11-34 Megarange FW cog interchangeability?



Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bluto

Guest
I have a small handful of derailleur bikes, and for these Shimano's 11-34 7 speed freewheel has
become my favorite cluster-- so much so that I have extended it an exemption from my general embargo
on Brand S parts.

I am rebuilding an old, sentimentally valuable bike that was originally equipped with a 12-28
cluster. I think that the rear derailleur may be able to accomodate a 32t cog, but a 34 is doubtful
and puts the RD way over its wrap rating. I would rather not switch to an anachronistic and
unfamiliar RD, but I do want to use my favorite freewheel.

I would like to put a 28 or 30t cog on the Shimano freewheel in place of the 34t cog. Is the body
for the new design freewheel compatible with previous generation Hyperglide freewheel cogs?

Furthermore, is there any way (short of plundering a NOS freewheel) for me to get loose cogs of the
appropriate size?

I appreciate any relevant input.

Chalo Colina
 
A

A Muzi

Guest
The low gear can use a cog from the Z, New 600, Sante or New Dura Ace freewheels. One spline has
been modified to acheive index of the Hyperglide slots but it's not an impediment.

--
Andrew Muzi http://www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April 1971 "Bluto"
<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> I have a small handful of derailleur bikes, and for these Shimano's 11-34 7 speed freewheel has
> become my favorite cluster-- so much so that I have extended it an exemption from my general
> embargo on Brand S parts.
>
> I am rebuilding an old, sentimentally valuable bike that was originally equipped with a 12-28
> cluster. I think that the rear derailleur may be able to accomodate a 32t cog, but a 34 is
> doubtful and puts the RD way over its wrap rating. I would rather not switch to an anachronistic
> and unfamiliar RD, but I do want to use my favorite freewheel.
>
> I would like to put a 28 or 30t cog on the Shimano freewheel in place of the 34t cog. Is the body
> for the new design freewheel compatible with previous generation Hyperglide freewheel cogs?
>
> Furthermore, is there any way (short of plundering a NOS freewheel) for me to get loose cogs of
> the appropriate size?
>
> I appreciate any relevant input.
>
> Chalo Colina

The low gear can use a cog from the Z, New 600, Sante or New Dura Ace freewheels. One spline has
been modified to acheive index of the Hyperglide slots but it's not an impediment.

--
Andrew Muzi http://www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April 1971
 
S

Sheldon Brown

Guest
Chalo Colina asked:

>>I have a small handful of derailleur bikes, and for these Shimano's 11-34 7 speed freewheel has
>>become my favorite cluster-- so much so that I have extended it an exemption from my general
>>embargo on Brand S parts.
>>
>>I am rebuilding an old, sentimentally valuable bike that was originally equipped with a 12-28
>>cluster. I think that the rear derailleur may be able to accomodate a 32t cog, but a 34 is
>>doubtful and puts the RD way over its wrap rating. I would rather not switch to an anachronistic
>>and unfamiliar RD, but I do want to use my favorite freewheel.
>>
>>I would like to put a 28 or 30t cog on the Shimano freewheel in place of the 34t cog. Is the body
>>for the new design freewheel compatible with previous generation Hyperglide freewheel cogs?
>>
>>Furthermore, is there any way (short of plundering a NOS freewheel) for me to get loose cogs of
>>the appropriate size?

A usually reliable source replied:

> The low gear can use a cog from the Z, New 600, Sante or New Dura Ace freewheels. One spline has
> been modified to acheive index of the Hyperglide slots but it's not an impediment.

Sorry, not so. That's true of all the other current Shimano freewheels, but the 11-34 is a radically
redesigned unit, and nothing on it is interchangeable with any earlier freewheel. The splines for
the 34 are quite a lot larger than all other models.

This new freewheel is a brilliant, revolutionary design, a work of mind-boggling genius, superior to
all previous freewheel designs.

I have an article about this amazing piece of equipment, see:

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/mega7/

If you can't use the 34, there is a more conventional 14-28 available.

Alternatively, you could remove the 34 and use it as a 6-speed 11-24.

