Removing a stuck freewheel

[Mark]

[email protected] wrote:
> I have never encountered a "stuck" freewheel that could not be removed
> with the vise + skewer method. But, I have always used a large vise
> that was bolted to a bench with said bench bolted to the floor or the
> floor and the wall.

That was my experience also, until last summer:

The problem wheel: 1st/2nd [1] generation Phil tandem hub (stainless
body with aluminum screw?-on flanges), SunTour Winner Pro freewheel, in
place since ~1987 or so. Threads *were* greased on installation, but
that was a long time ago.

The Method: Freewheel puller tool (4 prong type) bolted in place and
put in vise. Grip rim and honk hard (yes, counter-clockwise)

The problem: The flats on the puller tool are narrow [2]; when I twist
the wheel, the tool twists and pries open the vise jaws (!! This is a
large, heavy quality vise !!). I figure that the narrow tool flats
require more force to deliver a given torque.

The upshot: I got scared at the prospect of what would happen if the
tool broke loose from the vise, and swapped out the cogs instead (the
goal of this exercise was to change the gearing on the tandem for a tour).

I probably better get a different tool and try again, before such tools
can no longer be found and the freewheel seizes permanently.

Footnotes:
[1] Both generations predated the all-aluminum body Phil hubs; we tore
the threads out of the first-generation flanges by honking on the pedals
so hard that the freewheel forced the flange inward. Did this on two
separate 1st-gen wheels, in the early '80s. Phil of course replaced
both with the second-gen model, which has a wider flange base. No
problems since.

[2] The flats are almost exactly 1/2" wide on the Maeda-issue tool. The
irony of the non-metric measurement strikes me; since there are only two
flats, not six, it isn't a matter of conveniently fitting someone's
monster socket wrench.

Mark J.

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 14:44:01 GMT, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:

>John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 07:21:53 -0300, "jtaylor"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Get (or borrow) a bigger vice.
>>>
>>> Make sure the remover is snug.
>>>
>>> Tighten the vice like you _mean_ it.
>>>
>>> Inflate the tyre for a better grip, and turn the rim - apply torque
>>> as suddenly and as forcefully as you can.
>>
>> Work gloves might be useful when doing this.
>

>What, appropriate protective gear?!?

It makes sense to wear protective gear when facing some sort of pain
that is likely or certain to occur, such as when yanking very had on a
wheel in a vice. In the case of work gloves, they might even allow the
user to hold on even more tightly than with bare hands.

>Risk compensation! Risk compensation!
>
>(BTW, was impressed with all your pics of various helmet types. Rather
>makes one wonder why you'd rant against them so.)

I'm not going to comment on what you've said about helmets here.

All I will say is that I have already responded to helmet-related
comments from you almost exactly like the ones you've made above in
that other thread, so I cannot understand why you bring them up here
other than to be a ****.

More generally, if you're going to try to tweak or insult me or even
simply criticize/question me in some way related to helmets, I'd
suggest you keep those comments confined to threads that are directly
related to helmets, rather than crapping up other parts of this
newsgroup. Please note, I'm using the term "**** up" not about the
*meaning* of your comments (although they usually are ****) but rather
your bringing them outside the helmet discussions. That's polluting
other threads.

Similarly, if you feel the need to make ad hominem attacks on me, it
would be good if you could confine them to the helmet threads, or at
least keep them out of legitimate threads that other people start,
rather than crapping up more of this group. I do read the helmet
threads, so I will be sure to read your comments there.

Of course, if you want to criticize me about something related to a
particular non-helmet thread, it makes sense to do so in that thread.

JT


****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

 

[Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman]

Bill Sornson wrote:
> What are you talking about?

I don't know.

