Rohloff vs convetional gears on an MTB

[GrumpyGregry]

A thread elsewhere in here prompted a short discussion on the subject...

serious question... are Rohloff's really as good as some make out? A real serious competitor to derailer type gears or a draggy leaky high maintenance expensive failure prone box of garbage.

cos I'm might seriously think about a rohloff equipped mtb because I am sick of rear mechs getting full of crap and along with front mechs not shifting properly.

Looking for first hand experience or, if second hand, at least experiences in the public domain I can read up on myself.

Wish I'd spelt conventional right!

 

[dan_bo]

A mate of mine runs an alfine on his MTB and sez it's the mutt's.

 

[redfalo]

serious question... are Rohloff's really as good as some make out? A real serious competitor to derailer type gears or a draggy leaky high maintenance expensive failure prone box of garbage.

cos I'm might seriously think about a rohloff equipped mtb because I am sick of rear mechs getting full of crap and along with front mechs not shifting properly.

Looking for first hand experience or, if second hand, at least experiences in the public domain I can read up on myself.

Dificult questions since my impression is there are generally two types of Rohloff owners. Those who love their hub fanatically - big majority - and those who turn away deeply dissapointed and sell it agaion (a small but vocal minority) . The Rohloff really polarizes, problably due to high high price. I think it´s psychology which is behind this phenomeon. When you spend so much money on something which you also could get much cheaper you have to reassure yourself that this was completely justified.

I have a Rohloff on my recumbent which I bought used so I did not have much of a choice . IMHO these are the most important pros and cons:

Pro:
- smooth and idential gear ratios between all gears. (Uncounciously I switch gears much more often with the Rohloff to keep the same pedaling cadence)
- you can change gears while standing (very convenient on a recumbent)
- gear is protected against hud ect. (more important on an MTB than on a recumbent)
- The back wheel has more stability because it is spoked symmetrically, broken spokes are less likely
- shifting of gears is very convenient

Con:
- extraordinarily expensive

- it´s noisier than a derailleur gear, especially in the lower gear. The noise the Rohloff makes partly depends on the particular frame you´re using. With some alloy oversided frame some people have real problems.

- the degree of efficiency (compared to a derailleur gear in perfect condition) is a little bit lower. Rohloff states this is not true but my subjective feeling is different.

I´d strongly recommend testing one before buying. The Rohloff is a beautifully engineered thing but it has its weaknesses. I love it for the idential gear ratios and the ability to shift gears while standing, but hate it for the noise.

I had no trouble with leaking oil or other issues and to my unterstanding from a similar forum in Germany those kind of problems are a rare expecption. The box really is more or less failure proof.


And just in case you really decide buying one: be sure to get one with the external gear mech. It costs a little more but makes life (removing the wheel, replacing the cable, ect) much easier.

 

[MacB]

I've done a lot of reading up Greg and I still plan on getting one. It is a bit less efficient than a smooth, and clean, derailler setup. It is heavier than the parts it replaces, but not by much, I guestimate 300g. There have been some complaints about shifting under load. I think price is the only reason it's not on a lot more MTBs, and other bikes for that matter. But there's seems to be more people running Alfines or 1x9/1x8 rigs, some I-9's but I don't believe they're rated for offroad.

I've spent a year riding two bikes, a 22lb derailler and a 35lb I-9 hub gear. The I-9 makes the Rohloff seem almost lightweight, I reckon it's pushing 3kgs. There are only two things that stop me going fully hub gear and never looking back:-

1. mechanicals are hard to sort and unlikely to be fixable locally, I know, my I-9 is away for repairs. You can't just chuck a spare wheel on, unless you can afford to keep a spare Rohloff lying around. Though you can keep any old spare, with a cassette, and just run it as a SS.

2. shifter options, I don't like twist shifters and you can't manouver them round bends in bars. I have spoken to Rohloff and SRAM and they have no plans for alternate shifting options. I appreciate that the amount of cable pull makes a road lever tougher, but triggers or thumb mounts should be easy.

Have a look at the stuff on belt drives as well, that could be the future. There are a few manufacturers offering 700c MTB(29er) frames with a frame break to allow for hub gears and belt drives. Right now you'd spend a lot and be an early adopter, but it could be the future.

 

[andrew_s]

2. shifter options, I don't like twist shifters and you can't manouver them round bends in bars. I have spoken to Rohloff and SRAM and they have no plans for alternate shifting options. I appreciate that the amount of cable pull makes a road lever tougher, but triggers or thumb mounts should be easy.

Mittelmeyer do a Rohloff shifter that fits a drop bar.
It's still a twist shifter though. With the amount of cable pull and the pull one cable to shift up, pull the other cable to shift down working of the hub, it's difficult to see any other method working.

Having said that, a suggestion if anyone wants to start building one:-
You want a lever that will pull cable, but let it out with no resistance. Have two shifters with levers like STI inner or Campag, one to change up, the other to change down.,] The first part of the lever travel would tighten a cable gripper, then further lever travel just pulls the cable. Let go and the gripper lets go of the cable and moves back for another bite. You would be able to feel the gear change clicks up the cable from the hub.
You would lose out on being able to change more than 2 or 3 gears in one go. Pressing both levers would either do nothing, or pull the cable end out of the splitter.

