Hello,

Why are there manufacturers who are bringing folders on the market with a derailleur system?

What are the advantages?

The Giant Halfway was at the top of the list for my first folder, but it's sinking now I think about the disadvantages of a derailleur system:

* More maintainance than hub gears;
* More dirty than hub gears;
* More sensitive (to shocks, e.g. while (un)folding). So a lot of adjustment is needed.

Can someone give me one reasson (or more) why to choose a folder with a derailleur system?
Maybe a derailleur is a bit more efficient than a hub gears? But does it change that much?)

Can derailleur advocates explain me what's arguments can be used against Brompton explanation:

http://www.bromptonbicycle.co.uk/index.cfm?fuseaction=thecompany.philosophy:

Why, for instance, don't we use multi-geared derailleur systems, so popular at the moment?
Answer, they do not (unless reliability is compromised) give satisfactory gearing on a small
wheeled bike, and, on a folder, they are vulnerable, difficult to keep in adjustment, and fairly
bulky and heavy: so you won't find these on a Brompton (what you find instead on most
Bromptons is gearing based around the reliable, compact and highly efficient 3-speed hub
gears that have been perfected over many decades).

I am not really a derailleur advocate but I can give you 2 reasons;

I believe that it can be often harder to take the wheel off the bike with hub gears- so if you get a flat it can cause complications and delay

Also derailleurs are cheaper.

Advantages of deraileur equipped bicycles.Better gear range at a cheaper price than hub gears.When the cassette wears out simply replace it gearing is easily changed.Gearing is not so problematic on 20 inch wheeled folders as brompton claims.On 17 inch and smaller wheels it is problematic as they say.My boardwalk has a 30-94 inch gear range with a 7 speed freewheel.I consider that a good range.Maintenance on a freewheel is really not that bad just keep the chain ,freewheel and derailleur lubed with a good chain lube such as boeshield etc and clean the chain and cassette /freewheeel occasionally. Dahon has 3 and 5 speed internal hub bicycles available. It might occur to one that Brompton favors hub gears because their home market I.E England tends to be quite rainy at times. :rolleyes:

Yep, it's certainly messy here, though I suspect that Brompton favour hub gears because they give a smaller fold.

I have a 7 speed Halfway and like it. I would not buy it if it has hub gear.

Deraileur systems are usually have better gear ratios, they are not difficult to maintain, hub gear are very difficult to maintain and near imposible for an average cyclist to remove/replace the real wheel to change tire. The Halfway real wheel could be remove by loosing just one nut! You could actually change the Halfway tires without removing the wheels. Deraileur gives better efficiency, and much lighter too.

The reasons Brompton do not use deraileur is because of the small wheels. There are limit in the size of the big gear before the deraileur hit the road surface. Distance between bb and real hub in the Brompton is too short for proper deraileur operation.

My Halfway folds very nice and does not seems to have any problem that need adjustment.

I own two Raleigh 20 and and a 26" Raleigh 3 speed, I hate to fix the hub gears on those bikes. I just let them rusted in the Garage. I shall never buy a hub gear bicycle again.

Lighter, cheaper to buy, more mechanical efficiency, easier to repair.

...hub gear are very difficult to maintain and near imposible for an average cyclist to remove/replace the real wheel to change tire.
"Average cyclists" should not have to go about maintaining hub gears. Yes, they do break down, need servicing, etc., but not to the extent which seems to be suggested.

The changing tires remark is exaggerated: difficult for anyone who cannot turn a wrench, yes.

Downsides:
• Brompton rear wheels, despite what they say and think, are fairly heavy with their hub gears, thus making the bike quite heavy to lift and carry
• Brompton also neglects to tell you to carry extra/specialized tools to service some aspects of these bikes in the field
• Brompton's also have very wide ranging gear ratios because of that hub (however, I addressed this by changing the cranks and chainring)

In fact, I'm waiting for my hub to wear out so that I can turn the bike into a single speed.


The Halfway real wheel could be remove by loosing just one nut!
That's because it has half of a fork and half of a chainstay.


But that's a good reminder: if you want a bike that you don't have to buy exclusive parts for in order to maintain, you're probably better off with something like a Dahon or Bike Friday or whatever you can get in the Netherlands which uses readily available parts/spare parts.

Hello,

Why are there manufacturers who are bringing folders on the market with a derailleur system?

What are the advantages?

The Giant Halfway was at the top of the list for my first folder, but it's sinking now I think about the disadvantages of a derailleur system:

* More maintainance than hub gears;
* More dirty than hub gears;
* More sensitive (to shocks, e.g. while (un)folding). So a lot of adjustment is needed.

Can someone give me one reasson (or more) why to choose a folder with a derailleur system?
Maybe a derailleur is a bit more efficient than a hub gears? But does it change that much?)

Can derailleur advocates explain me what's arguments can be used against Brompton explanation:

http://www.bromptonbicycle.co.uk/index.cfm?fuseaction=thecompany.philosophy:

Why, for instance, don't we use multi-geared derailleur systems, so popular at the moment?
Answer, they do not (unless reliability is compromised) give satisfactory gearing on a small
wheeled bike, and, on a folder, they are vulnerable, difficult to keep in adjustment, and fairly
bulky and heavy: so you won't find these on a Brompton (what you find instead on most
Bromptons is gearing based around the reliable, compact and highly efficient 3-speed hub
gears that have been perfected over many decades).

The Giant Halfway was at the top of the list for my first folder, but it's sinking now I think about the disadvantages of a derailleur system:

* More maintainance than hub gears;
* More dirty than hub gears;
* More sensitive (to shocks, e.g. while (un)folding). So a lot of adjustment is needed.<<<<<<

It's sad to hear the Halfway has sunk. This bike should have derailleur because a 20' inch wheel bicycle like this would certainly be at an advantage. A person buying the Halfway is not looking for the smallest possible folder and are really looking for a wider gear range.

