Rohloff Hub Gears

[Tom Crispin]

On 20 Jun 2007 23:14:48 +0100 (BST), David Damerell
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Quoting Tom Crispin <[email protected]>:
>>No more arriving at traffic lights in 11th gear then changing to 3rd
>>while waiting for them to change.
>
>Why would you _want_ to change down eight gears just to pull away from the
>lights?

Because I can.

I just love changing my Rohloff gears. Though there's little I like
more than cruising along in 11th, knowing that the hub is doing
absolutely no work as 11th is direct drive.

 

[Roos Eisma]

David Damerell <[email protected]> writes:

>Quoting Tom Crispin <[email protected]>:
>>No more arriving at traffic lights in 11th gear then changing to 3rd
>>while waiting for them to change.

>Why would you _want_ to change down eight gears just to pull away from the
>lights? Do you secretly want to be a lorry driver or something?

On my commute I have a gentle downhill, followed by a sharp right hand
turn into a fairly steep uphill. No lights, but I often need to stop or at
least lose all my speed at the turn to give way for oncoming traffic.
I normally shift down from the big to the granny ring in front, which
probably is not far away from 11 down to 3rd. Much easier on a hub gear so
you don't have to plan ahead.

Roos

 

[David Damerell]

Quoting Roos Eisma <[email protected]>:
>David Damerell <[email protected]> writes:
>>Why would you _want_ to change down eight gears just to pull away from the
>>lights? Do you secretly want to be a lorry driver or something?
>On my commute I have a gentle downhill, followed by a sharp right hand
>turn into a fairly steep uphill. No lights, but I often need to stop or at
>least lose all my speed at the turn to give way for oncoming traffic.

Well, yes, but that answers "why would you want to change down eight gears
before a steep hill", and indeed that will be easier with a hub gear.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!
Today is Oneiros, Presuary.

 

[David Damerell]

Quoting Tom Crispin <[email protected]>:
><[email protected]> wrote:
>>Why would you _want_ to change down eight gears just to pull away from the
>>lights?
>Because I can.

Right, but why not concentrate on the actual advantages of the Rohloff? If
I wanted to do some pointless lever-flicking I'd mount a disconnected gear
lever somewhere and jiggle it about when I stopped.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!
Today is Oneiros, Presuary.

 

[Peter Clinch]

David Damerell wrote:

> Well, yes, but that answers "why would you want to change down eight gears
> before a steep hill", and indeed that will be easier with a hub gear.

Okay, I get to the lights with a trailer-load of moppets and shopping
while chugging along at a fair pace, and my hope of sailing through is
dashed and I stop at the red (if you can imagine such a thing). When
the lights change again, do I want to wobble about and bother my knees,
listen to interesting clonking noises before the chain gets thrown
trying to change down a lot with derailleaurs, or just click down a load
with a hub?

I know I can cope happily with derailleurs because I do. That doesn't
mean I wouldn't like a Rohloff though.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[David Damerell]

Quoting Peter Clinch <[email protected]>:
>David Damerell wrote:
>>Well, yes, but that answers "why would you want to change down eight gears
>>before a steep hill", and indeed that will be easier with a hub gear.
>Okay, I get to the lights with a trailer-load of moppets and shopping
>while chugging along at a fair pace, and my hope of sailing through is
>dashed and I stop at the red (if you can imagine such a thing).

Spare me the random slurs, please.

>When
>the lights change again, do I want to wobble about and bother my knees,
>listen to interesting clonking noises before the chain gets thrown
>trying to change down a lot with derailleaurs, or just click down a load
>with a hub?

All of a sudden we're towing a lot of cargo?

Once again - very good, but it doesn't really address the question of why
someone just riding along would need to drop down eight gears for a simple
stop. One, maybe, but that's not a desperate challenge with a derailleur;
the eight gears is an artificially selected requirement to make the
derailleur equivalent be a front shift.

Even this contrived case doesn't really do it. If I'm towing 40kg of gear
I might well come down two gears for a stop, but that's still not a front
shift and it still isn't hard.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!
Today is Oneiros, Presuary.

 

[Brendan Halpin]

David Damerell <[email protected]> writes:

> Once again - very good, but it doesn't really address the question of why
> someone just riding along would need to drop down eight gears for a simple
> stop. One, maybe, but that's not a desperate challenge with a derailleur;
> the eight gears is an artificially selected requirement to make the
> derailleur equivalent be a front shift.
>
> Even this contrived case doesn't really do it. If I'm towing 40kg of gear
> I might well come down two gears for a stop, but that's still not a front
> shift and it still isn't hard.

I don't know what's so odd about it: unladen, I'll routinely drop
three at the back and one at the front when coming to a stop from
cruising speed (i.e. from 48/17 to 38/21). Gears are for changing.

