Bicycle Mechanics - Has anyone heard of a rohloff ?

Hi,

I came across a bike that doesn't have derailleurs.

It's got a gear system which is like a super version of a sturmey archer 3 speed.

I'm quite tempted, but are they any good ?

Are they reliable and efficient ?

In the past I have ridden SA geared bikes and there always seemed to be a loss of power.

Any thoughts ?

Has anyone tried one ?

TIA...

:)

Yeah, internal hubs are pretty well known & understood by tourers and folding bike riders.

Rohloffs are arguably the best IH out there. Widest gearing range, very reliable. Still not quite as efficient as derailleurs, but not ridiculously off. Easy to clean, won't get messed up by dirt or rain, straight chain. IIRC they're a little temperamental and can be noisy for the first 1000 miles or something like that.

Oh, and they're absurdly expensive. $1200 and up for just the hub.

Probably not worth it, unless you're doing serious touring in 3rd world, or have lots of disposable income to burn.

Hi,

I came across a bike that doesn't have derailleurs.

It's got a gear system which is like a super version of a sturmey archer 3 speed.

I'm quite tempted, but are they any good ?

Are they reliable and efficient ?

In the past I have ridden SA geared bikes and there always seemed to be a loss of power.

Any thoughts ?

Has anyone tried one ?

TIA...

:)

Are you kidding?! Rohloff hubs are, arguably...well maybe NOT arguably the best IG hubs in the world. They sell for over $1000.00 for the hub assembly alone. Go to http://www.rohloff.de/en/products/speedhub/ When I go IG for my commuter it'll be Rohloff...in fact I'm saving up for one right now. :p

Hi,

I came across a bike that doesn't have derailleurs.

It's got a gear system which is like a super version of a sturmey archer 3 speed.

I'm quite tempted, but are they any good ?

Are they reliable and efficient ?

In the past I have ridden SA geared bikes and there always seemed to be a loss of power.

Any thoughts ?

Has anyone tried one ?

TIA...

:)

If you want the best internal, it's rohloff. Unmatched gear range.

If you want the best internal, it's rohloff. Unmatched gear range.

Every gearhub has it's application. I have 2 Rohloffs, one for my utility bike, and one in my recumbent. For my commuter, however, I simply don't need the range, so my Sturmey Archer 5 speed is a perfect fit.
If ya need the range and strength though, Rohloff is the answer.

Rohloff? Strange unknown brand made in some sweatshop.

Seriously I did a bunch of research on the hub and they are
the best as far as most opinions are concerned. If you need
that range then go for it. If you don't and just want a relatively
low maintenance hub a SRAM 3-speed does ya.

Rohloff? Strange unknown brand made in some sweatshop.


Lol

Funniest thing i've read in a while

Personally I think the best IG system was on the Ferrari Colnago shown at the '88 CABDA show. All the gearing was in the BB and it looked really clean with a slim rear hub. Also had hydraulic brakes with no calipers. The pistons were integrated on the inside of the fork and seat-stays. All you saw was a post sticking out with a brake-pad on it.

Hi,

I came across a bike that doesn't have derailleurs.

It's got a gear system which is like a super version of a sturmey archer 3 speed.

I'm quite tempted, but are they any good ?

Are they reliable and efficient ?

In the past I have ridden SA geared bikes and there always seemed to be a loss of power.

Any thoughts ?

Has anyone tried one ?

TIA...

:)
it is a dated product that could use an upgrade. i wouldn't buy until they change it a bit.

also, be careful what you put it on. it can bend dropouts from the torque it produces.

in my searches, i concluded it is almost a better product for a frame made to use it.

mx

it is a dated product that could use an upgrade. i wouldn't buy until they change it a bit. mx

What's wrong with it as it is ?

it is a dated product that could use an upgrade. i wouldn't buy until they change it a bit.

also, be careful what you put it on. it can bend dropouts from the torque it produces.

in my searches, i concluded it is almost a better product for a frame made to use it.

mx
Look for an updated version soon. Increased ratio range and slightly lighter weight. They are being a bit secretive about when to expect it, but I'm willing to bet we will hear more about it after Interbike.

What's wrong with it as it is ?

Not much.

The Rohloff speed hub is a fine product.

It needs little or no maintenance. The internal gear remains clean under the most severe road and weather circumstances. No dust nor salt can reach it. It can shift anytime, even when standing still, which is an advantage in busy city trafic.

Its price is the main hurdle. If only the Rohloff hub were less expensive I would buy one immediately.

