After some years using a recumbent trike, I'm going to have to change to a recumbent bike and I notice the model I'm going for (a Nazca Fuego) offers the option of a Rohloff 14-speed hub. They seem to be just amazing, offering 14 gears evenly spaced over a 526% range, but are *hideously* expensive. Does anyone think it's really worth considering for city commuting in all winters, including over-winter, and light touring? The alternative is a perfectly standard derailleur system.
Does anyone have any experience, or strong opinions?
Thanks for any replies.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Questions/Support/Help
Hub gears vs derailleurs
(37 posts)- Started 12 years ago by alanr
- Latest reply from crowriver
- This topic is
not resolved
-
Posted 12 years ago #
-
No experience or strong opinions but I'd be asking what kind of gear range I really needed for city commuting and light touring and how many derailleurs I could replace for the cost of a Rohloff.
Posted 12 years ago # -
My experience of Rohloffs is limited to a couple of goes on Roibeard's Hase Pino and a couple of commutes on LaidBack's LELing Circe Morpheus. About ten miles of gentle riding.
I've also owned an oldschool 3-speed Sturmey-Archer iron horse, and briefly ridden 8-speed Sturmey-Archer, SRAM-7 and Alfine-8 devices.
Of the above, the Rohloffs felt most robust, but the Alfine-8 shifted slickest and felt least lossy. The Rohloff, like the 3-speed, is an oilbath rather than greased(as are all other hubs except Shimano's Alfine-11) and that seems to give a hub a certain blood-of-virgins property. Bathe them and they rejuvenate.
I can happily lift my bikes up and change gear at traffic lights since I've got SPDs and they're uprights, but for bikes without that option, hubs get very sexy.
Posted 12 years ago # -
I don't have any direct experience with gear hubs, but from the ones I've seen around town they're not worth bothering with unless you also have a full chaincase. They usual selling point about them being 'impervious to weather' is fine but if the chain is exposed it's going to be every bit as much hassle to keep clean as a derailleur so you may as well skip the expense and go for the standard system. This assumes you care about the maintenance advantage of the gear hub, if you're prepared to clean the chain regularly but also want the shifting benefits of a hub I don't see any reason not to go for it.
So, no great experience, but here are my strong opinions:
The other point that gets touted about gear hubs is reliability. It's quite an interesting comparison to derailleurs actually. Hubs run basically perfect or not all at...if that Rohloff fails you'll be hard pressed to find anywhere that will even think about fixing it. Meanwhile the derailleur is, for all it's alleged problems, still darn hard to truly destroy.
I guess if you can stomach the cost of the hub gear it's likely to be a decent choice for your use. But ask yourself what else that money could do for you.
Posted 12 years ago # -
I think you know the general answers to your basic questions.
I imagine if a Rohloff was half the price you'd buy one.
So it's probably a question of how many miles you do a year and how many miles/transmissions changes would be required to 'pay for' a Rolhoff.
Also if your normal route(s) are relatively flat 14 gears (or more accurately the Rohloff range) may be unnecessary.
Plenty reviews on the web. This one seems quite 'in depth' -
"
For epic rides and touring I give it two thumbs up and I favor it over any other transmission currently out there. For XC-racing, jumping and such I know it does work, it just wouldn´t be my first choice."
http://twentynineinches.com/2010/04/08/rohloff-speedhub-german-engineering-or-hype-final-review/
Posted 12 years ago # -
For my commuting steed I chose derailleur over Alfine after looking up on youtube how to take the wheel out. There was no way was going to risk that sort of fiddle to change the tube in the event of a puncture on a cold wet winter's night. I don't know if Rohloff is any easier.
Posted 12 years ago # -
Actually it really isn't hard to repair punctures with an alfine hub but you do need to carry a big spanner. My issue with them is more that the rear wheel is soooo heavy and it definitely feels less lively. The gear jumps are less than convenient as well at cruising speed. It is cheaper to maintain, but this is more because there is only one sprocket to pay rather than longevity.
Posted 12 years ago # -
Thanks, all of you, for your thoughts so far.
My only commuting experience so far has been using my Ice recumbent trike which is reasonably heavy, maybe 25 kg loaded, so on-road weight about 110 kg, and I start from Baberton, up Wester Hailes Road to Gillespie Crossroad then down Lanark Road to the West End. So in the morning I steam down the hill in my top gear (about 110") and in the evening I climb up Lanark Road again in 2nd or 3rd gear (about 25").
As several of you say, the killer is the cost of a Rohloff drive, about £850, and it doesn't have the same range as the derailleur I currently use. However, in three years, the derailleurs have been cleaned about ten or twelve times, and I have had four re-bends of the hangar plate (the rear mech runs not more than three inches from the ground).
