Freewheel Compatibility Question
02-25-09 | 09:19 AM
#1
Freewheel Compatibility Question
There is a Sachs freewheel for sale on eBay which has a tooth configuration of 13-30. The gearing is 13-15-17-20-23-26-30. And I'm thinking to myself...Setting that up with a double crank on a vintage bike (I'm not interested in modern compact crank arrangements) seems like a great alternative to a triple setup for biking in the mountains. The seller indicates this freewheel is compatible with indexed 7-speed systems. And I am wondering why this freewheel could not be used with the early Chorus Synchro RDs in a friction setup. Those RDs had an A-B setting specifically designed for freewheels with large tooth variances from smallest to largest cog which resulted in what Campy calls an open taper freewheel (as opposed to an acute taper freewheel where the tooth variance is small). Can I get some expert opinions on this? I have no desire to use the Campy Synchro shifting to make this work, so it's either friction capable or I'll just forget it. Thanks for any info!
02-25-09 | 10:33 AM
#2
Super Moderator
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,980
Likes: 1,156
From: Ffld Cnty Connecticut
Bikes: Old Steelies I made, Old Cannondales
If you're in friction mode you should be fine as long as the RD can handle a 30 tooth cog.
__________________
Bikes: Old steel race bikes, old Cannondale race bikes, less old Cannondale race bike, crappy old mtn bike.
FYI: https://www.bikeforums.net/forum-sugg...ad-please.html
Bikes: Old steel race bikes, old Cannondale race bikes, less old Cannondale race bike, crappy old mtn bike.
FYI: https://www.bikeforums.net/forum-sugg...ad-please.html
02-25-09 | 10:49 AM
#3
As a followup to my original post, how much difference would there be in lowest gear between a double crank with 39 in the front and 30 in the back and a triple crank with 30 in the front and 25 in the back? Any math geniuses out there?
02-25-09 | 11:04 AM
#4
Banned
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,258
Likes: 14
02-25-09 | 12:08 PM
#5
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 13,973
Likes: 145
From: Tampa, Florida
The triple setup would be 8.33% lower.
02-25-09 | 02:07 PM
#6
feros ferio
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 22,398
Likes: 1,865
From: www.ci.encinitas.ca.us
Bikes: 1959 Capo Modell Campagnolo; 1960 Capo Sieger (2); 1962 Carlton Franco Suisse; 1970 Peugeot UO-8; 1982 Bianchi Campione d'Italia; 1988 Schwinn Project KOM-10;
Miamijim is almost correct. To pick a nit, (39/30)/(30/25) = 1.08333, making the double 8.33% higher than the triple. In turn, since (30/25)/(39/30) = 0.92307, the triple is 7.7% lower than the double. The difference is in which ratio one uses as the reference when computing the percentage change, i.e., 3 is 50% greater than 2, but 2 is 33% smaller than 3.
__________________
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
02-25-09 | 02:41 PM
#7
After visiting the Sheldon Brown link courtesy of Old Fat Guy, I did my own calculations and I came up with the same answer that you did. I appreciate the response from everyone. I learned something new today!
