimentations (1972-1980) =

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' It was used in the 1978 track world championships in Munich, in combination with the Assos skinsuit. The Assos skinsuit is a fundamental part of the development of the aerodynamics of cycling because before they became the norm riders were still wearing wool jerseys, it tremendeously helped alleviate the rider part of aerodynamic drag. The rider equipped with those items in 1978 was Daniel Gisiger <ref>''[https://www.condorcycles.com/blogs/journal/53701633-design-icons-the-assos-skinsuit Design Icons : The Assos Skinsuit]'', condorcycles.com , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>.

<ref>''[https://www.letemps.ch/sport/cyclisme/daniel-gisiger-nos-coureurs-ont-besoin-d-une-equipe-suisse-pour-devenir-des-gagneurs Daniel Gisiger: «Nos coureurs ont besoin d’une équipe suisse pour devenir des gagneurs»]'', letemps.ch , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came around the same time. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front brake and the dropping handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. Not much information is available about the bike but what is known is that it was most likely a Textima which is very reminiscent of later bikes. Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. The prominent member of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. <ref>A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team.</ref> He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes (1997-2000) =

To tie all of this together, I will end this page with the first UCI-compliant Hour Record after the ban. In october 2000, Chris Boardman rode 49,441km in an hour. This ride beat Merckx's by a mere 10m. It came three years after the ban and at the very end of Boardman's career. The bike Boardman rode was Look-branded and featured very racy geometry : very long and very low. The stem alone was 160mm.

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

=== Chris Boardman's Look (2000) ===

Chris Boardman's Look was only a Look because it said so on the downtube. In reality, it was made by hand by none other than Terry Dolan and was made out of Columbus Foco steel. It featured two wheels of the same 622 size, with shallow rims laced with 16 spokes in the front and 20 spokes in the back. If long and low hadn't been emphasised enough, this bike was very long, and very low. Boardman was 175cm, but this bike supposedly featured a 61cm top tube with a 49cm seat tube. Not only that but the stem was a monstruous 160mm long<ref>''[https://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_recordsHour.html Bike Cult : World Hour Records]'', bikecult.com, last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2025-12-17T14:14:49Z

Louison : /* Ban of most of what made these bikes */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref> : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

= Experimentations (1972-1980) =

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' It was used in the 1978 track world championships in Munich, in combination with the Assos skinsuit. The Assos skinsuit is a fundamental part of the development of the aerodynamics of cycling because before they became the norm riders were still wearing wool jerseys, it tremendeously helped alleviate the rider part of aerodynamic drag. The rider equipped with those items in 1978 was Daniel Gisiger <ref>''[https://www.condorcycles.com/blogs/journal/53701633-design-icons-the-assos-skinsuit Design Icons : The Assos Skinsuit]'', condorcycles.com , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>.

<ref>''[https://www.letemps.ch/sport/cyclisme/daniel-gisiger-nos-coureurs-ont-besoin-d-une-equipe-suisse-pour-devenir-des-gagneurs Daniel Gisiger: «Nos coureurs ont besoin d’une équipe suisse pour devenir des gagneurs»]'', letemps.ch , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came around the same time. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front brake and the dropping handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. Not much information is available about the bike but what is known is that it was most likely a Textima which is very reminiscent of later bikes. Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. The prominent member of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. <ref>A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team.</ref> He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes (1997-2000) =

To tie all of this together, I will end this page with the first UCI-compliant Hour Record after the ban. In october 2000, Chris Boardman rode 49,441km in an hour. This ride beat Merckx's by a mere 10m. It came three years after the ban and at the very end of Boardman's career. The bike Boardman rode was Look-branded and featured very racy geometry : very long and very low. The stem alone was 160mm.

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2025-12-17T13:55:47Z

Louison :

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref> : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

= Experimentations (1972-1980) =

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' It was used in the 1978 track world championships in Munich, in combination with the Assos skinsuit. The Assos skinsuit is a fundamental part of the development of the aerodynamics of cycling because before they became the norm riders were still wearing wool jerseys, it tremendeously helped alleviate the rider part of aerodynamic drag. The rider equipped with those items in 1978 was Daniel Gisiger <ref>''[https://www.condorcycles.com/blogs/journal/53701633-design-icons-the-assos-skinsuit Design Icons : The Assos Skinsuit]'', condorcycles.com , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>.

<ref>''[https://www.letemps.ch/sport/cyclisme/daniel-gisiger-nos-coureurs-ont-besoin-d-une-equipe-suisse-pour-devenir-des-gagneurs Daniel Gisiger: «Nos coureurs ont besoin d’une équipe suisse pour devenir des gagneurs»]'', letemps.ch , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came around the same time. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front brake and the dropping handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. Not much information is available about the bike but what is known is that it was most likely a Textima which is very reminiscent of later bikes. Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. The prominent member of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. <ref>A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team.</ref> He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes =

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2025-12-17T13:54:54Z

Louison : /* When did this happen and why did it happen */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref> : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' It was used in the 1978 track world championships in Munich, in combination with the Assos skinsuit. The Assos skinsuit is a fundamental part of the development of the aerodynamics of cycling because before they became the norm riders were still wearing wool jerseys, it tremendeously helped alleviate the rider part of aerodynamic drag. The rider equipped with those items in 1978 was Daniel Gisiger <ref>''[https://www.condorcycles.com/blogs/journal/53701633-design-icons-the-assos-skinsuit Design Icons : The Assos Skinsuit]'', condorcycles.com , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>.

<ref>''[https://www.letemps.ch/sport/cyclisme/daniel-gisiger-nos-coureurs-ont-besoin-d-une-equipe-suisse-pour-devenir-des-gagneurs Daniel Gisiger: «Nos coureurs ont besoin d’une équipe suisse pour devenir des gagneurs»]'', letemps.ch , last accessed : 17/12/2025</ref>

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came around the same time. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front brake and the dropping handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. Not much information is available about the bike but what is known is that it was most likely a Textima which is very reminiscent of later bikes. Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. The prominent member of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. <ref>A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team.</ref> He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes =

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2025-12-14T18:01:38Z

Louison : /* Gitane Profile (1979) */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref> : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. It was used in the 1978 track world championships. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' As an observer, I can notice two points as to why this might have been the case : first of all both wheels are 700c and the frame looks to have a run of the mill race geometry of the time. So despite the agressive looking bike with fork-crown-mounted bullhorns, I would wager that the position would be close to identical to someone riding in the drops of a road bike of the time.

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came soon after. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front fork and the dropping handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. Not much information is available about the bike but what is known is that it was most likely a Textima which is very reminiscent of later bikes. Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. The prominent member of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. <ref>A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team.</ref> He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes =

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. It first came out to be for the 1979 Tour de France for the Gitane-Campagnolo-Renault team featuring Bernard Hinault. With this out of the way, there were different versions of this bike/model but I will focus on this bike specifically. The frame was made out of profiled Reynolds 531 tubing. It had a gusset going from the top to the bottom of the headtube, extending inbetween the top tube and the downtube but also between the head tube and the downtube. This is note worthy because not many bikes with gussets had this specific part covered, in fact only a few exemples of this bike had this specific aspect to it. The tubing was profiled as mentioned, but the top tube remained round. The seat tube was also dented inwards to allow the back wheel to be scooted forward, to make the bike shorter overall. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube. I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

Later versions didn't have the indented seat tube, didn't have a round top tube and featured different tubing. Moreover, the version mentioned was made for time-trial when other version were made for road racing. As with the Laser concept, the Gitane Profile was more like a idea rather than a model, many models existed but all were of the idea to make a profile road bike with aerodynamic features.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2025-12-14T17:21:38Z

Louison :

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref> : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. It was used in the 1978 track world championships. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' As an observer, I can notice two points as to why this might have been the case : first of all both wheels are 700c and the frame looks to have a run of the mill race geometry of the time. So despite the agressive looking bike with fork-crown-mounted bullhorns, I would wager that the position would be close to identical to someone riding in the drops of a road bike of the time.

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came soon after. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front fork and the dropping handlebars<ref>''[https://mediaclip.ina.fr/fr/i18341707-cyrille-guimard-et-le-velo-revolutionnaire-de-bernard-hinault.html Cyrille Guimard et le vélo révolutionnaire de Bernard Hinault]'', ina.fr , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/40365317@N06/32531846557 Picture of one of the Team Time-Trial stages of the 1979 Tour de France]'', flickr.com , last accessed : 14/12/2025</ref>.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. Not much information is available about the bike but what is known is that it was most likely a Textima which is very reminiscent of later bikes. Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. The prominent member of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. <ref>A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team.</ref> He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes =

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. The frame had a few gussets and the tubing was flattened in places to allow air to flow more freely on them. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube, the rear brake directly behind the seat stays and aiming at the seat tube but I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2025-12-14T17:18:27Z

Louison : /* When did this happen and why did it happen */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref> : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. It was used in the 1978 track world championships. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' As an observer, I can notice two points as to why this might have been the case : first of all both wheels are 700c and the frame looks to have a run of the mill race geometry of the time. So despite the agressive looking bike with fork-crown-mounted bullhorns, I would wager that the position would be close to identical to someone riding in the drops of a road bike of the time.

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came soon after. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time and as a time-trial bike. The prominent features were the profiled tubing, the deep wheels, the back mounted front fork and the dropping handlebars.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. Not much information is available about the bike but what is known is that it was most likely a Textima which is very reminiscent of later bikes. Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. The prominent member of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. <ref>A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team.</ref> He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes =

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. The frame had a few gussets and the tubing was flattened in places to allow air to flow more freely on them. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube, the rear brake directly behind the seat stays and aiming at the seat tube but I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2025-12-14T16:22:26Z

Louison : /* Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref> : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. It was used in the 1978 track world championships. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' As an observer, I can notice two points as to why this might have been the case : first of all both wheels are 700c and the frame looks to have a run of the mill race geometry of the time. So despite the agressive looking bike with fork-crown-mounted bullhorns, I would wager that the position would be close to identical to someone riding in the drops of a road bike of the time.

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came soon after. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. Not much information is available about the bike but what is known is that it was most likely a Textima which is very reminiscent of later bikes. Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. The prominent member of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. <ref>A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team.</ref> He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes =

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. The frame had a few gussets and the tubing was flattened in places to allow air to flow more freely on them. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube, the rear brake directly behind the seat stays and aiming at the seat tube but I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2025-12-14T16:21:15Z

Louison : /* When did this happen and why did it happen */

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref> : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. It was used in the 1978 track world championships. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel tests were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' As an observer, I can notice two points as to why this might have been the case : first of all both wheels are 700c and the frame looks to have a run of the mill race geometry of the time. So despite the agressive looking bike with fork-crown-mounted bullhorns, I would wager that the position would be close to identical to someone riding in the drops of a road bike of the time.

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came soon after. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. Not much information is available about the bike but what is known is that it was most likely a Textima which is very reminiscent of later bikes. Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. The prominent member of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. <ref>A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team.</ref> He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes =

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. The frame had a few gussets and the tubing was flattened in places to allow air to flow more freely on them. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube, the rear brake directly behind the seat stays and aiming at the seat tube but I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

The aerodynamics of the last century

2025-12-14T16:19:28Z

Louison : Page créée avec « In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how... »

In a world where bikes are getting more and more aerodynamic as a result of the research for the marginal gains within the UCI rules, it's interesting to reflect on the times where the UCI wasn't the rigid law it is nowadays. So in this page I hope to try to make a concise history of the "lopro", "funny bike", "chrono", "plongeant" track and time-trial bikes of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't plan on listing them all but I want to expand on when they came to be, how they came to be, what they tried to achieve and how, how they evolved and finally when they stopped existing. I will also list a few of the popular exemples, and odities that pushed the innovation at the time.