Of course, in a recumbent bike the rear mech will be much higher off the ground, as much as six inches up. My main driver is reduction of damage and maintenance, but the cost is off-putting.
Thanks for all your thoughts.Posted 12 years ago # -
You could look at cheaper alternatives to Rohloff, such as Shimano Alfine 11, SRAM i-9, etc. Even the Alfine 8 or the new SRAM G8. All sealed hubs, available for a fraction of the cost of a Rohloff.
Hub gears are certainly more reliable, mainly because they're not prone to being bashed like a derailleur, and they don't get clogged with gunk and dirt to the same extent, even if the chain is exposed. Generally they use the stronger 1/8 chains too, so less chance of your chain snapping on a climb.
Derailleur set ups can be cheaper at the lower end, but once you've moved up the groupset hierarchy a bit hub gears look pretty competitive pricewise: unless that is you are just runing a single chainring with a derailleur set up, which very few do as it limits gear range.
Posted 12 years ago # -
I'm slowly rebuilding my Fuego from its winter strip down, and I intend to stick an Alfine 11 in. The real benefit on for a recumbent seems to be chain management - if there's no shifting sideways or up and down I can position the idlers exactly and run the return chain run dropped down without chewing into the fork on the granny ring.
Time will tell if this achieves much benefit, but at least the Alfine isn't quite as cripplingly expensive!
Posted 12 years ago # -
The main benefit of hub gears for me is that I can change gear while stationary: I'm never going to put derailleurs on a commuting bike again for that reason alone.
I have an Alfine 8-speed: it's not that much of a faff to take the wheel off, but then I've got Marathon Plus on the bike and thus don't get punctures, so I only take the wheels off twice a year: once to put the winter tyres on and once to take them off.
I'd like a belt drive, but that's probably not so relevant for a recumbent...
Posted 12 years ago # -
I can confirm that the Rohloff wheel is easy to remove and replace, but the Pino has the "clickbox" which apparently helps with that.
As for fixing the Rohloff, I think you're limited mostly to shipping it back to Rohloff, but failures appear very rare, and Rohloff's service reportedly good. I thought the whole wheel would need to be sent back, but the manual suggests that the gearbox can be removed from the hub for return.
You're welcome to give the Rohloff a ride on the Pino, of course, but that won't necessarily be comparable - it is great on a tandem allowing for stationary changes at lights and so on. I'd see similar benefits for load bikes.
I'd also see that a hub gear would be great on a trike, avoiding the low hanging mech issue with small drive wheels - I'd spec one on my "dream Kettwiesel". But that's a money no object matter, and the Rohloff's biggest drawback is indeed the cost!
I've not had the issue with ghost shifting mentioned in the review, but I have found that the 7/8 change does go via 15 (or 13) - it effectively is 2x8, and the two changes (equivalent to down/up a chain ring and from one end to the other of the cassette) happen one at a time, and if you don't ease off you can be stuck in high.
Oh, and I actually love the sound of the precision engineering at the back.
As Laidback has found, an annual oil change keeps things sweet (what Uberuce refers to above) - we've found the same.
I'm intrigued about "going to have to change to a bike" bit! Do tell...
Robert
Posted 11 years ago # -
You're right Darkerside, it does look like the chain management is much easier on the Fuego with a hub gear - I was on a tour with laidback and one of his clients who has one with a Rohloff, hence all this thought. However, with my commuting route, and possible touring needs, I'm not sure I'd be willing to stick with just 11 gears (or even 8) - of course, as long as you have the *right* 8 or 11 gears, maybe it doesn't matter. The standard setup on my trike, for example, has about 24 possible gear ratios, but there are a good number of duplications. A belt drive might indeed be interesting, and as the technologies are steadily improving, we may see even more choice in the future.
Posted 11 years ago # -
According to Shimano, Alfine 11 gear ratios are as follows:
Gear Ratio Total Difference 409%
Gear Ratio 1 0.527
Gear Ratio 2 0.681
Gear Ratio 3 0.770
Gear Ratio 4 0.878
Gear Ratio 5 0.995
Gear Ratio 6 1.134
Gear Ratio 7 1.292
Gear Ratio 8 1.462
Gear Ratio 9 1.667
Gear Ratio 10 1.888
Gear Ratio 11 2.153Looks pretty useful!
