Rohloff hub frame modification

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

Quoted message said:

My friend that owns the bike says that the weight is about the same as a
conventional dérailleur system because you don't need the dérailleur or
the front gears and associated front dérailleur and shifters (even though
at the moment he still has a triple chain ring on the front in the
picture.)

Quite true. The Rohloff internal gear hub has little to do with the extra
weight of this bike.

Here's an example:

The parts that came off my bike when I converted it to a Rohloff hub:
Rear wheel with conventional hub and gear cluster, chain, front and rear
derailluers, shifter cables with housing, brifters, bottom bracket, crankset
with triple chainwheels.
Total weight: 11 pounds, 1 ounces (5.03 kg).

The new parts that went on the bike with the Rohloff hub:
New rear wheel with Rohloff hub and single sprocket, chain tensioner, torque
arm, chain, shifter cables with housing, shifter, brake levers, bottom
bracket, crankset with single chainwheel.
Total weight: 9 pounds, 6 ounces (4.26 kg)

To be fair, the parts removed from bike were all very low end quality
supplied by the factory on a Specialized Globe. If one compared the very
best (and lightest) components such as Shimano Dura Ace or XTR or Campagnolo
Record, they would probably weigh a little less than the Rohloff stuff but
the difference would be small.

BobT

Lou Holtman said:

Friday said:

Lou Holtman said:

Ted Bennett wrote:

> Lou Holtman <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>
>> Ted Bennett wrote:
>>
>>>> With regard to chainguards the US is a third world country. Visit
>>>> Dutch bicycle companies. Chainguards are so common here. Here is
>>>> the ultimate commuter:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.idworx-bikes.de/nl/bikes/easy-rohler/bilder.php
>>>>
>>>> Lou
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> from that page: gewicht: ca. 15,2 kg [weight: about 33.5 lb.]
>>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, that is correct. So?
>
>
>
> Just that I find such a bike to be unnecessarily porky.
>
> Why does a good commuter bike have to be so heavy? Now that racing
> bikes are down to 15 or 16 lb., surely fatter tires, fenders and an
> internally geared hub shouldn't double that.
>

For a commuter bike it is not heavy. I see nothing unnecessary heavy
on that bike. Please look at de 'specificatie' and tell me what part
is unnecessary heavy for a commuter?

Lou

My friend that owns the bike says that the weight is about the same as
a conventional dérailleur system because you don't need the dérailleur
or the front gears and associated front dérailleur and shifters (even
though at the moment he still has a triple chain ring on the front in
the picture.)

http://www.hyperactive.oz.nf/Rohloff/Rohloff.htm

Friday

Well it is still 0.5 kg heavier according to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohloff_Speedhub
but for a commuter or touringbike not important.

Lou

My friend carries 5 litres of water and a large bottle of coke, not to
mention bags of pasta, sleeping bag, tent, clothing and so forth. 500
grams is a flea on a hogs back.

Friday

Friday said:

Lou Holtman said:

Friday said:

Lou Holtman wrote:

> Ted Bennett wrote:
>
>> Lou Holtman <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Ted Bennett wrote:
>>>
>>>>> With regard to chainguards the US is a third world country.
>>>>> Visit Dutch bicycle companies. Chainguards are so common here.
>>>>> Here is the ultimate commuter:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.idworx-bikes.de/nl/bikes/easy-rohler/bilder.php
>>>>>
>>>>> Lou
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> from that page: gewicht: ca. 15,2 kg [weight: about 33.5 lb.]
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, that is correct. So?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Just that I find such a bike to be unnecessarily porky.
>>
>> Why does a good commuter bike have to be so heavy? Now that racing
>> bikes are down to 15 or 16 lb., surely fatter tires, fenders and an
>> internally geared hub shouldn't double that.
>>
>
>
> For a commuter bike it is not heavy. I see nothing unnecessary heavy
> on that bike. Please look at de 'specificatie' and tell me what part
> is unnecessary heavy for a commuter?
>
> Lou

My friend that owns the bike says that the weight is about the same
as a conventional dérailleur system because you don't need the
dérailleur or the front gears and associated front dérailleur and
shifters (even though at the moment he still has a triple chain ring
on the front in the picture.)

http://www.hyperactive.oz.nf/Rohloff/Rohloff.htm

Friday

Well it is still 0.5 kg heavier according to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohloff_Speedhub
but for a commuter or touringbike not important.

Lou

My friend carries 5 litres of water and a large bottle of coke, not to
mention bags of pasta, sleeping bag, tent, clothing and so forth. 500
grams is a flea on a hogs back.

Friday

I agree, but 500 grams on a total weight of 1.5 kg is not 'about the same'.
5 liters of water and a large bottle of coke???? Where does he bike, in
the desert?

Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu. Meld u aan op http://www.nb.nu

Ted Bennett said:

Lou Holtman said:

Ted Bennett said:

>With regard to chainguards the US is a third world country. Visit Dutch
>bicycle companies. Chainguards are so common here. Here is the ultimate
>commuter:
>
>http://www.idworx-bikes.de/nl/bikes/easy-rohler/bilder.php
>
>Lou

from that page: gewicht: ca. 15,2 kg [weight: about 33.5 lb.]

Yes, that is correct. So?

Just that I find such a bike to be unnecessarily porky.

Why does a good commuter bike have to be so heavy? Now that racing
bikes are down to 15 or 16 lb., surely fatter tires, fenders and an
internally geared hub shouldn't double that.

It ain't a racing bike, it's a pothole bike. Remember what happened to Hincapie,
that won't happen on this bike. A normal everyday pothole enabled bike weighs
more like 22-25 pounds. Add a few features like lights, fenders, rack and such
and 33-35 is real reasonable.

