+1 to alot of the recent discussion.
I think a cyclocross bike would be a good sweet spot. Perhaps a trailer for better utility on big errands/grocery runs, leaving you with a bike that has 90% of the speed of a road bike with more comfort and durability (and utility - racks, perhaps fenders).

Bikesdirect ti looks tasty
http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/..._pro_ti_xi.htm

The most important difference between IGH and derailleur is the shifting technique...derailleurs don't shift well in traffic (although they fit like a glove for "le tour"). Since I always ride in traffic I would never consider a derailleur, even in San Diego or bone dry Phoenix.

Only the upfront cost is more expensive. In the long run IGHs are way cheaper because they don't wear out like cassettes do (or all the new chains you have to buy to prevent damaging your cassette). Chains and chainrings are also cheaper because you can use whatever is on sale.

Derailleurs are cheap crap which cost you more in the long run like all other cheap crap.

A common misconception is that all chains require the same maintenance. This isn't so. The way a derailleur treats a chain is completely different from the way an IGH treats a chain. With an IGH you can "maintain" your chain just as you would a belt (ie not at all) and it will still be more efficient and longer wearing than a belt.

The only thing overrated about the maintenance advantage of IGHs are that some people don't know how to get out of the derailleur mindset and stop obsessing about maintenance.

Also the same things applies to efficiency. Hub gears are more efficient derailleurs, but since 99% of people don't know how to set them up correctly they lose out on this benefit and are left with the misconception that derailleurs are more efficient.

That's the nice thing about an IGH: I never find myself in too high a gear because I always shift to bottom gear when stopping. So it's not possible for me to "realize I'm in too high a gear until I start moving". Besides, you quickly get used to shifting at the dead spot of your stroke (or when getting out of saddle...which is a very effective technique while accelerating: light turns green, spin through the intersection while watching for red light runners, then upshift while standing up to hammer).

This is typical of derailleur users...they criticize problems that simply don't exist with hub gears. What you think is a problem is only a problem because you have poor derailleur specific riding technique.

You can't?
http://www.niagaracycle.com/product_...oducts_id=2444

Once again a false comparison because unless you're using a lower spoke count your IGH wheel will be much stronger than your derailleur wheel. A fair comparison would be to weigh your bike with a 36 spoke derailleur wheel vs a 32 spoke IGH wheel or a 32 spoke derailleur wheel vs a 28 spoke IGH wheel.

Also before you go measuring your heart rate make sure you use the largest rear cog possible for maximum drivetrain efficiency. Most riders don't know about this because it's not possible to fix it with a derailleur, but using a small (vs large) external cog actually causes twice as much friction as the hub internals.

I think you can fix it with a derailer somewhat:

http://www.bikeworldnews.com/wp-cont...Derailleur.jpg

That's just the idler, but the real losses are from the loaded cogs in the cluster which are as small as 11T. The problem is inherently unfixable for a derailleur system because efficiency optimization via cog size conflicts with the very principle of adjusting gear ratio via cog size.

I measure chain wear by counting how many NJS certified parts I've snapped in half beating my chains into submission:
http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=195613
With this measure my chains last more like 20-30 times that of derailleur equipped bicycles for which chain wear must be measured in mm.

With the way things are going I fear derailleur users will soon give their chains the right to citizenship and I'll be forced to pay my chains minimum wage. :p

...this is pretty silly. Obviously deraillers don't shift differently in traffic as they do in a race.

An IGH with a chain requires replacing the cog on the back just like a derailler requires replacing the rear cassette. Assumably a single cog does cost less than a whole cassette. Though how often is a single cog on sale? I would hardly call it "way cheaper".

I can see where this is going. A lot of lies and hyperbole about the thing you've decided is "below you", deraillers in this case.

The idea that a chain would ever outlast a belt seems pretty ridiculous. Belts last a lot longer than chains, and chains last quite a long time themselves (as long as you aren't riding in a Minnesota winter). To be fair, the belt really should last longer as it certainly costs more.

If you obsess with maintenance you'll need to maintain the chain on a derailler or igh. If you don't obsess with maintenance (and most people do not), you won't.

Now that's just hilarious. They're "more efficient" than deraillers. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight. The "I love my IGH" crowd doesn't even usually try to make that claim.