The Alfine 8 a bit of a narrower range:
Gear Ratio Total Difference 307%
Gear Ratio 1 0.527
Gear Ratio 2 0.644
Gear Ratio 3 0.748
Gear Ratio 4 0.851
Gear Ratio 5 1
Gear Ratio 6 1.223
Gear Ratio 7 1.419
Gear Ratio 8 1.615http://www.shimano.com/publish/content/global_cycle/en/us/index/products/0/alfine.html
Alternatively there are the Sturmey Archer 8 speed hubs, with a bit more range, but perhaps better suited to small wheeled bicycles?
• Overall Range - 325%
• Gear 1 - 100% (Direct Drive)
• Gear 2 - 130% (Gear 1 + 30%)
• Gear 3 - 148% (Gear 2 + 14%)
• Gear 4 - 169% (Gear 3 + 14%)
• Gear 5 - 192% (Gear 4 + 14%)
• Gear 6 - 220% (Gear 5 + 14%)
• Gear 7 - 250% (Gear 6 + 14%)
• Gear 8 - 325% (Gear 7 + 30%)http://www.sturmey-archer.com/products/hubs/cid/5
Can't find much information on the SRAM G8, which is very new. Wait and see there I suppose...
Posted 11 years ago # -
I did some spreadsheeting with the various gear options - I can effectively get the Alfine to match my current triple set up by dropping a few gear inches off the top. Frankly I never use these anyway, so it's no great loss. I'm not an overly sluggish rider, so unless you're planning on really going for it on a regular basis I reckon the Alfine would be adequate.
The Rohloff is certainly better, but I can't convince myself at the moment that it's £500+ better...
Posted 11 years ago # -
In fact, here's the spreadsheet...
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2AxxaMDE0y_RzJuTE9TenM5Nms/edit?usp=drive_web
Posted 11 years ago # -
Hi Darkerside, I've just requested access to your spreadsheet - my email on the request is alanr766@gmail.com. Thanks for being willing to share it.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Hi Alan - done.
For everyone else, I've managed to find the setting where you can access the document without logging in or requesting access, so that link above should take you straight through.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Hi, you're right, sorry. I got straight through now, and it was really interesting. The Aline has a slightly more compact range than the Rohloff; I'm not sure that I really need the very lowest gears on the Rohloff and if I got somewhere over 100" as the top gear that might do. Please set the permissions back to what everyone else has got on your spreadsheet.
Thanks for sharing.Posted 11 years ago # -
Hi Roibeard, yes .. "going to have to change the bike" .. my daughter, 6, wants to go out on the canal / cycle path / WoL with her bike and my trike is much too wide for the canal, and too low-hanging at the rear mechanism for the WoL, so I'd like to (ideally) buy a recumbent bike as well, but I'm not sure I've got the go-ahead for that, so I'm looking into a trade-in. Which is a great pity, as the trike is an excellent road-only machine. The Fuego is a good deal higher off the ground (say six inches as compared to two). Laidback has now advertised it on it "for sale" section so watch this space ..
Posted 11 years ago # -
@alanr, does your trike have a sort of windshield type thing? I'm wondering if you're the person I've seen on the Dalry and Lanark Roads on occasion...
(P.S. I assume getting a cheap upright bike for cycling with your daughter is not an option...?)
Posted 11 years ago # -
No worries Alan - you have still got the same permissions as everyone else, but given I originally shared it from the tablet I set it up wrongly. My fault!
I was surprised how little there was in it between the two. Although the spacing is certainly better on the Rohloff. Someone else described the Alfine 11 as basically being a 9 speed with an additional bail out and overdrive gear, which fits well in my head.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Hi fimm, yes it does, and I am he .. I do need a high top gear because typically I descend the hill from Gillespie Crossroads at 35 - 40 mph. Then a lowish bottom is useful for coming back up in the evening. I do have an upright bike and I have used it for cycling with her, but I greatly prefer riding a recumbent, it's a *lot* faster and a *lot* more comfortable.
Thank you, Darkerside, I will definitely be considering the Alfine 11 as it is offered as an option on the Nazca Fuego.
Posted 11 years ago # -
@alanr I didn't find the Fuego to be ideal for unsealed surfaces, but that was a limited attempt with an unskilled pilot... I expect to stick to uprights for off road stuff as I find it easier to make fine adjustments to balance using body weight movements.
Might be worth trying the Fuego on the conditions you envisage just to be certain - no doubt there'll be a recumbent mountain biker along in a moment to say that it's perfectly fine on the rough stuff!
As for not needing the lowest gears on the Rohloff, you can just move the entire range (to a certain extent) by changing the sprocket or chain ring. Of course, you may have meant that you didn't need the entire range, but I'm assuming that isn't the case since earlier you compared to your existing wider range.
I suspect the recent Rohloff Pinos Laidback has sold have had a higher gearing than mine, by virtue of having a larger chainring - ours may have been modified/specified by the original owners to be a bit more hill friendly! By our cadence top pedaled speed is still ~30mph.
