best internal shifting hub?

[Khoomei]

What is the best internal shifting hub on these important points:
- reasonably lightweight compared to a road group
- reliable operation
- parts are available from the usual channels, not some guy working
out of his garage.
- has more than 3 speeds.

[Antti Salonen]

In rec.bicycles.tech Khoomei > wrote:

> What is the best internal shifting hub on these important points:
> - reasonably lightweight compared to a road group
> - reliable operation
> - parts are available from the usual channels, not some guy working
> out of his garage.
> - has more than 3 speeds.

The 14-speed Rohloff Speedhub should satisfy all these requirements (and
many more), especially as you didn't specify any price limitations. See:

http://www.rohloff.de/?p=PRODUKTE/SPEEDHUB

It's about $800, available for example from Harris Cyclery.

-as

[(Pete Cresswell)]

RE/
>What is the best internal shifting hub on these important points:
>- reasonably lightweight compared to a road group
>- reliable operation
>- parts are available from the usual channels, not some guy working
>out of his garage.
>- has more than 3 speeds.

Depending on one's definition of "reasonably lightweight", there may not be much
left.

Rohloff adds about two pounds to the bike, is less efficient, makes considerable
noise, and costs an arm and a leg.


I just bought a second one for my hardtail.
-----------------------
PeteCresswell

[Khoomei]

How about for drop bars as well?

On 27 Jul 2003 21:16:31 GMT, Antti Salonen
> wrote:

>In rec.bicycles.tech Khoomei > wrote:
>
>> What is the best internal shifting hub on these important points:
>> - reasonably lightweight compared to a road group
>> - reliable operation
>> - parts are available from the usual channels, not some guy working
>> out of his garage.
>> - has more than 3 speeds.
>
>The 14-speed Rohloff Speedhub should satisfy all these requirements (and
>many more), especially as you didn't specify any price limitations. See:
>
>http://www.rohloff.de/?p=PRODUKTE/SPEEDHUB
>
>It's about $800, available for example from Harris Cyclery.
>
>-as

[Sheldon Brown]

Khoomei wrote:
> How about for drop bars as well?

See: http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/rohloff.html

Scroll down about 2/3 of the way.

Sheldon "Roll On" Brown
+-----------------------------------+
| Habit is the nursery of errors. |
| --Victor Hugo |
+-----------------------------------+
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
http://harriscyclery.com
Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com

[Khoomei]

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 21:59:06 -0400, Sheldon Brown
> wrote:

>Khoomei wrote:
>> How about for drop bars as well?
>
>See: http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/rohloff.html
>
>Scroll down about 2/3 of the way.

I never thought I'd see the return of stem shifters!

That Surly with 2 sets of bars is awesome.

"Tuva or Bust!"
http://www.fotuva.org

[Tom Ace]

Khoomei wrote:

> How about for drop bars as well?

A German company (Norwid) makes a separable road
handlebar suitable for mounting the Rohloff twist grip.
Last I heard, these bars were available through Rohloff's
US office (contact info at www.rohloffusa.com).

Or you can make your own twist grip:
http://www.qnet.com/~crux/twist.html


Tom Ace

[Jennifer Donleavy]

Does this Rohloff, or the other new internal-gear hubs available these
days, have the same design issue that Jobst has refered to existing in
the Sturmey-Archer hubs that pitched him off the bike?

Also, how loud are these things? I am getting spoiled by my quiet
shimano one-speed freewheel!

Thanks!

Jennifer D

[Chalo]

Khoomei > wrote:

> What is the best internal shifting hub on these important points:
> - reasonably lightweight compared to a road group
> - reliable operation
> - parts are available from the usual channels, not some guy working
> out of his garage.
> - has more than 3 speeds.

It seems like all gearhubs from 4 to 14 speeds weigh about the same
1.7 kg, give or take. With some you get a brake, making those
effectively a little lighter.