 

[MacB]

Hmmm, as you say the Rohloff shifter uses two cables and turn direction dictation which cable is pulled and which released. Road shifters use a ratchet and release system, or at least STI/Ergo do, I still haven't seen the SRAM double tap in the flesh. I think the STI version would be more suited as a base for Rohloff design.

When you move the large lever on STI the whole body moves, then the small acts as the ratchet release. Add in a join and make it a two part system. The brake lever moves the outer aspect pretty much as it does now. The inner lever moves the new, nearer, aspect. Almost like the inside of the workings are a mini twist shifter, split in two, with each part working on a counter rotation basis. Position it so that the brake, and brake cable, work pretty much as they are already. You'd have two gear cables snaking into the one STI from the side.

I believe the Rohloff uses a lot of cable so volume of this could be a problem to overcome. But you have an STI for the Alfine now so maybe that will prompt some action.

 

[aoj]

Here is a site you will find a wealth of hub info.

http://hubstripping.wordpress.com/speedhub-rohloff/

See the KATZ bike on the site. I've seen a video showing the wheel removal by simply pulling out the wheel a spindle.

See also the Thorn bicycles website forum on the Rohloff bikes. They let you buy one on a 100 day or money back trial.

Like you I find exposed chains and sprockets to be a chore. The Rohloff bikes provide an engineering answer but low production numbers result in a high final price, which means I probably wouldn't buy one.

Honda for example can build a small motorbike/moped with an engine, fuel, injection and lights etc for less but in quantities that make it profitable.


http://www.bikeodream.com/diamondback-downhill.html

See the link to the Diamondback, too heavy for anything other than downhill at 44lbs. As an engineering solution not bad, at a price though. Note the swing arm pivot inline with the gearbox sprocket allowing constant chain tension.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

this sort of thread is the reason I come in to cc. will do some more research....

the thorn people seem to rave. i'm no mtb racer (anymore) I just want something i can ride all four seasons without grinding to a halt or having a rear mech dive into the wheel.

It used to be that tyres clogging in the frame was what stopped me. i fixed that with narrow tyres for mud, but this just shifts the focus to the mechs.

 

[MacB]

Another option for mounting the shifter is the Thorn Accessory bar, basically a mini stem and handlebar combined, t-shaped. This can take any twist shifter and also lights etc. I'm trialling one on the Surly, or will be when the rear wheel comes back. I've also made my own mount that's just a bit off a straight bar, jubilee clipped to a handlebar. There's the hubbub extension that fits in like a bar end to give you 22.2mm tubing to mount a twist shifter at the ends of drop/moustache bars. I've seen a few other workarounds as well, even a drop bar that joins in the middle.

With all of this I do find it quite amazing that Rohloff and SRAM don't offer more shifting options. These things don't get designed if there isn't a serious desire from a lot of people.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

but have you ever seen a european touring on a bike with drops? I met some in Austria summer of '08 but they were fiercely proud of the essential Englishness of the bikes they were riding. everyone else has been a brit or a north american. flat bars start at calais

 

[MacB]

but have you ever seen a european touring on a bike with drops? I met some in Austria summer of '08 but they were fiercely proud of the essential Englishness of the bikes they were riding. everyone else has been a brit or a north american. flat bars start at calais

I hadn't been aware of that up until a few months ago and it surprised me a bit. I find the worst option out of all bars to be plain flats, for comfort. Even in the MTBing world there seems to be more alternate shaped bars appearing. But flats are easy to put stuff on.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

well when i say flats I guess I means 'flats'- in all their variety ergo's butterflys etc. as oppossed to any sort of drops

 

[P.H]

I've had my hub in a Thorn Raven since 2004 and have ridden it around 30,000 miles. I bought it as a no nonsense high mileage commuter for my 140 mile a week commute half of which was on gravel tracks. In that time the only breakage I've had was a bayonet connector that became clogged with dried mud and snapped when I tried to undo it with pliers. Other than that, I've used three £9 chains, spent £40 on enough oil to last a lifetime, replaced the chainring and rear sprocket once (they're both reversible) replaced the inner gear wire twice (Costs £5 a time) and the other cables three times (Standard brake & gear cables). So from a reliability and servicing point of view it has been fantastic.
The link in your op that claims Mark Beaumont had problems with his hub are I think incorrect as I've answered on that thread.
I no longer have a long commute, down to 10 miles a day, all on tarmac, so I no longer get the use out of the hub that I used to. I have an itch to try it in another frame, lighter, faster and 700c wheels, more in tune with the sort of cycling I’m now doing.
The pros and cons have been covered already, whether it’s suitable for your use is imposable to say, you really do need to try it for yourself. If there’s anything in the Thorn range that suites your purpose, their 100 day trial takes the risk out. The reasons most people wouldn’t get on with a Rohloff also apply to other hub gears, so why not try a cheaper hub first? There’s a guy in the Thorn forum with two Rohloffs who also likes the Shimano Alfine.
http://www.thorncycles.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=2341.0