Ron

Lou Holtman said:

Friday said:

Lou Holtman said:

Friday wrote:

> Lou Holtman wrote:
>
>> Ted Bennett wrote:
>>
>>> Lou Holtman <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Ted Bennett wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> With regard to chainguards the US is a third world country.
>>>>>> Visit Dutch bicycle companies. Chainguards are so common here.
>>>>>> Here is the ultimate commuter:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.idworx-bikes.de/nl/bikes/easy-rohler/bilder.php
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lou
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> from that page: gewicht: ca. 15,2 kg [weight: about 33.5 lb.]
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, that is correct. So?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Just that I find such a bike to be unnecessarily porky.
>>>
>>> Why does a good commuter bike have to be so heavy? Now that
>>> racing bikes are down to 15 or 16 lb., surely fatter tires,
>>> fenders and an internally geared hub shouldn't double that.
>>>
>>
>>
>> For a commuter bike it is not heavy. I see nothing unnecessary
>> heavy on that bike. Please look at de 'specificatie' and tell me
>> what part is unnecessary heavy for a commuter?
>>
>> Lou
>
>
>
> My friend that owns the bike says that the weight is about the same
> as a conventional dérailleur system because you don't need the
> dérailleur or the front gears and associated front dérailleur and
> shifters (even though at the moment he still has a triple chain ring
> on the front in the picture.)
>
> http://www.hyperactive.oz.nf/Rohloff/Rohloff.htm
>
> Friday

Well it is still 0.5 kg heavier according to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohloff_Speedhub
but for a commuter or touringbike not important.

Lou

My friend carries 5 litres of water and a large bottle of coke, not to
mention bags of pasta, sleeping bag, tent, clothing and so forth. 500
grams is a flea on a hogs back.

Friday

I agree, but 500 grams on a total weight of 1.5 kg is not 'about the same'.
5 liters of water and a large bottle of coke???? Where does he bike, in
the desert?

Lou

Yes

Per Lou Holtman:

Quoted message said:

Well it is still 0.5 kg heavier according to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohloff_Speedhub
but for a commuter or touringbike not important.

Maybe in some marketing guy's dreams.

Mine measured exactly two pounds heavier.

--
PeteCresswell

Per (PeteCresswell):

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Well it is still 0.5 kg heavier according to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohloff_Speedhub
but for a commuter or touringbike not important.

Maybe in some marketing guy's dreams.

Mine measured exactly two pounds heavier.

But now that I think about it, the group that it replaced was moderately
high-end (SRAM 9.0)....

Maybe somebody could rationalize just a pound if the replaced group was really
heavy.... dunno the diff between a heavy cluster and a high-end on is, but it
might be a good bit.
--
PeteCresswell

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

For unloaded day riding I think a derailleur system is still superior.

If you like the Rohloff Speedhub for touring, why don't you prefer it for
unloaded day riding?

Because for unloaded day rides on sealed roads, usually with a bunch, I
prefer closer gear ratios than the Rohloff provides. I've taken the Rohloff
machine out on such rides, and quite often find that the gear I want is
between two of the available gears.

Nick

Quoted message said:

Well it is still 0.5 kg heavier according to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohloff_Speedhub
but for a commuter or touringbike not important.

Lou

That's a fair article and weight comparison, except there doesn't seem
to be any shifters on the derailleur setup, typically 200 - 250g. Be a
shame to have all those heavy gears and no way to change them!
I used weight weenies to make the comparison, around 300g is about
right, depending on choice of components.

BobT said:

I've heard that some fully
enclosed chain cases make removal of the rear wheel to fix a flat difficult.
Do you know if this is true?

They all do, by definition. It has to come off before the wheel goes away,
or it's not nearly fully enclosed.

Jasper

(PeteCresswell) said:

Maybe somebody could rationalize just a pound if the replaced group was really
heavy.... dunno the diff between a heavy cluster and a high-end on is, but it
might be a good bit.

The difference in weight between a mountain cassette and road cassette
isn't even all that trivial.

Jasper

On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 10:30:16 -0500, RonSonic <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

It ain't a racing bike, it's a pothole bike. Remember what happened to Hincapie,
that won't happen on this bike. A normal everyday pothole enabled bike weighs
more like 22-25 pounds. Add a few features like lights, fenders, rack and such
and 33-35 is real reasonable.

Those 60 mm Big Apples they get specially-made for them have no trouble
whatsoever with even large potholes.

Jasper

(PeteCresswell) said:

Per BobT:

Quoted message said:

I agree its difficult to see, but I think the bike pictured is using the
Rohloff sliding dropouts and hence probably the OEM1 axle plate that doesn't
require the arm or speedbone.

Could you elaborate? Bolt through one of the disc brake mounts?

Elongated dropouts and a *very* sturdy version of a standard gearhub
anti-rotation-washer, except integrated into the sideplate, IIRC.

Jasper

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

Quoted message said:

The difference in weight between a mountain cassette and road cassette
isn't even all that trivial.

I guess, like beauty, trivial in in the eye of the beholder.

Here's some data:

Shimano XTR, (11-32T) cassette - 224 gm
Shimano Durace (11-23T) cassette - 173 gm

Intentionally, I'm comparing apples to oranges, but this is only a 51 gm
difference.
The weight of one jigger of water in your bottle, or a package of GU in your
pocket, or in the range of the amount of urine that accumlates in your
bladder in a quarter of an hour.
To me trivial. To others, perhaps not.

BobT