Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Classic & Vintage
Reload this Page >

Introduction of 126 spacing and 7 speed

Classic & Vintage This forum is to discuss the many aspects of classic and vintage bicycles, including musclebikes, lightweights, middleweights, hi-wheelers, bone-shakers, safety bikes and much more.

Introduction of 126 spacing and 7 speed

Old 03-22-18, 09:07 AM
  #26  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 14,203

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 801 Post(s)
Liked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by ThermionicScott View Post
Another data point. The Retro-Velo timeline notes that Campagnolo revised their Grand Sport rear derailleur to handle 6-speed freewheels -- in 1961! Velo-Retro: Campagnolo Timeline
The race managers probably said to Tullio, "Tullio, my old and dear friend! We must be able to test 6-wide rear sprocket sets. Will you provide something to support us?"
Road Fan is offline  
Old 03-22-18, 10:03 AM
  #27  
Salamandrine 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,883

Bikes: 78 Masi Criterium, 68 PX10, 2016 Mercian King of Mercia, Rivendell Clem Smith Jr

Mentioned: 106 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1713 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 32 Times in 22 Posts
Originally Posted by 63rickert View Post

Yes axles will break simply from fatigue. More likely the dropouts are not parallel. Or there is a bit of slop in the cone adjustment and then the QR bends the axle a bit when clamped tight .These things will happen and they will happen more to those who are a little sloppy and to those with lower end bikes. If you had a late 70s basic Gitane or Nishiki you were not as fussy about dropout alignment or even aware of it and maybe it was a problem for those bikes, I don't know. My axles never broke before having 5000 or more miles and I was bigger than average. From some points of view 5000 miles is short service life. From other POV, 5000 miles doesn't even happen to any but a small sample of bikes. Right now I am too big and am running an FB QR axle that is 80 years old without problem. And yes I have done over 5000 on that ancient part.
That sounds about right, perhaps conservative. IIRC I'd get around 15,000 miles out of them before breaking, sometimes much more. The era of 6 speed 126 OLD coincided with my teenage years. Back then I rode about that mileage per year. I was always OCD about dropout alignment and stuff like that, and also fairly light on my bike. So, yeah, it wasn't a real problem, just an occasional annoyance. Practically speaking, an axle might break every year or two. Keep in mind that with this kind of mileage, I'd have gone through at 2-3 rims, at least a couple chains, oodles of tires, and probably a couple of freewheels in that time.
Salamandrine is offline  
Old 03-22-18, 10:52 AM
  #28  
dddd
Ride, Wrench, Swap, Race
 
dddd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern California
Posts: 6,526

Bikes: Cheltenham-Pederson racer, Boulder F/S Paris-Roubaix, Varsity racer, '52 Christophe, '62 Continental, '92 Merckx, '75 Limongi, '76 Presto, '72 Gitane SC, '71 Schwinn SS, etc.

Mentioned: 78 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 533 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 19 Times in 19 Posts
Originally Posted by Road Fan View Post
I think Ultra-6 was a way to sell the 6-speed innovation to owners of 120 mm bikes as the lowest cost upgrade - no cold-setting or axle replacements, just change the cluster and chain, which were seen as wear items, anyway.

As a side benefit it let SunTour lead the way in getting field experience with narrower chains and narrower rear pitch.

Sorry, no experience with 6's specifically in the '60s. What I will say, is that the racing community was very conservative, because broken bicycles don't finish races, and one cannot win a race that one does not finish. So the racing world was not the agent for change across the board. I doubt that axles and spokes were weaker by much than what we have now - stainless was an available as a material, as was CrMo for axles. So upgrades to stronger spokes and axles were available to the industry. Perhaps dishing was an issue before the pitch of a 6 was reduced to fit the total width of a 5, but I really don't know.

Whether 6-speeds would lead to wheel rim problems with 120 spacing would vary greatly, so it was up to the bike's mechanic to avoid using too light of a rim, insufficient tensioning or too much variation of spoke tension.
With attentive tensioning, I believe that most of my converted wheels are stronger than they were when they came into my hands as five-speeders.


The durability of spokes has a lot to do with their processing, including quality control and testing.
Also, the purity of the metal and not just the alloy specification. That (and the exact processing), determines the grain structure within the spokes which has an enormous effect on the spoke's lifespan.
That said, quite-good spokes have been around for a long time by now, and I have yet to break even one of my older Schwinn's butted, galvanized (and hard-ridden) spokes.


