dabac

I believe true automatics are easy to build, but difficult to make nice to ride, as the bike doesn't know what you're planning/why you're slacking off or spinning up.
A shift under power will be harder on the gear, and quite surprising.
But maybe one could add a torque sensor to deal with that.


For my solo rides/commutes, i think it could work rather well even w/o a torque sensor.
Can't come up with a catchy name at the moment, maybe "utility" mode.
I don't try for any KOMs, I don't socialize.
It's strictly business.
Staying on power, in the zone.


While waiting on that, the first two features I'd like to see (one already on the way in) to do away with this front/rear shift stuff.
Toggle the button one way for a higher gear, Another for a lower gear.
The bike will figure out which derailer to move, and how.


(Frankly it's embarrassing that bike riders for so long accepted that the same hand action would have reverse effects on the overall pedalling experience depending on if it's a front or rear shift. Couldn't anyone spell "user friendly" back in the days?)


Then there's "auto-return" or "auto-start".
Maybe call it speed matching?
Bring the ol' FFS back, and have the bike automatically keep the drivetrain in a gear where I can apply power the moment I'm done coasting or braking.
I'd like that too, particularly on my commuter.
In urban riding, it happens quite often that I get distracted by something else when approaching an intersection that I forget to select a useful starter gear before coming to a stop.


One thing I've asked about before is a related, but sorta inversed question: how small increments can a rider actually benefit from? 5-8-12%?


This, I feel, is an overlooked or ignored feature.


I could easily specify the speed range that 90-95% of my commuting is done in.
That speed range translates into a gearing range.
Splitting that gearing range into finer increments/more ratios than my knees would actually notice would just be wasted engineering for me.


There ought to be a recommended, or ideal number of gears for each given speed range.


I could probably be quite comfy commuting on a 1x10 or 1x11 setup three out of four seasons.
But would need more range when winter comes around.

Racing Dan

For marketing reasons this will continue, but will add no real value to the consumer. At least not 99% of the consumers. Most dont even use what they already have. Even 9 speed is fine if you carefully combine cassette and chain rings. Trouble is factory bikes often come with "head under arm" gearing that has a number of gears way too low or high, or both.

Bike Gremlin

Bicycle is my only means of transport, used for recreation as well. As far as gearing goes, I'm quite happy with 3x6 drivetrain(s). One more thing:

A typical 6 speed cassette, widely available one, starts with 14 T sprocket. e.g. 14-28, or 14-32 for MTB.
Go to 7 speeds - all you get is one more smaller sprocket. Like 13-28 - 13-32.
8 speeds? Unless paying more than double the price, you get another gear you seldom use except on downhills:
12-28, 12-32, even more often 11 starting cassettes.
More sprockets? Sure - but you're still stuck with 11, or 12 T smallest sprocket. 13, or 14T starting ones, quite more useful to riding that isn't for sports (only).

For me (and most non-racing cyclists IMO), a 7 speed 14-15-16-17-19-23-28 cassette would be better than an 11 speed 11-12-13-14-15-17-19-21-23-25-28 one. The latter one is a lot more expensive and calls for more cross chaining from the big ring on a triple setup, while gives me nothing I really need.

rm -rf

A modest proposal:
Make 1/2 inch pitch chain obsolete.

The 12.7mm -- 1/2 inch pitch chain is way too big. It's heavy and limits the cog choices.

It's time to bring back the Shimano "10 pitch", 10mm chain. Or even smaller.

Make the chain narrower, too. Now you can fit 15 cogs.
In 1/2 inch equivalents, 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 25 28 32 36. Lots of close shifts and gears for steep hills.

Since we are redesigning everything, allow for more variation in the chainring sizes. Not fitting smaller than 34 chainrings was short sighted.

12.7mm vs 10 mm equivalent ratios (rounded to the nearest whole tooth):
10 tooth cog is the same as a 13 cog in 10mm.
20 tooth to 25
30 tooth to 38

34 chainring to 43.
50 chainring to 64

There's a limit to the diameter of the smallest cog that still fits on the cassette body. So the whole assembly can't just shrink down to 80% of the current sizes. Or can it?

skoda2

^this^ I think it's the bigger wheels, more gears, bigger bike, is a 'bigger is better' American fascination ! Often people come into the shop wanting bigger wheels, bigger bikes, and more gears! And then they return, complaining, their bike is hard to peddle, and their gears are making noise.

Racing Dan

^^ Just NO!

Metaluna

You also have the ability to use feedback from sensors to trim the derailleurs, reducing shift problems due to hanger misalignment and other mechanical tolerance issues. That would allows the industry to make frames and components cheaper and with even sloppier tolerances than they have now. I'm not sure if current systems do this or not but the potential is there.

