Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
Transmission / Re: Drive belt V wax chain
« Last post by mickeg on May 05, 2025, 11:38:33 AM »
When I built up my Nomad Mk II in 2013, I wanted a 26 inch wheel heavy duty touring bike with a Rohloff hub and S&S couplers.  Compared the Nomad against another brand that offered belt drive as an option.

I chose chain for one reason.  I knew that for heavy duty touring I would want lower gears than I would want for riding around near home with an unladen bike. 

Thus, when I go on a tour, I put a 36T chainring on it, take out four chain links.  When I get home, I put a 44T chainring on it, add four chain links (with a second quick link) for use around home.

I have also considered a trip where I might have wanted a 40T chainring for in between those two ranges, but have not set it up that way yet.

That would be more complicated and costly to do with a belt.

When my chain is noisy, it is telling me that it wants more lube.

I am quite happy with my decision to stay with chains on my Rohloff bike.
22
Transmission / Re: Drive belt V wax chain
« Last post by Tiberius on May 05, 2025, 10:21:19 AM »
I'm 5 years in on waxed chains - Rohloff, roughly 25,000 miles - and wouldn't go back to oil. I'm also just 9 months in on a belt - Pinion, roughly 3,000 miles - and I prefer it to a waxed chain. This bike is used daily near the coast and is regularly subjected to sand and sea water - the belt has never squeaked and has had literally zero maintenance. I didn't think that I could 'forget' all about transmission maintenance but I have since going with the belt drive. I did mess about with the belt when I first got it, learning how to put it on/off, getting the correct tension via the Gates app etc, but since then I haven't touched it - I really have forgotten all about it.

 I obviously need to do a few more years on the belt to draw any real conclusions, but so far so good.
23
Cycle Tours / Re: Shimano UN55
« Last post by PRP on May 05, 2025, 05:49:54 AM »
thankyou!
24
Transmission / Re: Drive belt V wax chain
« Last post by energyman on May 04, 2025, 06:55:14 PM »
All my belt drive bikes (4) are silent.  A squeak must mean something (alignment ?) is not as it should be.  My chain RST is silent too.
25
General Technical / Re: Pannier weight distribution
« Last post by mickeg on May 01, 2025, 12:52:02 PM »
Dan, beautiful bike.  And since I have half step plus granny on both my Sherpa and Lynskey, I of course noticed you have that too. 

I have some Axiom front racks on my Nomad Mk II, they mount the panniers maybe 3 inches higher than conventional low rider racks.  Two photos below.  The bottom of my front panniers is almost as high as the bottoms of my rear panniers that way.  When pushing into a killer headwind, I suspect that the higher mounting on the front panniers may be slightly better from an aero perspective, as the front panniers are directly in front of the rear panniers.  But if so, I am sure that is minimal at best.  But I do like that higher mounting after scrapping the bottom of a front pannier on a curb with my Sherpa years ago, if that curb was slightly higher I think it would have caused a crash.
26
General Technical / Re: Pannier weight distribution
« Last post by in4 on April 30, 2025, 07:00:19 PM »
Great looking bike, Dan. A real head turner.
The PDF article is really useful and articulates far better what I've been waffling on about!
I'm going to experiment to see if I can move my Super C's slightly forward; nearer to the wheel's centre line.
The Altura Orkney 50 litres will be used in combination with my sports rollers.
27
General Technical / Re: Pannier weight distribution
« Last post by Danneaux on April 30, 2025, 06:08:33 PM »
Jim Blackburn (of Blackburn Designs and the racks and accessories long marketed by the firm he established) and Jim Gentes (later of Giro helmets) did a number of experiments in the early 1980s on the best way to carry weight on a bicycle, using a number of criteria they put to test. The result was published in the April 1982 issue of American publication Bicycling magazine. My attempts to scan and attach a copy ended up too large to post but fortunately, I found a PDF online I can share here...

https://www.rennrad-news.de/forum/attachments/the-weight-factor-jim-blackburn-jim-gentes-pdf.1323699/

Though lowrider racks were a feature of French tourers with low-trail geometry in the Between Wars years, it was this article by Blackurn and Gentes that kicked off their revival from the early '80s onward and taken as doctrine since -- and with good reason, as a balanced load does make for generally better handling than one where all the weight is carried mostly in one place. This thinking has been supplanted recently with the bikepacking movement that largely eschews conventional racks and four panniers in favor of fork-mounted cargo cages, frame bags, and bags strapped into the handlebars and hung from the saddle. This effectively narrows the loaded bike's profile, raises the bags up and away from brush and such for better off-roading capability and saves the weight of conventional racks and panniers and is a scheme usable on bikes that cannot mount racks. Panniers with their mounting hardware, stiffened backs and generally heavier fabrics are very weighty compared to lightweight stuffsacks and straps but ultimately promise greater cargo capacity for extended time spent away from resupply and when carrying "more".