Lower-priced hub axles also are potentially much better today, with automated manufacturing processes making it much easier and cheaper to achieve better control of things like the concentricity of the hole within the axle. Many of today's axles omit any slot along the threads (not that breakage is a common problem with today's freehubs).
Quality-control practices have improved greatly in mass-produced parts, quality control that formerly relied on a factory worker's energy level throughout the day.
dddd is offline  
Old 03-22-18, 10:58 AM
  #29  
miamijim
Senior Member
 
miamijim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 13,923
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 323 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact View Post
126 and 130 hubs have the same bracing angles and flange locations. That was the point of 130 - to add 2mm on the outside while the cassette allowed the low sprocket to be 2mm closer to the flange than a freewheel could get.


A lot MTB 130's had the extra 4mm on the NDS only. This allowed for 4mm less dish. Same with 130 to 135, the extra 5mm was all NDS.
miamijim is offline  
Old 03-22-18, 11:13 AM
  #30  
noglider 
aka Tom Reingold
 
noglider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: West Village, New York City
Posts: 37,144

Bikes: 1962 Rudge Sports, 1971 Raleigh Super Course, 1971 Raleigh Pro Track, 1973 Raleigh Twenty, 1974 Raleigh International, 1975 Viscount Fixie, 1982 McLean, 1996 Lemond (Ti), 2002 Burley Zydeco tandem

Mentioned: 419 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5365 Post(s)
Liked 79 Times in 62 Posts
@dddd, that's true. Even a BSO today is a whole lot better than those Huffys and Murrays and Columbias of the 1970s.
__________________
Tom Reingold, tom@noglider.com
New York City and High Falls, NY
Blogs: The Experienced Cyclist; noglider's ride blog

“When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments.” — Elizabeth West, US author

Please email me rather than PM'ing me. Thanks.
noglider is offline  
Old 03-22-18, 11:48 AM
  #31  
Kontact
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,619
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2145 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by miamijim View Post
A lot MTB 130's had the extra 4mm on the NDS only. This allowed for 4mm less dish. Same with 130 to 135, the extra 5mm was all NDS.
The post I was responding to was clearly about 11 speed road wheels, not early '90s MTBs.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-22-18, 12:09 PM
  #32  
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Posts: 41,928

Bikes: 8

Mentioned: 188 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6833 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 214 Times in 178 Posts
Phil Wood freewheel hubs, solved the bent axle issue, so Did Roger Durham's Bullseye hubs.. have used both..


Ive been fine touring for a decade + on 6 speed 14~ 34, and 13~34t freewheels friction shifting, wider spacing makes it simple.


And, in swapping my old <C> hub wheels , to a new 130 frame , the Wheels of Boulder axles seem to be less brittle hardened,
than Tulio C's were..




...
fietsbob is offline  
Old 03-22-18, 06:58 PM
  #33  
dddd
Ride, Wrench, Swap, Race
 
dddd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern California
Posts: 6,526

Bikes: Cheltenham-Pederson racer, Boulder F/S Paris-Roubaix, Varsity racer, '52 Christophe, '62 Continental, '92 Merckx, '75 Limongi, '76 Presto, '72 Gitane SC, '71 Schwinn SS, etc.

Mentioned: 78 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 533 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 19 Times in 19 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact View Post
126 and 130 hubs have the same bracing angles and flange locations. That was the point of 130 - to add 2mm on the outside while the cassette allowed the low sprocket to be 2mm closer to the flange than a freewheel could get.

How does a cassette allow the low sprocket to be 2mm closer to the flange?
And 2mm closer than what?
dddd is offline  
Old 03-22-18, 07:35 PM
  #34  
Kontact
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,619
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2145 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by dddd View Post
How does a cassette allow the low sprocket to be 2mm closer to the flange?
And 2mm closer than what?
Than a freewheel, and probably because the freewheel has a back plate that retains the threaded sprockets. Cassette sprockets aren't threaded so they don't require something strong to resist the tightening caused by chain tension. Cassettes locate the low cog closer to the spokes.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-22-18, 08:06 PM
  #35  
dddd
Ride, Wrench, Swap, Race
 
dddd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern California
Posts: 6,526

Bikes: Cheltenham-Pederson racer, Boulder F/S Paris-Roubaix, Varsity racer, '52 Christophe, '62 Continental, '92 Merckx, '75 Limongi, '76 Presto, '72 Gitane SC, '71 Schwinn SS, etc.

