Originally Posted by zip22 (Post 5729710)

steel is heavier, corrodes, and most importantly for manufacturers - is more costly to machine (pretty sure on that one, but our machinist friend could chime in)

Originally Posted by wroomwroomoops (Post 5729737)

Only the interface needs to be made of steel. That is, only the part where the splined sprocket would lay.

Originally Posted by wroomwroomoops (Post 5729737)

Only the interface needs to be made of steel. That is, only the part where the splined sprocket would lay.

Originally Posted by Landgolier (Post 5730583)

And it attaches to the Al hub, so you've solved the problem of not wanting to have a steel-Al interface by creating the necessity of a steel-Al interface.

Fail.

Originally Posted by wroomwroomoops (Post 5729407)

Wait a second there: are you saying that a SRAM, BBB, Tiso, IRD or Suntour cassette fits more loosely to the freehub than a Shimano one? Or that they don't have the means (if they really had to reverse-engineer the specs, ludicrious as this would sound (it does)) to do precise measurements of a Shimano freehub? Any of these companies could afford a micrometer-precise measurement device. Heck, most could afford a SEM microscope for that matter, measure a group of 20 cassettes and get the specs. I don't think the problems lies in the precision of fitting.

If you want to argue that it's a worse solution than threaded because, hmmm... after a while it wold develop some play when used with a fixed hub, well, I actually don't know, that might happen. But the fitting tolerances, that's no issue at all.

Originally Posted by LóFarkas (Post 5726773)

Standard splines just would not be fun for fixed because the back-and-forth motion tears stuff apart. i'm pretty sure it would strip (well, at leas develop lotsa play anyway) a lot easier than threads. It works for BMX as the drive force in only in one direction.
If you're going to deviate from the standard threaded solution, go bolt-on.

Originally Posted by diff_lock2 (Post 5730091)

For fixed gear i think the best way is the bolt on method, like for disk brakes.

I have not found a dual disk rear hub though. And i am sure it will cost tons, just cause its not mainstream.

Originally Posted by humancongereel (Post 5731039)

why would you want double disc? you'd run fixed gear and a disc brake? sounds worse than drive side radial lacing.

Originally Posted by humancongereel (Post 5731039)

why would you want double disc? you'd run fixed gear and a disc brake? sounds worse than drive side radial lacing.

Originally Posted by Landgolier (Post 5731084)

Why would disc and fixed be bad, exactly?

Also, does anyone know what the stock "chainline" (as it were) for a rear disc brake is? I'm guessing it's wider than 42mm, so for a hub with ISO plates on both sides you'd need some kind of spacer to use it for fixed and disc (cyclocross/MTB madness) instead of just like a flipflop. Not a huge deal, tho.

Originally Posted by humancongereel (Post 5731217)

@landgolier
wouldn't fixed and disc put too much stress on the hub?

Originally Posted by queerpunk (Post 5722771)

there's talk of "solutions without problems," and unlike some other developments, this is one of them.

Originally Posted by wroomwroomoops (Post 5729407)

Wait a second there: are you saying that a SRAM, BBB, Tiso, IRD or Suntour cassette fits more loosely to the freehub than a Shimano one? Or that they don't have the means (if they really had to reverse-engineer the specs, ludicrious as this would sound (it does)) to do precise measurements of a Shimano freehub? Any of these companies could afford a micrometer-precise measurement device. Heck, most could afford a SEM microscope for that matter, measure a group of 20 cassettes and get the specs. I don't think the problems lies in the precision of fitting.

Originally Posted by Yoshi (Post 5731397)

He's saying that SRAM, BBB< Tiso, IRD and Suntour probably do have equipment to reverse-engineer the cassette. His comment about tolerances was that it wasn't as important for a cassette. Those two things aren't mutually exclusive.

More likely Shimano licenses their specs to other manufacturers while Campy does not. I'm pretty sure the splined interfaces would be patented so reverse-engineering them would be illegal.

Originally Posted by Landgolier (Post 5730658)

Again, why not put whichever really good steel-Al interface you're planning on using directly on the cog? And once you've chosen how you're going to do that, what makes it better than the already industry standard ISO disc pattern?

Originally Posted by wroomwroomoops (Post 5731586)

It's interesting to see how you went full-circle from criticizing my point of view, to actually agreeing that the Shimano cassette interface is a de-facto standard (and campi isn't). No, I don't expect you'd ever admit to this hahah, it doesn't matter.

Originally Posted by wroomwroomoops (Post 5731586)

Well, this is exactly what I was saying all along - the reverse-engineering angle was just to show that there is no way manufacturers couldn't get the tolerances right, and it was, as I said, ludicrious that anyone would have to or want to reverse-engineer.

Originally Posted by willfcc (Post 5735760)

I like the splined idea, but since no one makes it yet...

Originally Posted by Soil_Sampler (Post 5735840)

been done...


http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.p...7&postcount=32

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=274373

Originally Posted by dirtyphotons (Post 5736540)

^yes but again, since there is a freewheel in the bottom bracket, the force on the cassette is only in one direction.

aluminum splines will develop back and forth play. that's why this design isn't used.

Originally Posted by Yoshi (Post 5736617)

Yeah, I know. Just thought it was interesting, since we are on the topic of non-threaded fixed hubs.

Originally Posted by Landgolier (Post 5736544)

The eno is the same setup as Miche and we know what the problems are there.
The PMP costs a mere $350 or so, and has all the problems we've been discussing here.

Originally Posted by Landgolier (Post 3978567)

WI = Raleigh of Nottingham for a new millennium. Great stuff, but all proprietary. I hope their story ends differently.

Somebody wake me up when there is bolt-on equivalent of a formula (modded MTB fronts don't count).