Only the Rohloff Speedhub gives step sizes between gears that compare
to a road group. However, Sachs's and Shimano's 7 speed hubs give
overall ranges similar to that of a road bike. (Road bike with 53/39
crank and 12-23 block: 260% Sachs/SRAM 7 speed: 303% Shimano Nexus
7-speed: 244%)

If you need lots of gearing range and you can afford the Rohloff, then
that's the one for you. I have had two, and I don't think anyone
would find reason to switch back once accustomed to the Rohloff.

If the price of the Rohloff is too much committment and/or you would
like a drum brake, I recommend the Sachs/SRAM Spectro 7 speed. It is
the most free-running gearhub (with more than 3 speeds) I have used,
it seems quite durable, and the brake works consistently with minimal
fade.

Chalo Colina

[Ted Bennett]

> If you need lots of gearing range and you can afford the Rohloff, then
> that's the one for you. I have had two, and I don't think anyone
> would find reason to switch back once accustomed to the Rohloff.
>
> Chalo Colina



I am interested in hearing a little more from Chalo on the Rohloff, and
his reasons for buying them. (Chalo, aka Bluto is knowledgeable about
machining, materials and manufacturing, and is a super-size kind of
fellow.)

Chalo, have you ever taken one apart, either out of curiosity or
necessity? If so, did inspecting the innards lower or raise your
initial evaluation?

--
Ted Bennett
Portland OR

[(Pete Cresswell)]

RE/
>
>Does this Rohloff, or the other new internal-gear hubs available these
>days, have the same design issue that Jobst has refered to existing in
>the Sturmey-Archer hubs that pitched him off the bike?

Dunno what the Jobst issue was - but I've been riding Rohloff on my ATB for a
few thousand miles and haven't run into anything I'd call an issue.

>Also, how loud are these things? I am getting spoiled by my quiet
>shimano one-speed freewheel!

Depends on your sensitivity/perceptiveness and, probably, neurosis level.

I consider mine TB very loud in gears 7 and below and fairly loud in gears 8-14.
It's not just when pedaling either - lotta clicking going on in there with the
pawls.

I think it's something you have to hear and evaluate yourself. Personally, I
don't care for the noise, but just bought my second Rohloff hub (for my
hardtail) and wouldn't go back if I could avoid it.

-----------------------
PeteCresswell

[Khoomei]

What about the durability of the Rohloff hub? I always heard about how
great Phil Wood hubs are. I was very disappointed with them and
repeatedly trashed the insides (esp. where the pawls bite into). You
would think with all the gears inside the Rohloff that something is
likely to go in a relatively short period of time. I weigh over 200
pounds too. You can imagine that I'm seeing myself spend $800 and then
thrash the gears and its junk on the side of the road. Then I'm
opening the hub up trying to figure out where 100 gears fit in there.

So you're saying that there is more friction? Is that when coasting?
only when applying force to the cog?

I think the shifter on drop bars is not ready for prime time. If only
someone could come up with a decent shifter for drop bars. I like the
concept though. If these kinds of hubs are very reliable, then they
sound great.

Are we saying that if we take a road bike with say Ultegra trip and
STI and switch to Rohloff and no derailleurs that its going to be
roughly 2 pounds heavier? I'm just trying to get a ballpark figure.

I wish Shimano was more flexible with the road group components. As it
is STI is not cyclocross friendly in terms of brakes.



