Thorn Cycles Forum
Community => Rohloff Internal Hub Gears => Topic started by: templek on May 24, 2010, 01:20:52 pm
-
yesterday i took advantage of the sun, and went for a ride from victoria to hyde park's cycle lanes, with a lady friend of mine. I ride a Thorn Raven Sport, she had a cheap meteor flat bar bike around 20 years old, with low mileage. She is an occasional cyclist, i was a cycle courier for 4 years, which i got the bike for. I also cycled to meet her from Stratford. She didnt know the way from victoria and asked me not to go too fast for her, since i'm more experienced. Well to cut a long story short, the reverse happened! I cldnt keep up with, despite riding flat out. I thought her bigger thighs were the reason, till i rode bike. It was much faster. 3 yrs ago i was going to go on a week long end to end charity ride. When i went on a training ride with the group in the west country, i cld not keep up with the others most of the time, and was advised not to take part. I was the only one on a rohloff. It did attract strange stares of bewilderment from the others in their elite bikes. Has anyone else had this problem? You dont see rohloffs winning the tour de france or olympic cycle events
-
If the dérailleur is very well maintained Or you are riding on flat ground (no gear changes) then there is no doubt that the dérailleur will be faster - as you say you don't see a Rohloff speed hub wining the tour de France
On the other hand if you are off road up to you axles in mud then I would but my money on the Rohloff - especially if you are running without a chain tensioner.
The greater the number of gear changes per an hour and the harsher the conditions the better the Speedhub will get in comparison to a dérailleur .
I live in a very hilly rural area but ride mainly on road. I found my commute time averaged out about the same- if anything a little faster on the RST. (nb my RST is a drop handlebar). I have to admit I do hanker after a light weight true road bike in the summer time ( I sold mine when I got the RST) but in the rain and wind that we get here every second day I am very glad I am on a Raven!
-
In my experience, it's neither faster nor slower, all things (bike weight) being equal. On hilly touring terrain I find the Rohloff a little faster than my previous touring bikes. I THINK the reason is that I stay in the perfect gear all the time, as it's so easy to. I'm cycling with the same bunch of men for a long time and when I got the Rohloff, it made no difference.
Now, the tyres..
I ride slicks. If you're riding a big lump of a rigid tyre, THAT can slow you down.
-
i was using marathon plus tyres. Her meteor was a mountain bike with mountain bike tyres. I cld not keep up with her! Her bike was faster even though my bigger thorn was lighter. In mitigation i have not changed the oil in 2 years. but i had the speed problem when i went on the said training run. The oil had just been changed b4 hand . So rohloffs are not made for road racing in mind, but off road? I havent seen many if any in mountain bike competitions. Or are there any teams out there that do?
-
I don't think Rohloffs are significantly slower. Published efficiency figures show a 1-2% decrease in efficiency for the Rohloff at most. That's equivalent to a few watts of energy and equates to less than 0.5 km/h on the road. What does make the difference, though, is the bike as a whole, especially the bike's weight, type of tyres and how upright the riding position is.
As a real world example, on my racing bikes (8kg, 23mm tyres, drops) I'm reasonably fast (!) and average 28-30 km/h each ride. On my Raven Nomad (15kg, 50mm tyres, flat bars) I average about 22-23 km/h on the same roads.
(You may also have to accept that your recent cycling companion was just faster than you!!!).
Shaun
-
I find the rohloff a whole lot faster, from changing the gear in an instant to giving an equal and positive increase on each change. I did a short 30 mile run on Saturday morning (very hot) and had a Lycra clad derailleur using speedy type person come up from behind, I decided to challenge the power of the two, and thankfully after a long accent to the top and after much huffing and puffing I found myself alone again. I love doing this short ride as the view at the top gives much reward.
I ride both derailleur and rohloff, I find the rohloff much easier and cleaner in every aspect of the two in comparison, the rohloff is on an expr with straight bars.
-
I havent seen many if any in mountain bike competitions. Or are there any teams out there that do?