--
Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Impact is not a synonym of affect or effect

 

[[email protected]]

Mark wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > I have never encountered a "stuck" freewheel that could not be removed
> > with the vise + skewer method. But, I have always used a large vise
> > that was bolted to a bench with said bench bolted to the floor or the
> > floor and the wall.
>
> That was my experience also, until last summer:
>
> The problem wheel: 1st/2nd [1] generation Phil tandem hub (stainless
> body with aluminum screw?-on flanges), SunTour Winner Pro freewheel, in
> place since ~1987 or so. Threads *were* greased on installation, but
> that was a long time ago.
>
> The Method: Freewheel puller tool (4 prong type) bolted in place and
> put in vise. Grip rim and honk hard (yes, counter-clockwise)
>
> The problem: The flats on the puller tool are narrow [2]; when I twist
> the wheel, the tool twists and pries open the vise jaws (!! This is a
> large, heavy quality vise !!). I figure that the narrow tool flats
> require more force to deliver a given torque.
>
> The upshot: I got scared at the prospect of what would happen if the
> tool broke loose from the vise, and swapped out the cogs instead (the
> goal of this exercise was to change the gearing on the tandem for a tour).
>
> I probably better get a different tool and try again, before such tools
> can no longer be found and the freewheel seizes permanently.
>
> Footnotes:
> [1] Both generations predated the all-aluminum body Phil hubs; we tore
> the threads out of the first-generation flanges by honking on the pedals
> so hard that the freewheel forced the flange inward. Did this on two
> separate 1st-gen wheels, in the early '80s. Phil of course replaced
> both with the second-gen model, which has a wider flange base. No
> problems since.
>
> [2] The flats are almost exactly 1/2" wide on the Maeda-issue tool. The
> irony of the non-metric measurement strikes me; since there are only two
> flats, not six, it isn't a matter of conveniently fitting someone's
> monster socket wrench.
>
>

I just dug out my old Suntour /Maeda 4 prong tool (haven't used it in
awhile!). Yes it is wimpy. I have a new Park two prong (my original
Maeda two prong was "borrowed" and remains MIA), which is much more
stoutly built. When you do decide to remove that FW, I think the Park
version will do the trick. (FWIW, last year I removed a two-notch
Suntour Winner FW that was factory installed in 1983, probably sans
grease, and left in place ever since. It took alotta "grunt", but off
it came. The fact that it was a steel bodied Sanshin hub probably made
things easier.)

 

[Mark]

[email protected] wrote:
> Mark wrote:
>
>>[email protected] wrote:
>>
>>>I have never encountered a "stuck" freewheel that could not be removed
>>>with the vise + skewer method. But, I have always used a large vise
>>>that was bolted to a bench with said bench bolted to the floor or the
>>>floor and the wall.
>>
>>That was my experience also, until last summer:
>>
>>The problem wheel: 1st/2nd [1] generation Phil tandem hub (stainless
>>body with aluminum screw?-on flanges), SunTour Winner Pro freewheel, in
>>place since ~1987 or so. Threads *were* greased on installation, but
>>that was a long time ago.
>>
>>The Method: Freewheel puller tool (4 prong type) bolted in place and
>>put in vise. Grip rim and honk hard (yes, counter-clockwise)
>>
>>The problem: The flats on the puller tool are narrow [2]; when I twist
>>the wheel, the tool twists and pries open the vise jaws (!! This is a
>>large, heavy quality vise !!). I figure that the narrow tool flats
>>require more force to deliver a given torque.
>>
>>The upshot: I got scared at the prospect of what would happen if the
>>tool broke loose from the vise, and swapped out the cogs instead (the
>>goal of this exercise was to change the gearing on the tandem for a tour).
>>
>>I probably better get a different tool and try again, before such tools
>>can no longer be found and the freewheel seizes permanently.
>>
>>Footnotes:
>>[1] Both generations predated the all-aluminum body Phil hubs; we tore
>>the threads out of the first-generation flanges by honking on the pedals
>>so hard that the freewheel forced the flange inward. Did this on two
>>separate 1st-gen wheels, in the early '80s. Phil of course replaced
>>both with the second-gen model, which has a wider flange base. No
>>problems since.
>>
>>[2] The flats are almost exactly 1/2" wide on the Maeda-issue tool. The
>>irony of the non-metric measurement strikes me; since there are only two
>>flats, not six, it isn't a matter of conveniently fitting someone's
>>monster socket wrench.
>>
>
> I just dug out my old Suntour /Maeda 4 prong tool (haven't used it in
> awhile!). Yes it is wimpy. I have a new Park two prong (my original
> Maeda two prong was "borrowed" and remains MIA), which is much more
> stoutly built. When you do decide to remove that FW, I think the Park
> version will do the trick.

