The cog-hub interface solution
 

So, bolt on and LeveL style interfaces have not caught on mainstream for a couple reasons...LeveL's is proprietary and bolt on is mostly a homebrew workaround (and a great one at that).

What could catch on quickly if a particular company decided to push it?

Well, Shimano is doing fairly well popularizing the already standard cassette spline cog for singlespeed use in BMX!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...cks/csycog.jpg

All we really need is someone to cut splines into a normal track hub. This shouldn't cost anyone making hubs more than the threading they do right now.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...b-formula3.jpg

This is so stupid-obvious, why isn't this the standard?

tradition

...or if you want something different use a Miche carrier

because threathed track hub standard is way older than splined cassette

Actually, I think it would be harder to cut splines into a hub than threads. Cutting threads on the end of a hub is a simple machine operation. Cutting splines with a square bottom (the flat part which would be closest to the flange), not so easy. It would probably have to be a piece manufactured separate from the hub and attached, or the hub could be directly splined but without flanges which would then have to be pressed on or otherwise attached. More steps/pieces, higher cost; higher cost, less buyers...

because play develops. it develops with cassettes too but it's not a huge problem because the force is only one way.

besides, standards don't just happen. companies like level want people to buy their ****, so they make proprietary threadings and bolt patterns. track cogs have had the same threaded interface for many decades, even though better solutions have existed for several years at least.

if a new standard does happen, i'd hope that it'd be bolt on, which is by far the most durable and serviceable. in order for that to happen a big company like shimano or profile will have to start manufacturing cogs and hubs that have a good chainline (bonus if it can be easily respaced for conversion to disc brake use).

Miche already makes splined track cogs and this adapter thing that threads onto a track hub so you can use the cogs with any hub. The lockring holds the cog in place. It seems like a pretty good system, at least for track racing (street riding could conceivably put too much stress on the splines and create "play").

I think shimano has the splines patented and most wheel makers pay a royalty. Don't quote me on that.

I think this what miche was going for with their system.

I am not sure, but I think you are wrong about the splined interface for cassettes being proprietary. There are so many cassette makers, that I really doubt it.

And if you are right, it still makes little difference, because so many manufacturers have the right to use it (payed the royalty already), that there should not be problems in manufacturing a fixed hub with such interface.

As for developing of play: I use singlespeed conversion on all but one of my singlespeeds. So, I use one of those splined BMX sprockets on a normal (freehub) hub, and no play ever develops. Maybe all my hubs have a steel body.

It's all done on CNC lathe. Threading/cut outs/whatever. CNC's are super fast and cost affective (with the exception of how expensive the machines are) The cycle time per part would actually be slightly faster to notch the splines than to cut the threads.

And yes...I am a machinist.

... because splines suck for fixed. Play and stripping are not the buzzwords we are looking for.

I think you missed the point. We need to get rid of threading as load bearing interface. The Miche system still uses a threaded interface for the carrier on the hub.

Splining in this way is far, far superior than the threading we have now. Of course it's not perfect, but it's so good that it should negate the need for anything better. You're not going to strip a cassette-splined cog. :rolleyes: BMX cogs are wider than 10 speed cassette cogs, and take as much a beating as a fixed gear rider would give.

The main thing is that this is doable now, so manufacturers should take advantage.

The splined interface for casettes is proprietary. That's why Campagnolo cassettes won't fit on a Shimano freehub and vice versa. Hub manufacturers build their hubs to either the shimano interface or the campy interface.

Why do we need to get rid of the threading? How is it any better/worse? And don't you see that the Miche system only uses a threaded carrier because hubs are manufactured with threading? The carrier could just as easily be machined into the hub.

My only point in making this thread was to point out that manufacturers only need to put Shimano splines on their hubs in order to dramatically improve the performance and lifetime of the product. Miche cogs aren't as ubiquitous as Shimano, which is why I didn't base the thread on them.

Gotcha.