*More maintainance than hub gears;

It's only more maintainance if you're going to ride the bike 365 days a year in mud, snow and rain. The Halfway's derailleur will probably outlast the bike if cared for properly

* More dirty than hub gears

It depends on how you carry the bike and how many times it's cleaned. I have a very dirty Dahon Piccolo so it's possible to have a dirty hub geared bike. In general, the bike is only as clean as the owner makes it. I agree the Brompton is a very clean bicycle but town bikes tend to get dirty very fast.

* More sensitive (to shocks, e.g. while (un)folding). So a lot of adjustment is needed.<<<<<<

Not true. Sturmey Archer AW-3 is very sensitive to road shock and the transmission will lose itself if the rear wheel hits large ruts at a fast speed. In fact, Brompton owners already know that when the bike is new, you have to be in a high gear (when getting ready to fold) or the cables will pull the transmission out of allignment. My Dahon Speed 8 never had a problem with adjustments after folding and unfolding. Never.

>>>>Can someone give me one reasson (or more) why to choose a folder with a derailleur system?<<<

1. Touring
2. Commuting over 10 miles a day
3. Hills
4. Racing
5. Weak knees

>>>>>Maybe a derailleur is a bit more efficient than a hub gears? But does it change that much?)<<<<

It does change and is significant.

I like the Sturmey Archer AW-3 over the Shimano Nexus because the latter is very heavy. The Nexus 7 does not have a direct drive while the AW-3 feels comfortable in second gear because it has one efficient gear.

I would never have my weekend ride with a hub gear because it feels like I have a water bottle attached to the rear wheel. My Bianchi Milano is hardly ever used anymore since I discovered the efficiency of a derailleur system. I find the derailleur system to be more free rolling and this makes all the difference in the world. Hub gears are a compromise and that is the only reason one would use it in the first place.

>>>>>>Why, for instance, don't we use multi-geared derailleur systems, so popular at the moment?
Answer, they do not (unless reliability is compromised) give satisfactory gearing on a small
wheeled bike, and, on a folder, they are vulnerable, difficult to keep in adjustment, and fairly
bulky and heavy:<<<<<<<

This is only true if we are talking about the Brompton which is a 16' inch wheel folding bicycle. The Brompton is the ultimate 16' inch wheel folder and should have a hub gear. This is not true for a bicycle with 20' inch wheels or larger. A person buying a larger folder does not care about size and is looking for comfort, speed and efficiency.

I understand the problem with a derailleur system on a 16" wheel due to ground clearance. And I know manufacturers spec 3 speed internal hubs for cost and weight. So why not spec the Sram p5, and an option for a Nexus 8 speed. We can do it by a custom build as long as I have the skill, time or money to get it going. Do we all think the demand is that limited?

Before I fall off a plactic milk carton, I wonder how many Rohloff hubs need to be built to get the MSRP closer to $500 or so.

So why not spec the Sram p5, and an option for a Nexus 8 speed.
Well for one, hub axle length is a limiting factor. From what you've posted, it's not clear to me whether you're aware of that or not.

On my Brompton, my rear axle is ~110mm. Front hub is 74mm or 73mm. Try doing a size search for those. (On the other hand, my Bike Friday has a 135mm rear and 100mm front; very versatile.)


We can do it by a custom build as long as I have the skill, time or money to get it going. Do we all think the demand is that limited?
Are you a machinist or something? (Not interested in a rear hub, but am in a front hub.)


Before I fall off a plactic milk carton, I wonder how many Rohloff hubs need to be built to get the MSRP closer to $500 or so.

:rolleyes:

The reasons Brompton do not use deraileur is because of the small wheels. There are limit in the size of the big gear before the deraileur hit the road surface. Distance between bb and real hub in the Brompton is too short for proper deraileur operation.


I'd just thought i'd show this link, of a derailleur equipped Brompton:

http://www.ikd21.co.jp/bro/sp/

These are made by a English chap called Steven Parry.
They are made by cutting the hubs down to size, rather than spreading the rear triangle.
And look at the size of that front big ring!

Some of the Bromptons now use a rear derailluer in conjunction with 2 cogs and a sram or sturmey sunrace 3 speed hub for 6 ratios.The 2 speed Brompton uses only the rear derailluer with 2 cogs the lightest one weighs only 21 lbs with lots of titanium and a hefty price tag of 1250 lbs sterling. The ratios are 56 and 76 gear inches. :)

The only thing that comes to mind when I think of a derailleur equipped folding bike that generally is smaller wheeled is ick.

When I was building a list of possible folding bikes, it was 20" only. I never even considered anything other than a derailleur. Performance is fine and, most importantly to me, *standardization.* I can service every aspect of my bike or take it to any shop.

It's not a matter of "if" your bike will need service, it's "when."

SA 3-speed hubs are tough as nails, the wheel is very easy to remove, parts are available world-wide, and with the right chain ring and cog sizing can be adapted to most cycling environments, e.g. hills or lack thereof. The Nexus 7 and 8 speed hubs are significantly heavier and it does take some effort to remove the wheel, esp if you get it with the hub brake. I opted for a Strida for my folder, just one speed, easy wheel removal, gearing is actually quite good for moderate hills, the airlines are never gonna bust the derailleur, and I think it's the lightest folder around.

I specified the components on the new Swift Folder (website (http://www.xootr.com/xootr/swift/bikes.shtml)). I evaluated the SRAM 3-speed (internal hub for the "Dual Drive"), Nexus 7-Speed, and SRAM 4.0 derailleur.

