April 7th, 2006
Really Fugly
On behalf of everyone with a sliding dropout who has been insulted by my assertion that they are fugly I bring your attention to the Rohloff speedhub.
There are those who have fallen for the Rohloff way who now look upon the humble derailleur as “agricultural” compared to their rear end heavy, weight distribution shot to buggery Rohloff hub.
I on the other hand I’ve never seen anything so agricultural since I last looked at the power take off point of a Ford 8830 tractor.
For starters:
- It replaces the fragile rear mech with a fragile dangling plate on the opposite side. No benefit there then.
- The cable runs are to the wrong side of the bike (c.f. Sturmey Archer three speed hub, derailleurs), which leaves useless cable guides on one side and the need to zip tie extraaneous cables on to the other.Which get in the way of your brake cable/hose.
- It needs two bloody cables to operate because of it’s push me-pull you design. Can you spell “inefficient”?
Amongst the arguments for singlespeeding, this hub is way up there.
Update: Image from the Bogtrotters removed because their photographer is one of the converted and we don’t want him coming over here moaning. You can still clicky the link to see the monstrosity though.
![[Valid RSS]](http://32sixteen.com/wp-content/themes/three_column/images/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
del.icio.us
April 7th, 2006 at 9:58 pm
I take it you havent tried the hub on a tandem? =)
1. the plate isnt nearly as fragile as the mech, and its not sticking out or catching all the stuff that gets caught in the chain. I have never seen anyone have problems with it anyway.
2. Get the bike built with the right type of cable guides. All proper manufacturers have that option. =)
3. push’n'pull means that you can pack them hoses so full of rust and mud youll need pliers to pull the wire out for maintenance and it will still shift as crisp as lettuce.
April 11th, 2006 at 9:06 am
I can see the hub having lots of benefits on a tandem, especially a full suspenion one:
1 weight distribution isn’t an issue compared to solos
2 the ratio of sprung/unsprung weight means it won’t screw up suspension performance as much as it will on a solo
3 freeing up the front chainrings means you can use standard cranksets, which is cheaper, but I question whether it is any stiffer
I was wondering if the hub would cope with the amount of heat generated by a rear disc brake. (Santana did some unscientific tests which got the rear brake hot enough to peel paint from the frame). Searching the web for their tests I found Christoph Timm’s Rohloff equipped tandem.
Hey, if the Rohloff is good enough for Christoph’s tandem then it’s good enough for me.
Face it though, amongst the arguments against singlespeeding tandems are way up there :-)
Get the bike built with the right type of cable guides.
Pre-dating ISO was all very well, but standards have moved on since.
Who’s to say that the current mount is definitive?
And if you think I’m letting someone loose with a TIG welder on the only Turner tandem in the world, then think again.
April 13th, 2006 at 11:55 am
Is it just me, or do you have problems with shimano mechs and tandems?(i.e. springs too feeble to keep enough tension in long runs of cable as soon as they see a bit of mud / cludge) Maybe another pro for the rohloff?
April 13th, 2006 at 12:27 pm
Try Sram.
So so so much better shifting for longer. Ok not better to start with but very similar.
Fixed issues on a couple of full suspension bikes we’ve had.
Also the cable route into the mech is much nicer.
April 15th, 2006 at 3:36 pm
I actually prefer SRAM shifters, and have since 1992. Once they went ESP there really was no going back for me.
The tandem suffers from ghost shifts, especially as the suspension moves. Neither of the solo Turners - both SRAM equipped - have the same problem.