Geez the new Rohloff model is taking its time! Any word on its progress anyone?
I have to tell you, I never thought it likely we would see that particular new Rohloff model, even when the engineer in charge of it was telling us he was making the release video.
Think about it. The Rohloff is a wide range hub gearbox of the utmost durability. So they make a new model with a range a little wider, and produce a bit lighter, and say it breaks only 50% more often than the original model, then boom goes the entire company's reputation built up over so long. It's too big a risk.
And for what return?
From a marketing viewpoint, two models that close are simply confusing to customers. The new model was neither fish nor fowl. It wasn't light enough for road bikes, and, whatever the tourers say in their first enthusiasm about a new model, when it came time to spend big bucks on specifying their next bike, my bet is that they would listen to their dream of crossing Katmandu and go for the proven, reliable, original Rohloff. This on top of the fact that we (touring and utility bikers) are in the minority of Rohloff sales, the majority, offroaders, being even more focused on low service and reliability than we are. From a marketing viewpoint that particular additional Rohloff model never made the slightest sense.
It isn't for nothing that the SON hub dynamo, often specified alongside the Rohloff, is called the Schmidt ORIGINAL Nabendynamo.
***
I'm a light user. For me a Rohloff is an out and out luxury, bought because I can afford it and don't want to get oil on my hands too often; I shall never wear out my Rohloff in my lifetime. Would I buy the new model, as it is specified? No, I would notl It doesn't offer even me anything worth paying a premium for, or sacrificing the slightest reliability for. Would Thorn specify it as the standard box instead of the original? Don't make me laugh. Thorn sells bikes for extreme touring and extreme reliability. Maybe as an option with a warning that the hard cases should choose the one and only and best ORIGINAL. Who doesn't want to be a hard case? Even us older chappies dream of making the tours Vik makes, and some of the other guys here.
Who would specify the new Rohloff box? I ride a German Utopia, more expensive and refined than a Thorn, but also with a big reputation for reliable transworld tours. Significantly, Utopia was the first manufacturer to specify Rohloff hub gearboxes as standard fittings, so they have a longer track record with Rohloff than anyone else. Utopia bikes are so expensive, I suspect they are largely sold to the middle-aged who simply want the best and don't ask whether it makes any sense to buy a bike so overdeveloped and overbuilt and over-everything. Here's a market that, unlike Thorn's market which I suspect watches the value received carefully (it's why Thorn is perennially on my shortlist), will pay for the lighter gearbox without asking any of the questions I posed above. Utopia itself is in the habit of specifying only parts to its own custom specification, and tested even beyond the German government and bicycle industry's rigorous requirements, so they have routine means to discover how reliable the new Rohloff actually is. Will Utopia specify the lighter gearbox? Maybe as an option, and if it tests well perhaps with a warmer recommendation than I would expect from Thorn, but a couple of lines further it will say the same thing, if you are thinking about that midwinter ride from Berlin to Leningrad, we recommend the one and only, the ORIGINAL Rohloff 500/14.
***
That new Rohloff box sitting on a bench in Germany is dead in the water, killed by its older brother, which is just too big and too tough and too established a competitor to overcome.
***
Is there space for an alternative Rohloff gearbox? I don't know. Maybe. Here's one I would pay a premium for:
I live up a very steep hill. I need very low gears to get up it, and I pride myself that I ride up it when roadies are pushing. I ride, seconds and minutes from my door in any direction, on hilly countryside where the downhills can be very fast. The 500/14 doesn't in fact offer me a wide enough range; I have to compromise a little at one end or the other. It isn't enough of an irritation even to consider going to derailleurs, or sacrificing the reliability of what I have already for a marginal increase in range (as in the unreleased new model Rohloff).
But what if I could get a big jump in range, together with, though less important (to me personally), a substantial cut in weight, what would I be willing to sacrifice for it? I'd be happy to pay a financial premium of a third or even a half if I didn't have to sacrifice reliability. For the same price as the original 500/14, I'd be happy to sacrifice half the known 100,000km+ durability of the original Rohloff box. But for that large price (in either money or reliability) I'd want a future-proof box, say 700% range. However, I'd be willing to accept unequal spacing between gears, and wider spacing between gears than now, so that 14 gears would still be enough, as long as at the bottom they were as close as at present. In short, this would a specialized commuter/light touring box, and would probably sacrifice any offroad capability along with (very likely) some durability.
I don't know how many customers would agree. Maybe the heavy commuters would consider the weight saving important -- I'm not a commuter but, if I were, I'd choose the durability of the original Rohloff box for low long-term cost and reliability. I don't see a hub gearbox that would interest us being made light enough to appeal to the roadie crowd, and the box I've described has clearly compromised offroad capability. So how big a market does that leave?
I bet 50 pence each way that the alternative desirable Rohloff every contributor here specifies has something in common -- that they're each and every one different from all the others!
Let's hear your dream spec for a Rohloff gearbox, but specify what you will pay for it as either a percentage money premium or a cut in durability or something else you're willing to sacrifice.
***
CONCLUSION
The key appeal of the original Rohloff Speedhub 500/14 is that by accident rather than design it was created all things to all the cyclists who have the nous to appreciate and want it and the money to pay for it. That's a terrific barrier for any alternative Rohloff gearbox to surmount.
Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Bicycles at
http://coolmainpress.com/BICYCLING.html