We ended up going with the derailleur for these reasons:

1. Effiiciency
I did quite a lot of testing on this. The derailleur system with a clean chain registered 98 percent efficiency. The Nexus 7 registered 90 percent (the effiiciency varies by gear, but this is for Gear 3, one of the better gears). The dual drive is 98 percent efficient in Gear 2 ("direct drive"), but drops to about 94% in Gear 3, which is needed at top cruising speed, which is when you also want to have good efficiency.

90 percent is *really bad* for a bike you expect to do any kind of fitness cycling with, or for a bike you commute on "competitively" (as I do with three of my colleagues). Frankly, the Nexus is pretty much a little "heater" on your rear hub. Of the 150-200 Watts you deliver to the bike under normal conditions, 15-20 Watts are heating up the hub.

We didn't look at the SRAM 7 speed to seriously as it is really expensive. I expect it will have similarly poor efficiency (all of these set ups have multiple sets of gears meshing in them).

2. Weight
The internal hubs run 400-800 g heavier in terms of overall system weight than do the derailleur systems. On a folder, this can be a big deal. I found that pushing the bike down below 10 kg (22 lbs) made a real difference in terms of how readily I would pop it in the car or take it on a train.

3. Cost
The Nexus adds about $100 - $150 to the retail price of the bike.

Having said all this, I did like the Dual Drive rear hub with a single cog on it. I set it up so that Gear 2 was about a 65 gear-inch ratio, which let me run in the "direct drive" mode for most urban riding. The problem is that when shifting to Gear 1 to grunt up a big hill or Gear 3 to race with the guys, I would lose another 5 percent of my power (not a good thing at my age). Many people are also not willing to live with only three gears, which I understand.

I know this comes across as "bike geek" talk to a lot of people, and the internal hub stuff is probably fine for many low-intensity riders in urban settings. However, I felt there were too many compromises relative to the derailleur. Of course, this only works on a 406mm wheel (20in), as the really small wheels can't really be set up well with a derailleur.

Incidentally, a new chain costs $6. So, I just swap chains and clean the derailleur 2-3 times a year, which keeps the system running really well in the most grungy of conditions.

Best,

Karl U.
Xootr LLC

The internal hubs run 400-800 g heavier in terms of overall system weight than do the derailleur systems. On a folder, this can be a big deal. I found that pushing the bike down below 10 kg (22 lbs) made a real difference in terms of how readily I would pop it in the car or take it on a train.


Another factor that Nexus 7/German speed hub advocates like to point out is how their heavy hub compares with a derailleur system. They like to point out that their hub is not much heavier in terms of overall weight. This comparison is completely wrong!

A derailleur system puts most of the weight on the derailleur hanger and chain rings. In other words, a derailleur system distributes the weight onto the frame of the bicycle. Therefore, the weight is NOT in the center of the wheel where it slows down the bike dramatically.

In other words, a derailleur system distributes the weight onto the frame of the bicycle. Therefore, the weight is NOT in the center of the wheel where it slows down the bike dramatically.

Really? I thought as long as the weight was centered, it doesn't create the rotational mass that is so deadly in heavy wheels. I think this difference is overblown and I have never read anything that indicated that a heavy hub is more detrimental to performance than a heavy frame (or frame attachment). perhaps other, wiser folks could enlighten us, but I don't think a pound on the hub is any worse than a pound on the frame.

doesnt make a difference where the weight is "inside" : the wheel ..its all rotating mass even the hub itself, and it makes a huge difference everytime you accelrate.
( I get a kick out of crossdrilled brake rotors on import show cars, assumably because they are lighter, but than they add 18 inch wheels .... ooops)

as for shops who can work or even repair internal hubs , much luck. Its a good thing they ( the internal hubs ) do not blow up more than they do, cause even in germany the mechanics who actually repair them are getting less and less.

here in the US ... lol give me a break... maybe 50 shops. At the very most and it will cost you . In the time they are working on the hub, you can buy a new derrailleur ( or take any one which ANY shop has floating around ) for a substantial saving. Just try to get a spare part for a Sturmey archer internal hub here is a treat.

Internal hubs have their place. But derraileur systems have a lot going for them as well. Its only good that somehow taste varies, so we can have an individual opinion about those things.
And because we all like our bikes we should respect our fellow cyclist, no matter what they prefer

Thor

Another advantage of deraillers, not mentioned here unless I overlooked someone's post, is the quick release mechanism that you don't have on solid axled wheels found with internal speed hub designs. If traveling and needing to disassemble your bike to fit in airline approved size parameters or when getting a flat tire, trying to put the internal wheel back on ain't fun and can be very time consuming to do it right. Try that in the rain at night.

Time to chime in a on a few points that haven't been discussed to death yet. I think we can all agree that a derailleur in a perfect word is more efficient. However in the folding world things become more complicated. Out of the 15 bikes I currently have 10 are derailleurs or hybrid (like the dual drive setup) and 5 are hubs. Out of the 15, 3 are folders and they are all derailleurs and 2 of those are the SRAM DD setup.

Now having said that the next 3 folders I am buying will be ordered with hubs (A Swift) or converted to hubs (Downtubes). My rationale is quite simple. I don't ride in the perfect climates of California or Florida any more. I like to ride sometimes in areas where there is not a bike trail but more of a cow path. As a result the low hanging derailleur is a magnet for all the freaking dirt and debris on the rode. I recently rode a bit in Denmark on some walking paths and I was constantly picking weeds out of the low hanging derailleur which is essential if you want a wide ratio gear set. Add a few twigs and a couple layers of dirt and the efficiency goes down. The higher chain of the internal hub bike doesn't get so much crap on it.

In the cities of Berlin or Amsterdam where I ride when it is raining the front wheel just spews crap from the road all over the chain and rear tire. This further reduces my efficiency over time and I don't want to think about cleaning the chain every day.

