R
Robert Taylor
Guest
One of the articles of faith that we see repeated over and over is the statement that (other things
being the same) the axle is less likely to break in a freehub because the bearings are further
outboard thus reducing the length of unsupported axle. I submit that the length of unsupported axle
is reduced ONLY ON THE DRIVE SIDE. There is a bunch of unsupported axle on the non-drive side
especially in the case of really wide OLN tandem hubs (145mm to 160mm). I think the optimm tandem
rear hub would be constructed to provide zero dish which would most likely mean that there would be
as much unsuported axle on the non-drive side of a cassette hub as there would be on the drive side
of a freewheel hub. Granted the freehub would have less unsupported axle on the drive side.
Hubs could be made to reduce the unsupported axle length on the non-drive side by moving the bearing
outside the spoke flange on the non-drive side. Since to my knowledge no manufacturer bothers to do
this even on tandem hubs of extreme width it leads me to think that perhaps the length of
unsupported axle is of less importance than quoted wisdom would suggest.
My 1985 Santana tandem has a dishless freewheel rear wheel and in all that time it has had no
broken axles.
Bob Taylor
being the same) the axle is less likely to break in a freehub because the bearings are further
outboard thus reducing the length of unsupported axle. I submit that the length of unsupported axle
is reduced ONLY ON THE DRIVE SIDE. There is a bunch of unsupported axle on the non-drive side
especially in the case of really wide OLN tandem hubs (145mm to 160mm). I think the optimm tandem
rear hub would be constructed to provide zero dish which would most likely mean that there would be
as much unsuported axle on the non-drive side of a cassette hub as there would be on the drive side
of a freewheel hub. Granted the freehub would have less unsupported axle on the drive side.
Hubs could be made to reduce the unsupported axle length on the non-drive side by moving the bearing
outside the spoke flange on the non-drive side. Since to my knowledge no manufacturer bothers to do
this even on tandem hubs of extreme width it leads me to think that perhaps the length of
unsupported axle is of less importance than quoted wisdom would suggest.
My 1985 Santana tandem has a dishless freewheel rear wheel and in all that time it has had no
broken axles.
Bob Taylor