The quoted terms are not all mutually exclusive but they do mean different things. Lopro bikes are simply bikes with a top tube that slopes downwards towards the headtube. Funny bikes are bikes with a smaller wheel in the front. Chrono is an abbreviation of "Vélo de Chronomètre" aka a time-trial bike. And finally "plongeant" is the french word for diving, it's similar to lopro in definition. For the purpose of simplification, I'm going to flatten most of the differences and put them all in the same basket as they were used for the same purposes. If differences are notable, they will be mentioned.

= When did this happen and why did it happen =

I believe the when and the why of how low-profile came to be are closely related to one event in 1972. On the 25th of October 1972, Eddy Merckx rode 49,431km in an hour. Before that and for the majority of the post-war period of cycling, the gains were sought in the form of lightening the bikes. Aerodynamic bikes existed before, but they were just proof of concept rather than competitive options. One of the most striking exemples is Cristoforo Gazzoni's wooden and canva fairings bicycle<ref>''[https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/scienza-tecnologia/schede/x5020-00024/ Bicicletta - industria, manifattura, artigianato]'', lombardiabeniculturali.it, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. It dates back to the 60s at the latest and features fairings around a classical frame to make it more aerodynamic. Another good exemple is seen in an interview of Ernesto Colnago on his most iconic bikes<ref name=ec_int>''[https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/colnagos-classic-bike-collection Colnago’s classic bike collection]'', cyclist.co.uk, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref> : a prototype made for the hour record in 1968. The principles of what would drive the aerodynamic search were already here : fairings would allow the bike to cut the air more efficiently and the geometry was such that the rider would lean onto the front of the bike, reducing frontal area and again facilitating penetration in the air.

But going back to the hour record of 1972, I think it's important to talk about this event because the bike used embodies much of the Zeitgeist at the time and the event itself was so important that there is a distinctive before and after<ref>I think it's important to note that, in 1997, the UCI retroactively placed Merckx's record as the standard for the Hour Record by revoking all of the subsequent records. It's hard to grasp that the record was more than 25 years old at the time yet it still had an inherent athletic authority.</ref>. A lot of the information on the specific bike Merckx rode is confusing, conflicting or speculative but past the details we can keep in mind the following. Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of very thin tubing with lightened components. The takeaway being that the bike and every single one of its components were thought to be the lightest possible. It came out to a 5,75~5,9kg bike at a time where most road race framesets were already close to half of that when completely naked.

Merckx being, even at the time, considered the ultimate athlete in the sport and weight being a finite improvement (before running into rigidity issues), innovation was pushed by smaller framemakers. Exemples are few and far as it was still a transitional phase : not everyone believed aerodynamics were the path to follow. Use in competition was very scarce and documentation about them is even more scarce.

Around 1976, Tony Maier-Moussa, at the time bike mechanic and soon-to-be-successful Assos founder, was getting inspired by ski jumpers to make skinsuits and eventually rethink the position of riders on their bike. He imported carbon to create his own frame with drop-shaped tubing and with handlebars mounted on the fork crown. It was used in the 1978 track world championships. <ref>''[https://bikinvalais.ch/2015/01/toni-maier-moussa-histoire-assos/ Toni Maier Moussa : «Les habits de vélo, ce n’était pas prévu»]'', bikinvalais.ch, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>. Maier-Moussa acknoledges an important point in this interview : ''<pre>[The wind tunnel test were] fantastic. Until I asked Daniel Gisiger to get on the bike... With the cyclist, we measured almost no improvement. What a disappointment!</pre>'' As an observer, I can notice two points as to why this might have been the case : first of all both wheels are 700c and the frame looks to have a run of the mill race geometry of the time. So despite the agressive looking bike with fork-crown-mounted bullhorns, I would wager that the position would be close to identical to someone riding in the drops of a road bike of the time.

According to Claude Genzling and Bernard Hinault<ref>''Cyclisme sur route : la technique, la tactique et l'entraînement, Bernard Hinault & Claude Genzling, 1988''</ref>, the first studies that had bike AND position of cyclist in mind came soon after. <pre>The first studies aimed at reducing the aerodynamic drag of bicycles and optimising that of the man-machine combination according to the rider's position were undertaken in 1977 by Maurice Ménard, director of the Aerotechnical Institute of Saint-Cyr-l'École and professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers. This initially resulted in the Profile bicycle, which was tested during the 1979 Tour de France, followed by the Delta bicycle, which Laurent Fignon used in the 1984 Tour de France time trial stages.</pre> The Gitane Profile was a profiled road bike, and therefore doesn't necessarily fit in our history of time-trial bikes but I think it's important because it was used at the top of the sport at the time.

Koichi Yamaguchi, at the time an apprentice at 3Rensho under the supervision of Yoshi Konno, recalls toying with the idea of aerodynamics in 1977<ref>''[https://www.flickr.com/photos/21218357@N07/40099928240/in/photostream/ 3Rensho Kato 1977 1]'', flickr.com, last accessed : 25/09/2025</ref> : ''<pre>Attention to long fork (this bike use 700x700 wheels). Idea is long fork makes air go through between blades not blocking air flow. 2nd this makes head tube shorter. We try to design small front triangle to save weight and gain rigidity. This frame tubing is Isiwata 015 Very thin wall ultra light weight tubing. (light weight but bit flex much) 3rd we can inset stem from bottom of crown to make a Takhion style set up. </pre>'' While not explicitly being a lopro bike, I think it's important to note the aspects noted in the quote, namely the small headtube and the ability to make a Takhion style setup<ref>Takhion (Тахион) was founded in 1981, making this mention obviously posterior to the picture</ref>.

= Establishing a new standard (1980-1984) =

It's at the 1980 Olympic games in Moscow that came the first great recognition of this type of bike. The team time-trial was won by the Soviet Union on the Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica<ref>''[https://www.colnago.com/en-us/collections/past-models/mexico-tt Colnago Mexico TT]'', colnago.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref><ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOsNl0YqZE Cycling Olympics 1980 TTT 100km]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 02/11/2025</ref>. The Colnago was shyly aerodynamic but still featured parts or ideas that would be consistently used throughout the period. The more obvious being the front wheel being smaller.

Recognition also came at the same Olympic games with the win of Lothar Thoms in the 1000m men's individual pursuit. Not much information is available about the bike but what is known is that it was most likely a Textima which is very reminiscent of later bikes. Textima was a gigantic East German textile factory so big that a part of it was making bikes under the MIFA and Diamant monikers. But within this bike factory, was the institute behind the high-level bikes created for the East German athletes of the time. The prominent member of this laboratory was Paul Rinkowski. <ref>A whole page could be dedicated to this man, but to keep it short, he had been pioneering recumbing bikes since the late 1940s. He knew how poor the aerodynamics of the traditional diamond bike frame were and researched recumbent bikes on his own. His work is recognised as such but he was also recruited by the East German sports committee to created aerodynamic bikes for the East German team.</ref> He died in 1986 but Textima, later FES, lived on and propelled German bikes on the forefront of technology.

On the 19th of January 1984, Francesco Moser blew the record out of the water with an hour record of 50,808km. As the story goes, unsatisfied with the record, he promised to come back in 4 days to beat it again. And so, on the 23th of January 1984, Moser rode 51,151km.

= The craze (1984-1997) =

= Ban of most of what made these bikes =

= Notable Exemples =

This is the section where I detail the specific bikes I mentioned in the article. I didn't want to include it in the main text because I thought it would be too heavy, regardless, the bikes mentioned are clickable to bring you to here, so you can go back and forth if you want.

=== Eddy Merckx's Colnago (1972) ===

Eddy Merckx rode a purpose-built Colnago frame made out of double-butted tubing (0,7/0,4/0,7). Most of the componens were purpose-built with exotic alloys. According to Ernesto Colnago himself<ref name=ec_int></ref>, the stem and spokes were made out of titanium, hubs were made out of beryllium and most of the other components were drilled/milled : handlebars, headset, crankset, chainring, chain, seatpost and possible more. The seatpost and headset were also made out of an unknown alloy. Or a combination of all of the above<ref>''[https://veloretrocourse.proboards.com/thread/2226/colnago-deddy-merckx-record-lheure Le Colnago d'Eddy Merckx pour le record de l'heure (1972)]'', veloretrocourse.proboards.com, last accessed : 23/09/2025</ref>.

=== Gitane Profile (1979) ===

The Gitane Profile was a result of the aerodynamic studies that came out of the Aerotechnical Institute. The frame had a few gussets and the tubing was flattened in places to allow air to flow more freely on them. Apart from that, it did a few different things to be more aerodynamic : the front brake was directly between the fork and the downtube, the rear brake directly behind the seat stays and aiming at the seat tube but I think the most important part may have been the drooping and forward-curved handlebars made by Mavic.

=== Colnago Mexico TT/Aerodynamica (1980) ===

The Colnago Mexico TT differs in many ways to the original Mexico but the aerodynamic features are as follows. The most prominent parts are the brakes, they were put on the inside of the bike like the Profile. The front wheel was also 650c (when the rear was 700c) The downtube shifters were put on top of the down tube instead of the sides. The fork was specially made to be as sleek as possible. The seatpost provided (I assume) was also profiled.

=== Cinelli Laser (1981-1992) ===

I think the Cinelli Laser is most likely one of the most recognisable and talked-about bike of this era. Just about everything as been said about it but I think it's still important to note a few points about this bike in the context of this article. Historically speaking, the Laser is important because it launched TIG-welding into the world of high-end frame building. TIG-welding allowed for more freedom when constructing frames, angles at which the tubes could be connected were close to being free. It also made frames lighter and quicker to make. There is also a visual aspect to the Cinelli Laser, it's instantly recognised through its specific colour (Laser Azzuro) and the aerodynamics gussets that link the different tubes.
Apart from this, the interesting part of this bike is the off-set seat tube. Instead of linking the seat knot to the bottom bracket box in a straight line, the seat tube of the Laser goes down and finishes on the down tube. This allows the bike to be shorter and more nervous.
It needs to be said that the Laser is not a monolithic model. The Laser was more like an idea that was materialised through multiple different iterations of road, track and time-trial bikes. It would be criminal to not mention the last iteration of this bike, the Pista and Crono Rivoluzione. Where the seat tube is simply removed.

= Sources =

= References =

<ref>''[]'', , last accessed : </ref>

Accueil

2025-12-14T16:18:13Z

Louison :

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-07-21T22:34:21Z

Louison : /* Past the rules */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but the parts for 6-speed are nowadays fairly hard to come by.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it. According to disraeligears who quotes Sutherlands (6th edition), the maximum cog size was 26T, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available remains unchanged, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,5 ratio or 3,19m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2009) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

In 2009, Campagnolo offers for their last model year the Ergopower Mk2 levers before only offering their Ultrashift. Compatibility may have remained nonetheless.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1988
! →
! 1990
! →
! 1992
! 1993
! →
! 1997
! 1998
! 1999
! →
! 2001
! →
! 2005
! 2006
! →
! 2009
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/29
| →
| 34/29
| →
| →
| disc.
|}

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mentioned only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through, all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ratio was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1987
! →
! 1989
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1994
! 1995
! →
! 1997
! 1998
! →
! 2000
! →
! 2004
! →
! 2007
! 2008
! 2009
! →
! 2011
! 2012
! 2013
! 2014
! 2015
! 2016
! 2017
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| 39/30
| 36/28
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/26
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| 39/27
| →
| →
| →
| 34/27
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/27
| →
| →
| 34/27
| 34/28
| →
| →
| 34/30
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|}

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further.

