Thorn Cycles Forum
Community => Rohloff Internal Hub Gears => Topic started by: sd on May 27, 2014, 12:51:32 pm
-
18 gears 637% 11.5% apart. What do you reckon? Personally I would not normally need the extra gears but with very heavy load? Or on a 3 wheeled recumbent?
-
I assume we are talking theoretically, or have you spotted something? I am quite happy with the range of the rohloff. If they could make one with the same range and reliability, at least 7 gears but half the weight I might be interested.
-
These sound like the specs for the Pinion P1.18 BB-mounted gearing system that requires a frame deigned for it. See: http:/pinion.eu/
Best,
Dan.
-
The moment I hear the words "custom frame", that component is on my blacklist. Precisely what makes a bicycle such a customizable item in the hands of even amateurs with near-zero mechanicking skills is that the frame offers a standard fit to many, many excellent components to suit every taste, skill and pocket. Requiring a custom frame is about the worst no-no a component maker can perpetrate.
-
Riding a Pinion is (like the Rohloff to a large extent) about a bicycle choice, rather than simply a component choice.
My Thorn is solely a Rohloff-based vehicle. It cannot practically run any derailleur gears, even a Shimano IGH would be sub-optimal.
-
Riding a Pinion is (like the Rohloff to a large extent) about a bicycle choice, rather than simply a component choice.
My Thorn is solely a Rohloff-based vehicle. It cannot practically run any derailleur gears, even a Shimano IGH would be sub-optimal.
Rohloff goes to immense trouble to engineer their hub's peripherals so that it may fit any standard frame and some not so standard. See for instance the Speedhub selector at http://www.rohloff.de/en/products/speedhub/speedhub_finder/index.html for how to fit a Speedhub 14 to Horstmann Link, or just check the model list at any dealer.
As for repurposing a frame custom built for a Rohloff, I see no reason why another hub gearbox cannot be fitted. In the standard dropout/exccentric bottom bracket model common on Thorns it may be a little more difficult than on the standard Rohloff-sesigned sliders as for instance on my Utopia, where a different frame end is simply fitted to the sliders and then provides chain tensio., but I don't see that it is a big deal.
You cannot say the same for a bike that must have a totally unique frame, without a recognizably standard bottom bracket. Once the gearbox or the motor goes on such bikes, the entire frame is written off with the gearbox or motor. What a waste. A Kalkhoff may be a desirable bike with it doesn't even get on my long list because I won't countenance such built-in waste. It seems to me contrary to the ethos of cycling.
-
As for repurposing a frame custom built for a Rohloff, I see no reason why another hub gearbox cannot be fitted. In the standard dropout/exccentric bottom bracket model common on Thorns it may be a little more difficult than on the standard Rohloff-sesigned sliders as for instance on my Utopia, where a different frame end is simply fitted to the sliders and then provides chain tensio., but I don't see that it is a big deal.
My Thorn Nomad Mk2 has no derailleur hanger at all, and would be difficult to bolt one on. While an Alfine hub could be fitted, as I said it is sub-optimal. The frame has cable-guides fitted and they run down the left chainstay for the Rohloff, no use for the Alfine cable on the right chainstay. Also the Rohloff OEM droputs are best suited for Rohloff.
You cannot say the same for a bike that must have a totally unique frame, without a recognizably standard bottom bracket. Once the gearbox or the motor goes on such bikes, the entire frame is written off with the gearbox or motor. What a waste. A Kalkhoff may be a desirable bike with it doesn't even get on my long list because I won't countenance such built-in waste. It seems to me contrary to the ethos of cycling.
In such a case, should the Pinion gear-box in the distant future, wear out or fail I would be planning to simply buy a new gearbox. Same for my Rohloff, whenever that wears out.
-
such a case, should the Pinion gear-box in the distant future, wear out or fail I would be planning to simply buy a new gearbox. Same for my Rohloff, whenever that wears out.
I believe that Rohloff will be in business when for my 105th birthday I order a new Rohloff "Classic" box in a dayglow yellow frame...
-
As for repurposing a frame custom built for a Rohloff, I see no reason why another hub gearbox cannot be fitted. In the standard dropout/exccentric bottom bracket model common on Thorns it may be a little more difficult than on the standard Rohloff-sesigned sliders as for instance on my Utopia, where a different frame end is simply fitted to the sliders and then provides chain tensio., but I don't see that it is a big deal.
