Originally Posted by
cyccommute
There are trade-offs. The White Industries is lighter and, I feel, a little smoother but it's a bit harder to take apart. The Phil FSC can be taken apart with a couple of allen wrenches and the freehub comes off without having to break the cassette if you have to replace drive side spokes. The bearings are easier to remove and replace as well. For touring, the Phil Wood is probably the better choice.
I actually haven't used the Phil Cassette hub, since I bought the White and the Rohloff at the time. Their instructions indicate that you need to press in the bearings, which is not consistent with what you or others report, is there one series where you do and others that you don't? To me the main issue is to get a wheel that won't break in the first place, which is where these things excel. If I wanted in field repair I would take the Shimano, or the DT since they have loose bearing, those are a snap to play with. Who really carries extra cartridges, maybe if someone actually cycles the Darian Gap. The expectation with super hubs is that you will get 10 of Ks of them and never have to touch them, for road uses.
There are other downsides to freewheels that you neglect to mention such as removal in the field to replace broken spokes.
I didn't neglect to mention them, they are well known. There are at least 3 simple solutions to spoke switching, as you know. And to boot, I am only interested in the Phil hub, with extra spokes, if I go freewheel, and it is unlikely that will break a spoke. I don't break spokes and don't seem to have problems with freewheels.
There are tools for in field freewheel changes if you want to go that route. It is routine to spend some cycling features on lighter weight gear, like the guys who pick up problems with carbon forks but think it is worth it. Nice, light, and bombproof Phil hubs are just another choice. The only reason they get the gears, so to speak, is that there is a certain characteristic human reaction that can't rationally compare things if one is old and the other is new. Useable electricity is more recent and awesome, but fire is still cool too.
Removing a cassette is fairly easy even if you can't pull the whole freehub off like the Phils. Removal of a freewheel isn't something that is often not easy to do even with a vise. You have to carry (or borrow) a very large wrench to do it by hand.
No you don't. Even if you did you have other parts, though I will give you the consistency reward that you deserve for also using Octalink. Anyway, isn't touring about meeting people, what better people to meet than those with big wrenches.
I don't get your "rigging angles" argument. A freehub for an 8 speed isn't any narrower than a freehub for a 9 or 10 speed cassette. The hub bodies are the same but the spacers between the cogs and the cogs themselves are thinner.
I just looked at the spokes when building out the White M16 and sorta gulped the angles are crazy. It does look to me like something I might want if I was racing MTBs and there was some reason for it, but I do worry that I may learn what all the rest of you slick folks already know about breaking spokes, now that I have this upgrade. What you can say is Phil specifically chooses spoke angles on his touring hubs with touring cyclists in mind. Whatever the specifics of the calculations may be.
You don't need STI to use all the gears. Many people get along just fine with barend shifters and others do well with downtube. You'll find endless debates on the merits of each system here on the Bike Forums. One really isn't all that much better than the others.
Oh yeah, people make all kinds of looney choice. Shift systems developed back when we had 1/3rd the gears, or a sixth. If I am taking all the crap that comes with a lot of gears, and the list is very long, I actually want to use them. Sure you could get a machine *** and then buy belts with 5 rounds in them, but it seems a little limiting. I know one doesn't need STI, and that a lot of people prefer other systems, my point was that as far as cost prottest is concerned, really exploiting the full, and reasonable advantage of a 27 speed say, is a job for STI, or brifters, whatever we are supposed to call them. I like those systems actually, I am just saying they aren't cheap.
As for durability, there are dozens of cassette choices so you can't make a blanket statement about cassettes not being "durable". If you used a titanium or aluminum cassette, your durability probably isn't going to be great and it certainly won't be good enough to justify the expense. But a steel cassette will last every bit as well as a steel freewheel will. Chains are going to last just as well. A cassette and chain may not last for a around the world trip but they'll probably get you half to most of the way. And they would certainly last well past the duration of most people's touring trips...or several of them.
I am talking the shells, I may have mispoke. There are lots of opposing point of view on that. One problem about talking about Shimano is that it is a never ending moving target. I have no idea what they offer, or how good it is. I have no way of knowing because it doesn't stay around long enough for an endurance test like touring to be dealt with. Good business plan, and probably makes lots of racers happy. Meanwhile Phil freewheel stuff has been around in much the same form since the 70s. People can say whatever they want about shimano, because it is almost impossible to call them on it, it is out of the shops by the time you might want to follow their advice.
The Shimano freehub design isn't "bad" nor is it delicate. Seldom do I see a freehub that isn't functional at my local co-op and I see thousands of bikes each year. Generally speaking, if a gear cluster is going to drag and be frozen, 99 times out of 100, it's going to be a freewheel that has the problem, not a freehub."
That doesn't impress me, I am sure the clothing at the goodwill is in fine useable shape too. We are talking high end uses here, the stuff you see probably breaks down because people chained it outside, or maybe racing type uses. That isn't the drill for super hubs.
The real issue is that few people actually run their gear long enough for any of this to mater, but just as there are thousands of twerps in racing costumes with fake ads on them, there are tourist who want ultimate gear, and some of them do actually get one great bike and keep it forever. So they are entitled to buy their version of a high end car or watch.
And I have yet to see a bent axle on a freehub equipped bike. Bent axles on freewheel bikes are very common...enough so that we have next to no axles for freewheel hubs that we've scavenged from other bikes. Usually, we can't scavenge the axles because they are bent.
Again you are off topic, which is OK, but my statement is that Phil is the key hub, no reason to make another decison if you want freewheels, for touring. OP didn't ask for a review of world freewheel problems, the design fix for freewheel problems was pretty simple, and we didn't need to go where we did.
Personally I still ride a bike, my current only functoning bike, and it is from the freewheel age, it just keeps going the problems are largely a fiction if you run good, or super gear, and run the bike with any regard at all. I'm a big dude, again, so the bike gets a beating, and I don't seem to break parts. It is almost getting a little embarassing. I think we live in a disposable cuslture. If I break something I fix it. Not the most practical way to be any more, but it does teach you not to thrash stuff just because you can.