Mixing groupset parts is a path you can go. But most importantly, using a long cage/triple rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences, the main interest being the use of a compact crankset. Campagnolo usually made 37T capacity triple rear derailleurs. Assuming the offered cog sizes, a 34/28 would fit very comfortably as far as capacity goes while offering a 1.21 gear ratio, or 2,59m of development. Shimano

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

If you're willing to let go of indexation, and Italians forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train is pretty compelling. Though, when you take in consideration the rarity of 8-speed downtube shifters, this sort of modification is pretty useless.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the 6-speed friction Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount this size of chainring to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain.

Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main interest to us is the offer of a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. Removing indexation simply allows you to use MTB cassettes and even then, I've been using a mix of Road Brifters/MTB cassette 9-speed on one of my bike and it's far from perfect but you can definitely get-by.

= References =

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-05-12T20:56:09Z

Louison : /* 9 speed (1997-2016) */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but the parts for 6-speed are nowadays fairly hard to come by.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it. According to disraeligears who quotes Sutherlands (6th edition), the maximum cog size was 26T, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available remains unchanged, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,5 ratio or 3,19m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2009) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

In 2009, Campagnolo offers for their last model year the Ergopower Mk2 levers before only offering their Ultrashift. Compatibility may have remained nonetheless.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1988
! →
! 1990
! →
! 1992
! 1993
! →
! 1997
! 1998
! 1999
! →
! 2001
! →
! 2005
! 2006
! →
! 2009
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/29
| →
| 34/29
| →
| →
| disc.
|}

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mentioned only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through, all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ratio was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1987
! →
! 1989
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1994
! 1995
! →
! 1997
! 1998
! →
! 2000
! →
! 2004
! →
! 2007
! 2008
! 2009
! →
! 2011
! 2012
! 2013
! 2014
! 2015
! 2016
! 2017
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| 39/30
| 36/28
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/26
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| 39/27
| →
| →
| →
| 34/27
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/27
| →
| →
| 34/27
| 34/28
| →
| →
| 34/30
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|}

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further.

Mixing groupset parts is a path you can go, using a long cage rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

If you're willing to let go of indexation, and Italians forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train is pretty compelling. Though, when you take in consideration the rarity of 8-speed downtube shifters, this sort of modification is pretty useless.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the 6-speed friction Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount this size of chainring to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain.

Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main interest to us is the offer of a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. Removing indexation simply allows you to use MTB cassettes and even then, I've been using a mix of Road Brifters/MTB cassette 9-speed on one of my bike and it's far from perfect but you can definitely get-by.

= References =

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-04-06T21:19:49Z

Louison : /* 7 speed (1987-1998) */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but the parts for 6-speed are nowadays fairly hard to come by.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it. According to disraeligears who quotes Sutherlands (6th edition), the maximum cog size was 26T, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available remains unchanged, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,5 ratio or 3,19m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2009) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

In 2009, Campagnolo offers for their last model year the Ergopower Mk2 levers before only offering their Ultrashift. Compatibility may have remained nonetheless.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1988
! →
! 1990
! →
! 1992
! 1993
! →
! 1997
! 1998
! 1999
! →
! 2001
! →
! 2005
! 2006
! →
! 2009
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/29
| →
| 34/29
| →
| →
| disc.
|}

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mentioned only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through , all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ratio was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1987
! →
! 1989
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1994
! 1995
! →
! 1997
! 1998
! →
! 2000
! →
! 2004
! →
! 2007
! 2008
! 2009
! →
! 2011
! 2012
! 2013
! 2014
! 2015
! 2016
! 2017
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| 39/30
| 36/28
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/26
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| 39/27
| →
| →
| →
| 34/27
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/27
| →
| →
| 34/27
| 34/28
| →
| →
| 34/30
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|}

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further.

Mixing groupset parts is a path you can go, using a long cage rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

If you're willing to let go of indexation, and Italians forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train is pretty compelling. Though, when you take in consideration the rarity of 8-speed downtube shifters, this sort of modification is pretty useless.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the 6-speed friction Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount this size of chainring to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain.

Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main interest to us is the offer of a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. Removing indexation simply allows you to use MTB cassettes and even then, I've been using a mix of Road Brifters/MTB cassette 9-speed on one of my bike and it's far from perfect but you can definitely get-by.

= References =

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-04-06T21:18:49Z

Louison : /* 7 speed (1987-1998) */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but the parts for 6-speed are nowadays fairly hard to come by.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it. According to disraeligears who quotes Sutherlands (6th edition), the maximum cog size was 26T, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available remains unchanged, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,5 ratio or 3,19m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2009) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

In 2009, Campagnolo offers for their last model year the Ergopower Mk2 levers before only offering their Ultrashift. Compatibility may have remained nonetheless.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1988
! →
! 1990
! →
! 1992
! 1993
! →
! 1997
! 1998
! 1999
! →
! 2001
! →
! 2005
! 2006
! →
! 2009
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/29
| →
| 34/29
| →
| →
| disc.
|}

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mentioned only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through , all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ratio was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1987
! →
! 1989
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1994
! 1995
! →
! 1997
! 1998
! →
! 2000
! →
! 2004
! →
! 2007
! 2008
! 2009
! →
! 2011
! 2012
! 2013
! 2014
! 2015
! 2016
! 2017
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| 39/30
| 36/28
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/26
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| 39/27
| →
| →
| →
| 34/27
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/27
| →
| →
| 34/27
| 34/28
| →
| →
| 34/30
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|}

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further.

Mixing groupset parts is a path you can go, using a long cage rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

If you're willing to let go of indexation, and Italians forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train is pretty compelling. Though, when you take in consideration the rarity of 8-speed downtube shifters, this sort of modification is pretty useless.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the 6-speed friction Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount this size of chainring to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain.

Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main interest to us is the offer of a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. Removing indexation simply allows you to use MTB cassettes and even then, I've been using a mix of Road Brifters/MTB cassette 9-speed on one of my bike and it's far from perfect but you can definitely get-by.

= References =

Track-specific Groups

2025-03-26T20:43:41Z

Louison :

This page will serve as a hub to access all the different track-specific, track-adjacent groups or parts from different brands.

= [[Campagnolo_Parts|From Campagnolo :]] =

== [[Campagnolo_Record_Pista|Groups]] ==

=== [[Campagnolo_Record_Pista#Record_1033_(1958-1984)| Record Pista (1958-1984)]] ===

=== [[Campagnolo_Record_Pista#Super_Record_4100_(1973-1984)| Super Record Pista (1973-1984)]] ===

=== [[Campagnolo_Record_Pista#Super_Record_Keirin| Super Record Keirin (?-?)]] ===

=== [[Campagnolo_Record_Pista#C-Record_182_(1985-1988)| C-Record Pista (1985-1988)]] ===

=== [[Campagnolo_Record_Pista#Record_Pista_A000P_(1988-1993)| Record Pista A000P (1988-1993) ]] ===

=== [[Campagnolo_Record_Pista#Record_Pista_A000K_(1988-1993)| Record Pista A000K (1988-1993)]] ===

=== [[Campagnolo_Record_Pista#Record_Pista_(1993-2000)| Record Pista (1993-2000)]] ===

=== [[Campagnolo_Record_Pista#Record_Pista_(2001-2013)| Record Pista (2001-2013)]] ===

== [[Campagnolo Track-orientated wheels and rims|Wheels and rims]] ==

=== [[Campagnolo_Track-orientated_wheels_and_rims#Ghibli_(1991-2022)| Ghibli (1991-2022)]] ===

=== [[Campagnolo_Track-orientated_wheels_and_rims#Scirocco_(1991-1995)| Scirocco (1991-1995)]] ===

=== [[Campagnolo_Track-orientated_wheels_and_rims#Khamsin_(1991-1995)| Khamsin (1991-1995)]] ===

=== [[Campagnolo_Track-orientated_wheels_and_rims#Pista_(2003-2019)| Pista (2003-2019)]] ===

=== [[Campagnolo_Track-orientated_wheels_and_rims#Bora_Ultra_80_(2019-2022)| Bora Ultra 80 (2019-2022)]] ===

= [[Mavic_Parts|From Mavic :]] =

== [[Mavic_Track-orientated_components|Components]] ==

== [[Mavic_Track-orientated_wheels_and_rims|Wheels and rims]] ==

= From Miche : =

== [[Miche_Pistard]] ==

== [[Miche_Primato]] ==

== [[Miche_Track-orientated_wheels_and_rims|Wheels and rims]] ==

= From Ofmega : =

= From Shimano : =

== [[Shimano_Dura-Ace_Track|Groups]] ==

=== [[Shimano_Dura-Ace_Track#Dura-Ace_Track_(1972-1978)| Dura-Ace track (1972-1978)]] ===

=== [[Shimano_Dura-Ace_Track#Dura-Ace_7000_(or_10)_(1977-1981)| Dura-Ace FC-7000 (10mm chain pitch) (1977-1981)]] ===

=== [[Shimano_Dura-Ace_Track#Dura-Ace_7500_(1981-1984)| Dura-Ace FC-7500 (1981-1984)]] ===

=== [[Shimano_Dura-Ace_Track#Dura-Ace_7600_(1986-1994)| Dura-Ace FC-7600 (1986-1994)]] ===

=== [[Shimano_Dura-Ace_Track#Dura-Ace_7700_(2000-2022)| Dura-Ace FC-7700 (2000-2022)]] ===

= From SRAM : =

= From Stronglight : =

= From Sugino : =

Cinelli Vigorelli

2025-03-26T20:27:39Z

Louison :

The Cinelli Vigorelli needs no introduction, it's the bike that best represents what the mainstream fixie culture is about. A legendary brand naming a bike after a legendary place with stunning visuals and colourful colourways. With this concept set in stone from the get-go, it is now of no surprise how big of a reputation this frame has in 2024. But there is not a lot said about the history of this frame, so I will try to compile most of what I can find on them here.

Its history has been written over and over again but it's still hard to put a specific date on the first Vigorelli. Cinelli claims it has been made in 2005, 2006 and 2007 on different occasions. The first appearance of it is in the 2007 Cinelli catalogue (might have been out there by mid to late 2006), so the question is out there : what came before 2007 ? It's unknown for now but some bikes out there<ref>''[https://www.thespoken.cc/cinelli-mystery-track Cinelli Mystery Track frame]'',[https://web.archive.org/web/20230128111913/https://www.thespoken.cc/cinelli-mystery-track Archive], thespoken.cc, last accessed : 14/10/2024</ref> may close us in on the answer.

I will treat the different geometries as different models as it compacts the data. I will of course try to source as much as I can of the information I'm gonna mention.

== Original Vigorelli Geometry (2005-2012) ==

The original Vigorelli geometry followed a track-like geometry with fairly high Bottom Bracket, short chainstays, steep headtube angle and short rake.

