Originally Posted by
Kimmo
Yeah, I don't like it - it's weaker, heavier, or both.
Pretty sure it's both.
(reposting this from another forum)
[in response to the increased dish of this system] ...As far as dish goes It's no different than a current shimano freehub. Because it is a [blue anodized] carbon copy of a shimano freehub- those are the same male splines on the hub body and that's a shimano freewheeling mechanism (those are tiny ball bearings you see on the outer ring, outside the keyway, maybe they removed a dust cover?):
The kicker is that with a solid axle system, number 13 on the schematic here threads into the barrel of the hub unifying the rotating parts of the hub's body and providing strength in tandem with the solid axle. This design forgoes the added strength of #13 there, and puts all the stress on the axle. The threading of the two axle halves needs to be coarse enough to tighten in few enough turns to keep the most ADD cyclists happy while providing enough purchase to provide the strength of the solid axle as well as the integrated rotating body of the hub shell and #13. I have a feeling he's using that blue hub for a couple of reasons- not only to add a little bling, because, let's face it, there's not a whole lot of desire in paying for a novel idea if you can't show it off, and axles aren't that sexy, and also because aftermarket hubs can not only be found with larger diameter axles (strength ++), but equipped with cartridge bearings (no preload requirement) as well. I have a sneaking suspicion that there is an added bearing inside the hub shell, there should be anyway- if not ALL the strength of the wheel relies on a press fit of the splines for the ratcheting mechanism- but I can't see it. If there isn't at least a third set of bearings past the two pictured in the diagram, then we're not just dealing with a poor design, we're dealing with a dangerous design.
I think the concept has merit as an idea, but it's
nothing new. Hell the cinelli bivalent design was conceived to create a solution where a single wheel could serve as both a front or a rear wheel.
What frustrates me more than anything else is that there's really no reason (other than loose-ball bearing preload I guess, but cartridge bearings can surely be made to fit in shimano cups) that the HubDock solution couldn't exist as a retrofit axle for the gazillion shimano freehubs out in the wild already.
Am I missing something here?