Sheldon "Despite Appearances, This Posting Contains No Irony" Brown
+---------------------------------------------------+
| Time shouldn't just pass; things should happen. | --Harry Turtledove |
+---------------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 http://harriscyclery.com Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com
 
A

A Muzi

Guest
> Chalo Colina asked:
>
> >>I have a small handful of derailleur bikes, and for these Shimano's 11-34 7 speed freewheel has
> >>become my favorite cluster-- so much so that I have extended it an exemption from my general
> >>embargo on Brand S parts.
> >>
> >>I am rebuilding an old, sentimentally valuable bike that was originally equipped with a 12-28
> >>cluster. I think that the rear derailleur may be able to accomodate a 32t cog, but a 34 is
> >>doubtful and puts the RD way over its wrap rating. I would rather not switch to an anachronistic
> >>and unfamiliar RD, but I do want to use my favorite freewheel.
> >>
> >>I would like to put a 28 or 30t cog on the Shimano freewheel in place of the 34t cog. Is the
> >>body for the new design freewheel compatible with previous generation Hyperglide freewheel cogs?
> >>
> >>Furthermore, is there any way (short of plundering a NOS freewheel) for me to get loose cogs of
> >>the appropriate size?

> A usually reliable source ([email protected]) replied:
> > The low gear can use a cog from the Z, New 600, Sante or New Dura Ace freewheels. One spline has
> > been modified to acheive index of the
Hyperglide
> > slots but it's not an impediment.

"Sheldon Brown" <[email protected]> writing from an alternate universe where the Megas are
obstinate, in message news:[email protected]...
> Sorry, not so. That's true of all the other current Shimano freewheels, but the 11-34 is a
> radically redesigned unit, and nothing on it is interchangeable with any earlier freewheel. The
> splines for the 34 are quite a lot larger than all other models.
>
> This new freewheel is a brilliant, revolutionary design, a work of mind-boggling genius, superior
> to all previous freewheel designs.
>
> I have an article about this amazing piece of equipment, see:
>
> http://www.sheldonbrown.com/mega7/
>
> If you can't use the 34, there is a more conventional 14-28 available.
>
> Alternatively, you could remove the 34 and use it as a 6-speed 11-24.
>
> Sheldon "Despite Appearances, This Posting Contains No Irony" Brown

Huh. I actually did that before writing to Chalo and posting today. My New 600 and Dura Ace cogs fit
my Mega freewheel bodies just fine!

Perhaps you could tell me what I did wrong when I slipped this New 600 30t cog on a Mega body?

DISCLAIMER: No trick photography, no wires or mirrors, no animals were harmed in creation of
this freewheel

http://www.yellowjersey.org/MEGA.JPG

Seriously, what makes your East Coast Megas so hard to swap cogs on?

--
Andrew Muzi http://www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April 1971
 
S

Sheldon Brown

Guest
A Muzi wrote:
>>Chalo Colina asked:
>>
>>
>>>>I have a small handful of derailleur bikes, and for these Shimano's 11-34 7 speed freewheel has
>>>>become my favorite cluster-- so much so that I have extended it an exemption from my general
>>>>embargo on Brand S parts.
>>>>
>>>>I am rebuilding an old, sentimentally valuable bike that was originally equipped with a 12-28
>>>>cluster. I think that the rear derailleur may be able to accomodate a 32t cog, but a 34 is
>>>>doubtful and puts the RD way over its wrap rating. I would rather not switch to an anachronistic
>>>>and unfamiliar RD, but I do want to use my favorite freewheel.
>>>>
>>>>I would like to put a 28 or 30t cog on the Shimano freewheel in place of the 34t cog. Is the
>>>>body for the new design freewheel compatible with previous generation Hyperglide freewheel cogs?
>>>>
>>>>Furthermore, is there any way (short of plundering a NOS freewheel) for me to get loose cogs of
>>>>the appropriate size?
>>>
>
>>A usually reliable source ([email protected]) replied:
>>
>>>The low gear can use a cog from the Z, New 600, Sante or New Dura Ace freewheels. One spline has
>>>been modified to acheive index of the Hyperglide slots but it's not an impediment.

I explained:

>>Sorry, not so. That's true of all the other current Shimano freewheels, but the 11-34 is a
>>radically redesigned unit, and nothing on it is interchangeable with any earlier freewheel. The
>>splines for the 34 are quite a lot larger than all other models.
>>
>>This new freewheel is a brilliant, revolutionary design, a work of mind-boggling genius, superior
>>to all previous freewheel designs.
>>
>>I have an article about this amazing piece of equipment, see:
>>
>>http://www.sheldonbrown.com/mega7/
>>
>>If you can't use the 34, there is a more conventional 14-28 available.
>>
>>Alternatively, you could remove the 34 and use it as a 6-speed 11-24.

