Rohloff developments

User avatar
il padrone
Posts: 22931
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Rohloff developments

Postby il padrone » Thu Aug 27, 2015 9:39 pm

Some new changes for the Rohloff hub connections to be launched at Eurobike. New 12mm axle hub design, PM-bone torque connector to the disc mount, and a splined-carrier to enable use of splined sprockets on the hub threaded boss.

The splined sprocket carrier is the most beneficial one for me.

Image



Looks good!
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

User avatar
RobertFrith
Posts: 1749
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 9:27 pm
Location: Perth
Contact:

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby RobertFrith » Thu Aug 27, 2015 11:24 pm

I've been girding my loins for seal replacements on my Rohloff. Apart from the cost of the seal seating tool the most challenging aspect looks to be removal of the sprocket. Looks as if the splined sprocket carrier is well overdue. :-)
Image

User avatar
il padrone
Posts: 22931
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby il padrone » Thu Aug 27, 2015 11:41 pm

My son showed me a good way to get it off. Use a notch in the house brickwork to hook the chain-whip end under, then you can just give the shifting spanner (fitted to the removal tool) a good kick down, and it comes off quick smart.

:D
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

slaw
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 1:14 pm

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby slaw » Fri Aug 28, 2015 12:13 pm

Actually, it's the chain whip that needs to turn to unscrew the cog. The spanner holds the cog tool on to prevent the hub internals from turning. I used instructions from mtbr. (But the pictures don't show anymore).

I hold the cog tool on by putting the QR skewer back with a large washer. I place the shifter handle under the tow bar of our car, then apply downwards force on the chain whip. Always grease the threads before replacing the cog and it's not too hard to get off.

How often should the seals be replaced? My hub has done around 50K, so wondering whether it needs any other maintenance.

User avatar
il padrone
Posts: 22931
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby il padrone » Fri Aug 28, 2015 2:59 pm

Yes, you are correct, the chain-whip is the stationary bit. But once secured under the edge of the brickwork, the difference is a moot point. The brickwork 'turns' the chain-whip while my foot kicks the 'stationary' removal tool around :wink: Or vice versa.

For me, the chain tool hooks the brickwork better, and the shifting spanner has a larger contact surface to push/kick on.

BTW, the best thing to do to hold the chain-whip is to secure the end around the sprocket using a cable-tie
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

User avatar
Leaf T
Posts: 900
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 12:22 pm

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby Leaf T » Sun Apr 10, 2016 4:21 pm

Sad news :( I was looking at buying the splined carrier and a 17t cog but it looks like Bike24 aren't shipping Rohloff stuff to Australia anymore :cry: :cry: :evil:

Anybody know if this is available in Aus at a non ball busting price?

User avatar
Mugglechops
Posts: 2934
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 6:51 pm
Location: Shoalhaven

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby Mugglechops » Mon Apr 11, 2016 5:11 pm

You can get a Shipito address in Austria now.
Image

User avatar
il padrone
Posts: 22931
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby il padrone » Mon Apr 11, 2016 5:45 pm

The splined sprocket will not work with a Chainglider :(

It is a wider chainline - 3mm wider - equivalent to the outer sprocket on a triple crankset. This apparently has to be so on account of engineering design aspects to allow a 13t or 15t sprocket to be fitted on it. For me, the Hebie Chainglider is of greater benefit than the splined sprocket carrier.

I have bought a stock of 17t threaded sprockets from SJS Cycles (and a Thorn 19t for when I need to climb the Tibetan Plateau, or when the pins no longer push so hard), as from now Rohloff no longer makes the screw-on sprockets.
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

User avatar
rifraf
Posts: 3384
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 5:55 pm
Location: Two Rocks, WA

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby rifraf » Wed Apr 13, 2016 11:08 am

Leaf T wrote:Sad news :( I was looking at buying the splined carrier and a 17t cog but it looks like Bike24 aren't shipping Rohloff stuff to Australia anymore :cry: :cry: :evil:

Anybody know if this is available in Aus at a non ball busting price?


What about at hibike, starbike or sjscycles?

I'll probably get rid of my Rohloff if its going to be controlled by a cartel here in Aus. :twisted:
Surly Ogre, Carry Freedom Y-frame Trailer, Extrawheel trailer.

User avatar
Leaf T
Posts: 900
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 12:22 pm

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby Leaf T » Wed Apr 13, 2016 9:31 pm

I understand your concern. The way it's heading we may have to make do with Tioga and the occasional Aldi bike specials :(

tmac100
Posts: 187
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 12:09 am
Location: Qatar

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby tmac100 » Thu Apr 14, 2016 1:41 am

FWIW, I just did a dummy purchase on www.starbike.com and a 17 tooth steel Rohloff sprocket is 42.56 AUS and shipping and insurance to Australia is another 43.90. Removing 13.90 in VAT brings the total to 73.65 AUD..

