Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Bicycle Mechanics
Reload this Page >

Rolling Resistance: Hubs

Search
Notices
Bicycle Mechanics Broken bottom bracket? Tacoed wheel? If you're having problems with your bicycle, or just need help fixing a flat, drop in here for the latest on bicycle mechanics & bicycle maintenance.

Rolling Resistance: Hubs

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-20-23 | 05:00 PM
  #26  
mpetry912's Avatar
aged to perfection
Titanium Club Membership
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,242
Likes: 1,659
From: PacNW

Bikes: Dinucci Allez 2.0, Richard Sachs, Alex Singer, Serotta, Masi GC, Raleigh Pro Mk.1, Hetchins, etc

Originally Posted by sweeks
These changes are very small and hard to measure... but they can be measured.
I hope this helps settle the matter.
Thank you for those quotes. "interesting"

Has any matter ever been settled here on BF ?

now there's a topic for discussion.

​​​​​​​food for thought and grounds for further research

/markp

Last edited by mpetry912; 08-20-23 at 05:25 PM.
mpetry912 is offline  
Reply
Old 08-20-23 | 05:52 PM
  #27  
sweeks's Avatar
Senior Member
20 Anniversary
Community Builder
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 3,296
Likes: 1,040
From: Chicago area

Bikes: Airborne "Carpe Diem", Motobecane "Mirage", Trek 6000, Strida 2, Dahon "Helios XL", Dahon "Mu XL", Tern "Verge S11i"

Originally Posted by mpetry912
Has any matter ever been settled here on BF ?
sweeks is offline  
Reply
Old 08-20-23 | 06:34 PM
  #28  
masi61's Avatar
Senior Member
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,904
Likes: 527
From: SW Ohio

Bikes: Puch Marco Polo, Saint Tropez, Masi Gran Criterium

Gokiso hubs from Japan claim to be the smoothest, lowest friction hubs on the market. Can anyone speak to how to purchase a set of these outside of Japan?

https://www.gokiso.jp/en/products/hub_06.html
masi61 is offline  
Reply
Old 08-20-23 | 10:22 PM
  #29  
Jeff Wills's Avatar
Insane Bicycle Mechanic
Titanium Club Membership
Sheldon Brown Memorial - Titanium
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 10,156
Likes: 1,122
From: other Vancouver
Originally Posted by mpetry912
Thank you for those quotes. "interesting"

Has any matter ever been settled here on BF ?

now there's a topic for discussion.

food for thought and grounds for further research

/markp
I’m not sure anything is ever “settled” but I recall a test on the WISIL site (recumbents.com) that measured the least bearing “resistance” on a stamped-steel caged-bearing hub. Hurray for Wald!
__________________
Jeff Wills

Comcast nuked my web page. It will return soon..
Jeff Wills is offline  
Reply
Old 06-11-24 | 08:52 PM
  #30  
Newbie
 
Joined: Oct 2021
Posts: 23
Likes: 4
I recently bought a new carbon wheelset and did a free spin test on the front wheel compared to the front stock wheel from my 2016 Trek Domane. The old front wheel free spun for almost 2mins, the new front wheel spun for less than 20 seconds. I checked the brakes several times to make sure there was no interference. There just seems to be a ton of resistance/viscosity in these new hubs.

I realize that all the comments here disagree, but this rolling resistance must add up over time. I can genuinely feel a difference in resistance when spinning the wheel slowly by hand.

Could this all come down to extremely heavy grease being used in the hub? Any other thoughts?
leon6782 is offline  
Reply
Old 06-11-24 | 09:27 PM
  #31  
icemilkcoffee's Avatar
Senior Member
Titanium Club Membership
15 Anniversary
Community Builder
Active Streak: 30 Days
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,272
Likes: 3,686
Originally Posted by leon6782
I recently bought a new carbon wheelset and did a free spin test on the front wheel compared to the front stock wheel from my 2016 Trek Domane. The old front wheel free spun for almost 2mins, the new front wheel spun for less than 20 seconds.
This is not an apples-to-apples comparison. If you kept the same rim and same spoke, and only changed the hub, then that would be an apples-to-apples comparison where the only variable tested was the hub. In your scenerio- maybe the new rim has a greater moment of inertia which alows it to overcome the hub friction easier.
icemilkcoffee is offline  
Reply
Old 06-11-24 | 09:58 PM
  #32  
Bill Kapaun's Avatar
Really Old Senior Member
15 Anniversary
Community Builder
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 14,639
Likes: 1,887
From: Mid Willamette Valley, Orygun

