q-rings work great (except for shifting)

[Mark B]

JonB wrote:

Mark B wrote: Good heads up there, Robert. That would have been an expensive "oops".

Yeah oops. Would a rohloff work on a freerider?

I would imagine so, since it uses 26" wheels. I would assume they're mountain bike style hubs. You can confirm by measuring between the dropouts. They should be 135mm.

Mark

 

[Robert Stewart]

Mark B wrote: Good heads up there, Robert. That would have been an expensive "oops".

Mark

Hey, no problem. I would have gone for a Rohloff setup if I could. Of course, rumour has it that Rohloff are due to announce a new lighter hub at this year's Eurobike show, which runs from 4th to 7th September. You never know, there just might be a version suitable for road bikes. I am sure there is a demand, and the weight weenies cannot complain about 1400g. I will be watching closely for any announcements on this (it will be mine, oh yes, it will be mine) but, if there is a new hub, it isn't likely to be available for a while yet. *sigh*

Cheers,
Rob

 

[Mark B]

I just can't help but wonder what is the definition of "hardcore use"? It seems to me that could mean a lot of things. Also, doesn't sound like it will be rated for tandem use. This leads me to believe it will be a lot like the Nuvinci hub; rated more or less for cruiser bikes and not much else.

Mark

 

[JonB]

Mark B wrote: I just can't help but wonder what is the definition of "hardcore use"? It seems to me that could mean a lot of things. Also, doesn't sound like it will be rated for tandem use. This leads me to believe it will be a lot like the Nuvinci hub; rated more or less for cruiser bikes and not much else.

If you read bikehuggers review of nuvinci i dont think you will find it only for cruiser bikes.

http://bikehugger.com/2007/07/mondo_nuvinci_review.htm

As for the new Rohloff i read that the old Rohloff was made for 100.000 km, where as the new is only made for 50.000 km

 

[Hotdog]

Mark B wrote: I just can't help but wonder what is the definition of "hardcore use"? It seems to me that could mean a lot of things. Also, doesn't sound like it will be rated for tandem use. This leads me to believe it will be a lot like the Nuvinci hub; rated more or less for cruiser bikes and not much else.

I wouldn't read too much into those vague disclaimers from Rohloff. The original Speedhub was specced to withstand use on a tandem with two elite athletes giving it all they've got when they're using the lowest chainring/sprocket ratio Rohloff allow. The Speedhub "lite" will have a lower maximum torque specification, but will almost certainly still be rated to cope with the full power output of one elite athlete (or at least 2 mere mortals...) at the minimum chainring/sprocket ratio. And if you're using one for on road, non-loaded touring use you'd probably use higher than minimum gearing which reduces the torque applied to the hub (the real limiting factor) and puts you even further from being able to damage the thing. And even if you do somehow manage to overstress the hub then there's a shear pin in there which is designed to go first preventing you from damaging anything apart from a cheap, replaceable shear pin.

I wouldn't hold your breath on Rohloff making a version to fit in road bike dropouts though, even after all these years they still haven't produced a shifter that will work on drop bars despite the pleas of expedition touring types. Their primary target market was, and appears to still be, MTB despite the obvious benefits of these hubs for high end touring/commuting bikes.

 

[Robert Stewart]

Mark B wrote: I just can't help but wonder what is the definition of "hardcore use"? It seems to me that could mean a lot of things. Also, doesn't sound like it will be rated for tandem use. This leads me to believe it will be a lot like the Nuvinci hub; rated more or less for cruiser bikes and not much else.

Mark

I think "hardcore use" is supposed to be things like downhill mountain bike racing. Nothing to worry about on the road.

Cheers,
Rob

 

[Robert Stewart]

Hotdog wrote:
I wouldn't hold your breath on Rohloff making a version to fit in road bike dropouts though, even after all these years they still haven't produced a shifter that will work on drop bars despite the pleas of expedition touring types. Their primary target market was, and appears to still be, MTB despite the obvious benefits of these hubs for high end touring/commuting bikes.

