I had my Rohloff hub for a couple of years now and find I ride it less and less. Why - to me it seems like damn'd hard work compared to my normal derailleur bikes.
The main reason for me is not the weight (i'm 120kgs, more of a rugby player size than a cyclist so a few grams is nothing) but the resistance when freewheeling. With my good hubs I can spin the wheels, go to out the room for a minute or so, come back and its still spinning - with the Rohloff I'd be lucky to get 10 seconds before the resistance stops the wheel. I have changed the oil but it made no difference - is this by design or a problem with my hub?
Bike Forum
[closed]
Rohloff - hard work
-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
that's still not much resistance - the wheel inertia is tiny compared to that of rider and bike...
Posted 3 years ago # -
Sold my Rohloff for the same reason. I don't think the freewheeling is an issue. It just made the back of the bike feel dead. Pride of purchase wouldn't let me admit it for a year or so.
Posted 3 years ago # -
mmm... funny, I have to agree with sfb that I don't remember a huge difference in the freewheeling resistance.
On the other hand, I found the resulting weight balance just made my bike feel less 'fun', so I switched back to normal derailleurs. I'm glad I tried a Rohloff, but I don't think I'll go back to them any time soon.Posted 3 years ago # -
Don't think it'll harm you too much - the guy who rode across the world used a bike with a Rohloff. Getting mugged, beaten, knocked off his bike and a wee bit saddle sore appeared to bother him, his Rohloff did not.
Posted 3 years ago # -
...and another ex-Rohloff user here. Partly the heavy feel of the rear of the bike, partly the soul-destroying draggy sound in gears 1 - 7. But I sometimes wish I still had it for those muddy rides when the ss is too much hard work.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Spinning resistance could be due to the driveside seal being in contact with the sprocket - The Rohloff website has a troubleshooter section which may help you...a drop of Rohloff cleaning oil between sprocket & seal can help too !
I wouldn't swap my Rohloff for the world.... they just keep on working.Posted 3 years ago # -
I recently converted to a Rohloff for a reduced maintenance mtb (barely time to ride these days, let alone fettle)
Freewheel resistance isn't an issue. Its not surprising it doesn;'t spin forever due to the extra freewheels in it. I agree with sfb's point.It did initially make the back end feel "dead" - I've got it on a Cotic Simple which would be superbly quick as a singlespeed. However, since riding it, I've got fitter and stronger and I've found it less of an issue. Small price to pay for simplicity...
Posted 3 years ago # -
isn't is supposed to take 500 miles to bed in?
Posted 3 years ago # -
isn't is supposed to take 500 miles to bed in?
At least.
I've got 3 Rohloffs and the difference is really noticeable. The oldest, about 3000km, is nice and 'easy', whilst the newest is noticeably less free.
That said, even the new one is fine to ride.
It would take something really special to make me switch back to dérailleur.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Farticus -
... the soul-destroying draggy sound in gears 1 - 7. But I sometimes wish I still had it for those muddy rides when the ss is too much hard work.
That sums it up nicely. I think it's more a psychological problem than a real one, but my Rohloff lives in the attic and I prefer to ride SS.On the other hand my brother has just completed a 1,500 km overland ride in Oz towing a humungous trailer and he swears by his Rohloff. Totally reliable while his mate got through a couple of derailleurs.
If I was doing that, I'd fit a Rohloff too.
Posted 3 years ago # -
I have no problems. I agree there is a little resistance in some of the lower gears, but my derralier bike could build up a scary amount of resistance with (typical for my bike) normally worn jockey wheels, and a (normally) very gritty chain. It depends on your usage. For me, I jump on an unwashed bike every morning and commute off-road. It's a brilliant solution.
Artfularry, if you think it's "damn hard work", - then sell it. There are plenty of folks out there who disagree and will gladly pay good money for your hub!
Riding with others I have never felt I am loosing out. Perhaps if I was a racer I might be more concerned about the last few watts, but being able to chose the perfect gear instantly under any circumstances, and being able to change down any number of gears whilst climbing hard gives it all back (for me at least). I rode it up Ventoux last summer and chatted with a Belgian triathelete guy all the way up. I never felt at any disadvantage after 22KM in the lowest 4 gears. I believe It feels worse than it is because of the "cogging" vibration through the pedals in some of the lower gears.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Slight hijack.
I have never understood why a rohloff or other geared hub has never been put in place of a bottom bracket. I don't mean like a G-boxx or remote gearbox but the pedals connected directly to the G.B. axle.
This method linked to a traditional freewheel would eliminate a lot of drag. Biggest benefit would be repostioning the inherent weight to the centre on the bike.Posted 3 years ago # -
Ground clearance?
Posted 3 years ago # -
A Rohloff may be, I'm not sure of the diameter, but smaller hub like the Alfine wouldnt be any more than the 36t-or-so chain ring usually run with a geared hub. Definitely smaller than a 44t.
Posted 3 years ago # -
because the space in the BB is tiny?
But yes, why do we not have an ammerican (or an even larger one) standard BB, and a gearbox inside?
But half the advantage is in the gear change under power and freewheeling, so would need the chain to be spinning all the time, thus probably upping the drag anyway.
Still another 10 years off IMO, only been 4 products marketed so far (rohoff, alfine, hammersmidt, shlumph(sp).
Posted 3 years ago # -
I'm suggesting a whole new BB area. Not technology to fit the existing BB size. The G-boxx requires a whole new frame design with the boxx becoming part of the stressed frame. Does anyone know why the G-boxx has been designed to be remote from the crank spindle?
Posted 3 years ago # -
This method linked to a traditional freewheel would eliminate a lot of drag.
I don't see how ?
Given the typically short life of most BB systems I think you'd want to isolate the gearbox from the actual pedal axle with its large twisting forces, but I agree the gearbox would be better placed in the frame not the wheel.
Posted 3 years ago # -
I looked into patenting the idea of a rohloff type gearbox into the BB, but found that shimano already owe such a patent...maybe there is something in the pipeline. fingers crossed!
Posted 3 years ago # -
I looked into patenting the idea of a rohloff type gearbox into the BB
I'm surprised they could even GET a patent for that. It's too obvious.
Posted 3 years ago # -
I did find increased effort was required when I switched over to a 'hoff hub. I too feel fitter after owning it for just over two years.
No chain skip or suck, much increased drive chain longevity and just a yearly oil change. These were the reasons I got one.
The drawbacks...?
It took me while to get used to the increased weight at the back end though and on a stiff hardtail the back end does tend to slam down hard.
Yes, it does sound like a muted coffee grinder with mild indigestion in the lower gears! After the wide spread of gears you get with derailleurs, 14 does require a bit of getting used to and it can be annoying not being able to find the gear that gives the right cadence.
I don't think there is the 'right' solution to gearing on a bike. It's a question of knowing what your priorities are.
Posted 3 years ago # -
The drawbacks...?
hydrophobia
If you habitually ride through water (like the Bog Trotters) it can be trashed in less than a year as the 'seals' do not exclude water.
Posted 3 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