On 28 Jul 2003 15:58:22 -0700, (Chalo) wrote:

>Khoomei > wrote:
>
>> What is the best internal shifting hub on these important points:
>> - reasonably lightweight compared to a road group
>> - reliable operation
>> - parts are available from the usual channels, not some guy working
>> out of his garage.
>> - has more than 3 speeds.
>
>It seems like all gearhubs from 4 to 14 speeds weigh about the same
>1.7 kg, give or take. With some you get a brake, making those
>effectively a little lighter.
>
>Only the Rohloff Speedhub gives step sizes between gears that compare
>to a road group. However, Sachs's and Shimano's 7 speed hubs give
>overall ranges similar to that of a road bike. (Road bike with 53/39
>crank and 12-23 block: 260% Sachs/SRAM 7 speed: 303% Shimano Nexus
>7-speed: 244%)
>
>If you need lots of gearing range and you can afford the Rohloff, then
>that's the one for you. I have had two, and I don't think anyone
>would find reason to switch back once accustomed to the Rohloff.
>
>If the price of the Rohloff is too much committment and/or you would
>like a drum brake, I recommend the Sachs/SRAM Spectro 7 speed. It is
>the most free-running gearhub (with more than 3 speeds) I have used,
>it seems quite durable, and the brake works consistently with minimal
>fade.
>
>Chalo Colina

[Chris Neary]

> You
>would think with all the gears inside the Rohloff that something is
>likely to go in a relatively short period of time. I weigh over 200
>pounds too. You can imagine that I'm seeing myself spend $800 and then
>thrash the gears and its junk on the side of the road. Then I'm
>opening the hub up trying to figure out where 100 gears fit in there.

No experience with the Rohloff, but myself and many other Bike Friday owners
have had good experience with the Sachs 3 X 7 (and 8 and 9...) hubs on
Tandem Twos'days.

Tandems make 200 pound loads look like nothing.


Chris Neary


"Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could
you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I
loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh

[Paul Hamilton]

Compared to a road group, they are all about 2 pounds (1 kg) heavier.
They all are more reliable than a derailleur. Parts availability
should be good for all of them, although repairs will more likely
involve the factory rather than some guy in a garage. Going on 4,000
trouble-free miles on my Nexus-7, whose' one disadvantage is a
narrower overall gear range than on a typical derailleur bike.

Paul

[Martyn Aldis]

In message >, Jennifer
Donleavy > writes
>
>
>Does this Rohloff, or the other new internal-gear hubs available these
>days, have the same design issue that Jobst has refered to existing in
>the Sturmey-Archer hubs that pitched him off the bike?
>
No. Not the specific problem he has described in this group anyway.

He has written up a problem where an Sturmey Archer AW hub jumps out of
high gear under heavy load when the rider is standing. The pedals give
way and the rider falls.

I do not know how common this behaviour is and how many thousands of
miles service his hub had done before it failed.

The detailed reason he gives for this failure only applies to a hub with
a cruciform clutch passing load to the planet cage through extensions of
the planet pins. This design was used in AW and the AG dynohub and the
very similar drum brake 3 speed hubs. It was not used for medium or
close ratios 3 speeds (such as AM and AC), or the 4 speed FM, FC or the
FW and its five speed children the S5, S5/1 or S5/2.

The 5 Star (early 1990s?) axle would probably break anyway with the sort
of heavy use he describes so best avoid that one.

The Sturmey Archer Sprinter 5s and 7s use a different form of clutch and
an extra ratchet that means there is no neutral position. I've not seen
inside the new 3 speed from Taiwan but understand that they use this
system too. My first 5 speed Sprinter was made near the end of
Nottingham production in 2000 and had a problem with heavy loads in
first gear. It was replaced by the shop and its replacement has taken
some hard use without any problems, bearing in mind that it's still
nearly new in hub gear terms. I have read that the 7 speed Sprinter was
not always reliable.

I don't find I want to stand on the pedals in high gear on a 3 speed
bike anyway. I'm happy to change down when I get to a hill, that is
after all why we have gears, although I often stand to climb moderate
and short hills in middle gear (direct drive on all 3 and 5 speed SA
gears sold in the last 80 years or so I think). It's quite hilly round
here so I prefer a 5 speed.

Looking beyond the specific design problem attributed to the AW, any
gear system could fail to carry load if it is overloaded or worn out.
With totally exposed gears wear is more obvious (as well as very much
faster) but I expect some riders have fallen off because they didn't
notice that the teeth on their chainwheel had all but gone. Though not
Jobst Brandt one would imagine.