:'''Tubeset''': Columbus Airplane
:'''Fork''': Columbus Pista 1-1/8" (Carbon + Aluminium steerer)
:'''BB Thread''': BSA
:'''Seatpost diameter''': 31,6mm

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_geo.png|500px|frameless|center|]]

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|-
! Size
! S1
! S
! T1
! T
! HeadTube
! a°
! b°
! R
! C
! F
! WB
! E
! Fork
|-
! XS
| 500
| 460
| 520
| 511.5
| 114
| 72.3°
| 75.5°
| 35
| 389
| 570.5
| 952.2
| 58
| 366
|-
! S
| 520
| 480
| 535
| 526.1
| 134
| 72.3°
| 75°
| 35
| 390
| 581.8
| 964.6
| 58
| 366
|-
! M
| 540
| 500
| 545
| 535.7
| 150
| 73°
| 74.5°
| 35
| 392
| 581.5
| 966.3
| 58
| 366
|-
! L
| 560
| 520
| 555
| 545.8
| 170
| 73°
| 74.5°
| 35
| 392
| 592.0
| 976.9
| 58
| 366
|-
! XL
| 580
| 540
| 575
| 564.9
| 188
| 73°
| 73.5°
| 35
| 395
| 602.0
| 989.9
| 58
| 366
|}

=== "?" (2005-2006) ===

According to Cinelli, the Vigorelli was born in 2005<ref name=CinelliMilanoVigo>''[https://www.cinelli-milano.com/collections/vigorelli Cinelli-Made "Memorial" of the Vigorelli]'', cinelli-milano.com, last accessed 13/10/2024</ref>. But the first mention of it I could find was from 2007. This is a placeholder model for now.

=== "Italian White" (2007 <ref>''[https://cyclopedia.btz.alsace/images/c/cb/2007_Cinelli.pdf#page=23 Page 23 of the 2007 Cinelli catalogue]'', registrostoricocicli.com, last accessed : 03/11/2024</ref>) ===

The first edition of this frame is quite rare. It's a forgotten colourway that is rarely discussed or talked about, even Cinelli don't correctly point to it on multiple places discussing the "first Vigorelli"<ref name=CinelliMilanoVigo></ref><ref>''[https://www.cinelli-milano.com/blogs/news/shop-talk-10-vigorelli-extra Shop Talk #10 : Vigorelli Extra], cinelli-milano.com, last accessed : 14/01/2024</ref>, though they do showcase the correct colourway in their own history<ref>''[https://www.cinelli-milano.com/pages/history Cinelli's History]'', cinelli-milano.com, last accessed : 14/10/2024</ref>.

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_2007.png|500px|thumb|center|Cinelli Vigorelli "Italian White" (2007)]]

=== "Italian White" (2008<ref>''[https://cyclopedia.btz.alsace/images/6/67/2008_Cinelli.pdf#page=27 Page 27 of the 2008 Cinelli catalogue]'', registrostoricocicli.com, last accessed : 03/11/2024</ref>-2009<ref>''[https://cyclopedia.btz.alsace/images/b/ba/2009_Cinelli.pdf#page=29 Page 29 of the 2009 Cinelli catalogue]'', registrostoricocicli.com, last accessed : 03/11/2024</ref>) ===

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_2008.png|500px|thumb|center|Cinelli Vigorelli "Italian White" (2008)]]

=== "Italian White (Remastered)" (2010<ref>''[https://cyclopedia.btz.alsace/images/f/f8/2010_Cinelli.pdf#page=33 Page 33 of the 2010 Cinelli catalogue]'', registrostoricocicli.com, last accessed : 03/11/2024</ref>-2012<ref>''[http://web.archive.org/web/20111119065339/http://cinelli.it/mc4/files/cinelli_features/catalogo_biciclette_2012.pdf#page=36 Page 36 of the 2012 Cinelli catalogue]'', cinelli.it, last-accessed : 18/10/2024</ref>) ===

This colourway is toned down from the previous Italian White, the colours don't change but the big Cinelli branding is moved to the top tube and instead is a Cinelli logo.

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_2010.png|500px|thumb|center|Cinelli Vigorelli "Italian White (Remastered)" (2010)]]

== First Vigorelli Revision (2013-2014) ==

This is a very minute change in geometry if it even is one, I'm fairly sure Cinelli just rounded the more "exact" numbers from the original Vigorelli. The telling sign of these models is the cone-shaped seattube compared to the original Vigorelli.

:'''Tubeset''': Columbus Airplane
:'''Fork''': Columbus Pista 1-1/8" (Carbon + Aluminium steerer)
:'''BB Thread''': BSA
:'''Seatpost diameter''': 31,6mm

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_geo.png|500px|frameless|center|]]

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|-
! Size
! S1
! S
! T1
! T
! HeadTube
! a°
! b°
! R
! C
! F
! WB
! E
! Fork
|-
! XS
| 500
| 460
| 520
| 513
| 114
| 72.5°
| 75.5°
| 35
| 389
| 570
| 952
| 58
| 368
|-
! S
| 520
| 480
| 535
| 526
| 134
| 72.5°
| 75°
| 35
| 390
| 582
| 965
| 58
| 368
|-
! M
| 540
| 500
| 545
| 537
| 150
| 73°
| 74.5°
| 35
| 392
| 582
| 966
| 58
| 368
|-
! L
| 560
| 520
| 555
| 546
| 170
| 73°
| 74.5°
| 35
| 392
| 592.0
| 977
| 58
| 368
|-
! XL
| 580
| 540
| 575
| 565
| 188
| 73°
| 73.5°
| 35
| 395
| 602.0
| 990
| 58
| 368
|}

=== "Black is Black" (2013<ref name=Cinelli2013>''[https://web.archive.org/web/20140724115631/http://www.gambacicli.it/cataloghi/cinelli_catalogo_biciclette_2013.pdf#page=38 Page 38 of the 2013 Cinelli catalogue]'', gambacicli.it, last-accessed : 17/10/2024</ref>-2014<ref name=Cinelli2014>''[https://issuu.com/alexandrpanasovsky/docs/cinelli_2014/38 Page 38 of the 2014 Cinelli catalogue]'', issuu.com, last-accessed : 17/10/2024</ref>) ===

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_2013.png|500px|thumb|center|Cinelli Vigorelli "Black is Black" (2013)]]

=== "Vigorosa" (2014<ref name=Cinelli2014></ref>) ===

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_2014.png|500px|thumb|center|Cinelli Vigorelli "Vigorosa" (2014)]]

== Second Vigorelli Revision (2015-2022) ==

From 2015 onwards, the headtube is tapered. If there are no other ways for you to tell, this may be how you can identify the reissues that are the Vigorosa II and "Prima" (which are respectively Vigorosa and Italian White (2nd) reissues). These reissues are, according to some<ref>''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9B9CETonM0&t=251s What is the difference between Cinelli Vigorelli Vigorosa and Vigorosa II? | Fixie Corner]'', youtube.com, last accessed : 18/10/2024</ref>, new old stock found by Cinelli.

:'''Tubeset''': Columbus Airplane
:'''Fork''': Columbus Pista Leggera 1-1/8"-1-1/2" (Carbon + Aluminium steerer)
:'''BB Thread''': BSA
:'''Seatpost diameter''': 31,6mm

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_geo.png|500px|frameless|center|]]

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|-
! Size
! S1
! S
! T1
! T
! HeadTube
! a°
! b°
! R
! C
! F
! WB
! E
! Fork
|-
! XS
| 500
| 460
| 520
| 513
| 114
| 72.5°
| 75.5°
| 35
| 389
| 570
| 952
| 58
| 368
|-
! S
| 520
| 480
| 535
| 526
| 134
| 72.5°
| 75°
| 35
| 390
| 582
| 965
| 58
| 368
|-
! M
| 540
| 500
| 545
| 537
| 150
| 73°
| 74.5°
| 35
| 392
| 582
| 966
| 58
| 368
|-
! L
| 560
| 520
| 555
| 546
| 170
| 73°
| 74.5°
| 35
| 392
| 592.0
| 977
| 58
| 368
|-
! XL
| 580
| 540
| 575
| 565
| 188
| 73°
| 73.5°
| 35
| 395
| 602.0
| 990
| 58
| 368
|}

=== "Caleido" (2015<ref name=Cinelli2015>''[https://issuu.com/alexandrpanasovsky/docs/cinelli_2015/36 Page 36 of the 2015 Cinelli catalogue]'', issuu.com, last-accessed : 17/10/2024</ref>) ===

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_2015.png|500px|thumb|center|Cinelli Vigorelli "Caleido" (2015)]]

=== "Black is Black" (2015<ref name=Cinelli2015></ref>) ===

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_2013.png|500px|thumb|center|Cinelli Vigorelli "Black is Black" (2013)]]

Picture is of the 2013 frame.

=== "Team" (2016<ref>''[https://issuu.com/bajnoksziv/docs/cinelli_workbook_2016line_low/34 Page 34 of the 2016 Cinelli catalogue]'', issuu.com, last-accessed : 17/10/2024</ref>-2017<ref name=Cinelli2017>''[https://issuu.com/chickencyclekit/docs/cinelli-catalogue_2017lowres/24 Page 24 of the 2017 Cinelli catalogue]'', issuu.com, last-accessed : 17/10/2024</ref>) ===

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_2016.png|500px|thumb|center|Cinelli Vigorelli "Team" (2016)]]

=== "White Team" (2018<ref>''[https://issuu.com/waterfall.pl/docs/cinelli_202018_20workbook/34 Page 34 of the 2018 Cinelli catalogue]'', issuu.com, last-accessed : 17/10/2024</ref>-2019<ref>''[https://issuu.com/santinuro-/docs/catalogo_cinelli_2019_bassa/68 Page 68 of the 2019 Cinelli catalogue]'', issuu.com, last-accessed : 18/10/2024</ref>) ===

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_2018.png|500px|thumb|center|Cinelli Vigorelli "White Team" (2018)]]

=== "Prima" (2022<ref>''[https://www.facebook.com/cinelli.bicycles/posts/vigorelli-prima-is-almost-here-the-coolest-re-issue-of-italian-white-colorway-th/10158060262377364 Original Cinelli post announcing the Prima]'', facebook.com, last access : 13/10/2024</ref>) ===

Special limited edition of the second kind of "Italian White" based on the second revision of the Vigorelli frame that had no difference in colourway compared to the original.

=== "Vigorosa II" (2023<ref>''[https://www.facebook.com/cinelli.bicycles/posts/the-wait-is-over-the-vigorelli-vigorosa-ii-is-now-available-to-buy-to-general-pu/10158652670812364/ Original Cinelli post announcing the Vigorosa II]'', facebook.com, last access : 13/10/2024</ref>) ===

Special limited edition of the Vigorelli that had the drive side colourway of the Vigorosa but had the non-drive side be inversed.

== Vigorelli Steel (2017-2025) ==

Much slacker geometry made for crit racing, it's so slack in fact that Cinelli made a Road version of this frame.