Bikes: 87 RockHopper,2008 Specialized Globe. Both upgraded to 9 speeds. 2019 Giant Explore E+3

Originally Posted by leon6782
I recently bought a new carbon wheelset and did a free spin test on the front wheel compared to the front stock wheel from my 2016 Trek Domane. The old front wheel free spun for almost 2mins, the new front wheel spun for less than 20 seconds. I checked the brakes several times to make sure there was no interference. There just seems to be a ton of resistance/viscosity in these new hubs.

I realize that all the comments here disagree, but this rolling resistance must add up over time. I can genuinely feel a difference in resistance when spinning the wheel slowly by hand.

Could this all come down to extremely heavy grease being used in the hub? Any other thoughts?
Put a few miles on the new hub to let the seals etc. to wear in.
It's like putting on a new pair of of cheap jeans without washing them.
Bill Kapaun is offline  
Reply
Old 06-11-24 | 10:34 PM
  #33  
Jeff Wills's Avatar
Insane Bicycle Mechanic
Titanium Club Membership
Sheldon Brown Memorial - Titanium
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 10,156
Likes: 1,122
From: other Vancouver
Originally Posted by leon6782

I realize that all the comments here disagree, but this rolling resistance must add up over time. I can genuinely feel a difference in resistance when spinning the wheel slowly by hand.
?
Yes, you can feel the difference when turning the axle. The point that you’re missing is that it makes no difference in the real world.

Here’s how you test it: put a power meter on your bike. Ride a time trial course at a sustainable power level. Record your time. Go home, switch wheels, then ride the same course at the same power level. Record your time. Do that 9 more times. Remember to record all the variables: weather, tire pressure, what you ate for lunch, etc.

Now, is one wheelset consistently faster? There’s your answer. Is there no consistency? That’s also an answer.
__________________
Jeff Wills

Comcast nuked my web page. It will return soon..
Jeff Wills is offline  
Reply
Old 06-12-24 | 01:30 AM
  #34  
Senior Member
5 Anniversary
Community Builder
Community Influencer
Active Streak: 30 Days
 
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 3,843
Likes: 1,461
From: UK
Tiny numbers do add up over time. To what are still tiny numbers because all the other numbers add up over time too.
choddo is offline  
Reply
Old 06-12-24 | 03:29 AM
  #35  
Trakhak's Avatar
Senior Member
20 Anniversary
Community Builder
Community Influencer
Active Streak: 30 Days
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,034
Likes: 5,928
From: Baltimore, MD
If the wheels were identical in every way, including in levels of hub resistance, except that the new rim was substantially lighter than the old rim, the difference in rim weights would explain your results. Less mass means less inertia.

Example: drop a ping pong ball into water. Then drop a steel ball the same size into water. The lower mass of the ping pong ball accounts for the fact that the resistance of the water halts the ping pong ball almost instantly whereas the steel ball is barely slowed.

If the new wheel has a lighter rim, there's less inertia, and so wind resistance becomes a more important factor.
Trakhak is offline  
Reply
Old 06-12-24 | 03:54 AM
  #36  
Senior Member
5 Anniversary
Community Builder
Community Influencer
Active Streak: 30 Days
 
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 3,843
Likes: 1,461
From: UK
Bouyancy also plays a role in that example (but is related to mass too - but if you could reduce the volume of a pingpong ball enough to match the density of the steel one, it would sink pretty damn fast even with its much lower mass inertia) but yeah I completely agree a lighter rim will slow more quickly.

Also don’t think this has been mentioned, inertia of the bike and rider is 0 when spinning the wheel but high when rolling along the flat, makes the hub bearing friction even more negligible.