Mentioned: 78 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 533 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 19 Times in 19 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact View Post
Than a freewheel, and probably because the freewheel has a back plate that retains the threaded sprockets. Cassette sprockets aren't threaded so they don't require something strong to resist the tightening caused by chain tension. Cassettes locate the low cog closer to the spokes.

Sounds logical, but I see quite a bit of clearance for existing freewheel's back plate to move more than 2mm further inward while maintaining the same thickness.

But I guess that when you no longer have hub and freewheel possibly coming from two different companies or even countries, it should be possible to move the largest cog more accurately into optimal position wrt the spoke flange.

As for resistance to the idea of going from 5 to 6 cogs using standard spacing, I recall extremes of chainline angle being mentioned at the time, something that Ultra-6 addressed. And with the pioneering (bushingless) Sedisport narrow chain becoming available at the same time, with it's added flexibility, going to 7 narrow-spaced cogs thus became more logical in terms of any frictional issue having to do with chainline.
My '79 Fuji Professional still has it's original Ultra-7 freewheel, and with modern 8s chain I detect no issues having to do with chainline.

When 130mm road hub spacing became standard, 7s still was in use and (as miamijim already mentioned) they just added 4mm spacing to the left end of the axle to make everything work (and build a stronger wheel at the same time).

Last edited by dddd; 03-22-18 at 08:19 PM.
dddd is offline  
Old 03-22-18, 08:21 PM
  #36  
Ghrumpy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 800
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 379 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact View Post
Than a freewheel, and probably because the freewheel has a back plate that retains the threaded sprockets. Cassette sprockets aren't threaded so they don't require something strong to resist the tightening caused by chain tension. Cassettes locate the low cog closer to the spokes.
I can't think of anything inherent to a freewheel design that couldn't allow the lowest cog to sit as close to the spokes as a cassette/freehub would. A little relief in the rear of the body and a little offset to the cog would get it there. That's in fact what the Suntour Winner Pro freewheels had. The limit isn't the design of the cog carrier, it's the rear derailleur clearance.

Also, most freewheels that I'm aware of made since the 1970s have had splined sprockets like cassettes, or at least the innermost four or five are splined.

I think the reason freehubs got cogs closer to the spokes is simply because they had to as the number of rear cogs continued to increase past freewheels' practical limits. Freewheel development pretty much stopped cold after about 1990 because of axle overhang and breakage, and the increasing dominance of the Shimano freehub design. Shimano's integrated design also eliminated dimensional variables that might cause clearance issues when mixing hubs and freewheels from different manufacturers.
Ghrumpy is offline  
Old 03-22-18, 09:57 PM
  #37  
Kontact
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,619
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2145 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Ghrumpy View Post
I can't think of anything inherent to a freewheel design that couldn't allow the lowest cog to sit as close to the spokes as a cassette/freehub would. A little relief in the rear of the body and a little offset to the cog would get it there. That's in fact what the Suntour Winner Pro freewheels had. The limit isn't the design of the cog carrier, it's the rear derailleur clearance.

Also, most freewheels that I'm aware of made since the 1970s have had splined sprockets like cassettes, or at least the innermost four or five are splined.

I think the reason freehubs got cogs closer to the spokes is simply because they had to as the number of rear cogs continued to increase past freewheels' practical limits. Freewheel development pretty much stopped cold after about 1990 because of axle overhang and breakage, and the increasing dominance of the Shimano freehub design. Shimano's integrated design also eliminated dimensional variables that might cause clearance issues when mixing hubs and freewheels from different manufacturers.
The reason we're discussing this is because I said that the change to 130 was to put 2mm on the outside of the DS while 2mm where gained on the inside by the way the cassette made it easy to get to the cogs.