:'''Tubeset''': Columbus Thron tre-tubi (2017-2020) and "Cromor double-butted tubing" (2025).
:'''Fork''': Columbus Futura 1-1/8"-1-1/2" (Carbon)
:'''BB Thread''': BSA
:'''Seatpost diameter''': 27.2mm

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_geo.png|500px|frameless|center|]]

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|-
! Size
! S1
! S
! T1
! T
! Steer
! a°
! b°
! R
! C
! F
! WB
! E
! Fork
|-
| XS
| 470
| 435
| 512
| 502
| 100
| 72.5°
| 75°
| 45
| 391
| 568
| 953
| 53
| 368
|-
| S
| 500
| 465
| 535
| 526
| 114
| 73.5°
| 74.5°
| 45
| 393
| 578
| 965
| 53
| 368
|-
| M
| 530
| 495
| 550
| 543
| 136
| 73.5°
| 74°
| 45
| 393
| 589
| 977
| 50
| 368
|-
| L
| 560
| 525
| 562
| 556
| 156
| 73.5°
| 73.5°
| 45
| 394
| 596
| 985
| 50
| 368
|-
| XL
| 590
| 555
| 575
| 571
| 174
| 74°
| 73°
| 45
| 396
| 599
| 990
| 50
| 368
|}

=== Vigorelli Steel "Electric Feel" (2017<ref name=Cinelli2017></ref>-2018<ref>''[https://issuu.com/waterfall.pl/docs/cinelli_202018_20workbook/30 Page 30 of the 2018 Cinelli catalogue]'', issuu.com, last-accessed : 18/10/2024</ref>) ===

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_Steel_2017.png|500px|thumb|center|Cinelli Vigorelli Steel "Electric Feel" (2017)]]

=== Vigorelli Steel "Black Night" (2019<ref>''[https://issuu.com/santinuro-/docs/catalogo_cinelli_2019_bassa/64 Page 64 of the 2019 Cinelli catalogue]'', issuu.com, last-accessed : 18/10/2024</ref>-2020<ref name=Cinelli2020>''[https://strada.bicilive.it/e-magazine/bike-news/cinelli-strada-catalogo-listino-prezzi-2020/ Cinelli catalog and list prices]'', bicilive.it, last-accessed : 18/10/2024</ref>) ===

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_Steel_2019.png|500px|thumb|center|Cinelli Vigorelli Steel "Black Night" (2019)]]

=== Vigorelli Steel "80s Team Red-White" (2025<ref>''[https://www.cinelli-milano.com/collections/urban/products/vigorelli-steel-frame-kit Cinelli Vigorelli Steel frame sale page]'', cinelli-milano.com, last accessed 18/10/2024</ref>) ===

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_Steel_2025.png|500px|thumb|center|Cinelli Vigorelli Steel "80s Team Red-White" (2025)]]

== Vigorelli Shark (2019-2020) ==

Slightly more aggressive.

:'''Tubeset''': Columbus Airplane
:'''Fork''': Columbus Futura 1-1/8"-1-1/2" (Carbon)
:'''BB Thread''': BSA
:'''Seatpost diameter''': Proprietary

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_geo.png|500px|frameless|center|]]

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|-
! Size
! S1
! S
! T1
! T
! Steer
! a°
! b°
! R
! C
! F
! WB
! E
! Fork
|-
! XS
| 500
| 456
| 515
| 508
| 114
| 73°
| 74.5°
| 45
| 380
| 574
| 945
| 61
| 368
|-
! S
| 520
| 478
| 538
| 521
| 134
| 73°
| 74°
| 45
| 382
| 587
| 962
| 58
| 368
|-
! M
| 540
| 498
| 542
| 535
| 150
| 73.5°
| 73.5°
| 45
| 383
| 588
| 964
| 58
| 368
|-
! L
| 560
| 518
| 552
| 544
| 170
| 73.5°
| 73.5°
| 45
| 384
| 598
| 975
| 58
| 368
|-
! XL
| 590
| 548
| 580
| 564
| 188
| 73.5°
| 72.5°
| 45
| 385
| 608
| 986
| 58
| 368
|}

=== Vigorelli Shark "Red Alert" (2019<ref>''[https://issuu.com/santinuro-/docs/catalogo_cinelli_2019_bassa/60 Page 60 of the 2019 Cinelli catalogue]'', issuu.com, last-accessed : 17/10/2024</ref>-2021<ref>''[https://strada.bicilive.it/e-magazine/bike-news/cinelli-strada-catalogo-listino-prezzi-2021/ Cinelli catalogue and list prices]'', bicilive.it, last-accessed : 18/10/2024</ref>) ===

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_Shark_2019.png|500px|thumb|center|Cinelli Vigorelli Shark "Red Alert" (2019)]]

=== Vigorelli Shark "Galazy Grey" (2020) ===

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_Shark_2020.png|500px|thumb|center|Cinelli Vigorelli Shark "Galazy Grey" (2020)]]

== Second Vigorelli Geometry (2022-2025) ==

Brand new aggressive track-orientated geometry.

:'''Tubeset''': Columbus Airplane
:'''Fork''': Columbus Futura 1-1/8"-1-1/2" (Carbon)
:'''BB Thread''': BSA
:'''Seatpost diameter''': Proprietary

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_geo.png|500px|frameless|center|]]

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|-
! Size
! S1
! S
! T1
! T
! Steer
! a°
! b°
! R
! C
! F
! WB
! E
! Fork
|-
! XS
| 500
| 480
| 500
| 507
| 95
| 73°
| 73.5°
| 45
| 377
| 543
| 914
| 50
| 368
|-
! S
| 550
| 510
| 526
| 535
| 115
| 73°
| 74°
| 45
| 377
| 572
| 944
| 52
| 368
|-
! M
| 570
| 530
| 558
| 566
| 130
| 73.5°
| 74°
| 45
| 377
| 597
| 968
| 50
| 368
|-
! L
| 590
| 550
| 587
| 598
| 145
| 74°
| 74°
| 45
| 377
| 622
| 993
| 50
| 368
|-
! XL
| 605
| 565
| 621
| 632
| 160
| 74°
| 73.5°
| 45
| 377
| 651
| 1022
| 50
| 368
|}

=== "Rainbow" (2022-2024) ===

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_finless_2020.jpeg|500px|thumb|center|Cinelli Vigorelli "Rainbow" (2020)]]

=== "Special White" (2024) ===

Special Edition.

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_finless_2023.png|500px|thumb|center|Cinelli Vigorelli "Special White" (2023)]]

=== "80s Nazionale Blu" (2025<ref>''[https://www.cinelli-milano.com/collections/urban/products/vigorelli-track-alu-frame?variant=49632827507023 Cinelli Vigorelli frame sale page]'', cinelli-milano.com, last accessed 18/10/2024</ref>) ===

[[Fichier:Vigorelli_finless_2025.jpeg|500px|thumb|center|Cinelli Vigorelli "80s Nazionale Blu" (2025)]]

= Sources =

[https://www.registrostoricocicli.com/listing/?dir=mirror/birota/catalogues/cinelli registrostoricocicli.com Cinelli archive], This website has a large amount of catalogues from many different brands but importantly for this page, it holds the 2006 to 2011 Cinelli catalogues.

= References=

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-26T10:38:07Z

Louison : /* Table */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but the parts for 6-speed are nowadays fairly hard to come by.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it. According to disraeligears who quotes Sutherlands (6th edition), the maximum cog size was 26T, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available remains unchanged, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,5 ratio or 3,19m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2009) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

In 2009, Campagnolo offers for their last model year the Ergopower Mk2 levers before only offering their Ultrashift. Compatibility may have remained nonetheless.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1988
! →
! 1990
! →
! 1992
! 1993
! →
! 1997
! 1998
! 1999
! →
! 2001
! →
! 2005
! 2006
! →
! 2009
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/29
| →
| 34/29
| →
| →
| disc.
|}

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through , all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ratio was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1987
! →
! 1989
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1994
! 1995
! →
! 1997
! 1998
! →
! 2000
! →
! 2004
! →
! 2007
! 2008
! 2009
! →
! 2011
! 2012
! 2013
! 2014
! 2015
! 2016
! 2017
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| 39/30
| 36/28
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/26
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| 39/27
| →
| →
| →
| 34/27
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/27
| →
| →
| 34/27
| 34/28
| →
| →
| 34/30
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|}

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further.

Mixing groupset parts is a path you can go, using a long cage rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

If you're willing to let go of indexation, and Italians forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train is pretty compelling. Though, when you take in consideration the rarity of 8-speed downtube shifters, this sort of modification is pretty useless.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the 6-speed friction Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount this size of chainring to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain.

Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main interest to us is the offer of a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. Removing indexation simply allows you to use MTB cassettes and even then, I've been using a mix of Road Brifters/MTB cassette 9-speed on one of my bike and it's far from perfect but you can definitely get-by.

= References =

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-26T10:24:25Z

Louison :

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but the parts for 6-speed are nowadays fairly hard to come by.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it. According to disraeligears who quotes Sutherlands (6th edition), the maximum cog size was 26T, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available remains unchanged, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,5 ratio or 3,19m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2009) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

In 2009, Campagnolo offers for their last model year the Ergopower Mk2 levers before only offering their Ultrashift. Compatibility may have remained nonetheless.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1988
! →
! 1990
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1993
! →
! 1997
! →
! 1998
! →
! 1999
! →
! 2001
! →
! 2005
! →
! 2006
! →
! 2009
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/29
| →
| 34/29
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|}

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through , all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ratio was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1987
! →
! 1989
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1994
! 1995
! →
! 1997
! 1998
! →
! 2000
! →
! 2004
! →
! 2007
! 2008
! 2009
! →
! 2011
! 2012
! 2013
! 2014
! 2015
! 2016
! 2017
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| 39/30
| 36/28
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/26
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| 39/27
| →
| →
| →
| 34/27
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/27
| →
| →
| 34/27
| 34/28
| →
| →
| 34/30
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|}

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further.

Mixing groupset parts is a path you can go, using a long cage rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

If you're willing to let go of indexation, and Italians forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train is pretty compelling. Though, when you take in consideration the rarity of 8-speed downtube shifters, this sort of modification is pretty useless.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the 6-speed friction Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount this size of chainring to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain.

Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main interest to us is the offer of a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. Removing indexation simply allows you to use MTB cassettes and even then, I've been using a mix of Road Brifters/MTB cassette 9-speed on one of my bike and it's far from perfect but you can definitely get-by.

= References =

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-25T11:32:48Z

Louison :

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but the parts for 6-speed are nowadays fairly hard to come by.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it. According to disraeligears who quotes Sutherlands (6th edition), the maximum cog size was 26T, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available remains unchanged, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,5 ratio or 3,19m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2009) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

In 2009, Campagnolo offers for their last model year the Ergopower Mk2 levers before only offering their Ultrashift. Compatibility may have remained nonetheless.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1988
! →
! 1990
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1993
! →
! 1997
! →
! 1998
! →
! 1999
! →
! 2001
! →
! 2005
! →
! 2006
! →
! 2009
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/29
| →
| 34/29
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|}

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through , all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ratio was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1987
! →
! 1989
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1994
! 1995
! →
! 1997
! 1998
! →
! 2000
! →
! 2004
! →
! 2007
! 2008
! 2009
! →
! 2011
! 2012
! 2013
! 2014
! 2015
! 2016
! 2017
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| 39/30
| 36/28
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/26
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| 39/27
| →
| →
| →
| 34/27
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/27
| →
| →
| 34/27
| 34/28
| →
| →
| 34/30
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|}

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further.

Mixing sub-groupset parts is another path you can go, using a long cage rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences is the reason why, today, a 12s 105 groupset comes standard with a long cage rear derailleur, to accomodate for the 50-34 chainring setup coupled to the 10-34 cassette.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

If you're willing to let go of indexation, and Italians forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train is pretty compelling. Though, when you take in consideration brifters, this sort of modification is pretty useless.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the 6-speed friction Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount this size of chainring to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain.

Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main interest to us is the offer of a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. Removing indexation simply allows you to use MTB cassettes and even then, I've been using a mix of Road Brifters/MTB cassette 9-speed on one of my bike and it's far from perfect but you can definitely get-by.

= References =

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-25T11:31:42Z

Louison : /* Past the rules */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but the parts for 6-speed are nowadays fairly hard to come by.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it. According to disraeligears who quotes Sutherlands (6th edition), the maximum cog size was 26T, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available remains unchanged, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,5 ratio or 3,19m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2009) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

In 2009, Campagnolo offers for their last model year the Ergopower Mk2 levers before only offering their Ultrashift. Compatibility may have remained nonetheless.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1988
! →
! 1990
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1993
! →
! 1997
! →
! 1998
! →
! 1999
! →
! 2001
! →
! 2005
! →
! 2006
! →
! 2009
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/29
| →
| 34/29
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|}

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through , all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ratio was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1987
! →
! 1989
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1994
! 1995
! →
! 1997
! 1998
! →
! 2000
! →
! 2004
! →
! 2007
! 2008
! 2009
! →
! 2011
! 2012
! 2013
! 2014
! 2015
! 2016
! 2017
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| 39/30
| 36/28
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/26
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| 39/27
| →
| →
| →
| 34/27
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/27
| →
| →
| 34/27
| 34/28
| →
| →
| 34/30
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|}

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further.