I ride mountain bike competitions on a Rohloff.
I have seen one other Rohloff in MTQ trailquests, out of about 50 entries per event.
The most I've seen in endurance events was 4 at the Marin Rough ride (about 900 entrants) and 4 at mountain Mayhem 24 hour (about 2500 entrants as teams or solo).
I generally see one or two others at marathons or 12 hour races.
I've only done one XC race and mine was the only one there.
-
Hello
I own as some already know, three Thorn bikes (was four but finances etc). I once purchased a Rohloff hubbed Thorn Raven Tour. Whilst it was a very nice bike in comfort, ride etc I did not get on well with straight type bars with that gripshift type changer and did not desire drop bars with attached shifter. Whilst ownership was fairly brief due to the above mentioned I do admit that the bike felt slower in general and quicker downhill. I feel that there must be (and have been) some drag with the hub. This may of course reduce with wear (useage).For the type of use most buyers purchase these bikes for, I feel it is not a worry or problem. You buy and ride a hefty bike it is going to be slower!
John.
-
The thought that I may be going a little slower than I might with a derailleur, always comes to mind once I settle into the bottom seven gears for a nice climb. It just feels like there's a resistance there. My hub only has 1800 miles on the clock, so no oil change yet, and probably barely run-in, so it's probably not a fair comparison.
I think if I were only concerned about road speed, I would end up going back to derailleurs, but the other advantages (especially off-road) of the Rohloff swing the argument heavily in it's favour.
Expr, is that a Brooks saddle bag on your bike? It looks a whole lot better than the carradice on mine. Is it stable, and rattle-free?
-
Expr, is that a Brooks saddle bag on your bike? It looks a whole lot better than the carradice on mine. Is it stable, and rattle-free?
[/quote]
Hi wheezy,
Its actually a leather bum bag from when we went to Bulgaria. The two belt straps on it were perfect for attaching to the saddle rails via (large zip ties) its got a brass catch on and internal brass zip. I did look on ebay at this type
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/OSX-Leather-Biker-Tool-Roll-Saddle-Bag-Spanner-AC12-/370365349705?cmd=ViewItem&pt=UK_Motorcycle_Parts&hash=item563b7ebf49
but decided to go for the one i allready had. It is very quiet as all the tools etc have been rolled up in an oiled rag individually to prevent that annoying clanging noise.
Dave.
-
Its actually a leather bum bag from when we went to Bulgaria.
Ah. Thanks, Dave. Very helpful. I checked out the Brooks ones today on the web, and they look too small to carry the usual tube, multi-tool, phone combo.
Sorry to go off topic, everyone.
As you were...
-
Put the Rohloff in 11th gear - 11th gear it is 1:1, there are no losses in this gear - just like a single speed.
You should try to gear a Rohloff so that your most used gear is 11 :)
I've got a 2" Schwalbe XR up front and 2.25" Schwalbe XR in the rear, it's still fast enough for me :)
-
I've done an Audax SR (200km, 300km, 400km and 600km rides) using my heavy Thorn Raven Tour.
The last 2 "Around the World" world records have been set using Rohloffs.
As others have mentioned, put it in 11th and compare bikes. In 11th gear it will be at least as efficient as a Derailleur, probably more.
If your bike is slower in 11th gear then I suggest that the problem is tyres or the fit of the bike (or you)
Fit some different tyres. Panaracer Paselas 26x1.5 or less. Pump them to the max recomended pressure and try again. If this isn't faster, in 11th gear, than a MTB with MTB tyres then check your brakes aren't binding.
Note. "Faster" is subjective. My Raven Tour feels very slow because it's silent and smooth. However, I have a timed 15 mile circuit I use occasionally. This loop proves to me that my Raven Tour is 20 seconds slower, over 51 minutes, than my "fast Tourer". Wind-direction or temperature on the day can account for 20 seconds easily so, statistically, I would say there's no noticeable difference.
I suggest you do a timed circuit on different bikes.