That sounds like a lot of work, a lot more work than with a derailler if you're shifting to your bottom gear when stopping anyways. And I don't have a dead spot in my pedal stroke, not since I saw a bike fitter about my pedalling technique.

However, since I'm not on an agenda to bash one over the other, I will say that if you end up to high of a gear at a light I don't find that any better or worse on either my IGH bike or my derailler bike. It's also a pain to get out of it with a derailler as you need to keep enough momentum up to keep the bike upright, while you're trying to keep your head up to look around the intersection, which is tough if the gearing is way to high. If anything an IGH might be easier because you need to keep pedalling to shift, whereas on an IGH you can let up for half a second to shift.

(rolls eyes)

lol - what? Now adding an IGH hub to a wheel with the same spoke count magically makes the wheel stronger?

Except so far much more civilized.

All those smug IGH fanbois are being helpful. And so are the elitist derailer gear-heads.

:innocent:

(edit: oops. chucky spoiled the party...)

+1 My next bike will have a Rohloff at any cost.
+1 The 11T cog is a boat anchor.
+1 The chainline for going 16 to 22 MPH is always crosseyed. In/out or out/in combos, take your poor pick.
+1 Single steel cogs and chains last forever. See pic of mine and dads 1938? Rudge. Used every summer since 1968. Chain not even clean, lubed with plain oil. Before that it commuted to work for 10+ years.
At least 28,000 miles I figure.

What do you mean by "don't shift well in traffic" ? Just curious.

So far I've only replaced one cassette because I wore it out. I've replaced others because I've wanted a different range, or closer spacing.

Why can't you buy on sale? 7-9 speed cassettes aren't all that expensive unless you want Dura-Ace or Campy.


Everything I've heard says just the opposite. Well maintained derailleur systems are more efficient than IGHes.

Shifting while pedaling is not "poor technique", it just doesn't work well with IGHs.

Not sure why your trying to argue this point since it's an advantage I see for IGHes and single speeds, - inexpensive rust resistant chains are readily available. But, since you brought it up, the product you linked to is what I have. You'll see the Z51 listed as 6,7, and 8 speed some places and other places only 7. The reason is that it's very marginal for 8 speed, - a tad too wide. It didn't work very well at all on my bike and I eventually switched to an SRAM chain.

The wheel I'm replacing with an IGH wheel has 36 spokes, and a slightly wider/heavier rim. It's a MTB wheel and plenty strong enough. I got a good price on the 36 hole Nexus which is why I chose that over the 32. The weight of 4 spokes and nipples isn't going to be much anyway.

I'll use whatever combination of chain ring and rear sprocket makes the most sense for the conditions I need to ride under and my budget. Besides, I wouldn't be comparing it to the most efficient derailleur setup possible, I'll be comparing it to what's on the bike now, which is a fairly gunky derailleur and a chain that's near the end of its life. In other words, a real world test that if anything unfairly disadvantages the derailleur system.

For all the reasons above, I prefer IHG. Right now my commuter is an old Trek I modified by adding fenders, racks, a chainguard, swept-back handlebars, and a NuVinci CVT. When I need to replace it I'm planning to get either a Worksman Classic Cruiser (http://www.worksmancycle.com/) and have my LBS add a Schlumpf or go to Morgan Imports and get one of their Flying Pidgeons and have my LBS install an IHG and a Schlumpf.

Exactly. Derailleur shifting is optimized for races which don't have stopping vs traffic which involves a ton of stopping and accelerating from said stops (perfect for the shifting method employed by hub gears).

Since you can't shift while stopped with a derailleur, you have to shift while accelerating or decelerating. That means you're in the wrong gear when you're accelerating and decelerating....which is a large percentage of the ride in traffic.

A single cog costs less than $3-$4, is made of steel, and lasts 10x longer than a cassette due to the difference in chain operation between IGH/derailleur. A cassette costs $30+ and requires a new $10-$20+ chain every couple thousand miles. In the long run, IGH is wayyyyy cheaper.

I was talking about the other parts, chain, chainrings, etc. If the ones on sale aren't the correct width, don't have the proper ramps/pins, etc then you can't get them, but with an IGH they're all compatible so you can buy whichever one is on sale.