Brendan
--
Brendan Halpin, Department of Sociology, University of Limerick, Ireland
Tel: w +353-61-213147 f +353-61-202569 h +353-61-338562; Room F2-025 x 3147
mailto:[email protected] http://www.ul.ie/sociology/brendan.halpin.html

 

[Peter Clinch]

David Damerell wrote:
> Quoting Peter Clinch <[email protected]>:
>> David Damerell wrote:
>>> Well, yes, but that answers "why would you want to change down eight gears
>>> before a steep hill", and indeed that will be easier with a hub gear.
>> Okay, I get to the lights with a trailer-load of moppets and shopping
>> while chugging along at a fair pace, and my hope of sailing through is
>> dashed and I stop at the red (if you can imagine such a thing).
>
> Spare me the random slurs, please.

What? It's a silly aside about cyclists never stopping at red lights.
As we see here all the time. Please stop imagining offence everywhere
you possibly can, it makes things so much easier.

> All of a sudden we're towing a lot of cargo?

Well, why not? People do.

> Even this contrived case doesn't really do it. If I'm towing 40kg of gear
> I might well come down two gears for a stop, but that's still not a front
> shift and it still isn't hard.

It is if it's a sudden stop, because you don't get to change until it's
too late. Doesn't happen often to me, but it does happen. And it's a
PITA when it happens with derailleurs. 3 of my 4 bikes have
derailleurs: that's how I know.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Tom Crispin]

On 21 Jun 2007 14:02:15 +0100 (BST), David Damerell
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Quoting Tom Crispin <[email protected]>:
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>Why would you _want_ to change down eight gears just to pull away from the
>>>lights?
>>Because I can.
>
>Right, but why not concentrate on the actual advantages of the Rohloff? If
>I wanted to do some pointless lever-flicking I'd mount a disconnected gear
>lever somewhere and jiggle it about when I stopped.

If I did that, when would I have time to pick my nose?

 

[Simon Brooke]

in message <[email protected]>, Brendan Halpin
('[email protected]') wrote:

> David Damerell <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Once again - very good, but it doesn't really address the question of
>> why someone just riding along would need to drop down eight gears for a
>> simple stop. One, maybe, but that's not a desperate challenge with a
>> derailleur; the eight gears is an artificially selected requirement to
>> make the derailleur equivalent be a front shift.
>>
>> Even this contrived case doesn't really do it. If I'm towing 40kg of
>> gear I might well come down two gears for a stop, but that's still not a
>> front shift and it still isn't hard.
>
> I don't know what's so odd about it: unladen, I'll routinely drop
> three at the back and one at the front when coming to a stop from
> cruising speed (i.e. from 48/17 to 38/21). Gears are for changing.

Absolutely. I almost always change down into a fairly low gear - 39x18,
typically - before coming to a stop. Anyone who has gears, and doesn't use
a low gear when starting off, is an idiot who is stressing his bike as
well as his knees.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Q: Whats a webmaster?
A: Like a spider, but nowhere near as intelligent.

 

[Alistair Gunn]

David Damerell twisted the electrons to say:
> Quoting Tom Crispin <[email protected]>:
> >No more arriving at traffic lights in 11th gear then changing to 3rd
> >while waiting for them to change.
> Why would you _want_ to change down eight gears just to pull away from the
> lights? Do you secretly want to be a lorry driver or something?

So how many gears do you think he should be shifting between? Or to put
it another way, do you think he should be cruising in a lower gear or
setting off in a higher gear?

Shifting 8 gears for traffic lights doesn't seem too unreasonable to me.
I tend to cruise in middle-7, and start in middle-1 on my 'bent ...
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

 

[David Damerell]

Quoting Brendan Halpin <[email protected]>:
>David Damerell <[email protected]> writes:
>>Even this contrived case doesn't really do it. If I'm towing 40kg of gear
>>I might well come down two gears for a stop, but that's still not a front
>>shift and it still isn't hard.
>I don't know what's so odd about it: unladen, I'll routinely drop
>three at the back and one at the front when coming to a stop from
>cruising speed (i.e. from 48/17 to 38/21). Gears are for changing.

Gears are for hills. That's just playing at being a lorry driver again. It
won't get you away any faster - slower, probably, if you've got to upshift
in front.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!
Today is Oneiros, Presuary.

 

[David Damerell]

Quoting Peter Clinch <[email protected]>:
>David Damerell wrote:
>>All of a sudden we're towing a lot of cargo?
>Well, why not? People do.

I do. But there's a big difference between "the Rohloff is good because
you can shift down eight gears at a stop" and "the Rohloff is good if you
tow heavy cargo on a sufficiently regular basis".

>>Even this contrived case doesn't really do it. If I'm towing 40kg of gear
>>I might well come down two gears for a stop, but that's still not a front
>>shift and it still isn't hard.
>It is if it's a sudden stop, because you don't get to change until it's
>too late. Doesn't happen often to me, but it does happen. And it's a
>PITA when it happens with derailleurs.

Again; I have a trailer myself. I reasonably often tow heavy loads.
Starting up in the gear I was cruising around in is slow and mildly
annoying, but it's just ridiculous overdramatisation to suggest it's worth
spending 600 quid on a hub to eliminate so trivial a problem.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!
Today is Oneiros, Presuary.