Robert
Posted 11 years ago # -
About as rough as I'd want to get:
http://www.darkerside.org/2012/08/versatile/
Probably one of the better recumbents for that kind of terrain, but as Robert says, the upright allows much easier bodily positioning.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I actually find my battered old Streetmachine extremely good off road - having USS means I can sit up and control the bike in wobbly conditions with body English - I've taken it across the Pentlands, over the Cairngorms, from Rannoch to Corrour and many other places.
One guy I met on a double boinger going round Loch Ossian did say that I was taking the mick, but it works, and no matter how wet and muddy it gets, your feet stay dry - ahead of the spray.
It does have a derailleur though - I couldn't (and still can't) afford the Rohloff, no matter how much I plead(ed) with the bank manager
Posted 11 years ago # -
Thank you for sharing the link, Darkerside - what beautiful photographs! I don't think my normal riding includes that level of terrain, but if I have to, my upright bike is an Orange P7 which eats that kind of thing for breakfast. However, the rider isn't as good as the bike at such rough stuff, and the compensation of a Fuego may well be that you have less far to fall (off).
And overall, no matter how much I want one, I just can't afford a Rohloff, so it's an Alfine or a derailleur ..Posted 11 years ago # -
My thoughts on hub gears, having had one for a while:
1: maintenance, yes this is lower, however maintenance free does not mean wear free, and replacing a hub gear is much more hassle than replacing a cassette.
2: Theft. Rolhoffs are understandably attractive to thieves, you could prolly never take you bike to Berlin as they would simply cut the spokes to get the drive.
I think a r'hoff would be ideal on a commuting machine that goes from office to garage or a belt drive endurance monster but for casual/heavy touring and general use I dont think its really worth it, certainly the torques Ive been putting through the dual drive have taken their toll fairly quickly, its been rebuilt twice in about 6000km. Mind you the dual drive is not sealed so the wear has been more, I still think you will have to replace your 800quid drive after a while, a long while maybe. The alfine appeals but again Id use it for a light town bike with thick tyres and not anything serious.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I've been considering eventually converting my hybrid/town bike to hub gears from its current 24 speed derailleur set-up. I'll wait until the drive train/rear hub and rims are no longer fit for purpose, which will probably be in the next year or so as it's had a lot of winter use.
Alongside the Alfine 8 I've been looking at Sturmey Archer's 8 speed offering, the XRF-8(W). As well as a jockey wheel (like Sturmy's Singleator) it needs quite a small chainring up front plus a 25 tooth cog on the back with 700c wheels! Still the low gear was working out on the high side according to Sheldon's calculator.
So my attention turned to a new offering from SA: the 3 speed hub with a cassette freehub on the drive side. This seems similar to the SRAM Dual Drive hub which is specced on the well regarded Bike Friday New World Tourist folding bikes, and the Dahon Speed TR. Essentially it allows you to get rid of your front triple chainset and derailleur (allowing a partial chaincase/guard to be fitted), re-use your existing derailleur and simply swap cassettes when worn. Fewer chainline issues due to a single chainring up front. Interestingly the standard MTB style gear change controls will work with it, so no need for additional twist grips nor levers. I also figured out it gives a greater range of gears at high and low end than my current triple set up.
This might be an option to consider for recumbenteering too: depending on the derailleur and cassette, you could have 21, 24, 27, or 30 gears! All without the faff of a front triple and deraileur. On the flip side there's still the rear derailleur/cassette to contend with, and associated vulnerabilities/maintenance issues.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Ruggtomcat is right about the SRAM DualDrive and any of the non-sealed hub gears.
The Alfine 11 though is a sealed unit and uses similar oil to a Rohloff. A yearly oil change can be done in part of an evening. The first change is the one that will flush out any tiny bits of debris from the internal gears.
Range wise the Alfine 11 is around 409% as opposed to the Rohloff's 526%
In derailleur terms that could be like having an 18 speed set up with two rings at the front and the usual overlap of ratios you get with derailleur. So if you can live without the lowest gears or the highest then it's fine.
An 11-32 block = 290% or 11-34 = 300%On the Fuego a hub gear does give a good chain line and would improve chain longevity. You could of course spec a front derailleur and have it as a 22 speed (not an official spec but of course front mechs do keep very clean on recumbent bikes as they are out of the wheel spray zone. Circe did a 16 speed Helios Omnis Plus tandem with a rear Alfine 8 and two rings up front. (replaced this year by the SRAM Dual Drive which is an easier sell - being 27 speed with an immense range of over 600%)
Posted 11 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