Another thing to think about is that the relative angle for the chain line between the sprockets is more severe when you have a shorter distance between the front chain ring and rear cassette. This again reduces efficiency. Now I tend to believe Karl’s stats on the relative efficiency of the gearing systems but I’d like to know what platform they were tested on; a folder or a normal bike?

I just bought an 8spd Nexus (red label) and it definitely feels more efficient than my 7 spd Nexus. I don’t have many mile yet on it so it may be too early to tell but it feels better.

Another plus for me in the trail riding is the fact that there is less stuff hanging out to get smacked. Dirt alone is an issue but I have snagged my derailleur a few times but this probably isn’t an issue on city streets.

Yet another plus for me is that most internal hubs are slightly larger in diameter which allows for shorter spokes and thereby a stronger wheel. I am a big guy so this is definitely a consideration for me. Of course the downside is that the weight is slightly higher and there is a corresponding higher polar moment of inertia and greater rotational mass and greater unsprung weight and these are all somewhat detrimental to performance. But the same person who often complains about the weight will then drop on a tire that is 200 grams heavier than a light one and not even think about the consequences. Since I am not racing my folders this isn’t such a major concern for me.

A derailleur is the hot setup especially if you are racing or want the ultimate in efficiency. The way I used my folders (except my tandem) the hubs have a lot of benefits and the Rohloff, newer SRAM and 8spd Nexus have better efficiency than what Karl may have seen with the 7spd Nexus. The other thing that I absolutely hate is that the rear derailleur must be cleaned every time I need to pack my bike back in its suitcase or it just smears grease and dirt everywhere. It is much dirtier to carry when I carry it on a metro folded as well as the lower derailleur collected all the muck.

Both system have their places. But in the “commuting” world I like the internal hubs better. With the latest systems efficiency is better and they have pretty good gear ranges of 300% or greater and the new SRAM 9spd is over 340%! This is a pretty wide ratio. I also have been quite happy with the SRAM DD setup on my SpeedPro and Bike Friday. It is the best (and worst) of both worlds. I don’t need such a wide ratio rear cassette though because of the internal hub so the derailleur doesn’t need to be quite so low to the ground. I do get less muck on it that way. It still is close though.

I agree with Thor that we should respect everyone regardless of type of gear system. I am open to all systems but you must decide what is best for your purpose. For racing I’d go derailleur for sure and that is what I have on my race bike already. For easy portability, great in bad weather, keep my pants clean commuter bike I love the internal hubs. On my touring bikes I like the SRAM DD setup. Who says you can’t have your cake and eat it too? Just buy more bikes! :D

<I wonder how many Rohloff hubs need to be built to get the MSRP closer to $500 or so.

I doubt this will ever happen. There is already an opportunity to license to manufacturers who could do just that: turn out the product at a lower price point. I suspect that Rohloff is satisfied with their present strategy, building a premium component for high-end OEM and custom building applications. Their product is at the high end of almost every line of manufacturers of folding bicycles and of the exotic downhill bike builders like Nicolai. Why would they want to ruin that?

Wavshrdr,

To add to your points, I have a KHS with a derailler and 8-speed cassette on 20-inch (406mm) wheels. (Brompton, BTW, is a 349mm wheel)

I measured the wheelbase of this bike and came up with 38 inches. My father has a full size road bike with a wheelbase of about 40 inches. Food for thought on the topic of distance between rear sprockets and front chainrings - the folder isn't much smaller than a full size bike.

I can't disagree with you on the "hanging down" part. My derailler, a long-cage Deore to accomodate an 11-34 cassette and double front rings, is at best 3 inches from the ground when in the 34T cog. I stick to roads so this hasn't been a problem to date but I can see where you're coming from. On something like the Brompton, the smaller wheel diameter would put my derailleur in contact with the ground.

I've had some recent experience at a bike co-operative restoring bikes that have internally geared hubs. I'm feeling a lot more comfortable with them though I stand by the assertion that service would have to be DIY - nobody carries parts for them in Canada let alone knows how to service them.

Interesting trade-off - a hub that likely won't break down (the co-op has 45 year old hubs in perfect working order) but would be problematic if it did versus a derailler with a lot more "hanging out" and exposed but in the event of a failure, would be easily serviced anywhere.

Eeeny, meenie, miney, mo... ;)

af895,

Obviously the shorter you can make the swingarm the stronger it can be and get better energy transmission. So on my race bike the rear tire barely clears the seat post tube and they minized that distance as much as possible but still the tire and rim is much larger diameter so it will never be as close as a 20" wheel.

I don't hate derailleurs and see where they are useful and I do like them for many things. However after my last trip through Germany and Denmark on my Dahon I was cussing the thing as I set there picking weeds out. I could also see bits of sand that had been thrown up on it while riding along some of the coastal areas. Sand will quickly destroy gears, chains, sprockets and dearailleurs. When I got home I must have cleaned at least a teaspoon of sand out of it. That might not seem like much but for a small area it was a huge amount.

I think on the biggest cog on my Dahon, the lowest wheel sets maybe 2" or less from the ground. I just went and measured it and it is 5.1 cm (~2.1 inches) from the ground and that is with a big fat set of Schwalbe Big Apples on it which have taller sidewalls than the original Ritchie Rov'rs. It is pretty obvious why it is an issue for me when it is that low. I was thinking it was closer to 3" but after measuring it I was shocked. I have had to straighten it a few time from being knocked about but nothing major...yet!

I agree that derailleurs are easily serviced but then of course they require more service so they better. I have yet to wear out an internal hub so maybe I'm just lucky or I don't ride enough. On a typical day though I ride about 10-15 miles and most of the mile are on my folders. Weekends I'll put the miles on my race bike but even then that might be 30-40 each day and it is Campy equipped.

