are rohloffs slower than derraileurs?

[wheezy]

Are you suggesting the "occasional cyclist lady friend" was faster because she had closer gear gaps?

[Han]

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

[PH]

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/

[PH]

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.

[Fred A-M]

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.

[templek]

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?

[mylesau]

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?

[geocycle]

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).

[sbseven]

...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

[Fred A-M]

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.   

[templek]

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?

[Andre Jute]

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.

[Relayer]

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.

[john28july]

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.

[Relayer]

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.