Rohloff specify a maximum torque but I've no idea about noise or
longevity on those.

>Also, how loud are these things? I am getting spoiled by my quiet
>shimano one-speed freewheel!

I can't help with a decibels figure but unless you plan to fit a gun
mount and stalk game or poachers by bicycle you'll not be seriously
disadvantaged. A little bit of noise is no bad thing. (Last Sunday on a
quite country lane a dog walker stepped out in front of us on our nearly
silent 24 speed tandem. Our combined panic yell made her jump back just
far enough, just in time.) I doubt that you will hear any of the hubs
in motor traffic or with planes or helicopters (our local Royal Navy
noise makers) near.

For some of us who had a hub gear in our now distant childhood that
lovely nostalgic tick, tick, tick, in the middle gears is a great
comfort.... On a more practical note the ticking in middle gear of a 3
speed or gears 3 and 4 of a 5 speed gives an instant health check on the
low gear pawl springs. (Total failure here can also allow the hub to
freewheel forward but in low gear in this case.) For older oil
lubricated hubs, the tick also gives guidance on the lubrication status.

See

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/sturmey-archer.html#lubrication




Martyn

Martyn Aldis, e-mail
================================================== ============================

[Chalo]

Chris Neary > wrote:

> No experience with the Rohloff, but myself and many other Bike Friday owners
> have had good experience with the Sachs 3 X 7 (and 8 and 9...) hubs on
> Tandem Twos'days.
>
> Tandems make 200 pound loads look like nothing.

But small wheels significantly reduce a hub's torque load compared to
full-sized ones.

Chalo Colina

[(Pete Cresswell)]

RE/
>Frankly I'd be a little surprised if the difference were a
>whole two pounds or 900g, but it's in the ballpark.

It's got to depend on the weight of what it's replacing.

The one I put on my FS replaced a SRAM 9.0 setup. I weighed the whole bike
before and after and the diff was almost precisely 2 pounds.
-----------------------
PeteCresswell

[Edward Kleinbard]

I'm obviously in no position to quarrel with Pete Cresswell's scale,
but I wonder whether some of the weight pick-up he measured is
attributable to the torsion bar that one generally has to use when
converting existing bikes? The torsion bar is not needed if you are
building a new bike with Rohloff dropouts.
My Rohloff bike is a bit heavier, I imagine, than a derailleur bike
with a triple chainring (which one also needs to factor in, to be
fair), but I would have guessed that the number was a little lower
than reported by Pete. But since my bike was built for the Rohloff,
I'm not able to offer a precise before and after comparison.

As to the Speedhub's efficiency, there are some newish articles on
that topic in English at the Rohloff Germany site. (www.rohloff.de) My
own anecdotal conclusions, which now have been tested by riding the
same route on conventional and Speedhub-equipped bikes, are (i) I'm
pretty slow on any bike, (ii) the Speedhub seems equally efficient
when compared to a derailleur system in the top seven gears, and a bit
less efficient in the bottom seven, and (iii) the actual efficiency
differences are very minor. I'm coming to the view that many of us
(including me) are thrown off by the aural clues of the Speedhub, so
that when we hear those little gears whirring in some of the low
gears, we subconsciously interpret that as vast quantities of energy
being wasted. Unfortunately, I've found that switching to my
derailleur bike doesn't get me in fact to the top of the hill all that
much faster.

Finally, as to reliability, I do remember Rohloff boasting a year or
two ago that they never had the inner guts of a Speedhub fail in
service, but I don't know whether they can still make that claim. The
only issues that I have encountered, or remember reading about on the
web, are (i) the possibility of oil leaks, which in fact are said not
to be catastrophic at all (although a thirsty hub does run more
noisily), and (ii) the possibility of the snap-apart connectors that
enable you to disengage the shift cable, so you can remove the rear
wheel, failing, which turns your 14 speed into a 1 speed, until you
replace the cable.