Andy came back with:

> Huh. I actually did that before writing to Chalo and posting today. My New 600 and Dura Ace cogs
> fit my Mega freewheel bodies just fine!
>
> Perhaps you could tell me what I did wrong when I slipped this New 600 30t cog on a Mega body?
>
> DISCLAIMER: No trick photography, no wires or mirrors, no animals were harmed in creation of this
> freewheel
>
> http://www.yellowjersey.org/MEGA.JPG

Sorry, Andy, you should read more carefully. There are "Megas" and then there are "Megas."

Chalo and I were referring to the ELEVEN-34. If you had looked at the article I wrote about this
freewheel you'd perhaps have noticed that.

As I mentioned, the ELEVEN-34 is unique. All other Shimano freewheels are as you described. The one
you modified appears to be a FOURTEEN-34, with a conventional body. The redesign was necessary to
accommodate the use of the 11 tooth cog on top.

Sheldon "Not Wrong" Brown +--------------------------------------------------------+
| Education consists mainly in what we have unlearned. | --Mark Twain |
+--------------------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton,
Massachusetts Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 http://harriscyclery.com Hard-to-find parts
shipped Worldwide http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com
 
L

lisated

Guest
> This new freewheel is a brilliant, revolutionary design, a work of mind-boggling genius, superior
> to all previous freewheel designs.
>
> I have an article about this amazing piece of equipment, see:
>
> http://www.sheldonbrown.com/mega7/
>
> If you can't use the 34, there is a more conventional 14-28 available.
>
> Alternatively, you could remove the 34 and use it as a 6-speed 11-24.
>
> Sheldon "Despite Appearances, This Posting Contains No Irony" Brown

Your page convinced me that the Mega7 is a nice piece of work, but I have to ask, why? It seemed
clear that the industry, I mean Shimano, has pretty much abandoned the freewheel and the hubs that
need them. So why are they bringing out a new and improved freewheel for an inferior hub design? [1]

[1]Inferior is one of those aint-necessarily-so things, as evidenced by the fine freewheel hubs
offered by Phil Wood. Those things never[2] bent axles.

[2]This moment some fingers, somewhere, are typing words to the effect "oh, yes they
do/did/will". Yup.

Ted
 
B

Bluto

Guest
Sheldon Brown <[email protected]> wrote:

> Using threads that are tightened by the pedaling action is a fundamentally inferior approach, due
> to the excessive levels of force sometimes required to remove freewheels from old-fashioned hubs.

It's a fair complaint, but I'll point out that as a 360-lb rider with freewheels up to 38t, I have
yet to come across a hub and FW that couldn't be separated. In the worst case the freewheel body
must be destroyed. This is a low-cost subcomponent of a quality wheel.

Furthermore, I have never had to resort to such violence for any freewheel using a Shimano spline
for removal. Only 2-prong Suntour type bodies have had to perish in the name of progress.

> No doubt, but I maintain that cassette Freehubs are superior to thread-on freewheel hubs in every
> respect.

They're not, really. There is no Shimano freehub that compares in any detail to the aforementioned
Phil freewheel hubs, for instance. (Though to be fair, Phil cassette hubs hold up nicely to the
comparison.)

Suppose you want an dishless multispeed wheel, or a very stout axle, or an unusual drilling? What
if you want to put top-shelf 32h road hubs on a BMX bike, or 48h high-flange BMX hubs on your
road bike?

I have a set of hubs I made with 3/4" axles front and rear-- this is only possible with a freewheel.
I have a completely dishless 130mm wheel; no cassette system would permit such a thing, nor any
optimized use of a five- or six-speed block.

One has scores of choices in 48h rear hubs if the 1.37x24 standard is observed. In cassette hubs the
choice is pitiful and gets worse for anything other than tandem spacings. Likewise cheap
sealed-bearing hubs abound for freewheels, but if you want an all-cartridge-bearing cassette hub,
prepare to offer up a pound of flesh.

I think your assertion of the categorical superiority of cassette hubs holds sway only for typical
wheels on mainstream bikes for average riders. That's most of the bike market, but not most of the
market for functionally superior bikes. Those riders who are poorly served by OEM bikes are likely
to require wheels of a nature that cassette hubs in their current forms can't deliver.

