Originally Posted by
mstateglfr
You said you hadn't heard of freewheels being weaker and more prone to axle snapping, so I explained why.
You now say you are aware of the differences and argue that it basically wasn't a big deal.
I'm aware of the design difference but I have not heard of extensive axle failures. And apparently, I'm not alone:
Originally Posted by
Trakhak
...anyone who has worked in a bike shop can tell you that the incidence of significantly bent or broken axles of freewheel hubs has always been pretty low.
Originally Posted by
mstateglfr
When spacing went from 120mm to 126mm, the unsupported section grew. When axles went from 126mm to 130mm, the unsupported section grew. When bikes went to 130mm spacing, you saw a significant transition to freehubs.
A 135mm freewheel has even more unsupported axle.
You do realize that you can strengthen the unsupported section with more and stronger material? An engineer estimates the forces being applied to the axle, adds a factor of safety, and chooses the material and geometric characteristics accordingly.
Originally Posted by
mstateglfr
Argue that it doesn't matter much, if you want, but it's a real difference that has been looked into and tested.
Again, I am not aware of a huge increase in broken axles due to the use of freewheels. If you have any reports to the contrary, I'd be interested. I've had no problems with the G.1 so far, even on heavy washboard. And I'm part of a group of owners of the bike and have not heard a single instance of axle failure.
P.S. I just realized that you're the same person in the other thread about photo usage rights - you appear to have edited out a snarky sentence referencing that. If you've come here to pick a fight, no thanks.