The answer to your original question is "Yes" but it depends on many factors.
Is a Raven Sport Tour, with slick road tyres, slower then an MTB with MTB tyres? "No".
-
What everyone appears to have overlooked has overlooked (but have certainly seen previously mentioned on the site) is that if you're racing a MTB or other deraillieur bike, the gaps between gears are generally far smaller compared to the 13.5% gap between gears on the Rohloff. Particularly racing over any real distance of racing with any degree of undulation, each time you change gear there's a reduced chance of finding a gear that optmises racing speed because of the larger gap.
-
What everyone appears to have overlooked has overlooked (but have certainly seen previously mentioned on the site) is that if you're racing a MTB or other deraillieur bike, the gaps between gears are generally far smaller compared to the 13.5% gap between gears on the Rohloff. Particularly racing over any real distance of racing with any degree of undulation, each time you change gear there's a reduced chance of finding a gear that optmises racing speed because of the larger gap.
Again you are correct!
John.
-
Are you suggesting the "occasional cyclist lady friend" was faster because she had closer gear gaps? :o ;D
-
I did one of my loops on my Raven Tour last night. 1hr 14Min's. The same loop took 1hr 17Min's on my slicked up mountain bike. The Raven is about 3kg heavier than the MTB. So I have to conclude that the Rohloff is no slower. Maybe she was just faster :)
-
What everyone appears to have overlooked has overlooked (but have certainly seen previously mentioned on the site) is that if you're racing a MTB or other deraillieur bike, the gaps between gears are generally far smaller compared to the 13.5% gap between gears on the Rohloff. Particularly racing over any real distance of racing with any degree of undulation, each time you change gear there's a reduced chance of finding a gear that optmises racing speed because of the larger gap.
Big difference in gaps when compared to a road bike, but I think you'll find the Rohloffs gears are closer than most MTBs. A quick play on Sheldon's gear calculator shows the most common 11 - 34 cassette has gaps of 13 - 18%, even the 11 - 32 only has two less than 13%, these are also the most common standard cassettes on a stock touring bikes, though often with a larger chainset.
http://sheldonbrown.com/gears/
-
My Raven Tour is the slowest bike I ride. It puts up to an hour on my time for a 200k Audax compared to my lightweight tourer. I don't know how much is the hub, how much the bike and how much the rider. It's not a bike to reward the extra effort in the same way as something more lively, so the temptation isn't there to push it. I recently used it for the 1.75AA point Lumpy Scrumpy Audax, I was riding with a group of friends who were good enough to wait for me at the top of each climb! At the end they were all saying what a tough ride it was... I didn't find it so hard, just slow, it's that sort of bike.
-
PH, it doesn't quite tally with my own personal experience when occassionally racing MTB riders on my London commute - I generally lose momentum when making an uphill gear change but maybe it's got something to do with the fags and booze.
However, I'll happily respect your assertion as maybe I'm confusing hybrids with MTBs - my Ridgeback hybrid definitely had smaller gaps.
Wheezy, assuming you're not making an obscure double-entendre, I get currently overtaken by allsorts of unlikely looking people on my commute at present despite having done multiple strenuous long-distance cycle tours over recent years, but fact is until 3 weeks ago, I didn't touch my bike for 8 months for lack of time/opportunity so my point is that maybe Templek, despite former glories, isn't quite as fit as he would like to think.
-
well that was the 3rd time i rode this year and stopped couriering or riding 2 work 18 months ago, i used 2 ride from ilford to crystal palace daily! So cld b not as fit. However she is an ocasional cyclist. So panaracer tyres r better than marathö plus? I got them for their puncture resistance. So to my original point, if rohloffs r on par, why dont we see them winning major races?
-
So panaracer tyres r better than marathö plus?
Ahh, that would explain the difference in speed. Panaracer's are not necessarily better but would definitely be quicker. Marathon Pluses are heavy, but hard to puncture. You won't see the Tour de France winner running Marathon Plus tyres ;)
Oh, I may have miss read what you were saying - what type of tyres were on the other bike?