Illustration No. 3 in the above PDF shows a bike outfitted with front AND rear lowriders, like my own Rene Herse-style rando-tourer (photo attached below). When I tour-camp with this bike, I use my smaller Ortlieb Sportpacker panniers both fore and aft, as handling actually begin to suffer on this bike when my larger rear panniers are mounted in this position, inline with Blackburn's test findings. By the way, these racks were made for me back in the day by Yuki Nagaoka in his family's factory in Kobe. I still have pleasant memories of the transaction because he was such a nice fellow to deal with.

Best, Dan.
28
General Technical / Re: Pannier weight distribution
« Last post by mickeg on April 30, 2025, 12:47:09 PM »
Quote from: in4 on April 29, 2025, 03:56:14 PM
...
Whilst avoiding heel strike is a necessity I'm mulling over any other considerations/options that might be worth exploring. E.G. How low or high does the pannier sit on the rear rack? How far back does it sit? Where does it sit in relation to the rohloff hub? ...

First photo shows my Nomad Mk II better for location of rear panniers relative to the hub.

Second photo shows the upper pannier hooks and how high they are relative to the top of tire using the Tubus Logo EVO.

Keep in mind that Thorn is unusual in that they varied the chainstay length for different sizes, most bike manufacturers use one chainstay length for all sizes within a model.  Mine is a Nomad Mk II 590M with 466mm chainstays.  And of course with the eccentric, there is some slop in that number.  Some sizes has larger and some smaller chainstay lengths.  But I suspect that larger people have longer feet with the converse also true.  I wear bike shoes in the size 44 to 45 range.

The Carradry panniers are taller than the Ortlieb.  The result is that the Carradry panniers hang lower. 

I eventually fabricated my own lower hooks for the Carradry panniers to play well with the Tubus Logo EVO.  Third photo.  Unfortunately that does not show the upper hooks, but it is the same Logo EVO, so the pannier hooks are the same height compared to top of tire as the Ortlieb.

Fourth photo, the Carradry on the Nomad Mk II from a different angle.  I think the bottom of the Carradry is a few cm lower at the bottom of pannier.  (Front panniers are not Carradry, but that is not the topic here.)

But I can't say how much higher the panniers would be on the Thorn rack.

I adjust my panniers to give me adequate heel clearance, but no extra.  I have three touring bikes so each time I do a tour, I have to adjust my panniers fore or aft if it was on a different bike.  My Thorn Sherpa and my Lynskey Backroad have different chainstay lengths than my Nomad Mk II. 

I originally bought the Carradry rear panniers for the trip that did not happen where I would only use rear panniers, wanted bigger ones.  At that time Carradry advertised them at 58 liter, my Ortliebs are 40.  I was bummed when I received the Carradry as they clearly were not 58 liter, I estimated closer to 50 liter.  Later Carradry (and SJS) changed that volume claim to 48 liters.  At 48 they are still greater volume than the Ortlieb, but I am in USA, it would have been really hard to return the Carradry for that incorrect size claim with international shipping.  So I kept the Carradry, and have used them on one trip.
29
Transmission / Re: Drive belt V wax chain
« Last post by WorldTourer on April 30, 2025, 12:06:33 PM »
I have done about 20,000 km now on a belt drive, and I have never had any squeaking sounds. Much of my riding is offroad through very dusty terrain, too. When people report their belt drive making sounds, I always suspect that something was installed improperly on their setup.
30
Transmission / Drive belt V wax chain
« Last post by KDean on April 30, 2025, 10:07:42 AM »
I've recently  waxed my chain on my Surly Ogre with Rohloff  using the Silca kit & I'm really surprised at how I now prefer it over my  Olsen with Pinion  drive bet .The drive belt is ok until it starts squeaking & I didn't think the chain would feel more efficient as it does .When I get my Thorn sorted out I'll definitely be using a chain.   
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10