Rohloff for road?

Lou Holtman said:

Quoted message said:

I am having a custom road frame built this winter and am toying with
the idea of shrugging off the tyranny of the derailleur in favor of a
speedhub. I haven't ridden a bike with a ten speed cassette, but I
wonder if this isn't pushing the limits of what is possible with a
derailleur system, without much additional benefit. I have a speedhub
on a 29er already, and like it a great deal, but I haven't heard of
anyone using one on a pure road bike. Anyone tried this?

The gaps between the gears are bigger and that is more important on the
road that off road.

I understand a certain Jobst Brandt rides regularly in the mountains with a
6-speed freewheel and a double crank, which will have quite large percentage
changes between each ratio (and fewer actual ratios overall than the Rolex,
er Rohloff hub).

--
Sock Puppet

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Lou Holtman said:

Sock Puppet said:

Lou Holtman said:

[email hidden] wrote:

>I am having a custom road frame built this winter and am toying with
>the idea of shrugging off the tyranny of the derailleur in favor of a
>speedhub. I haven't ridden a bike with a ten speed cassette, but I
>wonder if this isn't pushing the limits of what is possible with a
>derailleur system, without much additional benefit. I have a speedhub
>on a 29er already, and like it a great deal, but I haven't heard of
>anyone using one on a pure road bike. Anyone tried this?
>

The gaps between the gears are bigger and that is more important on the
road that off road.

I understand a certain Jobst Brandt rides regularly in the mountains with a
6-speed freewheel and a double crank, which will have quite large percentage
changes between each ratio (and fewer actual ratios overall than the Rolex,
er Rohloff hub).

Pro riders climb all the mountains in the Tour de France with 39/23
max.... Doesn't mean anything to me either.

Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu

Dear Lou,

Some people believe that there is a difference between themselves and
elite professional Tour de France riders (and notorious mashers).

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

Lou Holtman said:

Sock Puppet said:

On 4-Sep-2005, Lou Holtman <[email hidden]> wrote:

>[email hidden] wrote:
>
>
>>I am having a custom road frame built this winter and am toying with
>>the idea of shrugging off the tyranny of the derailleur in favor of a
>>speedhub. I haven't ridden a bike with a ten speed cassette, but I
>>wonder if this isn't pushing the limits of what is possible with a
>>derailleur system, without much additional benefit. I have a speedhub
>>on a 29er already, and like it a great deal, but I haven't heard of
>>anyone using one on a pure road bike. Anyone tried this?
>>
>
>The gaps between the gears are bigger and that is more important on the
>road that off road.

I understand a certain Jobst Brandt rides regularly in the mountains with a
6-speed freewheel and a double crank, which will have quite large percentage
changes between each ratio (and fewer actual ratios overall than the Rolex,
er Rohloff hub).

Pro riders climb all the mountains in the Tour de France with 39/23
max.... Doesn't mean anything to me either.

Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu

Dear Lou,

Some people believe that there is a difference between themselves and
elite professional Tour de France riders (and notorious mashers).

I'm one of them Carl. That's why I have a triple crankset so I can keep
a close range cassette.

Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu

Tom Ace said:

Mounting a twist grip can be the biggest challenge in
setting up a road bike with a Speedhub. I didn't know about
the Norwid handlebar option when I made the shifter shown at
http://www.minortriad.com/twist.html

All the indexing is in the hub, right? Do the two cables simply move the
same distance in opposite directions (ie, one's always pulling)?

Jasper

On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 23:18:50 -0400, "(PeteCresswell)" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Per Jasper Janssen:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

All the indexing is in the hub, right? Do the two cables simply move the
same distance in opposite directions (ie, one's always pulling)?

Yes, and the requirement for precision is essentially zero. Somebody could do
it with string if they had to.

That *is* neat. I wonder if Rohloff could come out with 7 or 8 variant
that's about as bombproof as a Nexus rather than as bombproof as a Rohloff
and could compare to the Nexus in price as well. Hub gear indexing
maintenance sucks, especially of course when it's a SA 3 that leaves you
suddenly with less teeth if the 90%-of-the-time-used 2d gear happens to go
off at the wrong time.

Jasper

I have one on a bike that I use for training/touring/audax, and another on a
touring tandem. Both drop handlebars.

http://www.users.on.net/~njpayne/bikestuff/rohloff/

Nick

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I am having a custom road frame built this winter and am toying with
the idea of shrugging off the tyranny of the derailleur in favor of a
speedhub. I haven't ridden a bike with a ten speed cassette, but I
wonder if this isn't pushing the limits of what is possible with a
derailleur system, without much additional benefit. I have a speedhub
on a 29er already, and like it a great deal, but I haven't heard of
anyone using one on a pure road bike. Anyone tried this?

