What precisely is the difference between the hope integrated cassette and the 'block' of old where the sprockets and freehub were combined, rather than the hub and freehub combined?
As I recall, the benefit of the Shimano freehub system was that it placed the bearings in the hubs at the ends of the load bearing axle, thereby making it much stronger.
How does the Hope one actually work then?
Thik the Hope one is much like the old school screw on ones but is much lighter. I may be wrong though
Taff's right. The bearing thing is as GT said but that's true for most hubs these days (certainly cartridge bearing ones). Shimano do it a bit differently with the way that the freehub body actually bolts onto the main hub body so it's structural and the bearins sit pretty much as far out as they can.
my understanding is that the freehub bearings are similar to those in their current freehub so are supported as well as that is
The new hope cassette is in effect a standard hope cassette/freehub body with sprockets added to it so it'll be identical in terms of strength.
It's not really like a screw on, it's exactly as it sounds, the freehub body is integrated into the cassette. I imagine it'll still have 2 cartridge bearings in it, but they'll be a slightly smaller OD to fit inside the 9t sprocket.
Do you mean the old Hope 'screw-on' hubs? If I recall correctly, Shimano, Suntour, Campag, Sach-Sedis and everyone else that made gears all used this system until Shimano invented the freehub and cassette.
I reckon the thinking behind it was simply to offer a platform that only required the cassette to be changed when worn, rather than the whole bearing assembly. Not sure how it actually works (somebody on here doubtlessly will though, failing that Google definitely will) but I distinctly remember trying to swap one from one wheel to another as a kid, whatever it was that I undid resulted in tiny ball bearings going everywhere and rendering the wheel knackered (Well, knackered to a 10 year old with virtually no mechanical knowledge anyhow!).
FWIW, I reckon the freehub and cassette idea makes perfect sense. In nearly 30 years of bike riding, I've never once worn out a set of freewheel/freehub bearings but I've obviously gone through a fair few cassettes.
EDIT: Several other posts have appeared whilst I was typing this!
In nearly 30 years of bike riding, I've never once worn out a set of freewheel/freehub bearings but I've obviously gone through a fair few cassettes.
Really? Not trying hard enough.
The bearings in Hope hubs sit outboard of the hub flanges right? I'm not sure if Shimano had a patent on the freehub design when they introduced it way back, but I guess if they did it would have expired long ago hence why the design is now defacto for all hubs.
I guess then that the Hope cassette it also a load bearing member whereas with the old block design, the block screwed over the top of the axle, which was still the primary load bearing structure.
Do you like the way I managed to get the words 'flange' and 'member' into that?
In nearly 30 years of bike riding, I've never once worn out a set of freewheel/freehub bearings
I have - though strangely enough, only cartridge bearing ones, not cup and cone 
Well I wish they make it in 9 speed 9/36. Now that would be awesome 
18 months ago: http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/eurobike-2010-hopes-new-cassette-with-integrated-freehub-27582/
Might have changed
Huh? That's what we're talking about - why link to the article?
The bearings in Hope hubs sit outboard of the hub flanges right? I'm not sure if Shimano had a patent on the freehub design when they introduced it way back, but I guess if they did it would have expired long ago hence why the design is now defacto for all hubs.
All freehub bodies have bearings in them, outside of the flanges. As you rightly say, that's why they're stronger than screw-ons.
Huh? That's what we're talking about - why link to the article?
Thought it could be useful for some people as there's a nice photograph of it from behind, but my mistake.
Ah I see! There's not been much else on it since, so that's basically all the info people have anyway!
Although it's now half ti or sommat. So it's getting more expensive...
All freehub bodies have bearings in them, outside of the flanges. As you rightly say, that's why they're stronger than screw-ons.
Hmm - there's confusion between two different things here. On Shimano hubs, the freehub is a structural part of the hub, and the main hub bearings sit to the right hand end of the freehub. That makes them a huge amount stronger than freewheel hubs. On Hope hubs (and all other aftermarket hubs AFAIK) the main hub bearing is to the left of the freehub - the freehub runs on the same axle as the hub, but isn't a structural part of it. I've double checked the diagrams, and the right hand main hub bearing on a rear Hope hub is inboard of the flange - a Shimano hub doesn't have a bearing there.
The main difference from a freewheel hub in this case is that the freehub has bearings at either end, so the loads from pedalling are well supported, rather than going onto the main hub bearing - unfortunately these loads aren't actually that big compared to vertical loads on the wheel. Aftermarket freehub hubs do have a strength advantage over freewheel, but that's down to using a larger diameter axle than you could fit inside a freewheel, not bearing placement, and they are still at a big disadvantage compared to Shimano.
a 9/36 cassette makes sense if your running a 1x10 with a 32 t ring.
But IMO the cost will probably be rather steep for a consumable item.
Also it seems the cassette doesn't have those shifting ramps like the shimano ones do...?
I reckon hope should make us some nice looking cranks, shimano XT's look crap IMO.
