Locking nut torque

[dsim]

Hello, when trying to change from the splined sprocket carrier that uses the spit ring to the lock-ring type,  I ended up undoing the locking nut instead by mistake.

What is the correct torque for the locking nut?

The manual says it needs a 17mm spanner, but doesn't detail the required nm.

Thanks for any help!

UPDATE - if anyone else has this query, Rohloff replied to my email and said it should be 17nm. Screenshot of email in later comment.

[steve216c]

Firstly, welcome to the forum

I don’t have the locking ring so cannot speak from experience, but found this link in German which suggests 30nm.

https://www.bike-components.de/de/Rohloff/Lockring-fuer-Splined-Carrier-L-p67329/?o=200001-schwarz-universal&delivery_country=DE&cp=13&upid=google&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIiOL6zuqo_wIVgsp3Ch3aLwkbEAQYASABEgJDkfD_BwE

I trust this is the answer you need. 

[dsim]

Thanks for the response.

It's a little confusing since the name is very similar and I keep mixing then up. I'm looking for the torque for the 17mm wrench locking nut rather than the lock-ring.

It's the red nut in the photo below

[PH]

If you want to be absolutely certain I'd ask Thorn or Rohloff.
But, IMO, it isn't necessary to know, I'd just snug it up fairly tight.  I haven't plucked the opinion out of thin air, here are the things that I've considered:
The Rohloff manual not giving a figure in the appendix, where it does for those that require it
There's only a short thread on the axle, it may be that limit is fine
The nut presses against a spring, with a washer between, so it's not pressing against anything that's requires a fixed pressure
Lastly -  it's called a lock nut and these are by nature what they say, they're there to hold things in place rather than to load something.

[dsim]

That's a good point. It's currently done up to what you suggest as I thought I better just make it not loose until I find out more.

I might give Thorn a call tomorrow to make sure while I wait for the tool I need to remove the carrier.

Thanks!

[PH]

A little off topic but could I ask why you're changing to a lock ring? 

[dsim]

I'm changing to a Gates belt drive and you're supposed to change to the lock ring system for it. I presume it reduces lateral movement on the belt that the circular clip might allow

[PH]

I'm changing to a Gates belt drive and you're supposed to change to the lock ring system for it. I presume it reduces lateral movement on the belt that the circular clip might allow

Thanks, i did wonder if that was it, though I know someone who made the change on a chain bike because they struggled with the snap ring.
I keep getting belt curious, though it's an expensive upgrade so I've resisted so far...

[mickeg]

I have read, mostly on this forum that the spline fitted sprocket can be a bit loose after use, but that the lock ring can fix that.

I am still using threaded, not splined sprocket.

I was considering getting the lockring version later.

[dsim]

Thanks, i did wonder if that was it, though I know someone who made the change on a chain bike because they struggled with the snap ring.
I keep getting belt curious, though it's an expensive upgrade so I've resisted so far...

I originally wanted a belt but there were supply issues so Thorn couldn't do it at that point.

It's proven to be more expensive than I originally thought. Currently waiting on the too to remove the current sprocket carrier which I will only use once as the lock-ring uses a different tool. Guess I could sell it second hand in a week or so!

Looking forward to switching to the belt - I'm hoping I don't regret jumping in!

[dsim]

I have read, mostly on this forum that the spline fitted sprocket can be a bit loose after use, but that the lock ring can fix that.

I am still using threaded, not splined sprocket.

I was considering getting the lockring version later.

That must be why Gates require the lock-ring then as the belt is sensitive to lateral movement

[JohnR]

Looking forward to switching to the belt - I'm hoping I don't regret jumping in!

Make sure that the gearing ratio is appropriate for your needs as changing it requires replacing two of chainring / belt / sprocket.

I had a belt drive bike and discovered that it wasn't as tolerant of winter muck as I expected: The bike made progressively worse creaking noises which went away after I spent an hour scrubbing the belt. A chain with a Hebie Chainglider is lower maintenance and cheaper.

That bike was a bit small for me so it was dismantled, the belt drive sprocket and carrier removed from the Rohloff hub (very hard work) and the wheels reused in another frame. I've got the Gates CDX parts in a bag if you haven't already ordered yours.

[mickeg]

... Currently waiting on the too to remove the current sprocket carrier which I will only use once as the lock-ring uses a different tool. Guess I could sell it second hand in a week or so!

Looking forward to switching to the belt - I'm hoping I don't regret jumping in!

It is my understanding that if you want to remove the carrier, you will need that tool again.  I think most people never would need to remove it, but if I was in your shoes, I would keep it.

I mentioned above that I considered buying the lockring carrier, and might some day.  I am staying with chains, I was only thinking that if the sprockets on the spring circlip carrier can loosen up over time, then the lockring version might be better. 

[PH]

It is my understanding that if you want to remove the carrier, you will need that tool again.

That's the case with a split ring carrier, I'm assuming it's the same with a lockring type, though I've never used one.
When I flip or replace a sprocket I remove and grease the carrier, I don't know if I'll ever need to remove it, but I like to know it's possible should that arise.
I've seen videos where the sprocket has worn the carrier, I don't know how often that happens, but it does.  I can't see how the method of securing it will make any difference. 
I know someone with a lockring and chain, I bought a split ring carrier from them, they just didn't like the fitting and removal, it is a bit on a knack, very crude engineering, which might be why Rohloff didn't go that way to start with.  It's also very well proven, not just on cycle hubs but in all sorts of applications.

[dsim]

In case anyone else has this query, Rohloff answered my email and said it should be 17 nm