In my past purchases from Bike24, Starbike and Wiggle, it is best to make the order significant instead of ordering just a sprocket in this case.

Bottom line: www.starbike.com ships Rohloff to Australia. Hope this is useful info...

User avatar
Leaf T
Posts: 900
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 12:22 pm

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby Leaf T » Sat Apr 16, 2016 2:37 pm

Thanks tmac. I'm about get an order in for a few bits but I might see what some of the UK sites have on offer.

User avatar
Leaf T
Posts: 900
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 12:22 pm

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby Leaf T » Mon Apr 18, 2016 12:47 pm

I'm currently running 38x16 but want to gain an even more hill climbing ratio and was thinking of going to 38x17 or 37x16. Any reason why one would be better over the other? Using a gear ratio calculator it says they are 2.2 and 2.3 respectively but I'm not sure how this would translate into use. Is .2 difference fairly small? Would .1 not be enough?

User avatar
il padrone
Posts: 22931
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby il padrone » Mon Apr 18, 2016 2:33 pm

Larger sprockets/rings wear out slower.

*Rode the Pig & Whistle Ride yesterday on a 42-17 (65" gear). Three 'gears' - seated, standing, and head down-tail up coasting :mrgreen:
Mandatory helmet law?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."

User avatar
Leaf T
Posts: 900
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 12:22 pm

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby Leaf T » Mon Apr 18, 2016 2:42 pm

Thanks. Andy Blance mentions longer life in his Rohloff rant. I'm going to order one today as B24 won't send it. Was looking at getting a chainglider but not sure about ease of wheel removal and whether or not it is noisey.

User avatar
rifraf
Posts: 3384
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 5:55 pm
Location: Two Rocks, WA

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby rifraf » Sun Jun 04, 2017 12:20 am

Leaf T wrote:I'm currently running 38x16 but want to gain an even more hill climbing ratio and was thinking of going to 38x17 or 37x16. Any reason why one would be better over the other? Using a gear ratio calculator it says they are 2.2 and 2.3 respectively but I'm not sure how this would translate into use. Is .2 difference fairly small? Would .1 not be enough?


I have an idea that 1.9 is the new allowable ratio for riders under 100kg.

From Rohloff de:

"The higher the chainring/sprocket ratio, the lower the input torque to the gear-unit. It is imperative therefore that the chainring/sprocket factor does not drop below 1.9 (e.g. 34/17=2.0). The smallest permissible sprocket ratios for a rider weighing less than 100kg are: 40:21, 36:19, 34:18, 32:17, 30:16, 28:15, 26:14 und 26:13 = Factor ~ 1,9."

https://www.rohloff.de/en/products/spee ... index.html

I'm utilising a 34T crank ring and have a new splined carrier on the way with a new 18T hub cog to go with it.

I'm unsure what rear cog might best suit your 38T as I don't think Rohloff do a 20T so it will be an aftermarket version should one exist or a 19T should you with to use genuine Rohloff and/or stay within warranty terms.
Surly Ogre, Carry Freedom Y-frame Trailer, Extrawheel trailer.

Rodgerbiltit
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 8:45 pm
Location: The best place in Australia and the world for bicycle touring!

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby Rodgerbiltit » Sun Jun 04, 2017 8:02 am

I'm utilising a 34T crank ring and have a new splined carrier on the way with a new 18T hub cog to go with it.

I'm unsure what rear cog might best suit your 38T as I don't think Rohloff do a 20T so it will be an aftermarket version should one exist or a 19T should you with to use genuine Rohloff and/or stay within warranty terms.


I've arrived at a 38T chainring - 18T sprocket (2.1 ratio) combination after much consideration. There were multiple aspects to my decision...
I noted what was my "comfort" (20km/hr at 80rpm) gear ratio on my derailleur bikes and aligned that with gear 11 (1:1).
The smallest chainring that my Specilites TA double spider would take was 38T.
The smallest Stainless Steel chainring that Surly make is 38T. There's a recurring theme here...
General "wisdom" suggests larger chainring/sprocket combinations wear less and there is less wear with uneven ratios - even ratios wear more? Time will tell...
I am very pleased so far with my choice. I run 24T, 34T, 44T -> 11-34T on my derailleur bikes and have been very pleased with my gear 11 choice. Whilst it only gives me three gears above (14), I find that with a fully laden tourer I'm not wanting to push any harder (except perhaps in a glorious tailwind situation) - downhills are my rest time.
As for the lower gears, I no longer have "granny gear", I now have "stump jump"!
Realistically I have two gears lower than my previous (derailleur) 24T-34T combination.
I have "issues" with balance at low speed and with a fully laden tourer climbing anything approaching a 20% gradient generally find it safest to get off and walk - I've never been too proud to push...
Overall, thus far I'm very pleased with my choice. A tincture of time will clarify!