I don't have the Park tool (though I can pick one up), but I do have a
Maeda two-prong and a Bicycle Research 2-prong, I'll give it a try, thanks.

Mark J.

 

[bob prohaska's usenet account]

Thanks to all for good counsel, I guess there's substitute for brute force.

bob prohaska

 

[[email protected]]

Mark wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > Mark wrote:
> >
> >>[email protected] wrote:
> >>
> >>>I have never encountered a "stuck" freewheel that could not be removed
> >>>with the vise + skewer method. But, I have always used a large vise
> >>>that was bolted to a bench with said bench bolted to the floor or the
> >>>floor and the wall.
> >>
> >>That was my experience also, until last summer:
> >>
> >>The problem wheel: 1st/2nd [1] generation Phil tandem hub (stainless
> >>body with aluminum screw?-on flanges), SunTour Winner Pro freewheel, in
> >>place since ~1987 or so. Threads *were* greased on installation, but
> >>that was a long time ago.
> >>
> >>The Method: Freewheel puller tool (4 prong type) bolted in place and
> >>put in vise. Grip rim and honk hard (yes, counter-clockwise)
> >>
> >>The problem: The flats on the puller tool are narrow [2]; when I twist
> >>the wheel, the tool twists and pries open the vise jaws (!! This is a
> >>large, heavy quality vise !!). I figure that the narrow tool flats
> >>require more force to deliver a given torque.
> >>
> >>The upshot: I got scared at the prospect of what would happen if the
> >>tool broke loose from the vise, and swapped out the cogs instead (the
> >>goal of this exercise was to change the gearing on the tandem for a tour).
> >>
> >>I probably better get a different tool and try again, before such tools
> >>can no longer be found and the freewheel seizes permanently.
> >>
> >>Footnotes:
> >>[1] Both generations predated the all-aluminum body Phil hubs; we tore
> >>the threads out of the first-generation flanges by honking on the pedals
> >>so hard that the freewheel forced the flange inward. Did this on two
> >>separate 1st-gen wheels, in the early '80s. Phil of course replaced
> >>both with the second-gen model, which has a wider flange base. No
> >>problems since.
> >>
> >>[2] The flats are almost exactly 1/2" wide on the Maeda-issue tool. The
> >>irony of the non-metric measurement strikes me; since there are only two
> >>flats, not six, it isn't a matter of conveniently fitting someone's
> >>monster socket wrench.
> >>
> >
> > I just dug out my old Suntour /Maeda 4 prong tool (haven't used it in
> > awhile!). Yes it is wimpy. I have a new Park two prong (my original
> > Maeda two prong was "borrowed" and remains MIA), which is much more
> > stoutly built. When you do decide to remove that FW, I think the Park
> > version will do the trick.
>
> I don't have the Park tool (though I can pick one up), but I do have a
> Maeda two-prong and a Bicycle Research 2-prong, I'll give it a try, thanks.
>
>

Is the Maeda 2 prong different than the 4 prong? It's been years since
I saw one. I have one BR remover (Shimano), and it has the same size
flats as the Maeda, just more of them.

 

[bob prohaska's usenet account]

Richard B <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Per Sheldon Brown's article on removing s stuck aluminum seatposts
> ( http://sheldonbrown.com/stuck-seatposts.html )...
>
> "Aluminum seatposts frequently become stuck by corrosion also, and
> penetrating oil is almost useless against aluminum oxide. Fortunately,
> aluminum oxide can be dissolved like magic by using ammonia."
>
> Maybe this will work with a steel freewheel stuck to an aluminum hub.