Fools and their money...

...at which point the derailleur chain will wear out rather quickly and the IGH chain will keep working flawlessly and efficiently for tens of thousands of miles.

I guess the "I love my IGH" crowd isn't too smart then. The measurements speak for themselves: Larger cogs are way more efficient and hub gears enable you to use them in ways you can't with derailleurs.

What it sounds like is "whoosh" while I leave you behind at the traffic lights.

Even Lance has a dead spot. If you don't then maybe you should take your derailleur and join the Tour.

If you build it right it does (and always has), but maybe the "I love my IGH" crowd couldn't figure out that one either?

chucky - I really want some of those special lube free frictionless chains that last for tens of thousands of miles that you use.

All my bikes have a place and purpose and as my IGH bikes are all three speeds they are primarily urban , recreational, and foul weather machines and if I am going to mountain biking, racing, or touring the derailleur is my preferred weapon of choice and my primary summer commuter is also derailleur equipped.

I have ridden a number of my IGH bikes 100 miles and have also ridden these distances on my fixed gear bikes and of course, on the derailleur equipped bikes... the derailleur equipped bikes do long distances better as the road isn't flat and the wind is always blowing here so being able to find the optimal gear for the conditions is more efficient.

A number of people use IGH equipped bikes for touring and the Rohloff offers the best range while the Nuvinci has constantly variable gearing so eliminates the broader jumps you get with most IGH systems.

The IGH is also favoured among those who ride smaller wheels as the reduction gearing can greatly expand their gearing range.

A clean and properly serviced derailleur system is more efficient than an IGH but only marginally so and the IGH does not suffer the same efficiency losses that happen to derailleur equipped bikes when they get dirty as you can lose as much as 10% if you are running with a filthy exposed drive train.

Each system has it's advantages and disadvantages and just because you can't deal with a derailleur equipped bike in traffic does not mean that other people can't, and most do pretty well.

An 8 speed internal hub offers pretty much everything the average user desires... a nice gear range, low upkeep, long service life, and that ability to shift when stopped which really benefits those who do not practice their shifting technique.

But so very few of us are actually average and all have our own special needs.

That whoosh you hear might be someone on a derailleur equipped bike who knows how to shift and while you are dealing with a larger jump in gears and spinning back up the person on the derailleur equipped bike will pull away as they smoothly transition from one gear to the next in efficient little steps.

In most cases, the derailleur equipped bike offers advantages in that it has a wider gear range and closer steps than most internal hubs (there is usually a trade off between low and high) with less weight so if the road gets steep or if you'd like to go really fast this is the way to go.

This thread is deteriorating pretty fast, but as someone who rides both modern and vintage derailleurs and IGH, maybe I can help clarify some of these points.

Like a single-speed or an old long-chainstay 5-speed derailleur setup, the chainline of an IGH allows using a chain with full bushings, the same sort of chains used industrially for far longer lives than any bike chain. A full bushing has many times the bearing surface of a derailleur chain, and in better full-bushing chains, the bushing is an alloy chosen for lubricity and wear resistance without needing the tensile strength of the side plates. Finally, the full bushing holds lubrication better against wash-out. So, while they don't last forever, and do have friction, it's not unusual for a full-bushing chain with a chainguard to last tens of thousands of miles.

The wear issues of smaller cogs are more complex, but have to do with the greater angle of articulation of each chain joint as the chain moves around the cog, as well as the greater load per joint on smaller cogs. Similarly, the angled chain lines of modern derailleur systems stress the chain joints while they're articulating, creating greater friction and wear than the same chain on a straight chainline.

If you're really interested, your local library may have a copy of Mechanics of the Roller Chain Drive for the math behind the greater friction and wear of small cogs and angled chainlines.

Roller brake Nexus is a mess. Drum brake Sturmey, not so bad. Single indicator Sturmey, like butter.

Unfortunately the difference is probably more due to user error than any particular chain. If I had to guess I'd say:
1. The lubrication you're so fond of is behaving as more of a dirt magnet than a lubricant, thus shortening your chain life.
2. You're replacing your chains before their useful life has been spent. When the chain becomes so worn that it starts to skip teeth there's no need to replace it (though somehow I doubt you even let it go that far). Simply install a good chain tug and it will wear itself back into correct engagement.