Carl Fogel said:

Some people believe that there is a difference between themselves
and elite professional Tour de France riders (and notorious
mashers).

Ah yes, but the difference is not the gears they ride but how fast,
which is the true difference between average people and top racers.
The racers have a lung volume (carburetor) of more than 10 liters and
a pump to deliver this to the muscles.

Unfortunately many folks believe the higher cadence these racers ride
are the same for everyman who rides a gear far smaller than the fast
guys. RPM alone don't do it. As we used to say when the spin coaches
first appeared on the scene, "Spinning is important, but mainly in big
gears."

Jobst Brandt

Quoted message said:

Carl Fogel said:

Some people believe that there is a difference between themselves
and elite professional Tour de France riders (and notorious
mashers).

Ah yes, but the difference is not the gears they ride but how fast,
which is the true difference between average people and top racers.
The racers have a lung volume (carburetor) of more than 10 liters and

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Quoted message said:

a pump to deliver this to the muscles.

[snip]

Quoted message said:

Jobst Brandt

Dear Jobst,

More than 10 liters? Maybe on a tandem, but good luck trying
to hide more than five 2-liter Coca-Cola bottles in a
remotely normal person's lung cavity.

A normal adult has a total lung capacity of only about 4 to
6 liters. If anything, the chests of bicycle racers tend to
be on the small side, since they tend to be shorter, smaller
men.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_volume

Carl Fogel

Per Jasper Janssen:

Quoted message said:

All the indexing is in the hub, right? Do the two cables simply move the
same distance in opposite directions (ie, one's always pulling)?

Yes, and the requirement for precision is essentially zero. Somebody could do
it with string if they had to.
--
PeteCresswell

In article <[email hidden]>,

Lou Holtman said:

[email hidden] wrote:

[...]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Some people believe that there is a difference between themselves and
elite professional Tour de France riders (and notorious mashers).

I'm one of them Carl. That's why I have a triple crankset so I can keep
a close range cassette.

So do I. 9 speed: 13-19,21,23.

--
Michael Press

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

I am having a custom road frame built this winter and am toying with
the idea of shrugging off the tyranny of the derailleur in favor of a
speedhub. I haven't ridden a bike with a ten speed cassette, but I
wonder if this isn't pushing the limits of what is possible with a
derailleur system, without much additional benefit. I have a speedhub
on a 29er already, and like it a great deal, but I haven't heard of
anyone using one on a pure road bike. Anyone tried this?

For a road bicycle I highly recommend a system with close
gears. My 9 speed 13-19,21,23 cassette has much smaller
jumps than the speedhub, and it matters to me. Think hard
on this so that you make the correct decision.

The speedhub is an excellent system. It is 1000-1300g
heavier than a derailleur system, if that matters.

If you can ride everywhere you want in a 39/23, then run a
double chainwheel. Otherwise get a triple chain wheel.

I am not a strong rider, so do not think that my advice
does not apply on that account.

--
Michael Press

Carl Fogel said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Some people believe that there is a difference between themselves
and elite professional Tour de France riders (and notorious

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Ah yes, but the difference is not the gears they ride but how fast,
which is the true difference between average people and top racers.
The racers have a lung volume (carburetor) of more than 10 liters

Quoted message said:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Quoted message said:

and a pump to deliver this to the muscles.

Quoted message said:

More than 10 liters? Maybe on a tandem, but good luck trying
to hide more than five 2-liter Coca-Cola bottles in a
remotely normal person's lung cavity.

Quoted message said:

A normal adult has a total lung capacity of only about 4 to
6 liters. If anything, the chests of bicycle racers tend to
be on the small side, since they tend to be shorter, smaller
men.

So? I'm not talking about normal adults. In my biology class this
volume was measured of our students and the maximum among those in my
class was 9.5 liters. In other groups had there were ones with over
10 liters. In Europe I met Fredy R?egg, a Tour de Suisse winner
(1960) and world hour record holder before Roger Riviere who had 11
liters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_volume

If you were to test athletes at prime bicycle racing age for lung
capacity you could pretty well decide how had a chance for greatness
on lung capacity to body weight ratio.

Jobst Brandt

Quoted message said:

Carl Fogel said:

Quoted message said:

> Some people believe that there is a difference between themselves
> and elite professional Tour de France riders (and notorious
>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Ah yes, but the difference is not the gears they ride but how fast,
which is the true difference between average people and top racers.
The racers have a lung volume (carburetor) of more than 10 liters

Quoted message said:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Quoted message said:

and a pump to deliver this to the muscles.

Quoted message said:

More than 10 liters? Maybe on a tandem, but good luck trying
to hide more than five 2-liter Coca-Cola bottles in a
remotely normal person's lung cavity.