Last edited by choddo; 06-12-24 at 04:38 AM.
choddo is offline  
Reply
Old 06-12-24 | 04:18 AM
  #37  
Trakhak's Avatar
Senior Member
20 Anniversary
Community Builder
Community Influencer
Active Streak: 30 Days
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,034
Likes: 5,928
From: Baltimore, MD
Originally Posted by choddo
Bouyancy also plays a role in that example (but is related to mass too) but yeah I completely agree a lighter rim will slow more quickly.

Also don’t think this has been mentioned, inertia of the bike and rider is 0 when spinning the wheel but high when rolling along the flat, makes the hub bearing friction even more negligible.
To say that an object is buoyant is to say that it's lighter than the identical volume of water (and, of course, lighter than an object that isn't buoyant). So saying that buoyancy plays a role simply restates the point I was making. Otherwise, I agree with your post.
Trakhak is offline  
Reply
Old 06-12-24 | 04:39 AM
  #38  
Senior Member
5 Anniversary
Community Builder
Community Influencer
Active Streak: 30 Days
 
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 3,843
Likes: 1,461
From: UK
Yeah that’s what I meant when I said it was still related to mass but added a bit
choddo is offline  
Reply
Old 06-12-24 | 05:11 AM
  #39  
sweeks's Avatar
Senior Member
20 Anniversary
Community Builder
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 3,296
Likes: 1,040
From: Chicago area

Bikes: Airborne "Carpe Diem", Motobecane "Mirage", Trek 6000, Strida 2, Dahon "Helios XL", Dahon "Mu XL", Tern "Verge S11i"

Originally Posted by Jeff Wills
Here’s how you test it...
Even better: have a friend change the wheelset randomly, then ride without looking at the wheels. "Blind" testing helps eliminate confirmation bias...
sweeks is offline  
Reply
Old 06-12-24 | 12:51 PM
  #40  
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2021
Posts: 1,596
Likes: 864
From: SW Florida, USA

Bikes: Yes

Wheel bearing resistance is a tiny source of power consumption in comparison to both aerodynamic drag and tire rolling resistance.

If you're not already using them, changing to tires with a low rolling resistance is the easiest way to get a significant savings in power consumption while riding. The downside? That type of tire is typically more expensive, easier to puncture, and wears out more quickly than average. Pick your poison.
Hondo6 is offline  
Reply
Old 06-12-24 | 01:00 PM
  #41  
Senior Member
15 Anniversary
Community Builder
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,134
Likes: 1,641
Bearing friction in properly working equipment is negligible.
wheelreason is offline  
Reply
Old 06-12-24 | 01:12 PM
  #42  
Senior Member
15 Anniversary
Community Builder
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,134
Likes: 1,641
Originally Posted by Trakhak
If the wheels were identical in every way, including in levels of hub resistance, except that the new rim was substantially lighter than the old rim, the difference in rim weights would explain your results. Less mass means less inertia.

Example: drop a ping pong ball into water. Then drop a steel ball the same size into water. The lower mass of the ping pong ball accounts for the fact that the resistance of the water halts the ping pong ball almost instantly whereas the steel ball is barely slowed.

If the new wheel has a lighter rim, there's less inertia, and so wind resistance becomes a more important factor.
Ah, no. The steel ball will slow down or come to a stop (or even bounce up) depending on the specifics of it's velocity at impact and the size and shape of the "container". Then it will accelerate downward due to graivity. The ping pong ball will initially do the same, and then be acted upon by the opposing force of bouyancy. And none of this has anything to do with the rotational forces at work ina wheel.
wheelreason is offline  
Reply
Old 06-12-24 | 02:08 PM
  #43  
Senior Member
Titanium Club Membership
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 39,897
Likes: 3,865
From: New Rochelle, NY

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Originally Posted by leon6782
.....

Could this all come down to extremely heavy grease being used in the hub? Any other thoughts?
Short answer is yes. In a lighty loaded ball bearing, the viscous drag of the grease will significantly exceed the friction of the rolling elements.

But it barely matters anyway. When comparing rolling drag it's important to consider the torque rather than just the drag. Because the bearings are so close to the neutral axis, hub drag would have to be staggering to matter. Small differences between various hubs are comparable to worrying about the pennies in a jar when the mortgage payment comes due.