But it was also done with freewheels for 8. But Shimano did 8 first by using the advantages of a freehub to keep the same 120/126 chainline and expand the cogs in and out equally.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-23-18, 04:41 AM
  #38  
63rickert
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,066
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 478 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 18 Times in 15 Posts
@Kontact
Is this a marketing seminar or just a parallel universe? I just don't recognize any reality in which 126 hubs and 130 hubs are equally strong. Maybe it is the same reality where all 130 hubs have the same flange spacing. Also am puzzled by how you present as having encyclopedic comprehensive and detailed knowledge of everything but are reduced to gleaning tidbits from Velobase and asking the oldtimers here. And you worked for Ron, who would know as much or more about all the things you ask about as any person living. You could simply ask him.
@noglider
The function of stainless steel spokes is to be shiny. Customers pay for shiny.
Consider DT Revolution spokes @ 2.0/1.5mm. Most builders don't want to use them on DS rear. I have done that for personal wheels and am not playing again. Compare to Schwinn/Union 0.80/0.60" spokes. Oh eighty oh sixty is just American for 2.0/1.5. Schwinn built millions of wheels with those spokes and never a problem. The Union spokes were always simple and pleasant to work with.
I have a wheel built with rusty no name spokes that measure approx. 1.9/1.4mm. Actually a bit less than 1.4 but they are rusty so the rough measure will do. Built sixty years ago. At 190# I should not be riding a 32 spoke wheel with 1.4mm spokes. But I figure I'll ride it until it surrenders. Eight thousand miles so far and it seems fine. Good spokes. Also a good build.
63rickert is offline  
Old 03-23-18, 04:47 AM
  #39  
63rickert
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,066
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 478 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 18 Times in 15 Posts
Another post just to point out that Regina/Atom freewheels have no backplate or rear protrusion of any kind. Problems that do not exist do not need to be solved.
63rickert is offline  
Old 03-23-18, 09:46 AM
  #40  
Kontact
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,619
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2145 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by 63rickert View Post
@Kontact
Is this a marketing seminar or just a parallel universe? I just don't recognize any reality in which 126 hubs and 130 hubs are equally strong. Maybe it is the same reality where all 130 hubs have the same flange spacing. Also am puzzled by how you present as having encyclopedic comprehensive and detailed knowledge of everything but are reduced to gleaning tidbits from Velobase and asking the oldtimers here. And you worked for Ron, who would know as much or more about all the things you ask about as any person living. You could simply ask him.
Where did I say the hubs are "equally strong"? I said that the flanges didn't need to change location because the dimensions changed other places. Please quote me.

And I do have "encyclopedic comprehensive and detailed knowledge of everything" - starting around 1988 when I got into cycling at 15 and began working on bikes and reading everything book and catalog I could find. But a considerable amount of bike technology history from the '70s was not really accessible to me, and even though I started working as a mechanic in 1990, the older bikes I repaired didn't come with any date information and I wasn't as interested in them. By the time I was working for Ron in 1994, 1970s road bikes hardly came in the door. I learned more about the older stuff from Colin at Cronometro in Madison when I worked for him just a few years ago.

So that's why I'm asking now - to fill in some of the gaps I realized I had.

I hope that answered your questions, though I don't understand the purpose behind the personal attack. Please answer mine about the "equally strong" hub thing.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-23-18, 09:52 AM
  #41  
Kontact
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,619
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2145 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by 63rickert View Post
Another post just to point out that Regina/Atom freewheels have no backplate or rear protrusion of any kind. Problems that do not exist do not need to be solved.
That isn't a problem that "needed to be solved". I was pointing out one of the dimensional issues from the mix and match freewheel/hub days that kept the low cog from getting as close to the right flange as integrated cassettes got them. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with freewheels - but freehubs made it easier to extend the sprockets both inward and out for 8-11.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-23-18, 09:59 AM
  #42  
3alarmer
******
 
3alarmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Tomato
Posts: 17,274

Bikes: old ones

Mentioned: 226 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14537 Post(s)
Liked 71 Times in 61 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact View Post

And I do have "encyclopedic comprehensive and detailed knowledge of everything" - starting around 1988 when I got into cycling at 15 and began working on bikes and reading everything book and catalog I could find. But a considerable amount of bike technology history from the '70s was not really accessible to me, and even though I started working as a mechanic in 1990...
...yes, absolutely yes. No one could have said it better.
3alarmer is offline  
Old 03-23-18, 10:14 AM
  #43  
Kontact
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,619
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2145 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by 3alarmer View Post
...yes, absolutely yes. No one could have said it better.
Not so good with satire, eh?