I personally would love to see a Rohloff at a lower price point someday. I have been agonizing over springing for one or not. Really the last thing stopping me is that I'd hate to have the bike stolen with it and it would be a prime target for thieves. I can't always take the bike any with me and I always keep 2 locks on it when I am in Berlin. Even then people have tried to cut the pole (rather than the locks) that my bike was attached to. Damn near succeded one time. If they say it had a Rohloff I am sure the effort devoted to trying to steal it would go up. :(

I want something I can use like an appliance sometimes without a lot of maintenance. Sort of like driving a Honda, put gas in it and change the oil and it goes. Everytime I pack my bike in the suitcase I have to take off the derailleur so it will fit. Then I spend quite a few minuted fiddling with it at my destination to make it work properly again. Even though I have tried to scribe marks where everything needs to go it is just off enough to annoy me. My hub gears never seem to have this issue or not to the extent as my derailleurs. I also like the fact that gear changes are usually more positive on the hub gears than most of the lower end derailleur crap that gets put on folding bikes. I also like the fact that I can shift up or down a gear while stopped.

To each their own but for a while I'll keep both but for commuting the internal hub wins hands down for me.

Great thread.
I think the tire repair issue is overrated in considering hub vs Der.
As a commuter I get flats regularly and never remove the whole wheel
to fix the tube.

I am into Hubs as well. Though i am doing my first tour on my Twenty with 7 speed S-Ram hub this summer and then i will know better if they also work for my sort of touring. S-Rams are NOT expensive everywhere, here in the Netherlands they cost less than the Nexus. The Nexus is not too happening IMO for various reasons. See my other post for details.

I'd like to add that i also found it very easy to repair punctures, the hub doesn't give me any problems.

I specified the components on the new Swift Folder (website (http://www.xootr.com/xootr/swift/bikes.shtml)). I evaluated the SRAM 3-speed (internal hub for the "Dual Drive"), Nexus 7-Speed, and SRAM 4.0 derailleur.

We ended up going with the derailleur for these reasons:

1. Effiiciency
I did quite a lot of testing on this. The derailleur system with a clean chain registered 98 percent efficiency. The Nexus 7 registered 90 percent (the effiiciency varies by gear, but this is for Gear 3, one of the better gears). The dual drive is 98 percent efficient in Gear 2 ("direct drive"), but drops to about 94% in Gear 3, which is needed at top cruising speed, which is when you also want to have good efficiency.

90 percent is *really bad* for a bike you expect to do any kind of fitness cycling with, or for a bike you commute on "competitively" (as I do with three of my colleagues). Frankly, the Nexus is pretty much a little "heater" on your rear hub. Of the 150-200 Watts you deliver to the bike under normal conditions, 15-20 Watts are heating up the hub.

We didn't look at the SRAM 7 speed to seriously as it is really expensive. I expect it will have similarly poor efficiency (all of these set ups have multiple sets of gears meshing in them).

2. Weight
The internal hubs run 400-800 g heavier in terms of overall system weight than do the derailleur systems. On a folder, this can be a big deal. I found that pushing the bike down below 10 kg (22 lbs) made a real difference in terms of how readily I would pop it in the car or take it on a train.

3. Cost
The Nexus adds about $100 - $150 to the retail price of the bike.

Having said all this, I did like the Dual Drive rear hub with a single cog on it. I set it up so that Gear 2 was about a 65 gear-inch ratio, which let me run in the "direct drive" mode for most urban riding. The problem is that when shifting to Gear 1 to grunt up a big hill or Gear 3 to race with the guys, I would lose another 5 percent of my power (not a good thing at my age). Many people are also not willing to live with only three gears, which I understand.

I know this comes across as "bike geek" talk to a lot of people, and the internal hub stuff is probably fine for many low-intensity riders in urban settings. However, I felt there were too many compromises relative to the derailleur. Of course, this only works on a 406mm wheel (20in), as the really small wheels can't really be set up well with a derailleur.

Incidentally, a new chain costs $6. So, I just swap chains and clean the derailleur 2-3 times a year, which keeps the system running really well in the most grungy of conditions.

Best,

Karl U.
Xootr LLC

Like many, I was enthusiastic about a hub-drive system that I went and bought an '05 Vitesse D5 with the SA-5 hub. The idea of a sealed-gear system sounded ideal for commuting. I've been riding a derailleur system, and nothing but, ever since I was a kid, starting with my first first ten-speed from Sears at the age of 10. The Vitesse would be my first go at a hub-geared system, so I had no idea what to expect.

I must say that I totally agree with the effciency difference between a derailleur/cassette drive and an internal gear hub. After 3 months of commuting with the SA-5, here are my impressions:

"Mushy"..."muddy"...I like to describe it as pedaling with rubber cranks. Feedback through the pedals is anything but direct...like pedaling on mashmallows. It's a very weird feeling that I just could not get used to even after 3 months of use. Let me take you through the 5 gears:

1 - feels like I got rubber cranks...in the steep hills while in first gear, I fail to feel the bike surge forward with every downstroke...where is all my pedal power going to?
2 - this is the direct-drive of the 5 gears...feels solid, but not very useable except for slow, seated climbs...I prefer climbing steep hills in 2nd than 1st, as at least I feel as if most of my power is moving the bike forward.
3 - not as solid as 2nd, but is definitely the most useable of the 5...good for cruising ~15mph.
4 - here's where the "rubber cranks" feeling starts to kick-in again...you really start to feel your input being sucked-away by the gear hub mechanism, and you really have to work harder in this gear to pick-up the pace from 3rd.
5 - now this is the most interesting place...the rear hub now sounds and feels like my chain is connected to a coffee grinder, and all my power is being replaced by noise and friction...I'm not picking-up any speed at all from 4th, and there is almost no feedback from pedal, to cog, to rubber, to pavement, and hence my immediate reaction is always to down-shift back to 4th to get some feel back into the pedal stroke. This gear is best reserved for downhills in tailwinds. By this time, my hub is making so much noise, other riders are taking notice.