Last edited by FBinNY; 06-12-24 at 03:13 PM.
FBinNY is offline  
Reply
Old 06-12-24 | 02:20 PM
  #44  
Trakhak's Avatar
Senior Member
20 Anniversary
Community Builder
Community Influencer
Active Streak: 30 Days
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,034
Likes: 5,928
From: Baltimore, MD
Originally Posted by wheelreason
Ah, no. The steel ball will slow down or come to a stop (or even bounce up) depending on the specifics of it's velocity at impact and the size and shape of the "container". Then it will accelerate downward due to graivity. The ping pong ball will initially do the same, and then be acted upon by the opposing force of bouyancy. And none of this has anything to do with the rotational forces at work ina wheel.
Others understood the comparison.

To make it clearer for you:

Drop a solid steel ball the diameter of a ping-pong ball from a height of 12 inches into a bathtub filled with water to a depth of about 10 inches.

Observe the behavior of the steel ball. Does it bounce from the water surface? If not, how rapidly does it descend in the water?

Do the same with a ping-pong ball. Does it descend as rapidly as the steel ball? Why not?

And: why quotation marks for "container"?

Those words are spelled "gravity" and "buoyancy," by the way.

(Not grammar police; spelling police.)
Trakhak is offline  
Reply
Old 06-12-24 | 04:58 PM
  #45  
Senior Member
15 Anniversary
Community Builder
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,134
Likes: 1,641
Originally Posted by Trakhak
Others understood the comparison.

To make it clearer for you:

Drop a solid steel ball the diameter of a ping-pong ball from a height of 12 inches into a bathtub filled with water to a depth of about 10 inches.

Observe the behavior of the steel ball. Does it bounce from the water surface? If not, how rapidly does it descend in the water?

Do the same with a ping-pong ball. Does it descend as rapidly as the steel ball? Why not?

And: why quotation marks for "container"?

Those words are spelled "gravity" and "buoyancy," by the way.

(Not grammar police; spelling police.)
Quotations for container because the size and shape can vary from a solo cup to an ocean. Spelling police not reqired, reading glasses police required. The coomparison still isn't valid, steel sinks, hollow thin walled plastic balls float, duh!. What does that have to do with spinning wheels?
wheelreason is offline  
Reply
Old 06-12-24 | 11:25 PM
  #46  
Senior Member
Titanium Club Membership
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 39,897
Likes: 3,865
From: New Rochelle, NY

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

For those who fret over stuff like hub friction, may I suggest some DIY scientific research.

You'll need a friend who weights 20# or so more or less than you, a hill, and of course, a "slow" wheel, and a nice loose one.

Take the two bikes to the top of the hill, and do a coast race down. To be fair, each do their best aero tuck. Repeat the test switching bikes. Odds are the same person will win. If you have a number of friends you can repeat this until you find two matched closely enough that the bike actually determines the outcome.

Friends and I did this years (decades) ago and managed to find 2 close enough that 10psi tire pressure made the difference, but we never found two close enough for the hubs to determine the winner.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.

Last edited by FBinNY; 06-12-24 at 11:30 PM.
FBinNY is offline  
Reply
Old 06-13-24 | 06:11 AM
  #47  
JohnDThompson's Avatar
Old fart
Titanium Club Membership
20 Anniversary
Community Builder
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 26,359
Likes: 5,271
From: Appleton WI

Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.

Originally Posted by leon6782
I recently bought a new carbon wheelset and did a free spin test on the front wheel compared to the front stock wheel from my 2016 Trek Domane. The old front wheel free spun for almost 2mins, the new front wheel spun for less than 20 seconds. I checked the brakes several times to make sure there was no interference. There just seems to be a ton of resistance/viscosity in these new hubs.

I realize that all the comments here disagree, but this rolling resistance must add up over time. I can genuinely feel a difference in resistance when spinning the wheel slowly by hand.