-
why dont we see them winning major races?
Weight and ratios. As others have said there is no significant difference in efficiency between rohloffs and derailleurs for normal real world usage. Rohloffs are better in some gears and when derailleurs get gunked up. However, while it is argued that a rohloff is no heavy than a mid range groupset, it is heavier than a top of the range racing set up. The other issue is that the gear ratios are too wide for a racing set up. Finally, the reliablity aspect of the rohloff is lost if you have a team of mechanics following you every night to tweak your drive chain. Note that rohloffs have 'won' three round the world races, step forward Julian, James and Mark B and are used in some mtb disciplines I understand (see rohloff website).
-
...You dont see rohloffs winning the tour de france or olympic cycle events
...So to my original point, if rohloffs r on par, why dont we see them winning major races?
The Rohloff hub needs a rear dropout width of 135mm. Virtually all road racing bikes have a dropout width of 130mm. So the Rohloff won't fit a current lightweight road bike.
Rohloff's do win MTB races, but Rohloff's current share of the MTB racing maket is miniscule, so their impact will also be miniscule.
Although the Rohloff does have advantages in certain applications, IMO, it's clearly not been enough to bust through the enormous and established derailleur market. It's still a niche product, even after 12 years. Production methods have meant that there have only been about 100,000 Rohloff's built to date. The high (initial) price is also a factor, I expect, along with the special frame requirements. Bottom line, the Rohloff isn't radically better than a derailleur across enough applications to tempt the majority. (Maybe if Shimano had invented the Rohloff and could build it to the same quality for a quarter of the price, things would be different)?
Shaun
-
well that was the 3rd time i rode this year and stopped couriering or riding 2 work 18 months ago, i used 2 ride from ilford to crystal palace daily! So cld b not as fit. However she is an ocasional cyclist. So panaracer tyres r better than marathö plus? I got them for their puncture resistance. So to my original point, if rohloffs r on par, why dont we see them winning major races?
I'm in a similar boat Templek, fitness wise so no offence meant - I was surprised to be overtaken yesterday (despite coasting along at a reasonable speed) by a young lady, albeit on a road bike, whose physique suggested a life long addiction to cream cakes.
-
i've arranged to go riding with her again, hyde pk, to regents pk then to camden. I know the way but dread having her to stop so i can catch up! Will see if 11 gear helps. I rode her road bike, its definetly faster with less effort despite her mountain bike tyres. Surely marathon plus shd be faster than cheap mountain bike tyres, cos they r smoother?
-
i've arranged to go riding with her again, hyde pk, to regents pk then to camden. I know the way but dread having her to stop so i can catch up! Will see if 11 gear helps. I rode her road bike, its definetly faster with less effort despite her mountain bike tyres. Surely marathon plus shd be faster than cheap mountain bike tyres, cos they r smoother?
I shouldn't think so. Marathon Plus are pretty hefty tyres with that extra band of solid 5mm thick rubber all round the contact patch. It's all weight right at the rim that you have to spin up and keep moving at twice your road speed. That's going to count against you more in a stop-start environment like London than out on an open road in the country.
Whereas cheap MTB tyres are usually, despite appearances, pretty light, because materials cost.
I have Marathon on two bikes and like them, but racing tyres they ain't!
Is it possible that you aren't perhaps as fit as you think? I mean, I'm not pretending a Rohloff gearbox makes you faster, but it shouldn't make you slower either. The fraction it weighs more than a midrange derailleur system, if it does, is a red herring: the weight of the geartrain is a small fraction of the all-up weight of rider and bike, and such fractional differentials as between a Rohloff and a derailleur system will just get swamped*. The weight of the Marathon Plus will count for more in this equation, but certainly not for as much difference between reality and expectation as you describe. Without wishing to be ungallant, some beefy people are just hyperfit and it isn't all that difficult to mistake them for chubby and unfit.
Good luck on your next ride.