Hope that helps and please accept my apologies if your experience excepts you from learning better ways of doing things.

Not according to scientific inquiry.

Surely, but just because it's possible to get by with an inferior system it doesn't mean that system is equivalent to superior alternatives.

Or maybe by that point I'll be standing on the pedals (already instantaneously shifted into the correct high gear) and half way to the next stop. Smoothly transitioning between little steps may be an advantage on the open road, but in traffic it's far more important to be able to quickly transition directly between highest and lowest gears (often in the midst of unforeseen stops which cannot be anticipated).

This might be beneficial to people who ride bikes with single drives to extend chain life... might explain why some very old igh bikes run out as long as they do.

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/chain-life.html

I'd like to see the scientific inquiry showing that derailleur systems are less efficient if you can point me in that direction. Like I said before, everything I've seen to this point says the opposite. I'm looking for something that talks about more than just the pros and cons of various cog sizes.


My commute is 75% flat, especially the part that's in traffic. I spend the majority of time in the middle range of my gears. I can usually start pretty easily in any gear I happen to be in even if it's not the ideal one. Not always, but most of the time. Being able to quickly transition from lowest to the highest gear has almost no value since I would rarely choose either one for any part of my commute.

Interestingly enough this advice is the opposite of what is practiced by professional mechanical engineers who purposely chose odd toothed sprockets in order to distribute the wear more evenly:
http://www.renold.com/Products/Trans.../Sprockets.asp

I've never tried Sheldon's recommendation before, but as we speak I am putting together a hub gear bike with an even rear cog (largest available) and an even chainring (on sale). I'm curious as to which advice is better (Sheldon or the engineers), but it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if it were the less credentialed of the two. Either way I expect the chain will outlive my patience to carefully test it.

Cheers. :thumb:

Those same mechanical engineers you like to reference also have recommendations on chain lubrication requirements and when it comes to things like this, Sheldon Brown's credentials were rather excellent.

It would be interesting to test this to see just how many more miles one could get out of a drive set up like this... my winter bike runs a 40:20 and after an entire winter has no measurable chain wear. I am using a KMC 710 1/8 and have found these run for an extremely long time and only start to show minimal wear at 6000 km after some pretty extreme use.

Might have to mark the sprocket the next time I pull off the wheel and figure this chain will take me through summer rains and well into next winter... this is a plus with an IGH and a good chain / sprocket as the chain life is far better than any derailleur equipped bike that has to handle the same conditions.

This study reports a 5% increase in efficiency for bigger cogs and a 2% decrease from standard cluster to IGH with small cogs:
http://www.ihpva.org/HParchive/PDF/hp52-2001.pdf
So if you combine the two the net increase in efficiency is ~3% for a properly configured hub gear (maybe not quite that much because you can't get IGH cogs that big...I estimate it's closer to ~2% for stock cogs).

Other studies have reported similar results.

You might feel differently if it were easier to shift between widely dispersed gears (it doesn't necessarily have to be THE lowest and THE highest gear...just as easy to use 2 and 7 or 3 and 6 or whatever tickles your fancy...once you get good with the shifter you just slap it and it magically goes to the gear you want). Personally if I were going to be starting in less than ideal gears I'd sooner take a singlespeed bike than a derailleur (why bother having them if you can't use them to the fullest?). To each his own.

But I agree that it's not that hard to get into the right gear with a derailleur before stopping...it's just that I'd rather be focusing on braking, filtering, whether I can beat the yellow, picking my nose, etc. I also often change my mind about what gear I'm going to start with once I'm done picking my nose and have time to inspect the condition of the intersection (amount of potholes, etc) or if I decide to take a shortcut (right on red, maybe move to left lane for an upcoming turn...or maybe even run the light if no cross traffic).

Yeah, well there's no substitute for trying it yourself. Sheldon knew that very well: Some of the stuff he did should make anyone cringe, but there's no arguing with success.

As to the lubrication (if we'll ever let it die), some of the engineering requirements also relate to cleanliness. If we listened to them we'd have to conclude that roller chain is simply unsuitable for exposed bicycle use.