I've done all the adjusting and re-adjusting of the hub and chain as per the SA manual, but nothing seemed to improve it's efficiency and noise-level.

Shifting was extremely temperamental. Sometimes the hub wouldn't shift at all, other times it would only shift if I stopped pedaling or eased-up significantly on the pedal pressure, while on some occasions, the hub would shift more predicatbly if I pedaled backwards during the shift itself. This is not how I learned to shift a bike, and is way too weird.

So not only did I have a drive system that was inefficient, but also unresponsive to shifts. That's a lot to sacrifice for a supposedly "ideal" drive system.

I eventually gave up the beast in favor of a Xootr Swift with (you guessed it) a good, "ol' fashioned" derailleur/cassette drive system. Now when I flick the SRAM gripshift, "bang!"...it locks into the next gear and feels solid from 1st to 8th. Now THAT'S more like it!

Granted that derailleur/cassette drives are more complicated on the outside, they're actually less complex compared to the planetary gears/clutch rolling around inside of a gear hub. Granted also that derailleur/cassette drives can shift like crap when improperly maintained, to me a filthy derailleur system is still more efficient than a clean hub-geared system.

I must say that an internal gear hub drive gives the bike a cleaner look and a whole lot less exposed parts to maintain , but the extra added weight, along with it's inherent mechanical ineffciency is simply not enough to justify.

James, what you are experiencing with your 5 spd is like nothing I've felt with my Nexus hubs or even my SRAM DD setups on my Dahon and Bike Friday. Even the (arguably) crappiest of all my internal hubs, the Auto Nexus 4spd, I can't ever say it feels like I am stepping on rubber bands.

For example I have two very similar bikes. I have a Bianchi Auto Milano and a Bianchi Rollo. The Rollo is a fixie and the Auto Milano has the Nexus 4spd Auto internal hub. They both have the same frame size and tires but wheels are different. I have the same type of Contis on both. The Rollo is slightly lighter than the Milano but close enough for my comparo. If I ride them back to back, I can see the difference but it is not incredibly prounounced. Nothing like you mentioned and the fixie should be vastly more efficient but it really doesn't feel that much more. The Nexus is quite quiet in all gears except for a little hum in 4th. I may need to adjust but I am not worrying about it for now. All in all I was surprised at how nice the Auto Nexus worked. You can leave it in auto mode or shift it like a Porsche Tiptronic transmission. Only complaint I really have is I'd like a wider gear spread. Other than that it is great for its intended purpose.

I am not sure but i have heard there are def. better and lesser Hub gear models from Sturmey Archer and others. Maybe you got unlucky James and ended up with one with a lot of friction/poorer design? I had my SA-3 for years and never experienced the feelings you describe despite riding Ders now and then too for comparison.

I must say that I totally agree with the effciency difference between a derailleur/cassette drive and an internal gear hub. After 3 months of commuting with the SA-5, here are my impressions:

"Mushy"..."muddy"...I like to describe it as pedaling with rubber cranks. Feedback through the pedals is anything but direct...like pedaling on mashmallows. It's a very weird feeling that I just could not get used to even after 3 months of use. Let me take you through the 5 gears:

1 - feels like I got rubber cranks...in the steep hills while in first gear, I fail to feel the bike surge forward with every downstroke...where is all my pedal power going to?
2 - this is the direct-drive of the 5 gears...feels solid, but not very useable except for slow, seated climbs...I prefer climbing steep hills in 2nd than 1st, as at least I feel as if most of my power is moving the bike forward.
3 - not as solid as 2nd, but is definitely the most useable of the 5...good for cruising ~15mph.
4 - here's where the "rubber cranks" feeling starts to kick-in again...you really start to feel your input being sucked-away by the gear hub mechanism, and you really have to work harder in this gear to pick-up the pace from 3rd.
5 - now this is the most interesting place...the rear hub now sounds and feels like my chain is connected to a coffee grinder, and all my power is being replaced by noise and friction...I'm not picking-up any speed at all from 4th, and there is almost no feedback from pedal, to cog, to rubber, to pavement, and hence my immediate reaction is always to down-shift back to 4th to get some feel back into the pedal stroke. This gear is best reserved for downhills in tailwinds. By this time, my hub is making so much noise, other riders are taking notice.


Let me give you my opinion of the Sturmey Archer AW-3 speed hub since I put over 5K miles on my Dahon Piccolo.

1st gear --- This low gear has a low grinding feel like there are peanuts in the hub. It's not low enough for large hills but it's adequate for city riding. The reason why so many Brompton owners are installing various other hubs and chainrings is due to the fact that 1st gear is not low enough for anything but city riding. What people don't understand is the inefficiency of 1st gear is the major reason for their problems.

2nd gear --- This is the only gear I would spend 95% of my time and it was essential for it to be low or 1st gear would be waaay out of range. Only second gear was efficient, too bad SA couldn't design the other gears in this same manner

3rd gear --- I don't know why SA even built this gear since it was hardly ever used. The SA AW 3 is actually a 2 speed hub because 3rd gear is so waaaaaay out there to be totally unusable. The inefficiency was so bad, turning the cranks would leave you exhausted after two or three blocks of use.

As the prior writer of the Folding Society said about the AW-3, you peddal like mad in second gear and go nowhere and once you shift to 3 gear, your knees creek!

I recently invested a decent amount of money (about the original price of the bike) on a SRAM Dual drive (3x9). I just hope it wasn't a bad move.