Quoted message said:

A normal adult has a total lung capacity of only about 4 to
6 liters. If anything, the chests of bicycle racers tend to
be on the small side, since they tend to be shorter, smaller
men.

So? I'm not talking about normal adults. In my biology class this
volume was measured of our students and the maximum among those in my
class was 9.5 liters. In other groups had there were ones with over
10 liters. In Europe I met Fredy R?egg, a Tour de Suisse winner
(1960) and world hour record holder before Roger Riviere who had 11
liters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_volume

If you were to test athletes at prime bicycle racing age for lung

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Quoted message said:

capacity you could pretty well decide how had a chance for greatness
on lung capacity to body weight ratio.

Jobst Brandt

Dear Jobst,

Ignoring the other nonsense, lung capacity is remarkable in
that it varies little between 18 and 50.

Carl Fogel

Carl Fogel said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> Some people believe that there is a difference between
>> themselves and elite professional Tour de France riders (and
>> notorious

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Ah yes, but the difference is not the gears they ride but how
> fast, which is the true difference between average people and top
> racers. The racers have a lung volume (carburetor) of more than
> 10 liters and a pump to deliver this to the muscles.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

More than 10 liters? Maybe on a tandem, but good luck trying to
hide more than five 2-liter Coca-Cola bottles in a remotely normal
person's lung cavity.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

A normal adult has a total lung capacity of only about 4 to 6
liters. If anything, the chests of bicycle racers tend to be on
the small side, since they tend to be shorter, smaller men.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So? I'm not talking about normal adults. In my biology class this
volume was measured of our students and the maximum among those in
my class was 9.5 liters. In other groups had there were ones with
over 10 liters. In Europe I met Fredy R?egg, a Tour de Suisse
winner (1960) and world hour record holder before Roger Riviere who
had 11 liters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_volume

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If you were to test athletes at prime bicycle racing age for lung

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Quoted message said:

capacity you could pretty well decide who had a chance for
greatness on lung capacity to body weight ratio.

Quoted message said:

Ignoring the other nonsense, lung capacity is remarkable in
that it varies little between 18 and 50.

I'm not aware of that but the effectiveness of that volume definitely
degreases with age. I for one can assure you that I breathe much
harder at a lower bicycling speed than when I was in my 20's.

Jobst Brandt

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Carl Fogel said:

>> Some people believe that there is a difference between themselves
>> and elite professional Tour de France r iders (and notorious
>>

Quoted message said:

> Ah yes, but the difference is not the gears they ride but how fast,
> which is the true difference between average people and top racers.
> The racers have a lung volume (carburetor) of more than 10 liters

Quoted message said:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> and a pump to deliver this to the muscles.

Quoted message said:

More than 10 liters? Maybe on a tandem, but good luck trying
to hide more than five 2-liter Coca-Cola bottles in a
remotely normal person's lung cavity.

Quoted message said:

A normal adult has a total lung capacity of only about 4 to
6 liters. If anything, the chests of bicycle racers tend to
be on the small side, since they tend to be shorter, smaller
men.

So? I'm not tal king about normal adults. In my biology class this
volume was measured of our students and the maximum among those in my
class was 9.5 liters. In other groups had there were ones with over
10 liters. In Europe I met Fredy R?egg, a Tour de Suis se winner
(1960) and world hour record holder before Roger Riviere who had 11
liters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_volume

If you were to test athletes at prime bicycle racing age for lung

^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Quoted message said:

capacity you could pretty well decide how had a chance for greatness
on lung capacity to body weight ratio.

Jobst Brandt

Dear Jobst,

Ignoring the other nonsense, lung capacity is remarkable in
that it varies l ittle between 18 and 50.

Ignoring the other nonsense of yours, lung capacity varies with both
training and time spent at altitude,. Why, I believe they even mention
that in the nice little article referenced above which refuted your
other nonsense about bicycle racers having smaller than normal lung
capacities.f

Quoted message said:

If you were to test athletes at prime bicycle racing age for lung
capacity you could pretty well decide how had a chance for greatness
on lung capacity to body weight ratio.

If this were the case, it would be hard to understand the benefits of
EPO.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erythropoietin>

George King said:

Quoted message said:

If you were to test athletes at prime bicycle racing age for lung
capacity you could pretty well decide how had a chance for greatness
on lung capacity to body weight ratio.

Quoted message said:

If this were the case, it would be hard to understand the benefits of
EPO.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erythropoietin

You need the big carburetor regardless of what you do to the rest of
the machinery. It's all got to go through that gas exchange device.

Jobst Brandt

Quoted message said:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erythropoietin

You need the big carburetor regardless of what you do to the rest of
the machinery. It's all got to go through that gas exchange device.

I don't think this is a "the smallest hole determines the flow" situation,
more of a case of efficiency numbers all multiplied together into one big
result. ie, a 5 liter lung capacity with high red bloodcell count will be
better than a 5 liter with low count, and same for 10 liter lung capacity
persons.

Jasper

Quoted message said:

Carl Fogel said:

Quoted message said:

>>> Some people believe that there is a difference between
>>> themselves and elite professional Tour de France riders (and
>>> notorious

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> Ah yes, but the difference is not the gears they ride but how
>> fast, which is the true difference between average people and top
>> racers. The racers have a lung volume (carburetor) of more than
>> 10 liters and a pump to deliver this to the muscles.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> More than 10 liters? Maybe on a tandem, but good luck trying to
> hide more than five 2-liter Coca-Cola bottles in a remotely normal
> person's lung cavity.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> A normal adult has a total lung capacity of only about 4 to 6
> liters. If anything, the chests of bicycle racers tend to be on
> the small side, since they tend to be shorter, smaller men.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So? I'm not talking about normal adults. In my biology class this
volume was measured of our students and the maximum among those in
my class was 9.5 liters. In other groups had there were ones with
over 10 liters. In Europe I met Fredy R?egg, a Tour de Suisse
winner (1960) and world hour record holder before Roger Riviere who
had 11 liters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_volume

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If you were to test athletes at prime bicycle racing age for lung

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Quoted message said:

capacity you could pretty well decide who had a chance for
greatness on lung capacity to body weight ratio.

Quoted message said:

Ignoring the other nonsense, lung capacity is remarkable in
that it varies little between 18 and 50.

I'm not aware of that but the effectiveness of that volume definitely
degreases with age. I for one can assure you that I breathe much
harder at a lower bicycling speed than when I was in my 20's.

Jobst Brandt

Dear Jobst,

Yes, it's the effectiveness of the lungs, not their raw
size, that matters.

But the subject was total lung capacity.

At your age, for example, there may well be some reduction
of total lung capacity from what it was when you were 18-50,
due to either reduced mechanical function (rib cage
flexibility no longer allows as much expansion or
compression) or to closing off of small airways (sections of
lung are no longer aerated).

(Disease, of course, is another matter.)

If you want to see how total lung capacity is actually
measured, here's a quick explanation of the two methods:

http://oac.med.jhmi.edu/res_phys/Encyclopedia/BodyPleth/BodyPleth.HTML

The body plethysmography method measures raw expansion of
the chest by placing the patient's body in a sealed box
(with an outside breathing tube) and treating it as an
expanding piston. The drawback is that this method includes
sealed-off sections of lung that no longer function.

To use a very crude example, if an injury or growth blocks
the airway to one of the five lobes of a typical lung, the
chest expansion method would show 5 units of volume, but the
actual total lung capacity would be only 4 units.

The other method for measuring total lung capacity is gas
dilution:

http://oac.med.jhmi.edu/res_phys/Encyclopedia/GasDilution/GasDilution.HTML

In this method, the patient breathes from a source with a
known volume breathable air containing some known
concentration of a gas like helium.

In a few minutes, the helium in this closed system (which
contains enough air that the patient doesn't turn blue) is
presumably evenly distributed. The concentration of the gas
is measured again, is naturally less because the volume of
the system has expanded by the volume of the patient's lungs
and airway, and thus some gas-law and arithmetic will
predict the volume increase of the system, which is the
total aerated lung volume.

(The dead space of the patient's snout, mouth, and windpipe
must be taken into consideration. The trunk of an elephant
can confuse matters, while the trachea of a dainty 100-lb
pronghorn is almost large enough to accept a baseball bat.)

Neither method of measurement was commonly used in high
school biology classes in the 1950's.

Anyway, the larger the patient, the larger the total lung
capacity. But by itself, total lung capacity doesn't mean
much--children are much smaller than adults, have much
smaller total lung capacity, and are quite active. The ratio
of total lung capacity to body weight would be a better
measurement, but even that isn't terribly useful. It's the
efficiency of the lung that matters, not its raw size--the
best marathon runners, for example, often have smaller than
average chests.

Height and weight (adjusted for sex--women have smaller
average total lung capacity than men) are used for the
initial size screening in lung transplants.

Again, professional bicycle distance racers are typically
average-size people (or smaller), so they tend to have
average total lung capacity.

(Larger recreational bicyclists occasionally play with
pulmonary function test machines at medical offices. The
excuse is that it's necessary to make sure that the
computer and the PFT machine are working properly, but
actually it's just fun to blow into the thing and see the
graph. Total lung capacity is completely ignored on such
machines.)

Carl Fogel