Let us know. The one I'm building is 44/22 (not enough clearance for 46/23 or 48/24), but this one's a recumbent so the carbon frame will probably delaminate before the chain even begins to show signs of wear.

You mean the races where the racers need to be able to pedal full out, without pause, and still shift through several gears while doing so - something an IGH is not as good as a derailler at...

With a derailler you use a technique called "downshifting a gear or two as you come to a stop".

Only against people who don't downshift when they're coming to a stop. For most of us we would smoke you as we don't need to wait, or put a pause in our pedalling in order to upshift away from the light.

Not a big enough dead spot for the igh to always immediately shift while under load.

There are other points that I didn't quote, I'm not ambitious enough to go look them up.

If you have hung around here around here long enough you would see that when it comes to setting up singular drives I always advise using the largest chain rings and cogs that are practical as it has been known for a long time that smaller cogs decrease efficiency and drive train efficiency drops off markedly when you use a cog smaller than 13 teeth.

A singular drive with a clean chain and proper chain alignment will lose about 1% and this is what makes a fixed gear bike the most efficient bicycle from a mechanical standpoint but not as efficient from a practical standpoint as humans have such a narrow power band.

We have to include the engine in all of this...

Across a multiple speed cassette the frictional losses will vary widely and you may only lose 1% when you are running in those positions where your chain is straight and cog sizes are reasonable and will lose more when you are using the cogs with less than 13 teeth.

Losses approaching 20 % can be observed when you cross chain the drive depending on which way you are cross chaining.

If used correctly a derailleur equipped bike can also be extremely efficient as it allows riders to match their output to the conditions and a wider gear range more than offsets minor efficiency losses and if you can shift effectively efficiency loss can be kept to a minimum.

With an IGH you run the same straight chainline and because the drive gears are sealed the mechanical losses should remain consistent within the hub and are quite low... with any hub gear the direct drive is the most efficient as there are no moving parts and it runs like the fixed gear bicycle. Move away from the direct drive position and the efficiency will drop a little.

Modern hub gears are getting better and better and if the Shimano 11 speed proves to be successful it will come very close to offering the range and smaller steps you get out of a derailleur equipped bicycle at an affordable price and he price of the Nuvinci has come down a fair bit.

Most people's complaint about 8 speeds is that the steps between gears are too large and that you sacrifice top end for a lower gear or bottom end for a better top gear... this also is a factor in overall efficiency.

But doesn't it say that "Hub gears are generally about 2% lower in efficiency than derailleur-type gears" ?

(Item #2 under conclusions).

That's pretty close to the number I've heard before.

I think this talk of efficiency is rather vague and largely unimportant to the average commuter, especially when it's on the order of a few percent.

As far as I can see, both have practical advantages:

IGH:
-chains can last longer, since full-bushing chain can be used with a straight chainline, and can be fully enclosed in a chain case.
-use of said chain case prevents grease marks on clothing, making the bicycle more suitable for commuting in everyday clothes.
-can shift while stationary.
-simple operation due to only one shifter.
-generally less demanding of maintenance.
-rear wheel requires minimal or no dish.

Derailleurs:
-potential for a wider range, and smaller steps within that range
-can shift under load with more modern systems.
-can customise gearing to a large extent, unlike IGH, where the steps are fixed and only the 'final drive' ratio can be changed.
-simpler to repair at home.

I don't mind IGH steps when they're uniform and smaller than 20%. This is what makes my SRAM i-Motion 9 my favorite road IGH. 17% steps, 340% range for ~$350 with shifter. It's not as tough as a Shimano 8 speed but it's good enough for the road. Shimano 8 speeds have a 25% step between 5th and 6th gear. That translates to going from 95rpm to 70 rpm when I shift from 5th to 6th, I find it very irritating on the road. I'm not comfortable with a cadence less than 80rpm or more than 95rpm when I'm pushing, it puts a hole in my pace speed.

This my biggest gripe about the Alfine 8, as I spend the majority of my time in 6th gear, and use 5th for smaller grades or brisk headwinds (4th for ripping headwinds). This is a design oversight that it appears the 11 speed has eliminated, with its dead even spacing. I'm going to wait it out a year or so to let Shimano work out the bugs before I move towards a wholesale replacement of my current Alfine 8 setup.