We can but hope and lobby them. I have to say, I don't understand their existing decision to exclude sectors of the bike market who are willing to pay a premium for a good product (and speedhubs certainly carry a hefty premium over most gear systems). Intriguingly, this site claims there will be a new shifter for the new hub, though it’s not clear whether this will be an STI/Ergo style shifter for use with drop bars. Now if they are going to come out with a drop bar shifter, then maybe a road bike hub isn't out of the question. Watch this space...

Cheers,
Rob

 

[Mark B]

JonB wrote:

Mark B wrote: I just can't help but wonder what is the definition of "hardcore use"? It seems to me that could mean a lot of things. Also, doesn't sound like it will be rated for tandem use. This leads me to believe it will be a lot like the Nuvinci hub; rated more or less for cruiser bikes and not much else.

If you read bikehuggers review of nuvinci i dont think you will find it only for cruiser bikes.

http://bikehugger.com/2007/07/mondo_nuvinci_review.htm

As for the new Rohloff i read that the old Rohloff was made for 100.000 km, where as the new is only made for 50.000 km

I've read that review and a few personal anecdotes from people that have used them. 'I've also read this:

Nuvinci FAQ wrote: Fallbrook recommends that the current version of the NuVinci CVP be installed only in a comfort or cruiser bicycle although installation in other bicycle types may be possible.

The Nuvinci is also a 135mm hub, which rules out anything but mountain bikes.

Mark

 

[JonB]

Hotdog wrote: I wouldn't read too much into those vague disclaimers from Rohloff. The original Speedhub was specced to withstand use on a tandem with two elite athletes giving it all they've got when they're using the lowest chainring/sprocket ratio Rohloff allow. The Speedhub "lite" will have a lower maximum torque specification, but will almost certainly still be rated to cope with the full power output of one elite athlete (or at least 2 mere mortals...) at the minimum chainring/sprocket ratio. And if you're using one for on road, non-loaded touring use you'd probably use higher than minimum gearing which reduces the torque applied to the hub (the real limiting factor) and puts you even further from being able to damage the thing. And even if you do somehow manage to overstress the hub then there's a shear pin in there which is designed to go first preventing you from damaging anything apart from a cheap, replaceable shear pin.

cool. Reading this i dont worry about buying a 8 year old rohloff from it's 2. owner.

 

[Gromit]

Returning to Mark's (jeebus) original problem with the front deraileur and the Q-rings. Maybe the answer would be to fit a Schlumpf Speed-drive?
http://www.schlumpf.ch/sd_engl.htm
He could remove the Silvio's front deraileur completely and fit just a single Q-ring to the Speed-drive. Switching to the high range on the Speed-drive would give a ratio change of times 1.65. I have used a Speed-drive before on a trike. Superb bit of kit.

Edit: Didn't mean to imply that the discussion on Rohloff's/Nu Vinci's et cetera wasn't very interesting. Sorry guys.

 

[Mark B]

So you rehijacked a hijacked thread, no biggie! :lol: :lol:

Mark

 

[JonB]

Gromit wrote: Returning to Mark's (jeebus) original problem with the front deraileur and the Q-rings. Maybe the answer would be to fit a Schlumpf Speed-drive?
http://www.schlumpf.ch/sd_engl.htm
He could remove the Silvio's front deraileur completely and fit just a single Q-ring to the Speed-drive. Switching to the high range on the Speed-drive would give a ratio change of times 1.65. I have used a Speed-drive before on a trike. Superb bit of kit.

Wouldnt the highspeed drive be a better option? It has a 2.5 jump?

 

[Gromit]

Yes, that might be a better option. I haven't tried the High-Speed-Drive myself. It wasn't available when I bought my trike.
I guess that Mark would have to spend some time with a gear calculator to see which would suit him best.
http://sheldonbrown.com/gears/
There is a little bit of loss of efficiency when you're in the higher indirect gear range. On my trike's Speed-Drive, I could feel a small, very mild vibration through the pedals. It wasn't annoying.