Chalo Colina freewheelin' son of a gun
 
S

Sheldon Brown

Guest
[email protected] wrote:
> Sheldon Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>I wrote:
>>
>>>>This new freewheel is a brilliant, revolutionary design, a work of mind-boggling genius,
>>>>superior to all previous freewheel designs.
>>>>
>>>>I have an article about this amazing piece of equipment, see:
>>>>
>>>>http://www.sheldonbrown.com/mega7/
>>>
>>A shy person wrote
>
>
> Thanks for the informative reply, Sheldon, but why did you label me "shy"? I gave my real name
> and my real e-address. What more do you want?
>
> Ted Bennett

This discussion doesn't belong on the newsgroup, so I'm replying privately.

That message was signed "Ted." I don't consider that a sufficient identifier, but "Ted
Bennett" is fine.

All the best,

Sheldon

--
Sheldon "Insert Nickname Here" Brown
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| This message has been sent to you using recycled electrons | exclusively. Please do not discard
| them after use, | send them along and help conserve these irreplaceable | sub-atomic resources
| for future generations. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton,
Massachusetts Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 http://harriscyclery.com Hard-to-find parts
shipped Worldwide http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com
 
S

Sheldon Brown

Guest
I asserted:

>>Using threads that are tightened by the pedaling action is a fundamentally inferior approach, due
>>to the excessive levels of force sometimes required to remove freewheels from old-fashioned hubs.

Chalo Cholina demurred:

> It's a fair complaint, but I'll point out that as a 360-lb rider with freewheels up to 38t, I have
> yet to come across a hub and FW that couldn't be separated. In the worst case the freewheel body
> must be destroyed. This is a low-cost subcomponent of a quality wheel.
>
> Furthermore, I have never had to resort to such violence for any freewheel using a Shimano spline
> for removal. Only 2-prong Suntour type bodies have had to perish in the name of progress.

I've ripped Shimano splined freewheel pullers to shreds on recalcitrang freewheels, then had to
disassemble and destroy the freewheel in order to salvage the wheel.

>>No doubt, but I maintain that cassette Freehubs are superior to thread-on freewheel hubs in every
>>respect.
>
>
> They're not, really. There is no Shimano freehub that compares in any detail to the aforementioned
> Phil freewheel hubs, for instance. (Though to be fair, Phil cassette hubs hold up nicely to the
> comparison.)

You're comparing apples and locomotives. The question is whether the cassete design or the thread-on
design is superior, so you should be comparing Phil freewheel hubs with Phil cassette hubs.

A 1983 Rolls Royce is a nicer car than a 2003 Honda Civic. Should we conclude from this that
cars were better 20 years ago? Should we conclude from this that English cars are better than
Japanese cars?

> Suppose you want an dishless multispeed wheel, or a very stout axle, or an unusual drilling? What
> if you want to put top-shelf 32h road hubs on a BMX bike, or 48h high-flange BMX hubs on your
> road bike?

This has nothing to do with the question of which cluster system is superior, but is an issue of
availability of different model variations.

> I have a set of hubs I made with 3/4" axles front and rear-- this is only possible with a
> freewheel.

Also only _needed_ with a freewheel! ;-)

> I have a completely dishless 130mm wheel; no cassette system would permit such a thing, nor any
> optimized use of a five- or six-speed block.

For those who think a dishless wheel is important there are ways to do this, using wider dropout
spacing, but most folks don't think it's worth the trouble. There's no inherent reason why using
thread-on freewheels would make creating a dishless wheel easier, this is an issue of how many
sprockets are in the cluster and what their spacing it, has nothing to do with how the cluster
attaches to the hub.

5- and 6-speed blocks are long obsolete, and there's no technically valid reason for using them on a
new installation.

> One has scores of choices in 48h rear hubs if the 1.37x24 standard is observed. In cassette hubs
> the choice is pitiful and gets worse for anything other than tandem spacings. Likewise cheap
> sealed-bearing hubs abound for freewheels, but if you want an all-cartridge-bearing cassette hub,
> prepare to offer up a pound of flesh.
>
> I think your assertion of the categorical superiority of cassette hubs holds sway only for typical
> wheels on mainstream bikes for average riders.

No, I'd say it "holds sway" for any configuration in which suitable hubs are available in
both formats.

This is the case for 99.999% of derailer-bike applications.

It is true that there are a few oddball hub configurations for which the demand is so tiny
that no manufacturer has thought it worthwhile to invest in the necessary tooling to make a
cassette version.

Sheldon "Splines Are Better Than Threads" Brown +--------------------------------------------+
| When choosing between two evils, | I always like to try the one I've never | tried before. --
| Mae West |
+--------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts Phone
617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 http://harriscyclery.com Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com
 
Status
Not open for further replies.