It probably will work, but it'll play hell with the anodizing on the
rest of the hub. In this case, it's the hub I'd like to save.

Perhaps as a last resort.

Thanks!

bob prohaska

 

[bob prohaska's usenet account]

Sheldon Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> See: http://sheldonbrown.com/freewheels
>

That link brings up a blank page: No error, no 404, nothing.
Browser is Safari on Mac OS X 10.4.7

bob prohaska

 

[Bill Sornson]

D'oh!

Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:

>> What are you talking about?

> I don't know.

What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

 

[Sheldon Brown]

bob prohaska's usenet account wrote:
> Sheldon Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > See: http://sheldonbrown.com/freewheels
> >
> That link brings up a blank page: No error, no 404, nothing.

Looks like the file got corrupted on the server. I've just re-uploaded
it, works now.

> Browser is Safari on Mac OS X 10.4.7

Me too, but I'm in the middle of downloading:

APPLE.MAC.OSX.LEOPARD.V10.5.WWDC.PREVIEW-BETAOSX from Bittorrent...

Sheldon "Early Adopter" Brown
+---------------------------------------------------------+
| It is good to learn from your mistakes; |
| It is better to learn from the mistakes of others. |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
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

 

[[email protected]]

Bill Sornson wrote:
> D'oh!
>
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> > Bill Sornson wrote:
>
> >> What are you talking about?
>
> > I don't know.
>
> What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Snip, snip, snip?

Context? We don't want no stinkin' context!

 

[Bill Sornson]

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 14:44:01 GMT, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>>> On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 07:21:53 -0300, "jtaylor"
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Get (or borrow) a bigger vice.
>>>>
>>>> Make sure the remover is snug.
>>>>
>>>> Tighten the vice like you _mean_ it.
>>>>
>>>> Inflate the tyre for a better grip, and turn the rim - apply torque
>>>> as suddenly and as forcefully as you can.
>>>
>>> Work gloves might be useful when doing this.
>>
>
>> What, appropriate protective gear?!?
>
> It makes sense to wear protective gear when facing some sort of pain
> that is likely or certain to occur, such as when yanking very had on a
> wheel in a vice. In the case of work gloves, they might even allow the
> user to hold on even more tightly than with bare hands.
>
>> Risk compensation! Risk compensation!
>>
>> (BTW, was impressed with all your pics of various helmet types.
>> Rather makes one wonder why you'd rant against them so.)
>
> I'm not going to comment on what you've said about helmets here.
>
> All I will say is that I have already responded to helmet-related
> comments from you almost exactly like the ones you've made above in
> that other thread, so I cannot understand why you bring them up here
> other than to be a ****.
>
> More generally, if you're going to try to tweak or insult me or even
> simply criticize/question me in some way related to helmets, I'd
> suggest you keep those comments confined to threads that are directly
> related to helmets, rather than crapping up other parts of this
> newsgroup. Please note, I'm using the term "**** up" not about the
> *meaning* of your comments (although they usually are ****) but rather
> your bringing them outside the helmet discussions. That's polluting
> other threads.
>
> Similarly, if you feel the need to make ad hominem attacks on me, it
> would be good if you could confine them to the helmet threads, or at
> least keep them out of legitimate threads that other people start,
> rather than crapping up more of this group. I do read the helmet
> threads, so I will be sure to read your comments there.
>
> Of course, if you want to criticize me about something related to a
> particular non-helmet thread, it makes sense to do so in that thread.

So many words.

I just thought I'd try your tactic of stalking (AKA post humping). Too
boring.