Derailleurs are well established in the market of efficient bikes. The selling point of a folder is not efficiency, but if you want to go effectivelly fast (even with 20" wheels with folding frames), my understanding is that hubs are not the best. By the way, did Lance win the tour with an internal hub? ;)

Rafael

Hey Guys
For me it's a hub every time, I'm fed up repairing, replacing, cleaning and re-oiling the 'Klingon' on the side of my bikes. On my Birdy, the Rohloff gave me a huge range of gears, the ability to jump up or down numerous gears (even when stationary). And absolutely maintenance free! Magic!
Try riding a folder up the 'Taff Trail' I guarantee you will knock your derailleur on one of the stiles and it will either end up out of adjustment or will need replacing.
Derailleurs were never designed to sit so close to the road. Sorry guys, big thumbs down for derailleurs!

I guess it is a classic case of YMMV, i don't doubt that under testing conditions hub gears are less efficient. But if the differences were that marked & riding them was so horrible for everyone they would long ago have been ditched/gone out of usage. I am not a strong cyclist as such but for me the loss in 5 to 10 % of efficiency is more than compensated for by the fact that hubs can last up to 10 times as long as a der setup and that they are less vulnerable and need almost no adjustment. I like cycling more than i like wrenching and cleaning my bike. If using hubs adds 5% to my total ride time instead of having to spend that time cleaning and wrenching once i gets there or before i take off, well i'll opt for riding a bit longer or slower.

But i would say that ders can work fine on folders too, depending on your needs and application. There are now (extra) short cage ders, folders frames designed with decent der clearance in mind and one can always add for Big Apple Style tires to give a little extra clearance. I figure ders could work fine unless one likes using a folder for serious offroading. But again it is a matter of taste and what aspects one values most in a drive system. I think i would be more tempted by ders if they were made as well as many people say they used to be. A lot of build in obsolescence it would seem. In that respect the S-Ram Dual Drive may be a welcome surprise rather than all the Shimano Grouppos that people tell me have only declined in durability over the years.

The Rohlof is no doubt a beautifull product that can really put to shame quite some der setups, especially in the durability field. However it is out of most people's budget range. Then again if i had ders and spend about $ 1000 per 5 years on replacing them and having them adjusted (quite some riders do) i'd buy a Rohlof in a heartbeat.

I agree...until the day arrives when every rider's bike in the Peloton comes sans-derailleur, then a hub system simply is not the most efficient way to transfer power from the pedals to forward motion.

Take a look at the cross-section of this high-quality gear-hub system: http://www.rohloffusa.com/frame.htm

No one can argue that all those gears rolling around is just as/more efficient than the simple, direct-drive principle of a casette/derailleur system. It's simply mechanically not possible.

I agree...until the day arrives when every rider's bike in the Peloton comes sans-derailleur, then a hub system simply is not the most efficient way to transfer power from the pedals to forward motion.

Take a look at the cross-section of this high-quality gear-hub system: http://www.rohloffusa.com/frame.htm

No one can argue that all those gears rolling around is just as/more efficient than the simple, direct-drive principle of a casette/derailleur system. It's simply mechanically not possible.

No one could reasonable argue that it is. However Don't forget there are little idle wheels on a der. setup that suck up energy as well as the chain angles that become issues and more so on folders. So based on all our discourse we should just ride fixies! Now I just need to buy a fixie in every possible gear combination I need, sort of like golf clubs. :D

Better yet, I'll just but a Bion-X electric assist on my fixie for when I need a little help up a hill. Why downshift?

Let me give you my opinion of the Sturmey Archer AW-3 speed hub since I put over 5K miles on my Dahon Piccolo.

1st gear --- This low gear has a low grinding feel like there are peanuts in the hub. It's not low enough for large hills but it's adequate for city riding. The reason why so many Brompton owners are installing various other hubs and chainrings is due to the fact that 1st gear is not low enough for anything but city riding. What people don't understand is the inefficiency of 1st gear is the major reason for their problems.

2nd gear --- This is the only gear I would spend 95% of my time and it was essential for it to be low or 1st gear would be waaay out of range. Only second gear was efficient, too bad SA couldn't design the other gears in this same manner

3rd gear --- I don't know why SA even built this gear since it was hardly ever used. The SA AW 3 is actually a 2 speed hub because 3rd gear is so waaaaaay out there to be totally unusable. The inefficiency was so bad, turning the cranks would leave you exhausted after two or three blocks of use.

As the prior writer of the Folding Society said about the AW-3, you peddal like mad in second gear and go nowhere and once you shift to 3 gear, your knees creek!

My overall conclusion of my SA-5 was that it is essentially a 3-speed with 2 absolutely useless gears thrown-in for the namesake and thus price-point.

Let me add one point: Dahon offers a "Neos" derailler for some of it's bikes. It seems to be a specially designed der' (by SRAM?) that pivots forward instead of back - thereby increasing ground clearance versus a conventional der'.

A long cage derailleur is pretty much a necessity on a small wheel bike - you need that long cage for the chain capacity to deal with an 11-34 cassette and a double or triple front ringset. If you go with a narrower gear range, you're sacrificing top and/or bottom end.

Even though I like the long-cage Deore derailler I'm using, if a Rohloff hub were efficient (and I could afford one) I'd probably be looking at one as the ultimate drivetrain upgrade - for no other reasons than: HUGE gear range, no front derailleur, instant shifting while riding OR stopped.

I think it is important to point out once more (like Sheldon Brown and the owner of Rivendell did in that interview that is on-line). We are NOT and never will be the Peleton riders. To look at them in order to decide our gear/material choices is often folly. We don't get a new bike every season, we don't have skilled mechanics on call, we don't have the funds the teams have and our livelyhood and job does not depend on seconds/speed or single percentages of performance. To name but one example how many on these boards actually can afford a Dura Ace grouppo like the pros use? Half the people here have complete bikes that cost less that that bit of kit.