I ride most of the time with (younger) women, and I firmly believe, and often say, especially uphill, that a gentleman always lets the ladies go ahead, though of course on the downhill he scouts out the dangers ahead... That seems to cover all occasions.
Hobbes
*It feels faintly ludicrous even to be discussing such a fractional weight differential as if it could make a real performance difference. That we are discussing it is another symptom of the unnatural sway road racing, a tiny niche vocation, holds over all of cycling.
-
I would suggest the relative speed of your Rohloff bike depends on a whole lot of other things apart from the hub. Tyres have already been covered in this thread.
My RST is somewhat heavier than my 'audax' bike and this impacts on climbs, it is also a more upright riding position than the fast tourer with drops which makes going into headwinds seem harder work.
The setup of the bike also affects you e.g. my RST came with 165mm cranks which seemed reasonable for my relatively short leg length, however I felt I was being forced to 'spin' more than I am used to so I changed to 170mm cranks (which is what I have been used to)and that has increased my average speed for my usual 18 mile loop by at least one mile per hour.
-
Hello
Of course the rolling weight matters too. The rear wheel is heavy, unlike deraileurs which is bound to slow the bike even if only initially.
John.
-
I would add that being relatively lightweight I can climb faster (when I was younger and fitter than now!) than the majority of heavier built cyclists, but they can definitely roll along on the flat faster than me.
-
So are there skinny tyre, drop-bar, "fast" bikes out there fitted with Rohloffs?
-
it seems most of this thread is hogwash, unless the bike rides without a rider then i suggest the rider input is more likely to make the bike faster or slower.
Almost as stupid as someone saying that marathons are too heavy then forgetting the bike has a lump of lard riding it with fully packed ortliebs
-
I think I have to disagree, Travelling.
If we are comparing different bikes ridden over the same route by the same rider, as has been done by earlier contributors to this thread, their findings have to be meaningful.
Not so sure about the weight issue, but I think heavy tyres have a disproportionate effect on speed due to their rotating mass.
I do take your point though, about overall weight rendering the weight of the tyres insignificant.
Cheers,
pj
-
So are there skinny tyre, drop-bar, "fast" bikes out there fitted with Rohloffs?
I doubt it because of the gear changer issue on drops, rohloffs can't compete with STI for racers.
-
Dropbar, rohloff AND skinny tyres:
http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/santos-concept-bike-geared-for-roadies-23833
Still not as nice or useful as a Thorn !
-
I think I have to disagree, Travelling.
Of course your entitled too Peter
Sometimes however some forget we ride a bike and not a formula 1 car with a paddle gear system for that 100th of a second faster gearchange
-
>So are there skinny tyre, drop-bar, "fast" bikes out there fitted with Rohloffs?
I don't know about skinny by my Drop handled RST is equipped with 26 X1.25 Panaracer Pasela tyres which at a weight of 240g per a tyre compares favourably to the lightest of the Schwalbe Marathon (660g)
I have never timed the difference between my bike and my wife's Flat bared RT but I wouldn't be at al surprised if I was 10% slower on the RT (due to the bigger tyres and the flat bar)
-
I don't agree with the post that talks about a gear that optimises racing speed, and that the Rohloff gaps are too big.. There isn't a gear that "optimises" racing speed, though there may be such a range. The gearing gaps in a Rohloff are pretty similar to those if you're using an 11-32 cluster. I find no significant gaps in the Rohloff setup and moreover, it's so easy to change that you change all the time. Not only that, but I found touring with a Raven Tour that I was climbing better than a mate of mine who uses a derailleur-equipped bike than I was with a touring bike of similar weight. This was not a normal finding as we're both almost identical in climbing ability. I attribute it to the fact that I keep changing with the Rohloff so I'm always in the right range. If you're dealing with the vagaries of a derailleur "system" you're less likely to provoke the thing!
-
Gearoidmuar
I'd have to disagree with your seeming misinterpretation of my post.
