Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    Ectomorph in motion darronb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Brantingham, NY
    My Bikes
    1988 Schwinn Impact MTB, 2006 Schwinn Varsity 700c, 1976 Royce Union fixie
    Posts
    27
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Create asymmetrical rear dropouts to eliminate wheel dish?

    When reading about the Surly Pugsley on Sheldon Brown's site, I found the asymmetrical frame and fork ends to be a brilliant idea. I don't know if I'm allowed to post images here from the sites of others, so instead here's a link to an image on Sheldon's site for you to check out, and better understand what I'm referring to.

    I'm sure there's a good reason for this, but why don't more bikes with normal-width tires use this system, at least on the rear wheel? This would allow the building of rear wheels with no dish, making them stronger. The main objection I can think of is that the drive side crank arm would not clear the chain stay unless the stay was bent in a dog leg shape right behind the rear-most arc of the crank arm. This would weaken the stay, but it could be beefed up to compensate. This Clyde for one would gladly accept the extra weight in exchange for a stronger rear wheel.

    Perhaps even existing old steel frames could be asymmetrically bent to create a zero-dish setup. If there are any spacers on the non drive-side of the rear hub, you would want to remove them, then bend the non drive-side dropout in toward the frame's center-line a little, if possible. The drive side would be bent out to align a zero-dish wheel to the frame center-line . This would move the drive-side dropout ahead of it's opposite number, so horizontal dropouts would be required to allow the axle to be installed perpendicular to the frame's center-line. And the dropouts would have to be bent back into being parallel with the center line, as well.

    Hmmm, perhaps it's time to experiment on that freebie xmart gas pipe MTB frame I've got out in the shop...

    Darron
    Last edited by darronb; 01-18-08 at 10:11 AM.

  2. #2
    Senior member Dan Burkhart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Oakville Ontario
    Posts
    4,842
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by darronb View Post
    When reading about the Surly Pugsley on Sheldon Brown's site, I found the asymmetrical frame and fork ends to be a brilliant idea. I don't know if I'm allowed to post images here from the sites of others, so instead here's a link to an image on Sheldon's site for you to check out, and better understand what I'm referring to.

    I'm sure there's a good reason for this, but why don't more bikes with normal-width tires use this system, at least on the rear wheel? This would allow the building of rear wheels with no dish, making them stronger. The main objection I can think of is that the drive side crank arm would not clear the chain stay unless the stay was bent in a dog leg shape right behind the rear-most arc of the crank arm. This would weaken the stay, but it could be beefed up to compensate. This Clyde for one would gladly accept the extra weight in exchange for a stronger rear wheel.

    Perhaps even existing old steel frames could be asymmetrically bent to create a zero-dish setup. If there are any spacers on the non drive-side of the rear hub, you would want to remove them, then bend the non drive-side dropout in toward the frame's center-line a little, if possible. The drive side would be bent out to align a zero-dish wheel to the frame center-line . This would move the drive-side dropout ahead of it's opposite number, so horizontal dropouts would be required to allow the axle to be installed perpendicular to the frame's center-line. And the dropouts would have to be bent back into being parallel with the center line, as well.

    Hmmm, perhaps it's time to experiment on that freebie xmart gas pipe MTB frame I've got out in the shop...

    Darron
    The biggest drawback I can think of to what your proposing is getting an acceptable chainline. To do so would require putting the right crank and chainrings waaaay out there. The Pugsley is a different animal entirely, and riders who use it for it's intended purpose are not going to care about Q factor or whether their right crank is farther out than the left, but I think your average road rider would not accept such a design.
    Just my 2 cents.
    Gearhubs demystified and other cool stuff.


    Rule #12: The correct number of bikes to own is n+1

  3. #3
    Ectomorph in motion darronb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Brantingham, NY
    My Bikes
    1988 Schwinn Impact MTB, 2006 Schwinn Varsity 700c, 1976 Royce Union fixie
    Posts
    27
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Burkhart View Post
    The biggest drawback I can think of to what your proposing is getting an acceptable chainline. To do so would require putting the right crank and chainrings waaaay out there.
    D'Oh! Forgot all about that issue...

    Perhaps a dog-leg bend in the chain, as well ;-)

    Darron

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    12,199
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Framebuilder Tony Oliver produced some dished frames back in the 1980s and illustrated them in his book "Touring Bikers"
    The drive side stays looked pretty normal but the non-drive side was dished inboard

  5. #5
    Your mom
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,546
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think that dishing a wheel is a simpler and pretty proven solution.

  6. #6
    surly old man jgedwa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Carlisle, PA
    My Bikes
    IRO Mark V, Karate Monkey half fat, Trek 620 IGH, Cannondale 26/24 MTB, Amp Research B3, and more.
    Posts
    3,274
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Such bikes would be great for people that road track counter-clockwise all the time.

    jim
    Cross Check Nexus7, IRO Mark V, Trek 620 Nexus7, Karate Monkey half fat, IRO Model 19 fixed, Amp Research B3, Surly 1x1 half fat fixed, and more...
    --------------------------
    SB forever

  7. #7
    Senior Member Retro Grouch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    St Peters, Missouri
    My Bikes
    Rans Enduro Sport, Hase Kettweisel Tandem, Merin Bear Valley beater bike
    Posts
    23,602
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Burkhart View Post
    The biggest drawback I can think of to what your proposing is getting an acceptable chainline.
    How about getting the axle square with the rest of the frame? If you bend the right chainstay outward it's going to move the right dropout forward relative to the left dropout.

  8. #8
    Senior member Dan Burkhart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Oakville Ontario
    Posts
    4,842
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Retro Grouch View Post
    How about getting the axle square with the rest of the frame? If you bend the right chainstay outward it's going to move the right dropout forward relative to the left dropout.
    Yes, well the OP had already addressed that issue, my comment related to bikes designed around his proposal.
    Gearhubs demystified and other cool stuff.


    Rule #12: The correct number of bikes to own is n+1

  9. #9
    Videre non videri
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    My Bikes
    1 road bike (simple, light), 1 TT bike (could be more aero, could be lighter), 1 all-weather commuter and winter bike, 1 Monark 828E ergometer indoor bike
    Posts
    3,202
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The easiest and best method would be to make rear hubs without dish. That's accomplished by moving the non-drive-side flange in towards the centre of the hub, making it symmetrical. Just under half an inch in for a typical rear wheel.

    I'd much rather have a hub and wheel based on that. Not that I've had a problem with my rear wheels now, but I hate asymmetry. Asymmetry equals weakness. Weakness is not good.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Auld Blighty
    My Bikes
    Early Cannondale tandem, '99 S&S Frezoni Audax, '65 Moulton Stowaway, '52 Claud Butler, TSR30, Brompton
    Posts
    2,172
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Orbit in Britain had asymmetrical rear wheels for quite a few years.

  11. #11
    cab horn
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Toronto
    My Bikes
    1987 Bianchi Campione
    Posts
    28,292
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Velocity Aerohead OC (Off-center) rims.

    Mes compaingnons cui j'amoie et cui j'aim,... Me di, chanson.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    745
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've been building frames with offset dropouts and no dish for almost 30 years.

    Our 19 year old LWB recumbent tandem carries almost 300 lbs on the rear wheel when we're touring. We run 36 2.0-1.8-2.0 spokes and have never had a wheel problem.

  13. #13
    Broom Wagon Fodder reverborama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Minnesota
    My Bikes
    Fuji Supreme; Fuji Royale; Schwinn Varsity; Nishiki International; Schwinn Premis, Falcon Merckx
    Posts
    1,165
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Internally geared hubs = no rear wheel dish AND symmetrical dropouts.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •