You've touched on something else that's an important consideration for some people, - customizing cassettes. As you age, get stronger/weaker, or change the terrain you ride on, it's nice to be able to swap cassettes. Now I know you can change cogs on a single cog system, but that's going to change you're whole range.

For me, a cassette change is almost regular maintenance since I use completely different gearing during the winter. Actually I used a completely different bike, but if I did use the same one, having a summer and winter cassette to go with my summer and winter tires would be really helpful.

And as you've noted, upgrading or replacing a wheel is a much more expensive proposition with an IGH.

Since I mentioned winter I should also point out that if it wasn't for salty roads, there'd be very little Rear Derailleur/chain maintenance that I'd be inclined to do. Probably a good going over twice a year and that would be it.

And that's the case for me. In Seattle they don't salt the roads so I don't have to really go wild cleaning my drivetrain. Aside from regular lubing, my drivetrain is essentially maintenance free.

I know what you said, and whether I read your first two paragraphs separately or together It's still just as wrong. The degree of chain lube necessity doesn't change because of the precense of a derailer because the need for chain lube has 100% to do with chain wear and 0% to do with anything else.

I'm not entirely sure what this has to do with our discussion but since you bring it up.... yes, a ss drivetrain ill be quieter and more efficient with lubricant compared to dry, it won't rust solid either.... but that applies to all drivetrains.

wow, I don't even know where to begin..... I give up..... maybe you should post this in the mechanic's forum, they seem to be labouring under a totally different understanding of how chain wear impacts a derailer drivetrain. In the meantime I need to go back to uni and let them know that everything they're teaching in mechanical engineering is wrong.


No, I'm just as obsessed about my children, they also get soaked overnight in degreaser ever 300 miles before being thoroughly lubricated

Here's a clue - running your drivetrain untill you prematurely wear it out is not the way to optimize those qualities, an appropriate maintenance schedule is..... and for someone that doesn't care about pride you're getting a little steamy about a fricken bicycle chain of all things relax dude, it's not worth the stress

And btw, about obsessing over my drivetrain, I'm car-free in the suburbs and support a family of 3 kids under 6 years of age. Apart from towing all 3 of them on a trail-a-bike + trailer combo wherever we need to go I also do the weekly grocery shopping and do a daily commute which varies between 55 and 67 miles per day.... and I'm also studying for another degree. The point is that I don't have time to obsess over my drivetrain, but I also can't affort to get stranded with a mechanical breakdown. I got the impression you're as interested in getting the best service out of your bike(s) as I do out of mine which is why I'm just trying to help you out here.

This is a whole topic of discussion in itself. There's some fundamental differences between the drivetrain in a car and in a bicycle. The most relevant one here is that in the car the drivetrain runs enclosed in an oil bath whereas the bicycle drivetrain does not. Let me give you a real world illustration of what that means - in a motorcycle, what is the difference in service life between the chain that connects the engine and the gearbox which runs fully enclosed in an oil bath, and the chain that drives the rear wheel which runs in the elements? there's a huge difference in service intervals for two reasons: 1/ big difference in lubrication and 2/ the big difference in exposure to foreign contaminants. Can you see why comparing the car's drivetrain to the bicycle's drivetrain is meaningless?

What you can compare is identical bicycle drivetrains on bikes that ride in different terrain and weather conditions, or you can compare an open chain with one that's enclosed in a chaincase, or one that's enclosed in a chaincase that runs an oil bath (hello! now we're looking at really extending service intervals )

I ride with a derailler but I'd like to switch to an internal hub.
I'm not sure how an internal hub would mean I wouldn't have to lube my chain though; this winter I'm lubing every 2 days because of the wet and the salt, and even after only 2 days there are links that don't want to move; I should probably be lubing daily.
Most of the year I have no trouble at all with a derailler. I've never adjusted it at all except when I replaced the RD after 11,000 miles when the wheels were worn out (it's a cheap $20 derailler so it wasn't worth trying to get new wheels). I am about to put a new cable on, this spring; it's a little sluggish with the original cheap cable after 13,000 miles and a lot of surface rust on the cable. But it still shifts accurately once it gets around to it (it's about a 3 second delay now, when it's cold and icy, less when it's warm).

Based on my experience with a nexus 8 on my old commuter, xtr/xt/lx/x0/x9/x7 on my mtb bikes, dura-ace/ultregra/105/tiagra on road bikes I'd say the best commuting setup would be a mix of mtb and road bike components.

Ideally 7700 dura-ace shifters, dura-ace front derailuer, shimano r700 compact crank(50/34), xtr shadow rear derailuer, xt chain and xt rear cassette(11-34).

I run current gen tiagra shifters, tiagra front derailuer, truvativ rolluer compact crank(50/34), xt rear derailuer, xt chain and xt rear cassette(11-34) and it's fantastic for my commute year round.

I have a photo at
www.Cyclofiend.com

Its in the single speed updates on the left of the page.

The photo however doesn't show the two speed set up. What it is, is a Sugino triple crank using a 107 mm BB and a 36 tooth 74 bcd inner (granny) ring and a 39 tooth 110 bcd middle ring. This leaves a place for a chain ring guard that I have to purchase. I used a White industries double freewheel with 16 & 19 teeth. I redished my rear wheel one full turn on the spokes and respaced the axle etc. I will try to show a photo of the gear set up but I have to take one and load it tomorrow. I get good chain alignment and haven't spun a chain yet. My frame has horizontal dropouts so chain tensioning is easy. So far its been a good set up for my daily exercise loop that includes a one mile climb about like a freeway offramp and the rest is mostly flat. I can spin the 65 inch to around 25+ mph but I'm really going at high rpm. I can comfortably ride at 15-17 mph which is my normal flat to rollers pace. The 50 inch just gives me a bailout or for headwinds. If the hills get too steep I walk. For in town commuting that shouldn't be a problem in most cities. I live in the country but will use this on a couple of select routes and on my bike path/town partial commute of 18 mile RT.

If anything has 100% to do with chain wear and 0% to do with anything else then it would imply that chain wear is completely irrelevant and thus chain lube would be completely unnecessary.

You're assertion that chain lube is related to chain wear and in no way, directly or indirectly, related to anything else is just downright absurd. Obviously chain wear affects things other than just chain lube which implies that when chain lube affects chain wear it, subsequently, indirectly affects the same things affected by chain wear.

Feel free to go tell anyone else whatever you want. I, for one, am going to base my decisions on observable facts that I see in my drivetrain, not what some guy in the forum thinks about what is taught in universities or what is discussed in the mechanic's subforum. If you have something to tell me about derailleurs then I'd be glad to hear it, but don't go telling me I'm wrong about my own drivetrain because I'm obviously in a better position to judge that than you are.

Well no thank you for your advice. I currently get the best service out of my single cog drivetrains. You trying to tell me otherwise is not helping anything, as you obviously care more about telling me I'm wrong than understanding my requirements and why my methods are the best solution for me.

Why are you blathering on about this? You were the one that was insisting that the only way to reduce maintenance is by using a simpler design. Car's drivetrain, bicycle chaincase, sealed bicycle chaincase with oil bath, are all counterexamples to your claim whether you consider them meaningless or not.

If you don't mind me asking, what, in particular, did you like about the dura-ace/XTR setup over the Nexus 8 setup?

Cyclaholic and makeinu... just a word here.

Chill.

For me, the best drivetrain is the one I already have. Most non-department store bikes manufactured in the last 20 years have perfectly fine drivetrains for 99.9% of commuters. Now, what I _want_ is a different matter.
When I rebuilt my my 1990/1991 diamond back last fall I began with the intention of buying new components, especially the drivetrain. After much thought, I ended up just tuning what I had. It took me a few extra minutes to find parts, but with the exception of a broken shifter, I really just needed to learn how to tune my bike. Bikes are simple systems. Almost anybody can learn to take care of most problems on their own bike. A well tuned bike makes a huge difference.

well, the best set of componenets are the ones you want!

I would say the best components depends on the commute & the preferences of the person making the purchase.

Personally i have an mtb with Sram X.0 3x9 gearing. I never use the small ring but it came free on the crankset I wanted The component choice was determined by previous experience; sticking with established, available parts; & the need to use the bike as a commuter & beast of burden towing a trailer.

Cheers

Sorry, but I'm going to have to disagree with you here.

The combination of a worn chain and a small cog IS a serious issue, as I found out last November when I installed a Hebie Chainglider on my Downtube Mini. The Mini comes with 23/46 gears, but to use the Chainglider I had to switch those to 19/38. By this time the bike --and its original chain-- had a bit over 1500 miles on it. The chain kept falling off (resulting in the Chainglider exploding in rather spectacular ways). At first I assumed I didn't have the chain tight enough; but running it tighter made everything noticeably less efficient, but did not noticeably reduce chain throw. I rode with the chainglider for about a month, with the problem getting progressively worse, until I measured the chain and found, much to my surprise, that it had stretched to the point that 24 links measured 12.5". There were, to be sure, other problems: in particular the 19T cog isn't as dished as the 23T, so the chain line was way out of whack; and I didn't like the crank I was using (arms were too long). But the main problem was that the chain was worn.