Finding a gear that "optimises" your racing speed (ie. enables you to accelerate more quickly until you need your next "optimum" gear so that you get to your fastest possible speed in the shortest possible time) is more likely in most circumstances on a bike with narrower gaps (e.g 10%). An optimum gear for racing is relative to the changing circumstances (not fixed) of the rider, and a narrower gap between gears (again in most ordinary circumstances) is going to increase the likelihood of finding that optimum gear for speed, particularly when accelerating up an incline.
I certainly didn't in any shape or form suggest that the Rohloff gaps are too big, and have on several occasions written about the Rohloffs merits, especially for hilly or mountainous touring, and I'm also on record as stating that this is because I also change the gears more than with a conventional derailleur (because of the reliability and general precision of the change) - so at least we agree on one thing.
However, changing gear more frequently just makes more likely that you’re more likely to find/be in your "optimum" climbing gear, assuming that the incline or your body requires the changes. I get the impression that your preference for the using the word “range” is more about being contrary than expressing any clarity of thought. Range suggests there is a choice of gears. Maybe you are referring to the front chainset? If so this doesn’t apply to Rohloff, but you can also be in the right range on derrailleurs but the wrong gear. It is simply about being in the right (i.e optimum) gear at the right time according to your needs whether you are racing or climbing.
Travelling – your comments only serve to highlight your own stupidity over the valid contributions of others…..even overweight people (“lumps of lard”) have the right to enjoy lightweight tyres/bikes, unless of course you are saying that overweight people shouldn’t have a right to decent bikes of their choice and/or to maximise their enjoyment of cycling with all the resulting health benefits.
-
Fred A-M.
What I mean by "range" in my post is "there or thereabouts"
e.g. a gear of 81-84 inches instead of e.g. a gear of 82.5 inches.
-
I don't find the gaps between gears too big. Riding typical XC mountain bike terrain, any one gear is rarely ideal for more than a few metres anyway as the track constantly changes.
I very rarely know what gear I'm in. I did 18 laps at the Bristol bike Fest 12 hour marathon last weekend and after a few laps I got to know, for example, that at the end of the fast bit across the field I needed to shift down 4 clicks for the twisty bit in the trees coming up. I don't know if I was shifting from 11th to 7th or 9th to 5th.
The extra drag of a Rohloff is a constant complaint from derailleur fans.
Surely it wouldn't be too hard for a magazine or some other independent party to commission some research in to this.
An electric motor driving the cranks with n accurate measurement of power in against power at the tyre should make it possible to compare the drag of any drive system.
-
Surely it wouldn't be too hard for a magazine or some other independent party to commission some research in to this.
See this link http://www.bhpc.org.uk/HParchive/PDF/hp52-2001.pdf
Note they were using a new hub - a hub that has go a few thousand mile on the clock should be better
-
I don't think Rohloffs are significantly slower. Published efficiency figures show a 1-2% decrease in efficiency for the Rohloff at most. That's equivalent to a few watts of energy and equates to less than 0.5 km/h on the road. What does make the difference, though, is the bike as a whole, especially the bike's weight, type of tyres and how upright the riding position is.
As a real world example, on my racing bikes (8kg, 23mm tyres, drops) I'm reasonably fast (!) and average 28-30 km/h each ride. On my Raven Nomad (15kg, 50mm tyres, flat bars) I average about 22-23 km/h on the same roads.
(You may also have to accept that your recent cycling companion was just faster than you!!!).
Shaun
Without wishing to get into the old efficiency argument, realistically, a hub gear system that uses up to three planetary gearsets and has oil seals will be more than 2% less efficient in certain gears. Even in 11th (often misquoted as direct drive) a single planetary set is still in use. See http://www.ihpva.eu/HParchive/PDF/hp55/hp55p11-15.pdf (http://www.ihpva.eu/HParchive/PDF/hp55/hp55p11-15.pdf) for a resonably comprehensive test and note some of the graphs.
A derailleur chainset uses one chainring and sprocket at any one time. A rohloff chainset has a chainwheel, sprocket and one or more planetary sets in. And gears, even epicyclic, result in more loss than chains and sprockets.
