CHenry

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.

nitropowered

That is such a waste

Unknown Cyclist

**********???

mx_599

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

Unknown Cyclist

You like it then ?

What's confusing ?

Unknown Cyclist

Unknown Cyclist

mx_599

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


mx

Unknown Cyclist

Apparently it's a UAV - Urban Assault Vehicle.

Which bit do you find confusing ?

griftereck

hit by ugly rays

Unknown Cyclist

In what way is it a waste ?

mx_599

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

mx

Batavus

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: https://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!

Unknown Cyclist

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.

CHenry

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.

Flatballer

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.

griftereck

does the gears work?
as the cables look loose.

gosmsgo

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.

coldfeet

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. )

Unknown Cyclist

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

gosmsgo

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.

Unknown Cyclist

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 ?

CHenry

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.

Joshua A.C. New

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);

Juha

OK, I hate you now.