Forum menu
A Rohloff front chain guide costs £51, the far more complex Shimano front Acera derailleur costs £10.
A Rohloff tensioner costs £66, the far more complex Shimano Acera rear derailleur costs £15.50.
So, if a Rohloff hub costs £1050, why can't Shimano make something just as good, or better, for around £200?
500%+ gear range, proper torque arm, not just flats on the axle, and shifter included.
I think they are missing a trick by not updating and improving the Alfine.
selling derailleurs is a better business model.
❓
Economys of scale. It would be interesting to see how the sale figures compared but I would guess rolhoffs are in the hundreds at best whereas the acera would be in the tens or hundreds of thousands.
If the Alfine covers off that market for shimano would they ever get a return on their development spend?
I think they are missing a trick by not updating and improving the Alfine.
Me too. Alfine 11 was a real disappointment to me.
not just flats on the axle
What's wrong with this? Much neater than a torgue arm and I never heard of anyone having a problem with it.
I think the Alfine 8 is better than the Rolhoff anyhow. Its a lot lighter which for MTB purposes is main consideration. Its also more efficient in most gears I think....
When you add more gears you add more weight so happy with 8. I would just like a larger range please if possible, if you can reduce the weight and increase the efficiency that would be nice.
Its a lot lighter
About 100g, so not a lot in it.
I'd rather have a rohloff.
*COUGH* 700c Alfine 8 for sale in classifieds *COUGH*
Because they seem unable to make something half as good for £400? Alfine 11 was their attempt and they didn't get it right.
Really isn't much in the weights when you include all parts.
Rohloff are selling somewhere upwards of 20k hubs a year now so not tiny but shimanos numbers will be an order of magnitude larger.
why dont they make a 10speed 11-40 cassette?
ndthornton - When you add more gears you add more weight so happy with 8.
Their 11 speed is lighter than their 8 speed.
sram have some geared hubs and did the hammerschmit so they potentially are more likely but no one seems to be able to do it right
Their 11 speed is lighter than their 8 speed
So they must have improved and/or compromised other areas of the hub at the same time.
The same treatment given to an 8 speed hub would make it lighter still.
More gears is never less weight.
About [s]100g[/s] £600, so [s]not[/s] quite a lot in it.
I'd rather have [s]a rohloff[/s] a derailleur and learn how to set it up properly.
They compromised on reliability, I'd prefer they didn't do that to my 8 speed
I'd prefer they didn't do that to my 8 speed
Me neither
But they wouldn't make the same mistakes again. I'm convinced that with a little more investment there's more weight to be taken out of that hub.
I'd rather have a rohloff a derailleur and learn how to set it up properly.
It's not really about that though is it? No doubt at all that a dearailleur is lighter and quicker shifting when new but they don't stay like that for long. In time the front mech ends up slightly misshapen and the pivots wear on the rear so that it's no longer perfectly straight. When I cleared out my box of parts when we moved I had a box of about 10 XT mechs that were all potentially usable but were never going to run perfectly with any amount of proper set up. Other than the cranks and shifters the rest of a conventional drivetrain is basically a consumable on a mountain bike.
One of my Rohloffs is just about to go back to the factory for a once over - I think it needs new seals. It's 10 years old and has been in use most of that time. I've almost certainly spent more on replacing the rims on the wheel than i have the rest of it in that time.
I just took delivery of an M615 deore rear mech which cost the princely sum of £20 (thanks merlin), the cassette to go with it will be ~£20 the Shifter will be ~£25-30ish maybe, broadly similar expenditure would probably follow if I wanted multiple rings at the front (I don't), so a functional 2 or 3 ring 9/10 speed mech based drive is shimano's ~£200, ~500% range, alternative to spending ~£750 on a Rohloff drive...
I'm not completely down on the idea of Planetary hub gears, but I don't think they are universally the "Best" solution for all applications...
And what really is so terrible about Mech's exactly?
OK so you have to have a dangler at the back, is that the end of the world? how many have you really managed to bust? I've spangled a couple in the last ~25 years of using them, that's not very many, and they are replaceable, a bolloxed mech doesn't mean a whole new drivetrain just a new mech, maybe a cable and a hanger... Job done.
For all their faults I don't actually think the humble dérailleur has yet been beaten in terms of VFM or efficiency in providing a multi-speed bicycle drivetrain...
thepodge - Member(alfine) Their 11 speed is lighter than their 8 speed.
shimano would love us to believe that, but i've weighed both.
both 1690g.
(which i thought was weird)
As cookeaa says - different gears for different needs. I have 2 mtb's with derailleurs which I use about 70% of the time and I also have an alfine full susser for filthy weather conditions.
However those numbers you were quoting for drivetrain parts dont stack up quite so well against an Alfine 8. I think mine was £180 all in. and you didnt mention cleaning and maintenance times either.
Bike Rumor had this to say about 2015 developments
"If IG hubs are your thing, there is a new Alfine 8 speed mechanical IG hub with a flat bar Rapidfire top-normal shifter. The Nexus Inter-7 hubs see improvements as well for improved shifting. All hubs will be offered in black or silver, and are expected around September for availability."
Any engineering company redesigns and tries to improve reliability in it's next iteration of product development, and Japanese companies excel in this area. So, if Alfine is moving to top shifting, the opposite way round, perhaps this indicates greater internal changes.
Let's hope so.
Brian
One of my Rohloffs is just about to go back to the factory for a once over - I think it needs new seals. It's 10 years old and has been in use most of that time. I've almost certainly spent more on replacing the rims on the wheel than i have the rest of it in that time.
I find it easier to occasionally replace a rear mech than rebuild a wheel.
I use a bike every day, all conditions for my commute which is a 20 mile round trip using a mix of minor roasds, canal paths and woodland trails.
Rear mechs aren't even close to being a recurring problem for me - I guess you guys with boxes of trashed mechs must be several gnaars of rad above me (or just clumsy beggars)...
sram have some geared hubs and did the hammerschmit so they potentially are more likely but no one seems to be able to do it right
I believe there's some agreement with Suntour (who own Sturmey Archer) that SRAM don't market their IG hubs in countries where SA were strong and vice versa.
In any case, the Hammerschmidt wasn't renowned as a great example of a properly developed product when launched, and they've done SFA to improve it. Same goes for the Automatix 2-speed hub, which is another promising idea.
shimano would love us to believe that, but i've weighed both.
both 1690g.
Isn't that much the same as a Rohloff (I've got 1700g in my head as their stated weight)?
2 smashed rear mechs in 15 years is not much, but then 5 or a few more services on my Rohloff in 10 years (with the same rim all the time) is even better; less time servicing, more time riding, what's not to like (apart from the weight, but I'd rather worry about loosing body weight than a few hundred grams on my rear hub).
Back to the OP's question, I am still toying with the idea of building a 3 speed Sturmey Archer bike, cheap, light-ish and less restrictive than a single-speed for when it's not too steep.
Sven
I guess you guys with boxes of trashed mechs must be several gnaars of rad above me (or just clumsy beggars)...
Very few problems for me with mech's breaking.... but I hate cleaning my drive train and I hate noise (chain slap). So I'm lazy and intolerant.
Hmmm, Reading the linked bit on 2015 Alivio and Tourney ([url= http://www.bikerumor.com/2014/02/28/2015-shimano-alivio-tourney-groups-unveiled-trickle-down-trail-tech-for-all/ ]here[/url]) is interesting, 2015 Alivio may not have Shadow+ but as a groupset it is probably on a par with SLX/LX/Deore from just a few of years ago, especially with a HT2 Crank option and some proper disc brakes (looks to be lots of trickled down Deore parts), it makes you wonder how quickly Shimano are going to roll 11 speed down their MTB groupsets after XTR is released...
I reckon you'll be able to buy a Zee/SLX level 1x11 drivetrain by late summer 2017, they've understood they need to keep pace with SRAM now...
IGs will be put to one side while they try to hold position in their "Traditional" markets...
SA have some strong looking products: disc brake compatible 5 and 8 speed hubs at competative prices, but I don't know much about them at present... tempted to look at converting My SS to a cheap IG, but I would worry about reliability...
SA have some strong looking products: disc brake compatible 5 and 8 speed hubs at competative prices, but I don't know much about them at present... tempted to look at converting My SS to a cheap IG, but I would worry about reliability...
Questions would be about sealing, range & torque limitations. There's a project for someone looking at manufacturing a proper MTB IG hub, but it'll be a struggle to do it for less than a 'Hoff
I believe there's some agreement with Suntour (who own Sturmey Archer) that SRAM don't market their IG hubs in countries where SA were strong and vice versa.
Er... that sounds a bit illegal... source?
Although it worked well I found the weight distribution all wrong with the Alfine, especially when lifting the bike over fences etc. Think cleaning, maintenance is much easier with a 1x set-up and no horrible front mech.
2 smashed rear mechs in 15 years is not much
Lucky/unlucky, I think my record is 5 in 2 months, a run that was only halted when I broke my arm instead.
I keep thinking Shimano really should build a gearbox, it's the seemingly logical next step, not 10-42 cassettes (even less so 11-42), and about the only thing that really would be a leap ahead of SRAM, other than Di2, which is IMO just too expensive when cables are simple to maintain even if it is a PITA over the winter.
Build an XT (like the original disk brakes, it's not really an XTR product) gearbox, refine it for a few years, release a smaller lighter version and use that as the 'sandard' forever and a day (a bit like Di2, except I guess gearboxes will be tied to frames so standards are less anoying).
gearboxes are good in principle but require a bespoke frame to fit.