Mixing sub-groupset parts is another path you can go, using a long cage rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences is the reason why, today, a 12s 105 groupset comes standard with a long cage rear derailleur, to accomodate for the 50-34 chainring setup coupled to the 10-34 cassette.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

If you're willing to let go of indexation, and Italians forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train is pretty compelling. Though, when you take in consideration brifters, this sort of modification is pretty useless.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the 6-speed friction Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount this size of chainring to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain.

Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main interest to us is the offer of a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. Removing indexation simply allows you to use MTB cassettes and even then, I've been using a mix of Road Brifters/MTB cassette 9-speed on one of my bike and it's far from perfect but you can definitely get-by.

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-25T11:23:26Z

Louison : /* The rules */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but the parts for 6-speed are nowadays fairly hard to come by.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it. According to disraeligears who quotes Sutherlands (6th edition), the maximum cog size was 26T, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available remains unchanged, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,5 ratio or 3,19m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2009) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

In 2009, Campagnolo offers for their last model year the Ergopower Mk2 levers before only offering their Ultrashift. Compatibility may have remained nonetheless.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1988
! →
! 1990
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1993
! →
! 1997
! →
! 1998
! →
! 1999
! →
! 2001
! →
! 2005
! →
! 2006
! →
! 2009
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/29
| →
| 34/29
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|}

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through , all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ratio was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1987
! →
! 1989
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1994
! 1995
! →
! 1997
! 1998
! →
! 2000
! →
! 2004
! →
! 2007
! 2008
! 2009
! →
! 2011
! 2012
! 2013
! 2014
! 2015
! 2016
! 2017
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| 39/30
| 36/28
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/26
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| 39/27
| →
| →
| →
| 34/27
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/27
| →
| →
| 34/27
| 34/28
| →
| →
| 34/30
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|}

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further. Removing indexation removes the constraint of the number of speeds but most importantly allows us to swap over the MTB cassettes for exemple or ... Italian gods forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train. Mixing sub-groupset parts is another path you can go, using a long cage rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences is the reason why, today, a 12s 105 groupset comes standard with a long cage rear derailleur, to accomodate for the 50-34 chainring setup coupled to the 10-34 cassette.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the 6-speed friction Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount this size of chainring to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain. Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main piece is offering a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

As mentioned in the little preface, Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. I am personally running ST-3400 with a 48/38 crankset, RD-M750 and a CS-HG201-9 (11-36) to get a maximum gear ratio of 1,08. The shifting is not perfect but it's also a botched drive train because I wanted indexation, I think I could have no issue with these components if I went with friction downtube shifters.

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-25T11:12:09Z

Louison : /* Past the rules */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will also limit this guide to indexed shifters, which essentually means I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but going friction makes it significantly easier to tinker, I will talk about friction in my "Past the rules" section.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it. According to disraeligears who quotes Sutherlands (6th edition), the maximum cog size was 26T, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available remains unchanged, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,5 ratio or 3,19m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2009) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

In 2009, Campagnolo offers for their last model year the Ergopower Mk2 levers before only offering their Ultrashift. Compatibility may have remained nonetheless.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1988
! →
! 1990
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1993
! →
! 1997
! →
! 1998
! →
! 1999
! →
! 2001
! →
! 2005
! →
! 2006
! →
! 2009
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/29
| →
| 34/29
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|}

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through , all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ratio was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1987
! →
! 1989
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1994
! 1995
! →
! 1997
! 1998
! →
! 2000
! →
! 2004
! →
! 2007
! 2008
! 2009
! →
! 2011
! 2012
! 2013
! 2014
! 2015
! 2016
! 2017
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| 39/30
| 36/28
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/26
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| 39/27
| →
| →
| →
| 34/27
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/27
| →
| →
| 34/27
| 34/28
| →
| →
| 34/30
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|}

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further. Removing indexation removes the constraint of the number of speeds but most importantly allows us to swap over the MTB cassettes for exemple or ... Italian gods forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train. Mixing sub-groupset parts is another path you can go, using a long cage rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences is the reason why, today, a 12s 105 groupset comes standard with a long cage rear derailleur, to accomodate for the 50-34 chainring setup coupled to the 10-34 cassette.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the 6-speed friction Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount this size of chainring to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain. Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main piece is offering a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

As mentioned in the little preface, Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. I am personally running ST-3400 with a 48/38 crankset, RD-M750 and a CS-HG201-9 (11-36) to get a maximum gear ratio of 1,08. The shifting is not perfect but it's also a botched drive train because I wanted indexation, I think I could have no issue with these components if I went with friction downtube shifters.

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-24T18:02:37Z

Louison : /* 10 speed (2004-2015) */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will also limit this guide to indexed shifters, which essentually means I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but going friction makes it significantly easier to tinker, I will talk about friction in my "Past the rules" section.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it. According to disraeligears who quotes Sutherlands (6th edition), the maximum cog size was 26T, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available remains unchanged, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,5 ratio or 3,19m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2009) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

In 2009, Campagnolo offers for their last model year the Ergopower Mk2 levers before only offering their Ultrashift. Compatibility may have remained nonetheless.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1988
! →
! 1990
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1993
! →
! 1997
! →
! 1998
! →
! 1999
! →
! 2001
! →
! 2005
! →
! 2006
! →
! 2009
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/29
| →
| 34/29
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|}

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through , all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ratio was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1987
! →
! 1989
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1994
! 1995
! →
! 1997
! 1998
! →
! 2000
! →
! 2004
! →
! 2007
! 2008
! 2009
! →
! 2011
! 2012
! 2013
! 2014
! 2015
! 2016
! 2017
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| 39/30
| 36/28
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/26
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| 39/27
| →
| →
| →
| 34/27
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| 34/32
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/27
| →
| →
| 34/27
| 34/28
| →
| →
| 34/30
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|}

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further. Removing indexation removes the constraint of the number of speeds but most importantly allows us to swap over the MTB cassettes for exemple or ... Italian gods forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train. Mixing sub-groupset parts is another path you can go, using a Triple rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences is the reason why, today, a 12s 105 groupset comes standard with a long cage rear derailleur, to accomodate for the 50-34 chainring setup coupled to the 10-34 cassette.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage 6-speed derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount one to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain. Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main piece is offering a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

As mentioned in the little preface, Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. I am personally running ST-3400 with a 48/38 crankset, RD-M750 and a CS-HG201-9 (11-36) to get a maximum gear ratio of 1,08. The shifting is not perfect but it's also a botched drive train because I wanted indexation, I think I could have no issue with these components if I went with friction downtube shifters.

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-24T17:42:47Z

Louison : /* 10 speed (2004-2015) */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will also limit this guide to indexed shifters, which essentually means I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but going friction makes it significantly easier to tinker, I will talk about friction in my "Past the rules" section.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it. According to disraeligears who quotes Sutherlands (6th edition), the maximum cog size was 26T, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available remains unchanged, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,5 ratio or 3,19m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2009) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

In 2009, Campagnolo offers for their last model year the Ergopower Mk2 levers before only offering their Ultrashift. Compatibility may have remained nonetheless.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1988
! →
! 1990
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1993
! →
! 1997
! →
! 1998
! →
! 1999
! →
! 2001
! →
! 2005
! →
! 2006
! →
! 2009
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/29
| →
| 34/29
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|}

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through , all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ratio was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further. Removing indexation removes the constraint of the number of speeds but most importantly allows us to swap over the MTB cassettes for exemple or ... Italian gods forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train. Mixing sub-groupset parts is another path you can go, using a Triple rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences is the reason why, today, a 12s 105 groupset comes standard with a long cage rear derailleur, to accomodate for the 50-34 chainring setup coupled to the 10-34 cassette.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage 6-speed derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount one to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain. Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main piece is offering a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

As mentioned in the little preface, Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. I am personally running ST-3400 with a 48/38 crankset, RD-M750 and a CS-HG201-9 (11-36) to get a maximum gear ratio of 1,08. The shifting is not perfect but it's also a botched drive train because I wanted indexation, I think I could have no issue with these components if I went with friction downtube shifters.

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-24T17:24:39Z

Louison : /* 10 speed (2001-2009) */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will also limit this guide to indexed shifters, which essentually means I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but going friction makes it significantly easier to tinker, I will talk about friction in my "Past the rules" section.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it. According to disraeligears who quotes Sutherlands (6th edition), the maximum cog size was 26T, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available remains unchanged, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,5 ratio or 3,19m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2009) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

In 2009, Campagnolo offers for their last model year the Ergopower Mk2 levers before only offering their Ultrashift. Compatibility may have remained nonetheless.

=== Table ===

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1988
! →
! 1990
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1993
! →
! 1997
! →
! 1998
! →
! 1999
! →
! 2001
! →
! 2005
! →
! 2006
! →
! 2009
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/29
| →
| 34/29
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|}

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through , all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ration was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further. Removing indexation removes the constraint of the number of speeds but most importantly allows us to swap over the MTB cassettes for exemple or ... Italian gods forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train. Mixing sub-groupset parts is another path you can go, using a Triple rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences is the reason why, today, a 12s 105 groupset comes standard with a long cage rear derailleur, to accomodate for the 50-34 chainring setup coupled to the 10-34 cassette.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage 6-speed derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount one to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain. Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main piece is offering a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

As mentioned in the little preface, Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. I am personally running ST-3400 with a 48/38 crankset, RD-M750 and a CS-HG201-9 (11-36) to get a maximum gear ratio of 1,08. The shifting is not perfect but it's also a botched drive train because I wanted indexation, I think I could have no issue with these components if I went with friction downtube shifters.

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-24T17:23:44Z

Louison : /* 10 speed (2001-2009) */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will also limit this guide to indexed shifters, which essentually means I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but going friction makes it significantly easier to tinker, I will talk about friction in my "Past the rules" section.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it. According to disraeligears who quotes Sutherlands (6th edition), the maximum cog size was 26T, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available remains unchanged, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,5 ratio or 3,19m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2009) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

In 2009, Campagnolo offers for their last model year the Ergopower Mk2 levers before only offering their Ultrashift. Compatibility may have remained nonetheless.

{| class="wikitable centre" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; border: none;text-align:center;"
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
! Speed\Year
! 1988
! →
! 1990
! →
! 1992
! →
! 1993
! →
! 1997
! →
! 1998
! →
! 1999
! →
! 2001
! →
! 2005
! →
! 2006
! →
! 2009
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 7-speed
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 8-speed
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| →
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 9-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/26
| →
| 39/28
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|
|
|-
! style="font-weight:bold;" | 10-speed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 39/29
| →
| 34/29
| →
| →
| →
| disc.
|}

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through , all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ration was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further. Removing indexation removes the constraint of the number of speeds but most importantly allows us to swap over the MTB cassettes for exemple or ... Italian gods forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train. Mixing sub-groupset parts is another path you can go, using a Triple rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences is the reason why, today, a 12s 105 groupset comes standard with a long cage rear derailleur, to accomodate for the 50-34 chainring setup coupled to the 10-34 cassette.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage 6-speed derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount one to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain. Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main piece is offering a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

As mentioned in the little preface, Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. I am personally running ST-3400 with a 48/38 crankset, RD-M750 and a CS-HG201-9 (11-36) to get a maximum gear ratio of 1,08. The shifting is not perfect but it's also a botched drive train because I wanted indexation, I think I could have no issue with these components if I went with friction downtube shifters.

