Rohloff Hub Gears

[Simon Brooke]

in message <1182448761.25376.1.camel@cromwell>, Ambrose Nankivell
('firstname+'n'@gmail.com') wrote:

> 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.

It's one of the reasons I'm seriously thinking of fitting an epicyclic (if
not a Rohloff) to my utility bike.

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

The Conservative Party is now dead. The corpse may still be
twitching, but resurrection is not an option - unless Satan
chucks them out of Hell as too objectionable even for him.

 

[frankie]

squeaker wrote:

> 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 :~



I saw the box in the bike shop, looks lovely, not sure I want one though
--
--
_\|/_

 

[Clive George]

"Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> 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.

I think you overstate your case...

cheers,
clive

 

[Tom Crispin]

On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 11:24:41 -0700, squeaker <[email protected]>
wrote:

>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).

I love the noise in gear 7 - it'm a gentle humm of precision cogs
meshing in a bed of oil.

 

[Simon Brooke]

in message <[email protected]>, Clive
George ('[email protected]') wrote:

> "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> 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.
>
> I think you overstate your case...

Do you? In what way?

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

;; killing [afghan|iraqi] civilians is not 'justice'

 

[Simon Brooke]

in message <[email protected]>, Simon Brooke
('[email protected]') wrote:

> in message <1182448761.25376.1.camel@cromwell>, Ambrose Nankivell
> ('firstname+'n'@gmail.com') wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> It's one of the reasons I'm seriously thinking of fitting an epicyclic
> (if not a Rohloff) to my utility bike.

Speaking of which there's an absolutely gorgeous Cannondale on eBay just
now:
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=230145241516

That's about as nice a hardtail as it's possible to get. No, I have no
relation to the seller, and I can't afford to bid.

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

Morning had broken, and there was nothing we could do but wait
patiently for the RAC to arrive.

 

[Clive George]

"Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> in message <[email protected]>, Clive
> George ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>> "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>> 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.
>>
>> I think you overstate your case...
>
> Do you? In what way?

The strain on the bike for a start - that's nothing compared to going up a
steep hill or a sprint. So there's nothing lost there. Knees - depends a lot
on the person, but a couple of strokes in a slightly high gear isn't going
to hurt most people.

(I change down gears when I stop - but only by a little.)

cheers,
clive

 

[Paul Rudin]

Simon Brooke <[email protected]> writes:

>
> Speaking of which there's an absolutely gorgeous Cannondale on eBay just
> now:
> http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=230145241516
>
> That's about as nice a hardtail as it's possible to get. No, I have no
> relation to the seller, and I can't afford to bid.

It is nice, but the torque arm is a pita tbh (I have one on my
commuting bike), you're really better off with a frame designed to
take the Rohloff.

 

[M-gineering]

Paul Rudin wrote:
> Simon Brooke <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Speaking of which there's an absolutely gorgeous Cannondale on eBay just
>> now:
>> http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=230145241516
>>
>> That's about as nice a hardtail as it's possible to get. No, I have no
>> relation to the seller, and I can't afford to bid.
>
> It is nice, but the torque arm is a pita tbh (I have one on my
> commuting bike), you're really better off with a frame designed to
> take the Rohloff.

It's a diskbrake frame, so why didn't they fit a speedbone?

--
/Marten

info(apestaartje)m-gineering(punt)nl

 

[Mark]

>> 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,

It's my experience that I get away significantly faster by using a lower
gear.

I suspect the disagreement is because some of us whoosh around >20mph and
others <20mph. Changing down a fair few gears makes little difference if
the rider was doing less than twenty and minutes are significant. If doing
25mph and seconds are significant....

As for upshifting at the front, I usually do that when I'm up to a decent
speed so little time lost in the second it takes to shift or (if going for
it) I sod the chainline and start with it on the big ring. Decent and well
maintained gearing means it takes a fraction of a second to flick down to a
smaller cog.

 

[Roger Merriman]

Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:

> in message <[email protected]>, Simon Brooke
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
> > in message <1182448761.25376.1.camel@cromwell>, Ambrose Nankivell
> > ('firstname+'n'@gmail.com') wrote:
> >
> >> 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.
> >
> > It's one of the reasons I'm seriously thinking of fitting an epicyclic
> > (if not a Rohloff) to my utility bike.
>
> Speaking of which there's an absolutely gorgeous Cannondale on eBay just
> now:
> http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=230145241516
>
> That's about as nice a hardtail as it's possible to get. No, I have no
> relation to the seller, and I can't afford to bid.

got to say that my old mountain bike, old solid steel thing with
marthons which is fun for having a wiz would be great with a hub gear.
some of the busy streets here, it can be hard to see if someone is going
to cross or not and while i can stop fairly sharpish, i then end up
grunching down the cogs. which doesn't do my knee any good at all.

roger

 

[Roger Merriman]

Mark
<pleasegivegenerously@warmail*turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com.invalid>
wrote:

> >> 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,
>
> It's my experience that I get away significantly faster by using a lower
> gear.
>
> I suspect the disagreement is because some of us whoosh around >20mph and
> others <20mph. Changing down a fair few gears makes little difference if
> the rider was doing less than twenty and minutes are significant. If doing
> 25mph and seconds are significant....

yup same here, old bike but on the flat i can normally touch 20 or more
so 3-6 say the 3-4 gives a good pull away grear not so low you spin like
mad but low enought that it takes little effort to pull away.
>
> As for upshifting at the front, I usually do that when I'm up to a decent
> speed so little time lost in the second it takes to shift or (if going for
> it) I sod the chainline and start with it on the big ring. Decent and well
> maintained gearing means it takes a fraction of a second to flick down to a
> smaller cog.

roger

 

[Walney]

As the O.P. (nearly an OAP), I'd just like to thank all those who
responded. It seems to have sparked quite a debate. And there's me
just wondering if a Rohloff would be as helpful on hills as a
Megarange! Perhaps I'll just stick to my tried-and-trusted Galaxy.

John

 

[Peter Clinch]

Walney wrote:
> As the O.P. (nearly an OAP), I'd just like to thank all those who
> responded. It seems to have sparked quite a debate. And there's me
> just wondering if a Rohloff would be as helpful on hills as a
> Megarange!

Don't like Megaranges that much. Though the low gear is great it
comes by replacing 1st with 0th, so as you gradually drop through
the gears as the hill goes on, when you come down from 2nd you lose
quite a bit of momentum that you'd have kept with a bigger 1st. On
the whole, I'd prfer even spacings to the same low gear and lose a
bit off the top end, or slightly bigger spacings across the range.

Becuas ethe range on the Rohloff is so big, and the steps are
generally a fair bit smaller than 2nd to 1st on a MR, I think it's
a better weapon for taking hills. Also, it should change more
gracefully under load.

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 Simon Brooke <[email protected]>:
>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.

If your bike can't absorb the torque of you doing less than standing on
the pedals, maybe you should get one that isn't made of spaghetti? How
would you climb a very steep hill?
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!
Today is Mania, Presuary.

 

[David Damerell]

Quoting Brendan Halpin <[email protected]>:
>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.

I don't know about _need_, but certainly anyone who thinks a simple stop
needs a front shift or 8 clicks of a Rohloff should watch a few fixed
riders get away from a stop. No clicking through the gearbox there!
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!
Today is Mania, Presuary.

 

[David Damerell]

Quoting
Mark <pleasegivegenerously@warmail*turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com.invalid>:
>I suspect the disagreement is because some of us whoosh around >20mph and
>others <20mph.

I expect to cruise over 20mph on my normal bike. Not a _lot_ over 20mph,
admittedly.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!
Today is Mania, Presuary.

 

[David Damerell]

Quoting Peter Clinch <[email protected]>:
>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.

But a desire to indulge in pointless lever-flapping isn't a good reason
for a third party seeking advice on whether to buy a Rohloff.

>>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 did I, but in my experience the problems of battery lights are a lot
more irksome than being a bit slow away occasionally when towing a
trailer.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!
Today is Mania, Presuary.

 

[David Damerell]

Quoting Walney <[email protected]>:
>As the O.P. (nearly an OAP), I'd just like to thank all those who
>responded. It seems to have sparked quite a debate. And there's me
>just wondering if a Rohloff would be as helpful on hills as a
>Megarange!

Well, now, that _is_ where it'll help you out.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!
Today is Mania, Presuary.

 

[David Damerell]

Quoting Alistair Gunn <[email protected]>:
>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?

I'm not sure there's a "should" here but fixed fans don't seem to
experience any difficulty getting away, so I can't see that there can be
any advantage to going below 75" or so. Conveniently, this is a neat fit
for me, who generally rides around in an 81" gear and drops one shift
position to a 69" at a stop.

Conversely eight steps of a Rohloff are worth about a 70% reduction. In
other words, if the OP was cruising in a pretty big 90" gear, he's going
to be in a 28" gear after the stop. My absolute minimum Cornish hill gear
is only a 26.4". He's going to spin that out almost before he's finished
the first revolution!

28"'s good for about 6mph at a cadence between 70-80rpm. One good shove in
a normal gear and you're already at 6mph. What's the point here?

Something I've noticed on the tandem is that if the gear's too low at a
start, it causes problems - the right-hand pedal's moved to the bottom of
the stroke before my right leg is straight, because there wasn't enough
resistance. (This is particularly true if the stoker is overly feisty on
the first stroke, but it can happen anyway in a tiny gear). This isn't a
problem on a normal bike, where you can just delay the second pedal stroke
for a moment while you finish straightening your leg, but the stoker
doesn't know you're going to do that.

I mention this because obviously in that situation the first pedal stroke
is not putting in as much energy as it could. Too high a gear at a start,
and your power input is low because you are exerting full force but
travelling the distance slowly. But too low a gear and your power input is
low because you aren't exerting much force - and you're having to mess
around making gearshifts!

>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 ...

But on a recumbent you don't have the option of just slapping your weight
on the pedal for the first revolution.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!
Today is Mania, Presuary.