User avatar
Warin
Posts: 545
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 5:13 pm

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby Warin » Sun Jun 04, 2017 9:03 am

I believe chain sprockets of less than 16 teeth loose a little efficiency compared to larger sprockets. So, if you have the choice .. go for 16 or more teeth minimum.

User avatar
RonK
Posts: 9738
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 2:08 pm
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Contact:

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby RonK » Sun Jun 04, 2017 10:24 am

Rodgerbiltit wrote:I've arrived at a 38T chainring - 18T sprocket (2.1 ratio) combination after much consideration. There were multiple aspects to my decision...
I noted what was my "comfort" (20km/hr at 80rpm) gear ratio on my derailleur bikes and aligned that with gear 11 (1:1)...

I find that with a fully laden tourer I'm not wanting to push any harder (except perhaps in a glorious tailwind situation) - downhills are my rest time...

As for the lower gears, I no longer have "granny gear", I now have "stump jump"!

When I had a Speedhub I used 39x17 for exactly the rationale you describe - so the most commonly used gear was 11th. Direct drive, no noise, no drag.

This still yielded a top gear speed of around 45kph@90rpm with 26" wheels and allowed me to mostly avoid the noisy lower seven gears.

But when it came to climbing in the lower gears I often had to make double or even triple shifts. Rohloff make a big deal of the evenly spaced gears, but this is pure marketing spin.

Widely spaced gears are more usable at the lower end of the range, and closely spaced gears at the upper end.

Sheldon Brown explains why very well in his article on Gear Progression and in fact modern derailleur transmissions generally have very good progression.
Cycle touring blog and tour journals: whispering wheels...

User avatar
rifraf
Posts: 3384
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 5:55 pm
Location: Two Rocks, WA

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby rifraf » Sun Jun 04, 2017 12:44 pm

RonK wrote:
Rodgerbiltit wrote:I've arrived at a 38T chainring - 18T sprocket (2.1 ratio) combination after much consideration. There were multiple aspects to my decision...
I noted what was my "comfort" (20km/hr at 80rpm) gear ratio on my derailleur bikes and aligned that with gear 11 (1:1)...

I find that with a fully laden tourer I'm not wanting to push any harder (except perhaps in a glorious tailwind situation) - downhills are my rest time...

As for the lower gears, I no longer have "granny gear", I now have "stump jump"!

When I had a Speedhub I used 39x17 for exactly the rationale you describe - so the most commonly used gear was 11th. Direct drive, no noise, no drag.

This still yielded a top gear speed of around 45kph@90rpm with 26" wheels and allowed me to mostly avoid the noisy lower seven gears.

But when it came to climbing in the lower gears I often had to make double or even triple shifts. Rohloff make a big deal of the evenly spaced gears, but this is pure marketing spin.

Widely spaced gears are more usable at the lower end of the range, and closely spaced gears at the upper end.

Sheldon Brown explains why very well in his article on Gear Progression and in fact modern derailleur transmissions generally have very good progression.


My knees are fairly shot so my riding might be best described as a meander. :oops:
45km would be reached on my bike only on extreme declines when heavily laden and I've forgotten to replace my brake pads. :lol: :lol:

I wondered if I'd find my gearing too low when I dropped my 38T front ring to 34T.
Unfortunately not, hence my now adding a couple of teeth to my rear sprocket. :shock:

I'm now looking forward to actually utilising some of my higher gear positions on my shifter that have been for the most part redundant.
Being a weak rider my gear 11 wasn't seeing much use which is why I've decided to go lower again.
Surly Ogre, Carry Freedom Y-frame Trailer, Extrawheel trailer.

User avatar
VeloGiro
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 9:19 pm
Location: Ashwood, Vic

Re: Rohloff developments

Postby VeloGiro » Tue Jun 06, 2017 4:19 pm

rifraf wrote: I'm now looking forward to actually utilising some of my higher gear positions on my shifter that have been for the most part redundant. my gear 11 wasn't seeing much use which is why I've decided to go lower again.


...I'm with you re lowering the gearing rifraf. I am running 39:19 and as a result find myself riding in the 11th gear "sweet-spot" for a lot of the time with this setup :) for those that are curious that equates to a 56.1 gear inch sweet-spot for this fella...Yep that's low... "Lowdown and Groovy" ;)

The added bonus here is access to a crazy low 1st gear...one that has been (thankfully) been used to good effect on rough steep and gnarly climbs in the Otways...best of both worlds really...with perhaps the downside spinning out at anywhere near 40 KPH but for me that's OK.
Image

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users