For me it doesn't matter, as I use a triple crank and therefore don't exist in the industry's eyes. So I'll sit on the sidelines and continue frankenbiking as long as I can, to get wider gear ranges. Shimano's E-Tube project looks interesting though, at least until some bean counter shuts it down.

edthesped

I think it may have been done... They called it the IT Cycle...

Dan Burkhart 

Sheldon agrees.
Nanodrive Bicycle Chain Drive System

LesterOfPuppets

If the 11 makes your gearing too steep, you could always get a smaller chainring, and possibly reduce your Q.

Bike Gremlin

42-11 gives roughly the same gear ratio as 53-14, but the latter combo makes the (rear) chainring last a lot longer, and is more mechanically efficient (lower mechanical losses).

ksryder

25. That's my guess.

mongol777

Pinion may become more popular, https://pinion.eu/en/

I am not sure if I will be ready to trade my Rohloff for it but I am considering it within N+1 rule

Tunnelrat81

I have to say...that looks pretty cool.

-Jeremy

DrIsotope

I can't believe it took 62 replies to get to a Pinion-fitted bike. The future is no cassettes, no chains. It's gearboxes. They're already making 18-speed gearboxes with 636% range, and people are riding them for tens of thousands of kilometers with zero maintenance. Also, it makes the frames proprietary. And if the cycling industry loves anything, it's getting as absolutely proprietary as technically possible. Lefty forks, Shimano levers that don't work with anything outside their own specific product line, anything electronic, etc...

speshelite

Maybe. If you don't mind your bike being 3 lbs. heavier. :-)

Which is not many people at all.

I don't know when, if ever, IGH's will enter the mainstream. Right now, you can buy bikes with 3x8 systems which shift perfectly and disk brakes for $300. Whereas pinion bikes start at $5K.

DrIsotope

Three whole pounds? Oh my stars! My steel frame weighs double or triple what some hi-mod CF frame would weigh.
And just as I don't care, the guy that buys a $300 bike doesn't give a crap what it weighs, or even how many gears it has. Weight concerns are for the idiots that buy $250 titanium cassettes that last 1500 miles.

And sure, a Pinion bike is $5k. One company in Germany makes the gearboxes. Give it time.

speshelite

Well, that's my point exactly. The market for steel frames is small. As is the market for touring frames. And even smaller still is the IGH market. Combine all three and you have a vanishingly small market share. And IGH's have been around for two decades now. They're still barely a blip in a bike market which in and of itself is declining overall. Lefty forks have a tiny market share as well.

$5K in the road market gets you dual suspension, Ultegra Di2 electronic shifting, carbon frame and hydraulic discs. And this is from specialized known for charging a premium. This feature and value spec is so superior to IGH alone it's game over. And don't expect standard drivetrains to remain at a standstill.

IGH's are in a catch 22; they need market share in order to cut cost and potentially reduce weight with greater R&D budgets. The problem is, the touring market, where light weight is not essential, is tiny. MTB's could make good use of the gear range, but IGH's have virtually no presence there either.

Let's face it: derailleur drivetrains are so good, so light and so inexpensive, 99+% of cyclists will neither have the need nor desire to look for an alternative. And conventional drivetrains have just taken a major leap forward with electronic and also with wireless.

Derailleurs are here to stay. IGH's are CLOSE to being irrelevant, but I hope they stick around as they are a cool product.

HTupolev

IGH's have been around for well over a century. They're roughly the same age as derailleur drivetrains.

DrIsotope

speshelite

It's always funny seeing old people get angry when inanimate objects are criticized. :-) But yeah, basically no one rides IGH bikes.

Racing Dan

In northern Europe most ride IGH on their everyday bikes (shopping and commuting). IGH is not expensive at all if you stick to shimano or a few other common brands. No one cares if their bike is a few pound more or less. After all its of no real importance. Imo, outside of top level racing, the weight obsession is blown way out of proportion, to a point where Im not exactly sure if the drawbacks of super light outweighs the small benefit. Just for reference, the power penalty for riding an additional 3 lbs at 7mph up a fairly steep 7% incline is ... wait for it ... ~3w out of about 210w, depending on rider wight. You are much better of obsessing over tyres, where meaningful differences exist, and maintenance of the drive train.

mongol777

I went through all the post to make sure I did not miss it somehow and realized no one mentioned it.
Yep, 636% range (more than my Rohloff), rated for 60 000 kms.
Only downside for me personally - no easy retrofit to non-Pinion specific frames and so no easy way to transfer between bikes (right now it takes me about 2 hrs to relace rohloff to different rim and put it on another bike, I switch once or twice a year between cross frame and 29+ frame)

Reynolds 

So how much time to an electronic, automatic Pinion? That would be great!

corrado33

I'm going to point out that the above page is posted on sheldon's "joke" page full of false advertisements for things like hollow ball bearings and knives that attach to bar end shifters.