Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

Rohloff / Thorn eccentric bottom bracket shell

Started by BobT · · Last activity · 5 posts · 1,262 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
16 January 2006
Last activity
16 January 2006
Original author
BobT
Posts
5
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,262
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–5 of 5
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. I'm thinking about building a commuter bike using the Rohloff 14 speed hub.
    I've seen the Thorn frames with an eccentric bottom bracket shell for chain
    tensioning. Is this a better approach than using a standard bottom bracket
    shell and the Rohloff chaing tensioner device?

    BobT

  2. BobT said:


    I'm thinking about building a commuter bike using the Rohloff 14 speed hub.
    I've seen the Thorn frames with an eccentric bottom bracket shell for chain
    tensioning. Is this a better approach than using a standard bottom bracket
    shell and the Rohloff chaing tensioner device?

    Yes, but the best alternative is probably using a bike with Rohloff OEM
    adjustable dropouts.

    The tensioner is best avoided because it adds friction to the
    drivetrain and increases the likelihood of dropping the chain. It also
    makes wheel changes somewhat fussier and more complicated.

    An eccentric BB is rather heavy and adds a point of likely mechanical
    failure. Its main advantage over sliding dropouts is a cleaner
    appearance.

    Chalo Colina

  3. Quoted message said:
    BobT said:

    I'm thinking about building a commuter bike using the Rohloff 14 speed hub.
    I've seen the Thorn frames with an eccentric bottom bracket shell for chain
    tensioning. Is this a better approach than using a standard bottom bracket
    shell and the Rohloff chaing tensioner device?



    Chalo replied.

    Quoted message said:


    Yes, but the best alternative is probably using a bike with Rohloff OEM
    adjustable dropouts.

    An eccentric BB is rather heavy and adds a point of likely mechanical
    failure.

    "Likely"? Haven't had a lick of trouble with mine. I've worked on lots
    of tandems with eccentric bottom brackets, and have never seen any
    serious problems with any that use the simple grub screw system as Thorn
    does.

    It's true that the wedge type sometimes gets stuck if normal maintenance
    is neglected.

    Quoted message said:

    Its main advantage over sliding dropouts is a cleaner
    appearance.

    The sliding dropouts would appear to me to be at least as "likely" a
    failure point as an eccentric bb.

    With the sliding dropouts you need to worry about getting them set
    evenly or the wheel will wind up crooked...not a big issue, but not an
    issue at all with an eccentric.

    With an eccentric you also gain an option of vertical adjustability,
    which may be of value to some riders.

    An eccentric bottom bracket also permits fine-tuning for perfect
    chainline. Given that the Rohloff 54 mm chainline is not all that
    common, this feature can be quite desirable. Straight chainline is,
    after all, one of the chief benefits of internal gear hubs.

    Sheldon "Happy Thorn Raven Owner/Dealer" Brown
    +--------------------------------------------------+
    | Pohl's law: Nothing is so good that somebody, |
    | somewhere, will not hate it. |
    +--------------------------------------------------+
    Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
    Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
    http://harriscyclery.com
    Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
    http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com

  4. Sheldon Brown said:


    Chalo said:


    An eccentric BB is rather heavy and adds a point of likely mechanical
    failure.

    "Likely"? Haven't had a lick of trouble with mine. I've worked on lots
    of tandems with eccentric bottom brackets, and have never seen any
    serious problems with any that use the simple grub screw system as Thorn
    does.

    Ok, I'll accept that. My shop experience is only with the binder-bolt
    kind, which can damage their pinch bolts, and the internal-expanding
    type, which become an onerous problem if you strip a thread.

    It was partly due to the shortcomings in those two types (and to the
    nasty mess I've seen set screws make of seatposts) that I machined my
    own BB for my Rohloff-hubbed bike that uses an eccentric shell. I made
    the body with a 24tpi thread on the end and a massive lockring to clamp
    the BB onto its shell. I had to machine a pair of 2.5" aluminum crow's
    foot wrenches so I'd have reasonably compact tools to use for adjusting
    the BB.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Its main advantage over sliding dropouts is a cleaner
    appearance.

    The sliding dropouts would appear to me to be at least as "likely" a
    failure point as an eccentric bb.

    If you compare set screw BBs to to sliding dropouts, I'm sure you are
    correct. But expanding eccentrics have a well-earned reputation for
    getting stuck and defying reasonable attempts to extract them. Failure
    of an adjustable dropout is a heck of an easier problem to fix than a
    stuck expander.

    Quoted message said:

    An eccentric bottom bracket also permits fine-tuning for perfect
    chainline.

    Perfect chainline with offset cranks, maybe. I chose to use cranks
    with adjustable chainline and tread spacing. My BB does not have any
    lateral adjustability anyway. I like the eccentric system I have just
    fine, but if I had it to do over again I'd probably choose sliding
    dropouts and an American shell.

    Chalo Colina

  5. Per Chalo:

    Quoted message said:

    Yes, but the best alternative is probably using a bike with Rohloff OEM
    adjustable dropouts.

    I've gone both ways and also prefer the Rohloff adjustable dropouts.

    Lighter - although that's probably moot on a 32-pound bike...

    My main problem with the eccentric BB approach (elegant-looking as it is...) is
    that it eats into my fore-aft saddle adjustment range. There's only about an
    inch of that to begin with and who needs the BB adjustment reducing it further?
    --
    PeteCresswell

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.