Thread: Hub Gears: does near-perfect efficiency really matter?
View Single Post
Old 08-19-08, 12:30 PM
  #8  
rhm
multimodal commuter
 
rhm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NJ, NYC, LI
Posts: 19,808

Bikes: 1940s Fothergill, 1959 Allegro Special, 1963? Claud Butler Olympic Sprint, Lambert 'Clubman', 1974 Fuji "the Ace", 1976 Holdsworth 650b conversion rando bike, 1983 Trek 720 tourer, 1984 Counterpoint Opus II, 1993 Basso Gap, 2010 Downtube 8h, and...

Mentioned: 584 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1908 Post(s)
Liked 574 Times in 339 Posts
Originally Posted by timo888
Do small gains or losses in efficiency really matter to commuters, multi-modal commuters, and leisure riders?
No.
Originally Posted by timo888
"If racers, or even commuting or touring cyclists, could choose optimum gears
they would be hundreds of meters ahead at the end of 60 km (37 mi)."
-- The mechanical efficiency of bicycle derailleur and hub-gear transmissions
Chester Kyle and Frank Berto, in HUMAN POWER: the technical journal of the International Human Powered Vehicle Association NUMBER 52 SUMMER 2001
I agree. An efficient pedaling style matched to a gear appropriate to the terrain makes a more of difference than is lost through the hub.

For this reason I much prefer my Sturmey Archer 8-speed hub over my Sturmey Archer 3-speed hub; I believe the latter is a more efficient transmission, but the engine is more efficient with the 8-speed!
rhm is offline  
Reply