Think about it like this. A new sprocket should pull evenly on every link of a new chain. But it only pulls on one or two links at a time if the chain is worn; the others, with no tension on them, are free to climb up on the teeth. Under pedaling motion, only the top portion of the chain is under tension; the rest of the chain, which on the Mini measures somewhere around 24", has very little tension on it, and on mine this had about an inch of play. Of course I had taken up most of that play by moving the back wheel back as far as possible, but there was still enough play to allow the loose chain to climb up out of the teeth of the 19T sprocket.

By the way, I've now fixed the chainline problem with spacers, and replaced the chain, so I can use the chainglider again... and so far so good.

I'm a big fan of internal gear hubs, but let me try to be impartial and add some comment here.

I've got my commuter bike set up with studded tires and it hasn't been snowing much. So, I cleaned the chain on my Raliegh hybrid (C-50 from circa 1992) and have ridden it about half the days this winter. At the time this bike was manufactured, it had high quality derailer components, which are working fine and are properly adjusted.

My hybrid's rear derailer shifts reliably and thunks into position nicely. I trued the wheel and this steel bike rides very nice. The front derailer takes several moments to shift. I have to look down to see it engage--sometimes it won't. It needs adjustment occasionally and I clean the cable once a year or so. Still, the chain falls off occasionally. But the biggest problem is that the chain gets much grittier and needs regular maintenance (every two weeks or so).

My Nexus 7 speed hub on my Breezer is no maintenance. I haven't done anything to it for the 2+ years and 3100 miles I've had it. The chain needs to be oiled every month or two and I clean it once or twice a year.

I like the thunk of the rear derailer and I like it that the hybrid is a bit faster than my Breezer. Yet I much prefer the Breezer. The hub shifts effortlessly and has plenty of range. My pants never get dirty. I don't look at the chain and don't need to worry about anything. It's also more comfortable to ride.

The chain maintenance I do when I change tires in the winter and spring. It's no big deal.

IMO, a high quality rear derailer is fine but the front derailers are the problem. Looking and gauging your speed until the chain transfers rings is a nuisance. I love my chainguard. It's stupid not to have one, if you wear slacks/jeans regularly. No doubt three ring derailer's have a bit more range--but for the hills I go up it is not an issue. Also, there's a lot of gearing overlap. Occasionally, you end up in a bad frontring gear, just because the rear gearing gives you significant range with it. Also, there is a gear I'd like to ride in but can't. The middle frontring position is incompatible with the rear high gear position.

So as I ride the hybrid, I'm reminded of the smooth steel frame and the rear derailer thunk. I like it. But when I get back on my Breezer, I know that's the bike for me. It's more comfortable, simpler, cleaner, and better equipped. The big reason is the internal hub. Yet, I'm not sure if I'd prefer it to a single front chainring and a 9 speed rear derailer. I just find the front derailer to be problematic. In fact, I think it's a bit unsafe, since you have to look down to see it change. It's a PITA.

Weight, shifting feel, gear range, durability, the feeling of improved efficiency and very stiff feeling cranks.

I'm sure the nexus is pretty durable but I doubt it would hold up to the rigors of mountain biking in New Hampshire. Helps to have lots of engagement pawls in the rear hub here. Everything here is very technical with very few smooth trails. Tons of technical climbs and downhills into washout. Year round I have to deal with snow, salt, sand and tons of mud. My MTB takes a ton of abuse and xtr/xt works great so I'm pretty confident in it's durability.

I have no issues with tiagra on my cross bike but I don't beat on it nearly as much as my MTB. I simply picked dura-ace because it seemed like money was no object in your question. If I had to spend my own money I'd probably stick with 105.

I'm hoping by the end of this year I'll be strong enough to pedal a fixie for my commute. I think that is the ultimate for commuting if you can manage it.

I commuted for a winter in Seattle on a derailleur bike. XT "rear mech", 105 FD and crank, 105 STI shifters, mountain cassette. The only maintenance the drivetrain required was lube when the chain started to get noisy. Shifting was consistently good. I haven't used internally-geared hubs or singlespeed enough to compare. Infrequent maintenance of a derailleur bike results in a pretty grubby bike, though.