Shimano don't make frames so would require co-operation with a frame manufacturer. You cant retro fit them to existing frames so they wont make much money in the short term. Also no matter how good the gearbox is, weight weenies and racers will never buy it as a derailleur will always be lighter and more efficient. So long term profits are limited.
All of this is unfortunate as I would really like one
Although it worked well I found the weight distribution all wrong with the Alfine, especially when lifting the bike over fences etc. Think cleaning, maintenance is much easier with a 1x set-up and no horrible front mech.
Wait, what?
Weight distribution all wrong when lifting over fences etc? who gives a monkey's? really? I could understand if you said it felt a bit rear heavy, some say dead, some say planted/solid on the trails - but fences... give me strength.
As for thinking it's easier to clean and maintain a 1x set up - what maintence do you need on an alfine? My SG500 is 5.5 years old and I'm still on the original chain, sprockets, cables etc. It gets washed about once a year, I go on a spin I finish the spin it get put in the shed, it occasionally get oiled.
My SG501 isn't quite as old but has been looked after just as well. Only a single speed is less faff and possibly longer lasting.
Er... that sounds a bit illegal... source?
Now you mention it... though it may be related to some SA/Sachs licensing agreement. I'll have a proper look for the source when I'm at home and have proper internet.
I find it easier to occasionally replace a rear mech than rebuild a wheel.
Presumably you've had to buy or rebuild wheels in the last 10 years though?
Isn't that much the same as a Rohloff (I've got 1700g in my head as their stated weight)?
Just about. Total weight of the two systems isn't different enough to worry about.
There's a project for someone looking at manufacturing a proper MTB IG hub, but it'll be a struggle to do it for less than a 'Hoff
And what would you change? Rohloff have a proven, reliable product. Lighter would be good (and Rohloff supposedly had one in the works a few years back) but difficult as Shimano have shown. Cheaper would be good (but not at the expense of reliability - difficult as Shimano have shown)
The 'proper MTB' alternative are the Pinion or Effi-gear Gearboxes
gearboxes are good in principle but require a bespoke frame to fit.
Shimano don't make frames so would require co-operation with a frame manufacturer.
Really not an issue - Shimano have created enough 'standards' over the years and just expected frame manufacturers to cope. New bottom bracket standards, various disc brake mounts, headset/fork standards, belt drive - all need redesigned frames. A gearbox is no different.
I can't help thinking it's the razor blade model. In theory you could make a razor with ceramic blades that didn't go blunt but it's not a good business to be in as you only sell one to each customer. No-one else has come up with a gearbox or hub gear that has disrupted Shimano's markets - if someone does I'd expect them to respond pretty quickly with something really good.
Presumably you've had to buy or rebuild wheels in the last 10 years though?
Bought a spare set of wheels for winter use, never had to rebuild any though, in fact I tend not to break stuff at all, despite high mileage.
But I'm no heavyweight, ride smooth and have been lucky I guess 🙂
all need redesigned frames
Really??
I actually can't think of a single frame standard change that shimano have been responsible for.
Bottom brackets shells have been the same for donkeys years.
Headtubes went to 1,1/8 from 1 inch and now tapered but that wasn't shimano.
Did they have a hand in bolt through rear axles?
Even if they did we are talking about a frame that can only be used with gearboxes- not a disk mount that can be converted to whatever with a £10 adaptor.
I look at ihg as a lazy singlespeed instead of a replacement for a rear mech
I'm still quicker than some I ride with and slower than others I ride with regardless of what method I use to change gears
I'm sure it's not beyond the great minds of the bike business to fit a standard bb into a frame designed for a gear box so frames could be used with whatever you liked
You might do it but no one would buy it.
it would be the mother of all bodges and a big step backwards for derraileur bikes.
Oh and look pants
It would likely be heavy though. I suspect to become popular they'd need to be lighter which would mean making the box structural, so an addapter would end up costing a lot and being quite heavy anyway.
15mm was a stupid standard dreampt up by Shimano, as are some of the quirkier rear axles at the moment, and the original Saint mechs/hubs,
I admit it wouldn't be ideal but it's possible. In a very poor example it's like saying no one would go for an ebb when track ends are simpler, easier and cheaper but we know people are happy with both... Again, yes its a poor example
And what would you change? Rohloff have a proven, reliable product. Lighter would be good (and Rohloff supposedly had one in the works a few years back) but difficult as Shimano have shown. Cheaper would be good (but not at the expense of reliability - difficult as Shimano have shown)
As was posted a couple of years ago, a 400/7 Speedhub might be nice, but (unless I've misinterpreted) doesn't the Speedhub cope with more torque than an Alfine because it gears down for 10/14 gears?