As Grant Peterson (rivendell dude) said (more or less) how much do you hate cycling that you are willing to go for upgrades that will cost you more money and hassle in the long term only in order to shave seconds of a 10 minute ride?

But as for other reasons that entail opting for ders or hub, it is an individual choice whatever makes your riding more pleasant and you happy.

The Rohlof is no doubt a beautifull product that can really put to shame quite some der setups, especially in the durability field. However it is out of most people's budget range. Then again if i had ders and spend about $ 1000 per 5 years on replacing them and having them adjusted (quite some riders do) i'd buy a Rohlof in a heartbeat.

Spending $1,000.00 per 5 years for replacing a derailluer system? I suppose if we were discussing Dura Ace that would be true but derailluers are cheap. They cost about 30-40 dollars brand new and prices are cheaper on Ebay. A cassette cost about the same as a derailluer and I don't see how this can add up to $1,000.00 every 5 years.

Chainrings on a derailluer system will last about as long on a hub. My used Univega from the late 80's is still working like a dream and I only replaced the freewheel and derailuer on a bike that's probably over 16 years old. Maybe you're very hard on the equiptment but a derailluer system is cheap and parts are going for nothing on Ebay.

Well sure, i was speaking of Dura Ace because i think that -and some old stock/older versions of Ders can more or less measure up to hubs in terms of durability-. I was also referring to that Grouppo because there was an Analogy drawn that referred to the peleton and as a lot of the peleton uses Dura Ace...

I totally agree (as i kind off said in my previous post) that quite some older grouppos can really last long (in fact i have one myself on my Viscount racer) but many experienced riders that i know say a lot of the new stuff is just substandard in terms of wear and tear. These people are by no means retrogrouches, they still run ders because they are used to it and they like the range, but they do feel that current versions are just not build to last.

That figure of $ 1000 was of course exagerrated if we are not speaking of Dura Ace, but i was speaking of the cash that quite some cyclists i have spoken to spend. They spend it to have the Ders maintained & tuned and to replace them so that they feel real 'tight' and 'new' without skipping or play. Of course you can do little maintenance/do your own and get cheap setups. However that goes for both ders and hubs. As i have stated previously 3 speed hubs are so common here that i find them (in working order) on the streets on a regular basis. Most don't need any work, some need replacement of 3 parts totalling $ 10. Then you can ride them for another 10 to 40 years.

But at the end of the day it is all a matter of perspective, circumstances and preference. I don't think either system is better than the other for everyone, i just have a preference based on my needs. If you can find cheap ders there that work very well for you more power to you! I'll stick with hubs for now and may switch one day, it all depends.

I finally added some decent milage on my SRAM Dual Drive (3x8) to leave an opinion here.

It was the best investment I made on my Halfway RS. No negative things to say, strongly recommended.

Rafael Guerra

Hey Raf, looks real nice you bike in it's current form, pretty Sci Fi ish, just wondering, how much did the DD cost you. I have sometimes considered getting one.

Megarange cassette (8spd), Dual Drive Hub, Dual Drive derailleur, dual drive box (hub shifter), Dual drive shifter (handlebar) + intallation = Aprox 320 (US Dolars).

I use my bike as a regular bike, just need the folding capabilties so it fits inside my sedan's trunk without racks or other time consuming/unsafe devices. I am planning at least one century ride in 2006 and I don't think the "dragging" wil compromise my performance. If I were planning on travelling internationally often though, I would buy a 14 speed internal hub, even if it costed 3000 dolars (it is aprox. 1200). I jst did not have a good time travelling with derailluers this December.

Rafael

Cool! The 14 speed hub can be had for about 700 dollars or less actually. That is, if you are willing to buy a complete new bike with the hub, then cannabalize and replace the hub with something else and then sell the whole bike on again. Lot of hassle, but you can save some cash that way.

What bike, in the USA, come with a Rohllof 14 speed hub?

You can order a Bike Friday that way or a Swift if you want for example but I don't think that will save you any money. In Germany and Europe I saw quite a few with Rohloffs from the factory and I think that is how v1nce is looking at it.

Yes those bikes are pretty good examples and i think they could save you some money if you are good at scavenging a replacement drive system. However i was mostly speaking of bikes in Europe, The Netherlands, Germany, but even with them i am not sure it would be way cheaper. I personally i am pretty sure i might own one, one day once the price has dropped some.

My girlfriend will probably say something like "if you ride 2000 miles without adding anything to this bike I will give you one for free" kind of thing. It is a pretty big investment, specially for the "kind of cycling I do.

Not changing subjects, there are options out there. Actually, Made in the USA:

http://nupace.com/product.htm

My girlfriend will probably say something like "if you ride 2000 miles without adding anything to this bike I will give you one for free" kind of thing. It is a pretty big investment, specially for the "kind of cycling I do.

Not changing subjects, there are options out there. Actually, Made in the USA:

http://nupace.com/product.htm

Lot of disadvantages potentially to this option.

1. Doesn't have the range of the Rohloff.
2. Expensive and no proven track record.
3. Efficiency is unknown but not likely to be good.
4. LOTS of moving parts which increases odds of failure.
5. Can't get the same gear repeatedly for example while training which would make it difficult to see results over time.
6. Fill in your own if you want but there are quite a few.

I would like to see how it holds up over time before I'd even start to be interested in it. Combine that with its limited range and it is a non-starter for me.

The range issue could probably be solved by adding a Speeddrive. But this combo might end up costing (almost?) as much as the Rohloff. Personally for me the relative obscurity (unproven, what about replacement parts in the future, will the company be around, maintenance) of it makes it a no go at present. If i were going for a cheaper sortoff alternative to the Rohloff i'd go for a 7 speeds hub plus Speeddrive or possibly a Dual Drive.