I know and remember a lot of stuff - and it is funny how that seems to piss people off.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-23-18, 10:54 AM
  #44  
3alarmer
******
 
3alarmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Tomato
Posts: 17,274

Bikes: old ones

Mentioned: 226 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14537 Post(s)
Liked 71 Times in 61 Posts
.
...not so good with self insight, eh ?
3alarmer is offline  
Old 03-23-18, 10:58 AM
  #45  
Kontact
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,619
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2145 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by 3alarmer View Post
.
...not so good with self insight, eh ?
Man, you really love to come into threads and screw them up, eh?

How about posting about something bike related instead of the personal attacks? Have anything to say about 126 spacing? Nope? Bye.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-23-18, 11:34 AM
  #46  
3alarmer
******
 
3alarmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Tomato
Posts: 17,274

Bikes: old ones

Mentioned: 226 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14537 Post(s)
Liked 71 Times in 61 Posts
Originally Posted by 3alarmer View Post
...this is more or less in keeping with my experience, and I was around.

I still have bikes that are spaced in back anywhere from 120, through 122, 124, and 126.

And it's not unusual to discover older hubs where the OLD either came originally or has been adjusted using spacers to any of those numbers, along with 122 and 125.

I just put back together a 531 framed Legnano with the dropouts set and aligned very nicely at 122, and high flange Campy Record hub in the back to match. It may or may not have come that way originally, but it fits six cogs without interference in that configuration. I think it's probably a narrow freewheel, but I didn't measure it..

Anyway, to your point, I don't recall anyone being real rigid about this. If you needed to re-space something a little bit to make it work, that's what you did. Everything was steel, and if you had the tools it was not a big deal.
Originally Posted by Kontact View Post
Man, you really love to come into threads and screw them up, eh?

How about posting about something bike related instead of the personal attacks? Have anything to say about 126 spacing? Nope? Bye.
...you probly missed it because you were too busy pontificating on something.
3alarmer is offline  
Old 03-23-18, 11:40 AM
  #47  
Kontact
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,619
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2145 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by 3alarmer View Post
...you probly missed it because you were too busy pontificating on something.
Please stop trolling me. Really. Whatever public service you think you're providing by constantly criticizing my person is neither effective nor appreciated - by anyone.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-23-18, 12:19 PM
  #48  
3alarmer
******
 
3alarmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Tomato
Posts: 17,274

Bikes: old ones

Mentioned: 226 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14537 Post(s)
Liked 71 Times in 61 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact View Post
Not so good with satire, eh?

I know and remember a lot of stuff - and it is funny how that seems to piss people off.
^^^not trolling^^^

Originally Posted by 3alarmer View Post
...yes, absolutely yes. No one could have said it better.
^^^trolling^^^
3alarmer is offline  
Old 03-23-18, 12:58 PM
  #49  
Kontact
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,619
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2145 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by 3alarmer View Post
^^^not trolling^^^



^^^trolling^^^
Posting on a thread to continue to comment on someone's person without any contribution to the thread is trolling. Posting your insults is trolling. As rude as 63's comment was, at least it was about hub spacing history.

You're trolling. You're a troll. Please go away. I'm not the fight you're looking for.

Last edited by Kontact; 03-23-18 at 01:02 PM.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-23-18, 02:22 PM
  #50  
Ghrumpy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 800
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 379 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact View Post
The reason we're discussing this is because I said that the change to 130 was to put 2mm on the outside of the DS while 2mm where gained on the inside by the way the cassette made it easy to get to the cogs.

But it was also done with freewheels for 8. But Shimano did 8 first by using the advantages of a freehub to keep the same 120/126 chainline and expand the cogs in and out equally.
Yeah I mostly agree, I just don't think the cog position was a problem that needed the freehub to solve it.

The main problem with 8s 130/135 OLN freewheel hubs was axle overhang and breakage. The freehub solved the overhang issue. But the cog position had already been dealt with to an extent; Suntour had been stuffing more cogs into the space than anyone else for years already, starting with the New Winner Ultra-6. That and the Winner Pro had a relief on the seat equal to the height of the cog backstop, Sachs-Maillard's is somewhat less. No reason it couldn't have been done even more if the market had asked for it. But it didn't, so it wasn't.
Ghrumpy is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.