As Il Padrone says, using a Rohloff specific frame for something else is sub-optimal, but I reckon a Shimano hub gear on a Thorn is pretty neat, and much better than using a frame meant for derailleurs. Even Thorn do this - they sold off some of the Raven Sports Tour frames with Shimano hubs.
I fitted a Shimano Nexus 8 Premium to my second Thorn Raven Tour frame. Only issue is the cable run. Its possible to use one of the two cable runs for Rohloff that run along the top tube and reposition the entry on the Shimano hub to aim up the seatstay. I didn't do this, as the only way to fit a Chainglider to the Nexus 8 Premium needs the cable parallel to the chainstay.
Compared to my Rohloff equipped Raven Tour, the one with the Shimano hub has two empty cable runs and 1 cable run held by zip ties. I have the zip ties anyway on my Rohloff equipped bike, as I needed them for the rear lamp (Thorn recommend using a battery rear lamp, but I wanted two of my 3 rear lamps to run off the hub generator).
-
Cable ties are definitely the second-greatest invention of the 20th century, after the paper kitchen roll.
-
These sound like the specs for the Pinion P1.18 BB-mounted gearing system that requires a frame deigned for it. See: http:/pinion.eu/
Best,
Dan.
I wouldn't really have a problem with a custom built frame. ROHLOFF frames are not natural for derailleurs. At the end of day if the Pinion wore out you would replace the internals or just the whole box. I noticed it said it was good for 60,000 km. Not therefore up to the Rohloff.
Anyway I was asking a simple question is it a serious Rohloff competitor. From my point of view 14 gears is adequate but if I was looking at a tadpole recumbent I would definitely give it a look in. Also price is something to think about l would not be surprised if they started competing at a lower price than Rohloff equipped bike.
-
the second-greatest invention of the 20th century
Lotsa people are hooked on velcro; lots of others think it's just a rip-off :-)
-
Lotsa people are hooked on velcro; lots of others think it's just a rip-off :-)
;)
-
My usage is long distance touring, sometimes off-road. I've been very happy with the Rohloff for touring and am not seriously considering anything else at the moment. I'm taking this more as a wish-list for a new Rohloff.
A wider gearing range with similar spacing (and hence more gears) would be useful for touring. There are many 20-25% stretches in Indonesia. I had to walk these with a loaded bike. My setup was 38 x 16 and I was carrying over 40 Kg of gear. However I was subsequently riding in gear 14 a lot of the time in peninsular Malaysia & Southern Thailand, which are basically flat.
Rohloff should accommodate that touring cyclists do not always have access to approved spares and would prefer not to carry them. The system should be designed so that most parts likely to fail on the road can easily be substituted with parts commonly available anywhere. This may be the case anyway, for most parts and with enough foreknowledge, but is not explicit in Rohloff literature or design.
The external shifter gets gummed up very quickly in dusty situations. Maybe it could be better sealed?
The twist shifter (I have the triangular one) gradually jams up with ingress of sweat & dust. It is impossible to service it properly without also removing & hence changing the inner cables.
-
My usage is long distance touring, sometimes off-road. I've been very happy with the Rohloff for touring and am not seriously considering anything else at the moment. I'm taking this more as a wish-list for a new Rohloff.
A wider gearing range with similar spacing (and hence more gears) would be useful for touring. There are many 20-25% stretches in Indonesia. I had to walk these with a loaded bike. My setup was 38 x 16 and I was carrying over 40 Kg of gear
38x16 gives you an awfully low bottom gear - about 15". Any lower and you risk falling over! And if you expect to ride long 20-25% climbs then you will need a bit more than a low gear, maybe a motor as well. These sorts of grades are extremely tiring, even with very low gears. Generally it's best to aim to avoid such extremes - apart from short pinches
Rohloff should accommodate that touring cyclists do not always have access to approved spares and would prefer not to carry them. The system should be designed so that most parts likely to fail on the road can easily be substituted with parts commonly available anywhere. This may be the case anyway, for most parts and with enough foreknowledge, but is not explicit in Rohloff literature or design.
I have toured fairly extensively with my Rohloff over the past four years, and never really needed any proprietary spares, beyond the Rohoff oil every 5000kms.
The external shifter gets gummed up very quickly in dusty situations. Maybe it could be better sealed?
This has not been a problem that I have faced at all. After 20,000kms it still operates as well as it did on the first kilometre. And I have been very slack with any service of this - have not done the suggested regrease every 500kms :-X
The twist shifter (I have the triangular one) gradually jams up with ingress of sweat & dust. It is impossible to service it properly without also removing & hence changing the inner cables.