As for oil seals, a free-wheeling Rohloff wheel slows down significantly quicker than a derailleur one. Chain tensioners/derailleur jockey arms result in little loss because they are not under significant tension.
However, Rohloffs have many other advantages as we all know. That's why we love 'em.
Cheers,
Tony
-
Even in 11th (often misquoted as direct drive) a single planetary set is still in use.
Not according to Rohloff - they indicate that in gear 11 no planetary gears are in operation:
http://www.rohloff.de/en/technical/speedhub/efficiency_measurement/index.html
See Table 5.
-
Not according to Rohloff - they indicate that in gear 11 no planetary gears are in operation:
http://www.rohloff.de/en/technical/speedhub/efficiency_measurement/index.html
See Table 5.
Ummm...apologies - yes, you are correct. I had read that before, but somehow had it in my mind that it still used one planetraty set.
In which case the only losses associated with that gear would be the fixed losses associated with oil seal friction.
In which case, does anyone know how they do this? In all other hub gears, there is always at least one planetray set involved as this is the only way to transfer power from the sprocket to the hub itself. Presumably a sprag clutch?
Anyone any ideas?
Cheers
-
Here is a basic rundown of Gear 11 as I understand it.
-Sprocket drives Ring Gear 1 (nothing special here, same as all gears)
-Ring Gear 1 is locked to Sun Gear 1-1 via a ratcheting clutch ring (now two planetary elements are locked together, so the third (twin planet carrier) is forced to rotate along with Ring Gear 1 and Sun Gear 1-1/Sun Gear 1-2)
-The Twin Planet Carrier is locked to Ring Gear 2 (output) via the same effect listed above, only it's another clutch ring that locks Sun Gear 2-2 to Ring Gear 2.
-Ring Gear 2 is always (permanently, in any gear) connected to Sun Gear 3
-Sun Gear 3 is locked to Ring Gear 3 in the same fashion, with a ratcheting clutch ring. (This is the same effect for all gears 8 thru 14).
-Now with Sun Gear 3 and Ring Gear 3 locked together, Planet Carrier 2 (which outputs to the hub shell and makes the wheel go around) is forced to spin 1:1 with those components.
Long story a little bit shorter:
-Sun Gears 1-1, 1-2, 2-1, 2-2 and 3 are all spinning around the central axle, all at the same speed as the drive sprocket
-The Twin Planet Carrier and Planet Carrier 2 are both locked to the Sun Gears and spin with them, at the same speed
-All Planet Gears are locked and do not spin within their respective carriers
-Ring Gears 1, 2 and 3 are all locked to their respective Planet Carriers and spin at the same RPM as the Planet Carriers and the Sun Gears
Really short?
Every possible gear is spinning, all at the same RPM of the drive sprocket, all in unison. (The planet gears would spin if they could, but they are locked by the other planetary members.) Since none of the gears are actively multiplying or reducing ratios, even though they are spinning, they are considered "not active". Sprocket, Ring Gears, Sun Gears, Planet Carriers, the Hub Shell and your Bike Tire are all spinning at the same RPM.
-
Both these links appear to be dead.
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/HParchive/PDF/hp52-2001.pdf
http://www.ihpva.eu/HParchive/PDF/hp55/hp55p11-15.pdf
I should have downloaded the .pdfs at the time. ::)
Has anyone got a working link to any similar research ?
-
I have a specialised roubaix s-works & a rohloff drop bar bike. On both I can happily stay with the club Saturday training run, average speeds 25km/h to 30km/h for a 3-4 hour run (& on both I can outpace some & be out-paced by others). The rohloff bike is heavier by approx 3kg, but I weigh 83kg. I recently rented a bike with schwalbe marathons @ an upright position; that was a slow bike with any gearing system.
The snow + life meant that I was off my bike for a month around December & January, the loss of fitness was very clear, it took 6 weeks of bicycle commuting and weekly rides to get back to previous speed & endurance.