Hope this helps.

Ed Kleinbard


"(Pete Cresswell)" > wrote in message >...
> RE/
> >Frankly I'd be a little surprised if the difference were a
> >whole two pounds or 900g, but it's in the ballpark.
>
> It's got to depend on the weight of what it's replacing.
>
> The one I put on my FS replaced a SRAM 9.0 setup. I weighed the whole bike
> before and after and the diff was almost precisely 2 pounds.
> -----------------------
> PeteCresswell

[Chalo]

(Edward Kleinbard) wrote:

> I'm obviously in no position to quarrel with Pete Cresswell's scale,
> but I wonder whether some of the weight pick-up he measured is
> attributable to the torsion bar that one generally has to use when
> converting existing bikes? The torsion bar is not needed if you are
> building a new bike with Rohloff dropouts.

I thought about that after having posted my comments. Both my
Rohloff-hubbed bikes have been equipped with the dropout torque tab
and thus did not use the torque arm and its QR socket. The difference
is probably less than 200g, but it does exist.

Chalo Colina

[(Pete Cresswell)]

RE/
> ...wonder whether some of the weight pick-up he measured is
>attributable to the torsion bar...

The bar, axle plate, and fittings to secure it to the stay weigh in at 125
grams. I used the SpeedBone instead...considerably less. So I think I'd stick
with the 2 pounds.

> I'm coming to the view that many of us
>(including me) are thrown off by the aural clues of the Speedhub, so
>that when we hear those little gears whirring in some of the low
>gears, we subconsciously interpret that as vast quantities of energy
>being wasted.

I'd agree with that 100%...the sound *has* to be working on my mind - although
the second one I bought seems less noisy - they're using a different oil now and
we'll see when I change the old hub to the new oil.

>Finally, as to reliability, I do remember Rohloff boasting a year or
>two ago that they never had the inner guts of a Speedhub fail in
>service,

Stay tuned - I'm working on being the first. Just switched from a 34-tooth
ring (not recommended by Rohloff) to a 32-tooth ring (even more not
recommended...). Even so I'm 220, I'm in early geezerhood and I can't imagine
that even with 32 on the front that I'm putting anywhere near the stress on the
thing that a couple of reasonably fit tandem riders would.


-----------------------
PeteCresswell

[S. Delaire \Rotatorrecumbent\]

My 2 cents worth
Chet Kyle and Jim Browning set up a testing rig with the purpose of
finding the most efficient transmission system. Write up appeared in an
issue of Human Power.
Their conclusion:
Nothing beats a standard derailleur system for lowest power lost.
The Rohloff was good in some gears and bad in others. I seem to recall
the efficiency changed by 15% over the range of gears. Overall the
Rohloff is a beautiful piece of engineering and craftsmanship.
Strange as it sounds a Shimano Nexus 7 tested the best of all the
internal hubs in terms of efficiency in transferring power. Only a
couple of percent lower the a derailleur system.
Biggest problem with it, in my opinion is, no quick release for easy
tire repair.
Rohloff does have a QR
The old style Sturmey Archer tested poorly.
Speedy


Khoomei wrote:

> What is the best internal shifting hub on these important points:
> - reasonably lightweight compared to a road group
> - reliable operation
> - parts are available from the usual channels, not some guy working
> out of his garage.
> - has more than 3 speeds.



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

[Menotomy]

>The old style Sturmey Archer tested poorly.

Of course it did. The weight of the average cycle with a Sturmey-Archer
internal 3-speed hub would also do poorly. But I'd like to see a test of how
ANY internal hub compares with a Sturmey-Archer AW after say, 25 years of use?
Reliablility? Durability? Efficiency?

Kinda funny that this survey says "more than 3 speeds"...

Vin - Menotomy Vintage Bicycles, Inc.
http://OldRoads.com