Originally Posted by Buzzbomb

"I simply can't see any advantage whatsoever in this hub over the conventional der. system (other than being able to say that you own the most complex, expensive and impossible-to-field-repair hub/shift system ever designed)!"

After much thought I would rather take a little piece of metal and dangle it down below my chain, put it under spring tension, and let it slop my chain back and forth. I thought about it, and I don't care if my chain is under a lateral load, heck that probably doesn't wear it out or lead to premature failure, and if it does, I can always carry an extra chain along with my casette tool.

"One of the specs I noticed is that they limit the input torque to the hub (to me that indicates a certain amount of "delicacy" of the internal parts). Also, there is no way that a planetary gear system can possibly be as efficient in transmitting power as a chain and cog setup. The laws of physics can't be circumvented by spending lots of money."

Show me where I made any claim regarding efficiency. In fact, there have been studies made (I'm not gonna provide a link, find them if you want, if you can.) comparing them to Shimano XT drive trains that find them +/- around 5%, the advantage going to each one depending on the gear. Even the most robust equipment, including racing transmissions, military spec. transmissions, and construction equipment transmissions have allowable torque specs. They are derived as part of the normal engineering process. The fact that there is a spec means nothing in terms of the strength of the component.


"Also, there is a mechanical law that states that the more complex a given system is, the more likely it is to fail. There's no way to get around that one either."

You learned this when you got your mechanical engineering degree?

"I also noticed that there are two different oils, one for winter and another for summer. I assume that the viscosity is the difference. Wouldn't you need to carry the different oils and the change kit for the variable climatic conditions you would encounter?"

There is an all season oil, which is what I use.

"So, in conclusion, after becoming more knowledgable about this product I am even more convinced that this particular piece of equipment is not in any way suitable for use on a bike that's to be used for an around-the-world trip. Actually, I can't see any tangible advantage for its use on ANY bike if maximum durability, reliability, serviceability, affordability and readily available access to spare parts are to be achieved. Mechanical artwork has its place without a doubt, but believe that it would be especially inappropriate for use in this application."

Sounds like sour grapes. You can ignore all the first hand touring experience out there if you want to, go ahead and slam my choice of equipment if it makes you happy. As far as being the most costly and most likely to break, two points: 1) Have you priced an XT or XTR gruppo lately? 2) My previous post stated my experience, which has not been what your opinion says it should be; no mechanical failures under brutal MTB use.

"Peace & Love,"

I didn't mean to get confrontational with my first post, sorry if I came across that way. I find your condescension repugnant and childish, and
unfortunately, this conversation with you has degenerated to the point where useful exchange of info or opinion is not possible.

No love, but peace, out.