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-24T16:58:30Z

Louison : /* 8 speed (1990-1999) */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will also limit this guide to indexed shifters, which essentually means I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but going friction makes it significantly easier to tinker, I will talk about friction in my "Past the rules" section.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it. According to disraeligears who quotes Sutherlands (6th edition), the maximum cog size was 26T, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available remains unchanged, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,5 ratio or 3,19m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2009) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

In 2009, Campagnolo offers for their last model year the Ergopower Mk2 levers before only offering their Ultrashift. Compatibility may have remained nonetheless.

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through , all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ration was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further. Removing indexation removes the constraint of the number of speeds but most importantly allows us to swap over the MTB cassettes for exemple or ... Italian gods forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train. Mixing sub-groupset parts is another path you can go, using a Triple rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences is the reason why, today, a 12s 105 groupset comes standard with a long cage rear derailleur, to accomodate for the 50-34 chainring setup coupled to the 10-34 cassette.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage 6-speed derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount one to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain. Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main piece is offering a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

As mentioned in the little preface, Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. I am personally running ST-3400 with a 48/38 crankset, RD-M750 and a CS-HG201-9 (11-36) to get a maximum gear ratio of 1,08. The shifting is not perfect but it's also a botched drive train because I wanted indexation, I think I could have no issue with these components if I went with friction downtube shifters.

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-24T16:42:57Z

Louison : /* 9 speed (1997-2006) */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will also limit this guide to indexed shifters, which essentually means I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but going friction makes it significantly easier to tinker, I will talk about friction in my "Past the rules" section.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available is quite small, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,5 ratio or 3,19m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2009) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

In 2009, Campagnolo offers for their last model year the Ergopower Mk2 levers before only offering their Ultrashift. Compatibility may have remained nonetheless.

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through , all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ration was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further. Removing indexation removes the constraint of the number of speeds but most importantly allows us to swap over the MTB cassettes for exemple or ... Italian gods forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train. Mixing sub-groupset parts is another path you can go, using a Triple rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences is the reason why, today, a 12s 105 groupset comes standard with a long cage rear derailleur, to accomodate for the 50-34 chainring setup coupled to the 10-34 cassette.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage 6-speed derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount one to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain. Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main piece is offering a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

As mentioned in the little preface, Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. I am personally running ST-3400 with a 48/38 crankset, RD-M750 and a CS-HG201-9 (11-36) to get a maximum gear ratio of 1,08. The shifting is not perfect but it's also a botched drive train because I wanted indexation, I think I could have no issue with these components if I went with friction downtube shifters.

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-24T16:39:48Z

Louison : /* 10 speed (2001-2017) */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will also limit this guide to indexed shifters, which essentually means I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but going friction makes it significantly easier to tinker, I will talk about friction in my "Past the rules" section.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available is quite small, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 38T in the front, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2009) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

In 2009, Campagnolo offers for their last model year the Ergopower Mk2 levers before only offering their Ultrashift. Compatibility may have remained nonetheless.

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through , all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ration was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further. Removing indexation removes the constraint of the number of speeds but most importantly allows us to swap over the MTB cassettes for exemple or ... Italian gods forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train. Mixing sub-groupset parts is another path you can go, using a Triple rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences is the reason why, today, a 12s 105 groupset comes standard with a long cage rear derailleur, to accomodate for the 50-34 chainring setup coupled to the 10-34 cassette.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage 6-speed derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount one to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain. Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main piece is offering a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

As mentioned in the little preface, Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. I am personally running ST-3400 with a 48/38 crankset, RD-M750 and a CS-HG201-9 (11-36) to get a maximum gear ratio of 1,08. The shifting is not perfect but it's also a botched drive train because I wanted indexation, I think I could have no issue with these components if I went with friction downtube shifters.

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-21T23:58:34Z

Louison : /* 9 speed (1997-2016) */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will also limit this guide to indexed shifters, which essentually means I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but going friction makes it significantly easier to tinker, I will talk about friction in my "Past the rules" section.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available is quite small, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 38T in the front, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2017) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first and 105 (2000-2005) then. In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m. Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through , all of the 9-speed groups, including Ultegra (!), are noted to have rear derailleurs supporting only up to a 27T cog, this makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

Tiagra (2001-2011) was upgraded in 2007 to its 4500 generation featuring a Compact crankset allowing use for a 34T, this makes for a 1,26 ratio or 2,68.

The following year Sora (2008-2017) was released with the exact same specifications. However, in 2013, Sora was upgraded to its 3500 generation where the rear derailleur was able to support up to a 32T cog, making for a 1,06 ration or 2,36m.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ration was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further. Removing indexation removes the constraint of the number of speeds but most importantly allows us to swap over the MTB cassettes for exemple or ... Italian gods forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train. Mixing sub-groupset parts is another path you can go, using a Triple rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences is the reason why, today, a 12s 105 groupset comes standard with a long cage rear derailleur, to accomodate for the 50-34 chainring setup coupled to the 10-34 cassette.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage 6-speed derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount one to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain. Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main piece is offering a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

As mentioned in the little preface, Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. I am personally running ST-3400 with a 48/38 crankset, RD-M750 and a CS-HG201-9 (11-36) to get a maximum gear ratio of 1,08. The shifting is not perfect but it's also a botched drive train because I wanted indexation, I think I could have no issue with these components if I went with friction downtube shifters.

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-21T23:46:21Z

Louison :

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will also limit this guide to indexed shifters, which essentually means I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but going friction makes it significantly easier to tinker, I will talk about friction in my "Past the rules" section.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available is quite small, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 38T in the front, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2017) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2016) ===

In 1997, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace (1997-2003) groupset to 9-speed. As with the 8-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. It is interesting to note that in 1998, Shimano advertises the exact same rear derailleur as accepting a 27T maximum cog.

Shimano once again upgraded its groupsets by yearly increments, Ultegra (1998-2004) first, 105 (2000-2005), Tiagra (2001-2011) and finally Sora (2008-2017). In 1998, Ultegra's rear derailleur is advertised as supporting a 28T cog, this makes for a 1,39 ratio or 2,97m.

Curiously, from 2000 onwards and through , all of the 9

In 2013, 3500 makes you able to do 34/32.

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ration was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further. Removing indexation removes the constraint of the number of speeds but most importantly allows us to swap over the MTB cassettes for exemple or ... Italian gods forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train. Mixing sub-groupset parts is another path you can go, using a Triple rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences is the reason why, today, a 12s 105 groupset comes standard with a long cage rear derailleur, to accomodate for the 50-34 chainring setup coupled to the 10-34 cassette.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage 6-speed derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount one to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain. Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main piece is offering a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

As mentioned in the little preface, Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. I am personally running ST-3400 with a 48/38 crankset, RD-M750 and a CS-HG201-9 (11-36) to get a maximum gear ratio of 1,08. The shifting is not perfect but it's also a botched drive train because I wanted indexation, I think I could have no issue with these components if I went with friction downtube shifters.

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-21T23:11:05Z

Louison : /* 9 speed (1997-2017) */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will also limit this guide to indexed shifters, which essentually means I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but going friction makes it significantly easier to tinker, I will talk about friction in my "Past the rules" section.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available is quite small, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 38T in the front, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2017) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2017) ===

Dura-Ace (1997-2003)

Ultegra (1998-2004)

105 (2000-2005)

Tiagra (2001-2011)

Sora (2008-2017)

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ration was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further. Removing indexation removes the constraint of the number of speeds but most importantly allows us to swap over the MTB cassettes for exemple or ... Italian gods forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train. Mixing sub-groupset parts is another path you can go, using a Triple rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences is the reason why, today, a 12s 105 groupset comes standard with a long cage rear derailleur, to accomodate for the 50-34 chainring setup coupled to the 10-34 cassette.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage 6-speed derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount one to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain. Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main piece is offering a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

As mentioned in the little preface, Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. I am personally running ST-3400 with a 48/38 crankset, RD-M750 and a CS-HG201-9 (11-36) to get a maximum gear ratio of 1,08. The shifting is not perfect but it's also a botched drive train because I wanted indexation, I think I could have no issue with these components if I went with friction downtube shifters.

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-21T23:04:45Z

Louison : /* 9 speed (1997-2017) */

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will also limit this guide to indexed shifters, which essentually means I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but going friction makes it significantly easier to tinker, I will talk about friction in my "Past the rules" section.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available is quite small, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 38T in the front, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2017) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2017) ===

Dura-Ace (1997-2004)
Ultegra (1998-2006)

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ration was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further. Removing indexation removes the constraint of the number of speeds but most importantly allows us to swap over the MTB cassettes for exemple or ... Italian gods forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train. Mixing sub-groupset parts is another path you can go, using a Triple rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences is the reason why, today, a 12s 105 groupset comes standard with a long cage rear derailleur, to accomodate for the 50-34 chainring setup coupled to the 10-34 cassette.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage 6-speed derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount one to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain. Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main piece is offering a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

As mentioned in the little preface, Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. I am personally running ST-3400 with a 48/38 crankset, RD-M750 and a CS-HG201-9 (11-36) to get a maximum gear ratio of 1,08. The shifting is not perfect but it's also a botched drive train because I wanted indexation, I think I could have no issue with these components if I went with friction downtube shifters.

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-21T23:03:45Z

Louison :

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will also limit this guide to indexed shifters, which essentually means I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but going friction makes it significantly easier to tinker, I will talk about friction in my "Past the rules" section.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available is quite small, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 38T in the front, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2017) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one.

And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris. And obviously I will rule out Di2.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 ratio or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2017) ===

=== 10 speed (2004-2015) ===

In 2004, Shimano introduced the 10-speed Dura-Ace (2004-2012) groupset, the biggest cog allowed by the rear derailleur is 27T. Paired to the 39T chainring, it makes for a 1,44 ratio or 3,08.

As you most likely understand by now, Shimano released upgrades by increments, Ultegra (2005-2013) followed first and then 105 (2006-2014). But the gear ration was only improved in 2008, with the release of compact cranksets for Ultegra and 105 (with Dura-Ace following in 2009). The 34T smallest chainring with the 27T cog makes for a 1,26 ration or 2,68.

Dura-Ace 7900, released in 2009, improved ever so slightly by releasing a rear derailleur with a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,21 or 2,59m. Ultegra 6700 followed suit in 2010 and 105 5700 in 2011.

In 2012, Tiagra became a 10-speed groupset and improved, again, slightly : a rear derailleur able to use a maximum 30T cog size, making for a 1,13 or 2,41m.

It's necessary to note that despite setting an arbitrary limit earlier, 10-speed compatibility steps out earlier with the introduction of Tiagra 4700 which is incompatible with the other 10-speed groupsets.

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further. Removing indexation removes the constraint of the number of speeds but most importantly allows us to swap over the MTB cassettes for exemple or ... Italian gods forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train. Mixing sub-groupset parts is another path you can go, using a Triple rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences is the reason why, today, a 12s 105 groupset comes standard with a long cage rear derailleur, to accomodate for the 50-34 chainring setup coupled to the 10-34 cassette.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage 6-speed derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsaken reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their 7, 8 "and 9 speed" groupsets despite being able to mount one to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain. Furthermore, for a number of years, from 2005 onwards, Shimano offered alternative groupsetless parts to alleviate some of the constraints from their more "serious" road bike groupsets. The main piece is offering a Compact crankset when the main groupsets didn't. Though, to be fair, by 2008, Shimano was offering Compact cranksets for all their groupsets but Claris (which did get a compact crankset in 2011).