 

[[email protected]]

Bill Sornson wrote:
> John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 14:44:01 GMT, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 07:21:53 -0300, "jtaylor"
> >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Get (or borrow) a bigger vice.
> >>>>
> >>>> Make sure the remover is snug.
> >>>>
> >>>> Tighten the vice like you _mean_ it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Inflate the tyre for a better grip, and turn the rim - apply torque
> >>>> as suddenly and as forcefully as you can.
> >>>
> >>> Work gloves might be useful when doing this.
> >>
> >
> >> What, appropriate protective gear?!?
> >
> > It makes sense to wear protective gear when facing some sort of pain
> > that is likely or certain to occur, such as when yanking very had on a
> > wheel in a vice. In the case of work gloves, they might even allow the
> > user to hold on even more tightly than with bare hands.
> >
> >> Risk compensation! Risk compensation!
> >>
> >> (BTW, was impressed with all your pics of various helmet types.
> >> Rather makes one wonder why you'd rant against them so.)
> >
> > I'm not going to comment on what you've said about helmets here.
> >
> > All I will say is that I have already responded to helmet-related
> > comments from you almost exactly like the ones you've made above in
> > that other thread, so I cannot understand why you bring them up here
> > other than to be a ****.
> >
> > More generally, if you're going to try to tweak or insult me or even
> > simply criticize/question me in some way related to helmets, I'd
> > suggest you keep those comments confined to threads that are directly
> > related to helmets, rather than crapping up other parts of this
> > newsgroup. Please note, I'm using the term "**** up" not about the
> > *meaning* of your comments (although they usually are ****) but rather
> > your bringing them outside the helmet discussions. That's polluting
> > other threads.
> >
> > Similarly, if you feel the need to make ad hominem attacks on me, it
> > would be good if you could confine them to the helmet threads, or at
> > least keep them out of legitimate threads that other people start,
> > rather than crapping up more of this group. I do read the helmet
> > threads, so I will be sure to read your comments there.
> >
> > Of course, if you want to criticize me about something related to a
> > particular non-helmet thread, it makes sense to do so in that thread.
>
> So many words.
>

And so few brain cells. :-(


> I just thought I'd try your tactic of stalking (AKA post humping). Too
> boring.


It's less boring if you're stupid. ;-)

 

[Bill Sornson]

[email protected] wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> D'oh!
>>
>> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>
>>>> What are you talking about?
>>
>>> I don't know.
>>
>> What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?
>
> Snip, snip, snip?
>
> Context? We don't want no stinkin' context!

Well, sure, THAT. (I had top-posted the "D'oh!" so that's what I was
referencing.)

 

[Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman]

Bill Sornson wrote:
> D'oh!
>
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> > Bill Sornson wrote:
>
> >> What are you talking about?
>
> > I don't know.
>
> What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

I don't know.

--
Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Impact is not a synonym of affect or effect

 

[Mark]

[email protected] wrote:
>
> Is the Maeda 2 prong different than the 4 prong? It's been years since
> I saw one. I have one BR remover (Shimano), and it has the same size
> flats as the Maeda, just more of them.

The flats on the two-prong Maeda remover are slightly wider than the
four-prong Maeda. Sort of a "design downgrade" I guess.

I think the BR remover had the same width flats as the two-prong Maeda,
but they're not in my hands this moment. My BR remover is 6-sided like
(?) your Shimano.

Mark J.

 

[[email protected]]

bob prohaska's usenet account wrote:

> The big puzzle is how to apply torque to the freewheel; when I mounted
> it (~20 years ago) I turned the rim. Is there a better way? The wheels,
> if antiquated, run true and tires are available. Somehow I can't see
> wisdom in a major change (700C, new drivetrain) as the bike is just
> used for commuting and exercise.
>
> If it's a "turn it or break it, whichever comes first" situation,
> that's what I'll do, but damaging the rear wheel seems like a recipe
> for very expensive upgrades that won't pay dividends to a utility rider.

one way no one has mentioned is to take apart the freewheel itself and
clamp the freewheel "body" itself into a vise. this will probably give
you better grip than the freewheel tool, but it destroys the freewheel.