I'll agree and disagree. I usually don't have to look down when I shift the front derailleur, I can hear/feel whether it shifted or not. I can really feel it if the chain drops.

What I do agree with is that front derailleurs can be more problematic than rear ones. That and for operational simplicity, I think 1 x 7,8,9s are good options for basic commuters.

Because I think that Front derailleurs are more problematic, I have a difficult time with the premise that a traditional Rear Derailleur requires much more maintenance than an IGH. Maintenance issues crop up for me more in the Winter. If my chain gets rusty it does affect shifting performance, but it also makes the bike harder to pedal. It's not the RD that leads me to do more maintenance.

The chain of a rear derailer bike will collect more dirt than the IGH chainguarded chain, but it won't fall off and rarely needs adjustment. Thus, the dirt isn't that big of a deal as it is on a double or triple front chainring. I agree a 1 x 7,8,9 is a good option that might be more efficient and weigh less than an IGH geared bike. But, I still want the chainguard. Also, I'm not sure if there is a range difference between a Nexus 7-8 and a rear 1x7, 8, 9.

Unless you need the extra chainrings for steep climbs, I think the cons outweigh the pros for double and triple chainrings for commuting.

I would have 100% agreed with this statement before switching over to Campagnolo shifters last year. Indexed front derailleurs (on triples) are problematic IMO, but the infinite trim of a Campy front derailleur is very smooth and problem free.

I think what type of brakes you use significantly affects the amount of "crud" on your drivetrain, and also if you have mudflaps on your bike. I run disc brakes and the crud level on the chainrings and under the BB is relatively low. With a light wipe down with every lube, my bike looks pretty darn clean and what little is adhering to my chainrings is fairly easy to wipe off.

My biggest problem is with salt and a chain guard might actually make it worse because the salt laden snow and water are thrown at the chain from underneath the bike. A chain guard is just another place for it to collect. If you do drop a chain, a chain guard makes it harder to get the chain back on.

A partial chain guard or "pant guard" equipped chain ring may be all you need to keep your pants out of the chain. Rolling them up, a rubber band, reflective strap, or tucking them into my socks all work for me. Not elegant but I do have tights too, -not that those are going to score me any fashion points.

A chain case is an interesting alternative. I wonder how weather proof they are.

In your opinion

I don't have an especially hilly commute but I still use my chain rings. One twist, or flick (depending on the bike I'm on) and I'm in a substantially lower or higher gear.

I think doing without them is probably a good idea for a novice cyclist who doesn't get bicycle gearing and would just stay in the middle ring anyway.

Could I get by without them? Sure, but I like having them.

https://www.rohloff.de/en/products/sp...son/index.html

Having a nonstraight chainline puts lateral forces on the chain similar to a derailleur. I wonder if you would have had the same problem with a straight chainline. I'm curious to hear what will happen when your current chain wears down, but I'm afraid that probably won't be for a long long time.

Is it dirt or rust? Lube attracts dirt. If you don't want dirt you need to clean the lube off (not just stop putting it on). Steel chains rust, but KMC makes a rust-proof chain for single cog (1/8" track) drivetrains. Are rust-proof chains even available in the 3/32" derailleur chain sizes?

The roads here are treated with a nice sand and salt cocktail, so it's both. You can get rust-proof chains but when I asked about one at an LBS a few years ago, the first clerk gave me a blank stare, said they had pink and blue chains, but no rust-proof ones as far as she new.

She asked somebody else who said they didn't stock them because nobody bought them, -too expensive. In his opinion, the rust was more of a cosmetic problem and that the grit was the real chain killer. He recommended a couple of different types of lube that would last longer but said that if you're out there everyday during the winter expect to see some rust on the chain.

I'm not sure I agree completely about the rust being mostly cosmetic but he's probably right in that rust proof doesn't mean wear proof and it's debatable wether it's worth the extra cost.

Rust is a serious functional problem.

Neglect regular cleaning and oiling and our chain will rust and after some time the chain will begin to seize even if it is relatively clean.

what?.... did you say something?..... i couldn't hear you ever that unlubed drivetrain




This hub plus a fully enclosing chaincase would be my ultimate commuting setup. There's a bit of a weight penalty but I could live with that. If only my favorite commuting frame (Surly LHT) had horizontal dropouts.