 

[Mark]

> it's just ridiculous overdramatisation to suggest it's
> worth spending 600 quid on a hub to eliminate so trivial a problem.

Depends. If the hub is being bought as a toy, to be fitted to another toy,
then we're in the realms of hobby...

 

[Brendan Halpin]

David Damerell <[email protected]> writes:

> Gears are for hills. That's just playing at being a lorry driver again. It
> won't get you away any faster - slower, probably, if you've got to upshift
> in front.

If you use the same gears pulling off from a stop as you do
cruising along at 25-35 km/h then you clearly need a fixie. And if
a gear change (front or back) needs more than a practised flick,
your derailleurs need fettling.

Brendan

PS Maybe I am playing at being a lorry driver, but when I have to
stop suddenly and don't change down in advance, I pull off by
standing on the pedals and pulling on the bars, and then I feel
like I'm playing at being an athelete, which is even less realistic.

--
Brendan Halpin, Department of Sociology, University of Limerick, Ireland
Tel: w +353-61-213147 f +353-61-202569 h +353-61-338562; Room F2-025 x 3147
mailto:[email protected] http://www.ul.ie/sociology/brendan.halpin.html

 

[Ambrose Nankivell]

On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 17:47 +0100, Simon Brooke wrote:
> Absolutely. I almost always change down into a fairly low gear - 39x18,
> typically - before coming to a stop. Anyone who has gears, and doesn't use
> a low gear when starting off, is an idiot who is stressing his bike as
> well as his knees.
>
Or, in my case, an idiot who forgot that he was riding a bike with a
derailleur and had to change down before he stopped.

I really like being able to stop without having to fiddle around
changing down. It's one of those things that I appreciate every time, if
I think about it.
--
A

 

[Colin McKenzie]

David Damerell wrote:
> Quoting Brendan Halpin <[email protected]>:
>>I don't know what's so odd about it: unladen, I'll routinely drop
>>three at the back and one at the front when coming to a stop from
>>cruising speed (i.e. from 48/17 to 38/21). Gears are for changing.
>
> Gears are for hills. That's just playing at being a lorry driver again. It
> won't get you away any faster - slower, probably, if you've got to upshift
> in front.

Interesting view. I approach one set of lights, downhill, in 2/8 or
3/7 if traffic is flowing, and can continue in this gear if I don't
have to stop. If I stop, I need to restart in 2/3, for 2 reasons:
because beyond the stop line it's flat to uphill, and because by now
there are impatient drivers behind me. I don't choose to give them an
excuse to pass dangerously.

I don't know how this gear change compares to 8 Rohloff steps, but I'd
guess it's similar.

By experiment, I know that I am only really comfortable at cadences
between 80 and 90, so there are a lot of gear changes as I accelerate
away.

Colin McKenzie

--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at
the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as
walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.

 

[squeaker]

Getting back to the OP, what about noise? I've heard that they are
noisy, especially in certain gears (users who also drive diesel cars
need not comment).
..
..
..
It's a joke, relax, it's a joke :~

 

[Peter Clinch]

David Damerell wrote:

> I do. But there's a big difference between "the Rohloff is good because
> you can shift down eight gears at a stop" and "the Rohloff is good if you
> tow heavy cargo on a sufficiently regular basis".

But it is good for both of those reasons. Some people, like Tom,
find they're happier being able to change 8 stops stood still. It
doesn't bother you, but why wshould that affect the way he feels?

> Again; I have a trailer myself. I reasonably often tow heavy loads.
> Starting up in the gear I was cruising around in is slow and mildly
> annoying, but it's just ridiculous overdramatisation to suggest it's worth
> spending 600 quid on a hub to eliminate so trivial a problem.

Rather than having the existing set of battery lights transferred
between my bikes at a cost of 0£ and a little effort, I chose to
spend several hundred pounds on expense dynamo equipment on each of
the bikes to eliminate the trivial problems associated with battery
lights (which most people use and don't have any issues with). So
don't be quite so sure what minor things are worth cumulatively
over a decade or so.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Simon Brooke]

in message <ERe*[email protected]>, David Damerell
('[email protected]') wrote:

> Quoting Brendan Halpin <[email protected]>:
>>David Damerell <[email protected]> writes:
>>>Even this contrived case doesn't really do it. If I'm towing 40kg of
>>>gear I might well come down two gears for a stop, but that's still not a
>>>front shift and it still isn't hard.
>>I don't know what's so odd about it: unladen, I'll routinely drop
>>three at the back and one at the front when coming to a stop from
>>cruising speed (i.e. from 48/17 to 38/21). Gears are for changing.
>
> Gears are for hills. That's just playing at being a lorry driver again.
> It won't get you away any faster - slower, probably, if you've got to
> upshift in front.

I think that you're mistaken. I tend to start time trials, for example, in
a low gear for exactly the same reason. But even if you get away no
faster, you'll get away at the same speed with less strain on your knees
and on your bike, though.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; Conservatives are not necessarily stupid,
;; but most stupid people are conservatives -- J S Mill