Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Fri Dec 09, 2016 2:37 pm

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 9:27 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 7:41 am
Posts: 1083
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Good to know, although I would assume the 11 speed would be heavier with the extra gears?

So assuming by doing this it puts more weight over the rear axle rather then over the whole bike.

Would still love to get an 11 speed Alfine on the back of my full sus. Would need to run a tensioner of course.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 9:36 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 12:22 pm
Posts: 2942
Location: Platsa, Messinias, Greece
FST4RD wrote:
Good to know, although I would assume the 11 speed would be heavier with the extra gears?

So assuming by doing this it puts more weight over the rear axle rather then over the whole bike.

Would still love to get an 11 speed Alfine on the back of my full sus. Would need to run a tensioner of course.


I don't think that the 11 speed Alfine is much (if any) heavier than the 8 speed but, as you say, the weight is more noticeable because it's all concentrated in one place. Although it's not the worst place it could be, it's fairly low down and although it's rotating weight it's all near the wheel centre where it has least effect.
On a full suspension bike the downside is that it'll be all unsprung weight, if you bother about these things......


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 9:42 am 
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
retrobike rider / Gold Trader

Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 9:05 pm
Posts: 9245
Some good info chaps, thanks for your replies.

So it looks like going Alfine isn't going to make a bike that much heavier. It looks like the issue is that the weight is centered around the rear of the bike. I read somewhere recently that fitting an alfine over a 30 speed set up moved the centre of balance back by 30mm on a test bike. That's not a problem for me as I'm building the frame from scratch and can take that figure into consideration. I prefer a rearward weight bias anyway as I find it easier to lift the front up out on the trails. I'm planning on building the bike around Jeff Jone's mantra of keeping the bike short and slack to take the weight off my buggered wrists, so expect a rearward weight balance anyway.

One more question, what's the smallest rear cog available? I want to run as small a front ring as possible to maximize clearance without going too high on BB height. Also, what is the ideal ratio for the 29" wheelsize?

Thanks
Si


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 9:51 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 7:41 am
Posts: 1083
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Andy R wrote:
FST4RD wrote:
Good to know, although I would assume the 11 speed would be heavier with the extra gears?

So assuming by doing this it puts more weight over the rear axle rather then over the whole bike.

Would still love to get an 11 speed Alfine on the back of my full sus. Would need to run a tensioner of course.


I don't think that the 11 speed Alfine is much (if any) heavier than the 8 speed but, as you say, the weight is more noticeable because it's all concentrated in one place. Although it's not the worst place it could be, it's fairly low down and although it's rotating weight it's all near the wheel centre where it has least effect.
On a full suspension bike the downside is that it'll be all unsprung weight, if you bother about these things......


When you weigh almost 20 stone it wouldn't matter I would think :lol:
How would one get on with a Truvativ Hammerschmidt up front?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 10:03 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 12:22 pm
Posts: 2942
Location: Platsa, Messinias, Greece
Dr S wrote:
One more question, what's the smallest rear cog available? I want to run as small a front ring as possible to maximize clearance without going too high on BB height. Also, what is the ideal ratio for the 29" wheelsize?


The smallest sprocket is, I think, 13T but how easy it is to find one I don't know. Any Sachs/SRAM IGH sprocket will also fit, as they have the same fitting interface - they aren't dished like the Shimano ones though, so will move the chainline in or out by 2.5mm.

Ideal ratio for 29" wheel? I'd start with something like 1.6:1 I suppose, so if you want more chainring clearance you could use something like 28:17 and go up or down from there.
I'm not the best person to ask though as I have my 8 speed geared really low, at 32:23 or 1.4:1....

Allegedly Shimano don't recommend going lower than 1.9:1 or you'll "invalidate the warranty" but my view is that it's probably not worth a toss and anyway, how would they know what ratio you were using when the hub failed?

I'm sure that there are some brutally strong riders who could destroy a hub whatever the ratio.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 8:20 pm 
98+ BoTM Winner / Gold Trader
98+ BoTM Winner / Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 9:58 pm
Posts: 3520
Location: the Netherlands
To go short, for serious MTB use, save a bit longer and buy a Rohloff, wish there was something equal and cheaper but there just isn't at this moment.
Rohloff has been in a league of it's own over the last 13 years.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 9:13 pm 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 12:22 pm
Posts: 2942
Location: Platsa, Messinias, Greece
yo-eddy wrote:
To go short, for serious MTB use, save a bit longer and buy a Rohloff, wish there was something equal and cheaper but there just isn't at this moment.
Rohloff has been in a league of it's own over the last 13 years.


But not without their share of problems - what Rohloff does have is good after-sales service. But then IGH are their main business, whereas they're only a tiny part of Shimano's so I imagine that a bit of negative publicity regarding a few hub problems is of little concern to them (Shimano),whereas Rohloff, whose business revolves (sorry :oops: )solely around hubs, takes more care in looking after its customers.

Just my non serious opinion, obviously :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 9:29 pm 
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:00 pm
Posts: 5611
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne
3 times the price but are roholfs and better?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 9:53 pm 
98+ BoTM Winner / Gold Trader
98+ BoTM Winner / Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 9:58 pm
Posts: 3520
Location: the Netherlands
Andy R wrote:
yo-eddy wrote:
To go short, for serious MTB use, save a bit longer and buy a Rohloff, wish there was something equal and cheaper but there just isn't at this moment.
Rohloff has been in a league of it's own over the last 13 years.


But not without their share of problems - what Rohloff does have is good after-sales service. But then IGH are their main business, whereas they're only a tiny part of Shimano's so I imagine that a bit of negative publicity regarding a few hub problems is of little concern to them (Shimano),whereas Rohloff, whose business revolves (sorry :oops: )solely around hubs, takes more care in looking after its customers.

Just my non serious opinion, obviously :wink:


I agree with you, no product is 100% perfect. The failure rate on Rohloff hubs is extremely low and when problems occur Rohloff will sort these at no extra cost. Fact is that the initial build quality of the Rohloff is many standards above the Shimano hubs, you pay for actual quality, they'll last more than 3 times longer, but for me the most important thing is, they can handle the forces that occur during hard of road use. The Shimano hubs were never intended for this kind of use and will eventually fail (in my case....very quickly....and that was on a commuter).
You pay more, you get more, simple :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 26, 2012 9:30 am 
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
retrobike rider / Gold Trader

Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 9:05 pm
Posts: 9245
I'd like a Rohloff but they are too expensive for a bike that will only get used on occasion. Also if a Rohloff is three times more reliable than an Alfine, you can but three Alfines for the price of a Rohloff. No doubt the Rohloff is a better product with better aftersales, but I can't justify the cost.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group