I reckon hope should make us some nice looking cranks
They are making cranks! Probably be a while before they are available though!
Also it seems the cassette doesn't have those shifting ramps like the shimano ones do...?
If you look at some of the other pictures, there are ramps but there don't seem to be as many and the tooth profiles look don't look the same. I'd not be surprised if the Hope cassette didn't shift as well.
I'd not be surprised if the Hope cassette didn't shift as well.
Wait and see wait and see. Plus, looks like more a product for me than for you I would guess.
Aren't the Shimano shifting ramps still patented?
18 months on and still no sign of it being released?
Aren't the Shimano shifting ramps still patented?
They may be, but SRAM's cassettes still shift 95% as well as shimano's so there ought to be ways around whatever patent exists.
Aren't the Shimano shifting ramps still patented?
Nah, expired a couple of years ago, hence Cycle Dynamics etc knocking it ti cassettes with identical tooth profiles.
Plus, looks like more a product for me than for you I would guess.
What does that mean 
I like the idea, but my concern is how the chain will feel on a 9t sprocket, and how fast it may wear.
I like the idea, but my concern is how the chain will feel on a 9t sprocket, and how fast it may wear.
Njee I've seen you comment on that before but I don't understand the variables that would make a difference. Other than gearing, I don't notice any difference in feel between one size cog and the next.
What am I missing?
What does that mean
Probably not a pure racer product. I'll find I'll barely have to change gears in a matter of urgency.
I like the idea, but my concern is how the chain will feel on a 9t sprocket, and how fast it may wear.
From my standard very slowly as I would barely use it.
Shimano have been making 9T cassettes for years
9-26 Capreo, for dinky wheeled road bikes etc
the advantages of this system to me are twofold:
A) the whole assembly is lighter
B) the gain of a 9t cog. Previously you needed the metal of the freehub body to go round the bearing. You then needed the metal inside the sprocket to support the teeth. This limited the minimum diameter and therefore the number of teeth. With this the same bit of metal does both jobs so can be smaller diameter hence 9 teeth.
I hope the bottom cogs are titanium otherwise alloy ones will wear very quickly!
Surprised it took them so long to make this, although it will probs be very expensive and have a limited market so they will be rare. But hey, it got us talking about Hope products 
Shimano have been making 9T cassettes for years
Yeah, with a tiny market, on the road, where things are markedly cleaner.
Njee I've seen you comment on that before but I don't understand the variables that would make a difference
2 things really, angle of the chain: it's going to be hugging a much tighter radius on a 9t sprocket than anything bigger, plus it'll wear much more quickly, I've had cassettes where the 11 is worn and feels markedly rougher than the rest of the block, and a 9 will wear 20% faster than that.
Could be totally wrong, but I reckon that may be the case.
Larger sprockets are very marginally more efficient too. Part of the reason people don't run 22:11 for SS - exactly the same ratio as 32:16.
Shimano have been making 9T cassettes for years9-26 Capreo, for dinky wheeled road bikes etc
These need a special freehub - I doubt the whole lot is as stiff as conventional.
http://sheldonbrown.com/capreo/index.html
It's also a budget solution designed primarily for girls, rather than being marketed as a lightweight solution for racing under rather more powerful folk.
There is an obvious person of this parish who is far more qualified than I to post, although his objectivity may be questionable...
Well looking at that hub, I should think the right hand bearing isn't as far out as normal. Still further out that the one on the Hope hub though
I'm with njee.
I've got a 9T "driver" on my BMX and it feels SO much more gritty than the 13 that was on there before.
I think it is a move in the right direction.
The freehub is essentially a consumable but most of us only replace it when it completely packs in (there must be some performance drop off during life as bits get worn and sloppy) so now when you replace the cassette you get to replace the freehub.
Also your freehub needs to do the freehub job and be strong enough to take the loads from the cassette which on teeth without the aluminium carrier is quite concentrated. Then the cassette is designed to similarly transfer the torque into the freehub etc etc. Now you an make the whole assembly as a single item and not have to worry about an interface between two parts.
For space before you had the internal bits, the freehub outer and then the inner bits of the cassette sprockets - now you save space to enable the 9T sprocket so you do have more room for a bearing to sit further out (not seen the design fully yet).
As for bearings - i'd like to see 3. One on the disc side, one under the biggest sprocket of the cassette and one under or almost under the smallest sprocket. This would stop any twisting of the cassette relative to the rest of the hub.
But I too worry about the chain around the 9T sprocket as it is a very tight articulation which is not ideal. But then it is effectively an overdrive gear that you won't be using out in the trail. Or shouldn't be anyway.
Another thought - it depends on why you want the 9T. Is it so you can stick with a single 32T chainring or for something like a 38T chainring in a twin set up to get back some of the gearing of a triple 42/44T?
If the former then why not just fit a 34T front ring which will still have good clearance and use some of the weight saving of the integrated design and fit a 38T sprocket to get back the low ratio gearing. Bigger rings are better for the chain.
You must log in to post.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