If you are located in the UK, try to visit St. John Street Cycles in Bridgwater to see Rohloffs built into their Thorn Raven frames.
Alternatively you can browse Thorn bikes here. (http://www.thorncycles.co.uk/)

I'm almost done building my utility/future-touring bike with a Rohloff. Haven't ridden it yet, but it fits my needs perfectly. Since this bike is, in most ways, replacing a car, I don't see the cost of the Rohloff as an obstacle. Do some research - I'm sure you'll discover all manner of interesting facts and opinions.

I'm almost done building my utility/future-touring bike with a Rohloff. Haven't ridden it yet, but it fits my needs perfectly.

A picture is worth a thousand words...

How do you know it will fit your needs perfectly if you haven't ridden it ?

Rohloff? Strange unknown brand made in some sweatshop.I also hear the sweatshop is too busy fixing broken units to produce any new ones... :roflmao2:

Seriously though, bad news is if it breaks internally, in most cases you'd have to send it back to the factory for proper repairing. Good news is, that kind of internal failure is either extremely rare or non-existant. Their web page mentions one was sent to them after 90 000 kms for inspection, just in case. They didn't find anything wrong with it.

--J

I've just had a look at the bikes on SJSC site and they aren't anything like the bike I saw.

The one I saw had lots of suspension and big discs, it didn't look like an old guys bike.

:)

What's wrong with it as it is ?

nothing necessarily :)

however, "why mess with a good thing" doesn't cut it for me. i wouldn't spend 1000+ on something that old with no updates. unless they did something i am not aware of. the cabling/ shifter could be improved if nothing else.

it would be my luck to buy one now to have a fully updated one released in 2010

mx

Look for an updated version soon. Increased ratio range and slightly lighter weight. They are being a bit secretive about when to expect it, but I'm willing to bet we will hear more about it after Interbike.

see, good to hear. i look forward to it

mx

Buy the bike, convert it to derailleurs, then send the hub and shifter to me.:)

This is the rohloff bike I saw....

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e61/Unknown_Cyclist/DSC031813websize.jpg

Perhaps I am getting old but that is a fugly bike:50:

Why does a hub gear need a chain tensioner? I saw the same thing on the rohloff equipped bike Mark Beaumont was using on the recent tv progs.

Why does a hub gear need a chain tensioner? I saw the same thing on the rohloff equipped bike Mark Beaumont was using on the recent tv progs.

Because it has rear suspension - the distance between the rear spindle and BB isn't constant.

Torque arm, disc caliper and the rohloff external gear box.....

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e61/Unknown_Cyclist/DSC031773-websize.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/stimpysvideotrading/bandb.jpg

Just what I always wanted, a heavy DH bike with street slicks. I was going to say that it was like a lowrider street rod, but lowriders are cool.

That is such a waste

http://www.geocities.com/stimpysvideotrading/bandb.jpg

????????

????????

same thing i was thinking when i looked at the picture of the bike above!

i think an overwhelming sense of confusion set in too.

mx

same thing i was thinking when i looked at the picture of the bike above!

i think an overwhelming sense of confusion set in too.

mx

You like it then ?

What's confusing ?

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e61/Unknown_Cyclist/DSC031783-websize.jpg

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e61/Unknown_Cyclist/DSC03180websize.jpg

You like it then ?

What's confusing ?

i don't like or dislike the bike...just thoroughly confused and at a general loss for words.


mx

i don't like or dislike the bike...just thoroughly confused and at a general loss for words. mx

Apparently it's a UAV - Urban Assault Vehicle.

Which bit do you find confusing ?

:)

hit by ugly rays

That is such a waste

In what way is it a waste ?

Which bit do you find confusing ?

:)

the red and blue tail lights. this is the only thing i thought was a little weird. everything else was completely normal and is the same way i have my bike set-up :thumb:

mx

In what way is it a waste ?

It's a downhill or Freeride bike which are ususally pretty heavy. Full suspension which you don't need on the road, which this bike is set up for. Again Full suspension adds weight.

As mentioned earlier, because of the rear suspension, you need the chain tensioner, whereas a bike with horizontal drops (and no suspension) doesn't need one. Because it isn't Rohloff-prepared, it needs the torque arm. Again that adds weight. This bike must weigh at least 60 pounds!

The chain tensioner is required when a bike does not have horizontal dropouts or you can't be bothered to tension your chain or it will interfere with your schedule like this guy: http://www.pedallingaround.com/start/


Again, if you are only riding tarmac, this is probably the last bike you would choose.

Plus it just looks hideous with the fenders and lights and miles of cable, way too much going on.

Worst mismatch of parts ever!

This bike must weigh at least 60 pounds!

Worst mismatch of parts ever!

I've asked the owner and he said it only weighs about 19 kgs - 42 lbs.

It wasn't retailed as or designed to be a downhill bike and it took a lot of research to find parts that would compliment each other so perfectly.....

And btw - it is an object of great beauty.