As mentioned in the little preface, Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. I am personally running ST-3400 with a 48/38 crankset, RD-M750 and a CS-HG201-9 (11-36) to get a maximum gear ratio of 1,08. The shifting is not perfect but it's also a botched drive train because I wanted indexation, I think I could have no issue with these components if I went with friction downtube shifters.

A comprehensive guide to vintage gear ratios

2025-01-21T19:57:21Z

Louison :

This will differ from a standard wiki pages as it more aims at being an introspect into some of the research I've done and compiling what I've learned through said research.

I'm only a newborn in the realm of cycling and even more in the realm of (vintage) road bikes. I specify vintage road bikes because I've always been interested in the value second-hand objects can offer and I therefore began my cycling journey with a bike several decades older than me. The first issue I ran into when mixing practice and usage of the road bicycle was that the ratio available to me was absolutely abysmal. My first bike was a Raleigh Equipe with a 1x drive train, 52t in the front and a 7 speed corncob freewheel. I don't live in the Alps but I could figure out very quickly what was wrong. I've come a long way since then but I still am after the marginal ratio gains I can make when building up a vintage road bike while still using period correct components.

I am going to try here to offer some guidance on this quest. I will also touch on the advantages of mixing and matching components, era and fields of bicycle components.

= The rules =

The rules are fairly simple : when building a bike from a specific era, at the moment of manufacture of his bike, only a limited amount of components would've been available. As to keep the spirit of a vintage bike build, this is the contraint we are putting ourselves through to spark the search of marginal gains. Because, for me as a newcomer it wasn't so obvious, modern components blow old components out of the water if you want to make it easier to climb up anything. The standard chainring setup used to be 52-42, it's now more something like 50-34 and certain brands have been pushing for even smaller chainrings. Old components are a constraint of their own. And so we are going to be trying to optimise said old components in this page.

I will also limit this guide to indexed shifters, which essentually means I will only be talking about 7, 8, 9 and 10 speed groupsets. It might seem odd but going friction makes it significantly easier to tinker, I will talk about friction in my "Past the rules" section.

Disclaimer and almost hot-take : Triple chainring setups will, with no doubts but an aesthetic one or elitist one or gatekeepy one, void any issue or constraint posed in the preface.

Real disclaimer : I will assume a tyre size of 25mm for the gear development.

= Playing by the rules =

== Campagnolo ==

Campagnolo was scarce about the information they give on compatibility or even on the specifications of their components. So information will be guessed off the parts available for the different groups.

Two things to note about Campagnolo is that they always used a 135 BCD standard over the more common 130 BCD. This went on until they went straight to 110 BCD and eventually a 4-branch based mixed BCD. The minimum chainring size for the 135 BCD is 39T (not very different from the 38T Shimano). Not only that but it's necessary to mention that Campagnolo has had a very "panache"-based line up of gear ratios, to not say they outright gatekept their components to "real" cyclists who didn't need small gear ratios for a very long time.

=== 7 speed (1988-1992) ===

7 indexed speed Campagnolo is a convoluted mess as Campagnolo themselves suggested the use of different brands of freewheel and cassette. The 1987 Documentation of the 7-speed Record group says "The gear capacity, from 12 to 28, is the usual range for racing or fast touring" and a little later tells us the maximum cog size of the derailleur is 28T. So we will assume a minimum chainring size of 39T and a maximum cog size of 28T, making for a 1,39 gear ratio, or 2,94m of development.

=== 8 speed (1990-1999) ===

8 speed started in 1990 as downtube shifters and was largely relics of the 7 speed era. Before the "brifters" 8 speed groupsets, information about this specific period is fairly hard to come by so I've done my best to compile it.

For the 1992 model year, Campagnolo introduced the ErgoPower shifting and braking levers (supplied in reality by Miche, a detail that will be key later on) for its Record, Chorus RS and Athena RS groupsets. The gear range available is quite small, with Campagnolo only advertising up to 26T in the back and 39T in the front, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

From 1993 onwards, Campagnolo redesigned the hood covers and this is the specific version of 8-speed components that you will likely see. The Athena (1993), Veloce (1993-1997), Mirage (1995-1998) and Avanti (1995-1999) derailleurs were advertised as supporting up to a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the minimum 39T chainring.

Record and Chorus always advertised 26T max cog size for the time they were available, from 1992 to 1996.

=== 9 speed (1997-2006) ===

In 1997, Campagnolo introduced its 9-speed Record and Chorus groupsets, they were still made by Miche and so they still featured the Ergopower Mk1 levers. The derailleurs were barely changed from the 8-speed generation and so the gear range available remained the same : up to 26T in the back and 38T in the front, making for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

In 1998, Campagnolo released its remodeled 9-speed system, offering the Ergopower Mk2 levers and a new wheel hub. This broke compatibility with the previous generation of 9-speed components. In typical fashion, the high-end components keep their 1997 specifications; only Veloce (1998-2000) and Mirage (1999-2000) advertise a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m.

In 2001 however, rear derailleur maximum cog size change for many lower grade groupsets : Daytona (2001), Veloce (2001-2003), Mirage (2001-2003), Centaur (2002), Xenon (2002-2003) advertised a maximum cog size of 29T, making for a 1,34 ratio or 2,84m.

Weirdly enough, 9-speed groupsets advertised a 28T maximum cog size from 2004 to the end in 2006.

=== 10 speed (2001-2017) ===

Campagnolo introduced its 10-speed groupsets for the 2001 model year. It is definitely the more lenient generation of groupsets I've talked about so far. They introduced different lengths of cages for their top-of-the-line groupsets, namely Record and Chorus. While the short cage derailleurs cap out at a 26T cog size, the medium length derailleur caps out at 29T. This makes for a 1,34 ratio or 2,86m.

The "Compact crankset" appears finally for the 2005 model year for the Centaur, Chorus and Record groupsets; offering a 34T smallest chainring option, making for a 1,17 ratio or 2,48m.

== Shimano ==

I'm going to add rules for Shimano because while Campagnolo was very strict about what could be considered at all, Shimano blurs the line with great compatibility, groupsets for all possible uses of a bicycle and never really discontinued generations of groupsets. Because of this, I'm going to always resort to the maximum amount of speeds a groupset offers and I'm going to stop at the moment the lowest grade of groupset "jumped" a generation.

For exemples : Dura-Ace 7402 was advertised as a 8, 7 and 6 speed compatible groupset, in this case it would be a 8-speed groupset to me and 2018 Claris took on the design of 2009 Dura-Ace without any number of speeds added, so I will stop the documentation in 2017, regardless of Claris still being 8-speed to this day in 2025. You will have to bear with me on this one. And obviously I will strictly keep it to road bike groupsets, from Dura-Ace to Claris.

=== 7 speed (1987-1998) ===

Shimano introduced 7-speed components for its 1987 model year, with Dura-Ace (1987-1988) and, technically, Santé (1987) groupsets. With a 26T maximum cog size for Dura-Ace and the offered 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m. The Santé rear derailleur had a maximum cog size of 24T.

In 1989, Shimano starting bringing 7-speed to the lower grades of groupsets. Santé (1989), 600 Ultegra (1989-1991), 105 SC (1989-1993), Sport LX (1989), RX100 (1990-1993), Exage 500EX (1990-1992), Exage 400EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1990-1992), Exage 300EX (1995-1998) and RSX (1995-1998), all of which had their derailleurs advertise a 28T maximum cog size at their respective launch, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

For two exceptions : 1) In 1994, RSX100's short-cage rear derailleur was upgraded to 8-speed but the long cage derailleur (RD-A550-GS) remained 7-speed, however it was advertised as a 30T maximum cog size, making for a 1.3 ratio and 2.77m and 2) while every groupset mention only ever offered a minimum 39T chainring, RSX (1995-1998) offered a 46/36 crankset with 110/74 BCD (FC-A410). This would make for a 1,28 ratio of 2,74m.

=== 8 speed (1989-2017) ===

In 1989, Shimano updated their Dura-Ace groupset to 8-speed. As with the 7-speed version, the rear derailleur advertised a 26T maximum cog size and offered a 39T chainring, this makes for a 1,46 ratio or 3,17m.

With the same method of incremental upgrades, Shimano started from 1992 onwards to upgrade its lower grade groupsets : 600 Ultegra (1992-1998), 105 SC (1994-1999), Sora (2000-2007) and Claris (2003-2017)<ref name=Claris>For all intents and purpose : RX100, RSX and 300EX later on became Tiagra, Sora and Claris respectively. As such, the unnamed groupset based around the "Shimano 2200" moniker will be addressed as Claris</ref>. But only the groupsets from the years before 2000 have a 28T maximum cog size, making for a 1,39 ratio or 2,94m with the offered 39T chainring.

After 2000 and for clarity : Sora had a 27T maximum cog, Claris (generation 2200 from 2003 to 2009) 26T and Claris (generation 2300 from 2010 to 2013) 26T as well. Despite that, Claris 2300 offered a 50/34 crankset from 2011 to 2013, combined with the 26T cog, this made for a 1,3 ratio or 2,79m.

Moreover, Claris 2400 (2014-2017) has a maximum cog size of 32T, in combination with the 50/34 this makes for a 1,06 or 2,26m.

=== 9 speed (1997-2017) ===

=== 10 speed (2004-2017) ===

= Past the rules =

If what has been said until now is not enough, there are a few things we can mitigate to help further. Removing indexation removes the constraint of the number of speeds but most importantly allows us to swap over the MTB cassettes for exemple or ... Italian gods forbid, using a Shimano cassette on a Campy drive train. Mixing sub-groupset parts is another path you can go, using a Triple rear derailleur will also help accept bigger cog to chainring differences is the reason why, today, a 12s 105 groupset comes standard with a long cage rear derailleur, to accomodate for the 50-34 chainring setup coupled to the 10-34 cassette.

== Campagnolo ==

Miche offers more forgiving and even sometimes out of spec cassettes. For 8-speed and 9-speed, they match the 28T and 29T respective max cog size of the derailleur. For 10-speed, they go a bit further and offer a cassette going up to 30T. This makes for a 1,13 gear ratio, or 2,39m of development. This is as good as it gets without going for 11-speed.

Even when you get to 11-speed, you need to wait the 2019 model year to get a 32T cog, 2020 to get a 34T cog and finally 2024 and the release of the Super Record Wireless for a 29T chainring (yes you heard that right) in conjunction with a downgraded 32T cog, for still an overall smaller 0,90 gear ratio and 1,93m development.

== Shimano ==

I want to quickly mention the Shimano 600EX (6207) and the Shimano 105 Golden Arrow (A105) groupsets which offered a long cage 6-speed derailleur that was advertised as being able to handle a 34T maximum cog size as far back as 1984. This would've made for a 1,11 ratio. Far ahead of its time.

After this, for some god forsake reason, Shimano never offered a 38T chainring for their groupsets despite being able to mount one to their cranksets. This is a cheap simple gear ratio gain.

As mentioned in the little preface, Shimano is very forgiving if you're willing to let go of perfect shifting, indexation and if you're willing to make use of components from their other fields of components. I am personally running ST-3400 with a 48/38 crankset, RD-M750 and a CS-HG201-9 (11-36) to get a maximum gear ratio of 1,08. The shifting is not perfect but it's also a botched drive train because I wanted indexation, I think I could have no issue with these components if I went with friction downtube shifters.