It’s said good things come to those who wait, and Campagnolo certainly kept us waiting before it finally launched its own power meter in April this year. SRAM had a power meter as part of its Red groupset as long ago as 2012 and Shimano launched its Dura-Ace 9100 unit four years later. Even when the new Super Record Wireless groupset was unveiled last year there was still no power meter. So does the other half of the proverb apply? Is the Campagnolo Super Record Wireless power meter a good thing? Was it worth the wait? The short answer is yes.
I tested it on a Passoni prototype equipped with a full Campagnolo Super Record Wireless groupset and Bora WTO wheels – an all-Italian dream build.
Construction
The Super Record Wireless power meter is spider-based, giving the chainset a completely different, more industrial look compared with the standard version which has the familiar organic aesthetic. The four carbon spider arms no longer grow directly outwards from the crank to secure the chainrings – instead, an angular housing containing the sensors and electronics interrupts the flow. It has an appearance not dissimilar to the German SRM Origin power meter that UAE Team Emirates used with their Campagnolo groupsets before they switched to Shimano in 2023. However, it does clearly have the Super Record lettering on the carbon crank and the Campagnolo wings logo on the spider, so there’s no mistaking what it is. It’s a case of if you’ve got it, flaunt it. By comparison, because Shimano’s power meter is crank-based and places the strain gauges inside the cranks, only the small transmitter pod gives away that it’s a power meter. SRAM’s is, like Campagnolo’s, spider-based and with its chainring with the housing giving it a different look from the non-power chainset.
There are pros and cons for both types, but in terms of accuracy, Shimano claims +/-1.5%, as does SRAM, while Campagnolo claims +/-1%. The Campagnolo unit has 16 sensors sited in the spider and a gyroscope, with the power data derived from a crossing of the torque values from the strain gauges with the angular velocity from the gyroscope. Campagnolo says the “extreme accuracy” is guaranteed thanks in part to high-frequency data sampling, measured every five milliseconds and giving a frequency equal to 200Hz.
That said, it's not particularly meaningful or possible to draw conclusions by directly comparing number of sensors or method of collecting the data between power meters – for example, Dura-Ace has 24 sensors (12 per crank) but claims lower accuracy.
As for the construction, as you’d expect given its Super Record designation and price of £1,989.99, the crankarms are made from unidirectional carbon fibre running on a titanium axle and USB ceramic bearings, using the same hollow Ultra-Torque design as the standard chainset. The build quality is exceptionally good and in the flesh it's very expensive looking – as it should be.
Charging is via the same cable and magnetic port used for the derailleur batteries and, as with all of the Super Record Wireless groupset including the shifters, there’s a very visible LED to indicate charging is in progress or complete – and once in use to indicate whether it’s calibrated, active and so on. It comes in crank length options of 170mm, 172.5mm or 175mm and chainring configurations of 45/29, 48/32 and 50/34.
Ride impressions
Setup and calibration was very straightforward with the MyCampy 3.0 app, updated for extra functionality and compatibility with the new power meter. This is obviously also where you keep an eye on battery life. The battery has a claimed 100-hour runtime and a charge time of 3h 45min from empty to fully charged according to Campagnolo. This was incidentally the first time I’d used the app and I was impressed by the clean UI and also enjoyed, as a fan of Italian bikes, that in the English version some Italian words hadn’t been caught – ‘configurazione rear derailleur’ for example. The full Italian experience.
We have the claimed accuracy of +/-1% but a real-world test against another power meter is always worthwhile so I tested the Campagnolo Super Record Wireless against a set of Wahoo Powrlink Zero pedals (also with a claimed +/-1% accuracy) on the road. When I originally reviewed these pedals in 2022 I compared them against a Wattbike Atom which I know to be accurate and consistent having tested them together using ZwiftPower’s comparison tool. So I fitted the Wahoo pedals to the Campagnolo cranks and headed out for an hour that included some of everything – steady flat, hills and some sprints. I downloaded the .fit files and then uploaded them to the power meter comparison website Compare the Watts.
There was a two-watt difference in average power: 221 watts for the Wahoo Powrlink Zero and 223 for the Campagnolo Super Record. For the maximum power, the Campagnolo recorded 694 watts against the Wahoo's 686. Zooming in on sprint efforts (the lower graph), the pedals hit the higher power very slightly ahead of the spider and backed off before it, which resulted in a very similar average for the selection with the Campagnolo registering a handful of extra watts of peak power.
I know from multiple activities on the Wattbike – and an analysis at the Boardman Performance Centre four years ago – that my left leg is dominant. The Campagnolo power meter got it right – 52/48 in the left leg’s favour, which ties in with my usual numbers on the Wattbike Atom – but slightly bafflingly the Wahoo pedals put me at 54/46 in favour of the right leg, despite the overall average power aligning. This wasn’t for lack of calibration: I stopped after an initial three miles of readings that looked to be around 30 watts apart to reset and recalibrate the pedals after discovering the reason for the variation between the two was down to the 175mm cranks – I had assumed 172.5 (never assume).
Despite this hiccup, which I’m going to investigate, I’m satisfied that the Campagnolo power meter correlates with other power meters known to be accurate and consistent.
Although I’m reviewing the power meter here, as an aside I have to say I loved the ride feel of Super Record Wireless. Yes, I’m a little sad that there’s no longer a thumb shifter and it did take my fingers a little while to get used to the ergonomics of the up/down paddles behind the brake lever. I found it easier to hit the right paddle when in the drops rather than on the hoods but I’m certain that if I’d been able to borrow the bike for longer it would have become more instinctive.
The shifting itself was fast, crisp and precise. I have mechanical 12-speed Chorus on my own bike – a custom Racer Rosa made by Daccordi – and the rear derailleur is like a coiled spring. Super Record Wireless feels the same but with less effort at the controls – though with a slightly more positive feel than Dura-Ace, as has been the case in the past comparing mechanical groupsets – and that’s all I could ask for. The new hood shape is very comfortable indeed – bigger and longer than before, but still unmistakably Campagnolo. And the brakes possibly feel more refined than any on the market – plush but deceptively powerful.
To conclude, Campagnolo's power meter lives up to the legendary Super Record designation and is easily a match for all of those ultra-high-end components. Of course it has a Super Record-level price of £1,989, which is higher than the Dura-Ace (£1,199) and Sram Red (£1,125) and is even slightly above SRM’s 'official' Campagnolo power meter chainset (€2,057) But realistically, the power meter designed for the most expensive and most exclusive groupset on the market was never going to be cheap. Check out Campagnolo's website for all the details.
Specifications
- Construction: Unidirectional carbon fibre cranks, titanium axle and aluminum chainrings
- Bearings: USB ceramic
- Data accuracy: +/- 1%
- Compatibllity: Bluetooth and ANT+
- Weight: 656g (172.5m, 45x29, bearings assembled)
- Length: 170mm, 172.5mm, 175mm
- Combinations: 45x29, 48x32, 50x34
- SRP: £1,989