:)

If the bike had knobby tires, the comments might be different. But this bike looks like a DH-type bike built for a heavy suspension travel. The hub choice and presence of a tensioner is OK and necessary. The street slicks make the bike look odd; few people would choose a downhill bike for regular on-road use if for no other reason than there are lighter, more efficient and better designs for that purpose. But evidently a conversion for street use can be done, as the picture proves.

All the same, I would never want to own this bike. I dislike DH bikes generally as they always seem to look like old Bultaco dirt bikes with the engine and tanks stripped off.

The aero bars are the best part. I can't believe no one commented on those. That's the most ridiculous bike I've seen in a while.

does the gears work?
as the cables look loose.

Perhaps I am getting old but that is a fugly bike:50:

Why does a hub gear need a chain tensioner? I saw the same thing on the rohloff equipped bike Mark Beaumont was using on the recent tv progs.


My Rohloff needed a chain tensioner because its retrofitted to a quick release bike with vertical dropouts making it impossible to tension the chain otherwise.

After riding my rohloff I would never, ever ride a bike without one. 14 gears, NO CABLE ADJUSTMENTS EVER and a single chain ring that has replaced the gear ranges of my old small and middle chain ring.

Its awesome. The chain tensioner is super strong and looks like it would never fail. I'm not worried about it being the weak link.

The main difference between a rohloff and a cheap internal gear hub is that the indexing is done internally rather than in the shifter which basically eliminates cable adjustments.

That bike looks like someone found excuses to build the most expensive thing he could.

To me it looks ugly and pointless.

Only 42 pounds? Mine weighs 45 with full commuting luggage including clothing for work and at least 2 seasons. ( its Calgary, anything can happen. )

Mine weighs 45 with full commuting luggage including clothing for work and at least 2 seasons. ( its Calgary, anything can happen. )

Has your's got a rohloff, full suspension and disc brakes ?

Has your's got a rohloff, full suspension and disc brakes ?

My Rohloff weighed 150 grams more than the things it replaced. Not a big deal at all.

That bike is worthless unless your bombing down a mountain at 25 plus mph. If you are.....go for it!

If your cruising 1 mile to hardee's after work.....well thats a bit of an overkill. It would be like buying a hummer, raising it 18 inches, putting tracks on it instead of wheels and a air intake 5 feet high just incase you ever end up under water and driving it to church.

My Rohloff weighed 150 grams more than the things it replaced. Not a big deal at all

Hi,

I bet it didn't.... did you weigh it and check ?

I've been looking at this claim (on the SJSC site I was told to go to) and it simply doesn't add up.

150g is the best case scenario and only applies if you have no torque arm, no disc, no external gear box, no chain tensioner and you compare the rohloff to a fairly heavy geartrain.

If you compare the rohloff on an equal cost basis - ie an expensive drive train - you'll find that the rohloff is significantly heavier.

Also they (SJSC) factor everything into account that favours the rohloff eg. chain and spoke length, but as far as I can see they appear to have 'forgotten' some essentials parts on the rohloff side of the equation eg. the huge oversize bottom bracket filled with a solid chunk of aluminium and the two large bolts restraining it, not to mention the heavy duty drop out that looks like it's made from a piece of armour plate and of course the need for heavier chain and seat stays.

I'm not knocking Thorn's cycles, I'm researching so I can decide which one to buy.

:)

Is there any accurate info on the weight of the different rohloff equipped bikes they sell ?

I'm having trouble finding it.

Looking at the weights of the components and frame sets the bikes can't be much lighter than the poor much maligned beast I put pictures up of.......

TIA....

ps. has anyone got a rohloff equipped bike that they have actually weighed ?

Hi,



ps. has anyone got a rohloff equipped bike that they have actually weighed ?

Yes. It is a 700c wheel-size and custom frame--Columbus Zona tubeset, Thron fork. With the Rohloff hub,
Alex Adventurer rims, 700x37c tires (Kendas), a Schmidt front hub with dual halogen lamp in a stainless porteur rack and rear stainless rack (medium-duty, not heavy), alu fenders, Paul centerpulls, drop bars, it weighs about 32 lbs; with a bag and bottles, about 40 lb.

I figure the Rohloff penalty at 2 lbs over a high-grade rear cassette hub, 9-speed cassette and comparable-quality (XTR, SRAM 9.0, etc) derailleurs and a front touring triple vice the Sugino single with a 44t.

Yeah, it seems like, if you're using a Rohloff on a suspended bike, you'd want the rear to pivot at the BB so you don't need the tensioner (which, when really bouncing, is also an accidental derailleur);

Yes. [...] With the Rohloff hub [...] a Schmidt front hub [...]OK, I hate you now. :crash: :D