Could this all come down to extremely heavy grease being used in the hub? Any other thoughts?
As I noted way back in post #8, unloaded spinning has no real relevance to performance under load.
JohnDThompson is online now  
Reply
Old 06-14-24 | 06:40 AM
  #48  
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2021
Posts: 1,596
Likes: 864
From: SW Florida, USA

Bikes: Yes

Originally Posted by wheelreason
Quotations for container because the size and shape can vary from a solo cup to an ocean. Spelling police not reqired, reading glasses police required. The coomparison still isn't valid, steel sinks, hollow thin walled plastic balls float, duh!. What does that have to do with spinning wheels?
Like a mass moving in a straight line (such as a dropped bearing ball or ping-pong ball), a stationary spinning object (such as a spinning bicycle wheel on a truing stand) also has inertia. The object traveling in a straight line has translational inertia, while the stationary spinning object has rotational inertia. That is the analogy.

An object's rotational inertia depends on both the total mass of the object and the distribution of that mass around the axis of rotation. Mass farther away from the axis of rotation contributes far more than mass close to the axis of rotation.

Example: take the case of two wheels, identical except for one having a heavy rim and one having a lighter one. Once spinning at the same rate, all else being equal the wheel with the heavy rim will spin far longer before it comes to a stop - because it stored more energy (as rotational kinetic energy) and had far more rotational inertia than the wheel with the lighter rim. (The "flip side": the wheel with the heavier rim will require more energy input to spin up to the same rate of rotation as the lighter rimmed wheel.)

Calculating either inertia or stored kinetic energy is possible for both translation and rotation. However, calculation is significantly easier for translational inertia (m x v) or translational kinetic energy (1/2 x m x v^2) than either rotational inertia or rotational kinetic energy. In contrast, both rotational cases are dependent on size, shape, and distribution of mass around the chosen axis of rotation.

Last edited by Hondo6; 06-14-24 at 06:44 AM.
Hondo6 is offline  
Reply
Old 06-14-24 | 08:04 AM
  #49  
Senior Member
15 Anniversary
Community Builder
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,134
Likes: 1,641
Originally Posted by Hondo6
Like a mass moving in a straight line (such as a dropped bearing ball or ping-pong ball), a stationary spinning object (such as a spinning bicycle wheel on a truing stand) also has inertia. The object traveling in a straight line has translational inertia, while the stationary spinning object has rotational inertia. That is the analogy.

An object's rotational inertia depends on both the total mass of the object and the distribution of that mass around the axis of rotation. Mass farther away from the axis of rotation contributes far more than mass close to the axis of rotation.

Example: take the case of two wheels, identical except for one having a heavy rim and one having a lighter one. Once spinning at the same rate, all else being equal the wheel with the heavy rim will spin far longer before it comes to a stop - because it stored more energy (as rotational kinetic energy) and had far more rotational inertia than the wheel with the lighter rim. (The "flip side": the wheel with the heavier rim will require more energy input to spin up to the same rate of rotation as the lighter rimmed wheel.)

I can agree with that, I still don't see what that has to do with splashing a ping pong ball though, I used to be a pretty good ping pong player at one time...

Calculating either inertia or stored kinetic energy is possible for both translation and rotation. However, calculation is significantly easier for translational inertia (m x v) or translational kinetic energy (1/2 x m x v^2) than either rotational inertia or rotational kine tic energy. In contrast, both rotational cases are dependent on size, shape, and distribution of mass around the chosen axis of rotation.
So stuff in motion has inertia? who knew...
wheelreason is offline  
Reply
Old 06-14-24 | 12:37 PM
  #50  
Senior Member
Titanium Club Membership
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 39,897
Likes: 3,865
From: New Rochelle, NY

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Originally Posted by Trakhak
Others understood the comparison.

To make it clearer for you:

Drop a solid steel ball the diameter of a ping-pong ball from a height of 12 inches into a bathtub filled with water to a depth of about 10 inches.

Observe the behavior of the steel ball. Does it bounce from the water surface? If not, how rapidly does it descend in the water?

Do the same with a ping-pong ball. Does it descend as rapidly as the steel ball? Why not?
While I understand the point you're trying to make, it's unfortunately a poor analogy because ping pong balls float and therefore we can't compare sink rates.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Reply


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.