Because some of us are so fat/strong that we can't get our cogs off after riding for a few months. I broke my chainwhip (Park, not some cheapie) and the owner of my LBS bent the handle of his trying to get a cog off one of my wheels. :eek: I tried rotafixa, too, but it felt like spokes would start breaking before the cog came loose (not that they would, just that that's what it felt like), so I gave up. And, before you say anything, I greased the **** out of the threads before I installed it. :(

Basically when that kind of stuff happens the threads have mated in a way that you might actually strip it just from removing it. Best to choose a good cog and number of teeth from the beginning and never take it off.

Something I learned only recently...wish I could have started fixed knowing this. I had a 14t stamped cog that partially stripped my hub. I now run a Surly 15t, but I really should have started with a good 17t and a 52t ring.

I'm shopping for a good 40-42t 1/8" 130bcd ring right now because the gearing is too high for windy winter.

...which is a really smart thing, because it means that you can use their special, easy-to-use system on every other hub that ever existed anywhere*.

even when shimano made Dura-Ace 10 pitch, they made two sets of cogs - ones that screw onto DA 10P hubs, and ones that screw onto normal hubs. Why? because it's extremely risky to deviate from market standards and make a product that's not compatible with the rest of the gear that exists. there's talk of "solutions without problems," and unlike some other developments, this is one of them.

*hyperbole.

1) The Miche system still relies on a threaded interface. You can more easily change cog size, but the threat of stripping the hub is still there, especially if you decide to replace the carrier with a normal cog in the future.

2) Shimano already has a market standard with both their splined interface and the accompanying BMX cogs. It's a logical progression using off the shelf parts.

3) Solution without a problem? I think more people will disagree than agree with you there. As fixed gear road cycling and commuting becomes more and more popular, there are going to be more and more novices with stripped hubs and a reason to buy something better.

Again, to reiterate my (and mattio's) point - Miche already has a market standard with their splined track cogs. It's a logical progression using off the shelf parts.

Miche and Shimano are basically in the same boat. However Miche already makes an adapter that will allow you to use splined cogs on any hub.

EDIT: If you want to say Shimano is a more popular company then yes, I agree with you. But my point is that the Miche system already exists, is compatible with any hub, and could do exactly what you propose assuming hub manufacturers choose to do so.

You got that upside down: Campagnolo cassettes ARE proprietari!

No, both are proprietary.

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.

That may be, but the Shimano splines are a de-facto standard. I can buy Shimano-splined cassettes from many different sellers/makers, from super-expensive ones, to super-cheap ones. For me the indicator of standardness is if I can find a supplier that makes a very cheap version of product X. And for Shimano splined cassettes and BMX sprockets (the ones I use on my SS) I can find very cheap ones.

I found out last night that Shimano's freehub bodies are actually steel, but in 2004 they started producing aluminum bodies with a new higher profile spline. The new cassettes are backwards compatable. Supposedly this is going to be their new standard? *shrug*

This sucks.

Why should they? What exactly is this new interface supposed to solve? The problems of hipsters stripping their cogs/lockrings because they are using cheap **** or because of improper installation? These problems are because of user idiocy not because the interface is flawed, doesn't work or is inferior to the "level" way.

Levels hubs serve a niche group inside an already niche group of cyclists.

Miche has already tried this stunt with the cog/carrier. That turned out well.

Sure, but has shimano ever released specs? Or did the third parties just measure shimano stuff to get the dimensions? Freewheels don't need a precise fit so getting the dimensions and tolerances spot on wasn't important.

If you are going to use a standard to define parts that need a precise fit then the standard needs to be able to deliver. In this case I doubt it does. Either because the standard doesn't demand a precise enough fit in the first place or because only shimano actually makes stuff to the standard.
You might as well just buy a level because you would end up in the same position. Only being able to buy cogs from the hub manufacturer because that is the only way to get a precise fit.

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.

The splines on the hub would have to be steel to prevent play from developing, so either the hub is steel or you need another interface.

Fail.

The ISO disc rotor pattern is the obvious solution for this, we're just waiting for someone to make a production hub and cogs that yields a standard chainline and a symmetrical wheelbuild.

Why couldn't the hub be made of steel? You realize, don't you, that this hub would not be a freehub anyway, but it would have to be a separate, new product. And in that case, it could be made of steel, and fixed.