Again - no problems here. The twist-shifter spins quite freely with no sign of gumming up.
???
-
Regarding range, my derailleur touring bikes have a range of 630 percent. (High is 52/11, low is 24/32.) My lowest gears are of course only used on the steepest uphills, my highest two gears are only used for long shallow down hills or when I have a strong tailwind on the flats. Thus, the upper and lower extremes are rarely used, but are really nice to have.
For around town my Rohloff bike is fitted with a 44 chainring and 16 tooth sprocket. But for a trip where I knew there would be steep hills I used a chainring with 36 teeth. On that trip, I actually had both the 36 and 44 chainrings fitted to the double crankset. After the killer uphills hills were all completed, I added a few links and adjusted the eccentric to switch from the 36 to 44 to give me the gearing I wanted for the rest of the trip, which included gearing for some long shallow downhills.
I too would like a larger range than the 526 percent offered by the Rohoff. I however would not want the gear steps to be increased above the current 13.4 to 13.9 percent between each gear as the means to do that. Instead I think the ideal solution would be adding two gears for a total of 16. With this, I would not need a second chainring to give me the wide range I desire.
If you are wondering why I chose a 36 chainring for my lowest gearing, I rode up a really steep hill and noted the speed that I felt was the minimum speed where I could easily maintain balance and remain upright. I then back calculated what chainring I would need to give me that speed with a cadence of 72.
Quite frankly, I would not be able to pedal up a hill at my lowest maintainable speed if the grade was 20 percent. Thus, I do not need any gears that low.
-
38x16 gives you an awfully low bottom gear - about 15". Any lower and you risk falling over! And if you expect to ride long 20-25% climbs then you will need a bit more than a low gear, maybe a motor as well. These sorts of grades are extremely tiring, even with very low gears. Generally it's best to aim to avoid such extremes - apart from short pinches
By my calculations, 38x16 gives you 26" * 38 / 16 * 0.279 = 17.2" lowest gear & 90.6" highest gear. I have a thing for high mountains and I found that I could've used a lower gear in Indonesia.
For my next short trip (Borneo), I'm experimenting with 40x19, which gives a lowest gear of 15.3" and a highest of 80.3". The top end is going to be too low on the flats!
This has not been a problem that I have faced at all. After 20,000kms it still operates as well as it did on the first kilometre. And I have been very slack with any service of this - have not done the suggested regrease every 500kms :-X
Again - no problems here. The twist-shifter spins quite freely with no sign of gumming up.
Different riding conditions I expect. Lots of mud, dust & humidity in SE Asia. A major problem with the twist shifter is that it's not serviceable without changing the cables.
I'll never tour on a derailleur again and Rohloff undoubtedly provides the best IGH solution at the moment. But this thread is about improvements, non?
-
I too would like a larger range than the 526 percent offered by the Rohoff. I however would not want the gear steps to be increased above the current 13.4 to 13.9 percent between each gear as the means to do that. Instead I think the ideal solution would be adding two gears for a total of 16. With this, I would not need a second chainring to give me the wide range I desire.
I'd love to see a solution that provided something like a 12" to 100" range, with similar 13% step ratios.
-
If you don't mind paying for it, a Schlumpf drive (http://www.cyclemonkey.com/schlumpf-innovations.shtml) with a 30-tooth chainring and a 17 tooth sprocket would do it. :)
-
If you don't mind paying for it, a Schlumpf drive (http://www.cyclemonkey.com/schlumpf-innovations.shtml) with a 30-tooth chainring and a 17 tooth sprocket would do it. :)
30 / 17 = 1.76, which is less than the Rohloff limit of 2.1. With a 26" wheel, the lowest "legal" gearing you can achieve with a Rohloff is 26" * 2.1 * 0.279 = 15.2". A 40x19 setup is the closest you can get to the limit and gives a gear range of 15.3" to 80.3". The Schlumpf Speed Drive would extend the top end to a whopping 80.3 * 1.65 = 132.5.
BTW, I notice that Schlumpf is not making these any more. See here (http://www.haberstock-mobility.com/en/products/schlumpf-drive/schlumpf-speed-drive.html) for new manufacturer.
-
I feel the range offered by the Rohlof is perfect. I don't want more. More never ends. What I would like however, is "more" in my too easily tired, underpowered, legs. I don't think that is going to happen, but that is the slant of my wish list. :)
-
Cable ties are definitely the second-greatest invention of the 20th century, after the paper kitchen roll.
......and duct tape........
-
......and duct tape........
Heh-heh!