Basically, for the same reason that Ford don't make a super car for £10k. Some things are just expensive to make properly - if you've ever seen an exploded diagram or the video of Rohloff internals, the amount of precision gubbins in there is amazing.
It's not economies of scale either - Rohloff have made almost 200,000 hubs, they're already mass produced.
I'm surprised Rohloff haven't produced a 'premium' hub with titanium gear shafts & fasteners.
I'm surprised Rohloff haven't produced a 'premium' hub with titanium gear shafts & fasteners.
Well, they have been developing a 170mm fatbike hub.
Are you not talking about the Alfine 8 speed hub? I have one on my commuting bike and it is great.
Would not really want one on my mountain bike though as the rear wheel is heavy and it is harder to hop over logs and rocks so it would get a bit of a bashing. I also would not want one as it goes best with smooth pedalling that I do not think suits mountain biking where you have to change power in a much more aggressive/erratic way than what I use the Alfine for on the road.
so it would get a bit of a bashin
My Alfine 8 is going to a gravity Enduro next week. They can take more punishment than you think. Not sure what you mean about aggressive and erratic peddling either. That's not something to aim for on any bike - but dont see why an Alfine would suffer any more than a normal drive?
I'm surprised Rohloff haven't produced a 'premium' hub with titanium gear shafts & fasteners.
There have been prototypes. Problem was that it would end up double the price for a couple of hundred g in weight saving, and it wouldn't be as strong, so didn't go any further.
The Fatbike hub is interesting - it's the same internals in a wider shell, with extended LH axle and shifting rod, so a relatively simple version.
My Alfine 8 has amazed me; three years and a few thousand miles of solid abuse and I only serviced it because I wanted to.
Jumps and climbs well; maybe lose out a bit on the descents.
I have converted another bike to 1 x 10 and like that as well so who knows what the answer is?!
A 500% Nuvincini hubs is what's needed but about 800gms less than the current 360 % version
I mean it is harder to unweight the rear wheel so the rim gets bashed more. Not the hub which seems pretty tough.
You might not want to use one but there are at least two of us on here with alfine equipped full suspension bikes and I met a guy with a rolly on a transition something or other last weekend.
It's all about choice
The only issue I have with my Alfine full susser is pinch flats. I have to run 45 PSI in the back tyre to avoid getting flats on rock gardens. At this pressure I can forget about it though and just plough on through. Yes I could go tubeless but rather avoid all that mess and faff if I can.
Hey Saccades relax. My experience not yours.
I too fear / hate taking the rear wheel out on the alfine and run a higher pressure... Great minds eh?
I too fear / hate taking the rear wheel out on the alfine
I have stopped taking a spanner and tube out with me now. If I get a puncture (rare) I patch it with the wheel still attached. If its not fixable I push back to the car. Does help that where I ride its never a long walk.
Anything Shimano brings out seems to be obsolete within a few years - doesn't sit comfortable with me!
Er... What exactly has been obsoleted?
I've got an Alfine 8 in a Niner Sir9. It's not that healthy now but still fine. It is an acquired taste with definite drawbacks but I'm glad I've got one bike setup like that. Others have mentioned breaking rear derailleurs is a non issue so what's the point. The point for me is that our shitty mud around these parts means that on gloopy days a conventional derailleur setup often stops shifting after about 15-20miles until you can get it home and clean it properly rather than just poking it with a stick. The Alfine bike just keeps on shifting away. What I don't like about the setup most is the faff of slackening the ebb in the Niner to remove the wheel to the point that I actively avoid doing it unless necessary.
What I'd love Rohloff to make would be a version with a few less gears (or range of gears) sacrificed for a little less weight for the mtb market. And maybe lose the twist shift. Rohloff puts the 1:1 gear ratio in a much better place in the range than Alfine for MTB riding in my opinion.
Er... What exactly has been obsoleted?
Di2 (in it's dura ace 7900 guise)
Saint hubs/mechs
What I'd love Rohloff to make would be a version with a few less gears (or range of gears) sacrificed for a little less weight
+1
but keep the range for me?
Alfine 8 gears with a Rohloff range....
Oh and the trigger shifter of the Alfine 11. Don't like the fact I have to back off when shifting to an easier gear as I am normally hitting a steep upwards incline. It makes sense for the spring loaded shift to select a harder gear as your not likely to be torquing the pedals in this scenario.
Has anyone got any comments on what was so wrong the Alfine 11?
A lot wider range, is it any less reliable than the 8, or is ti something else??
Has anyone got any comments on the Alfine 11? A lot wider range, is it any less reliable than the 8?
I was going to replace my ageing 8 with an 11. But the reliability issues you frequently hear have made me think twice. That and the silly positioning of the 1:1 gear at 5th out of 11 gears. Alfine 8 also has the 1:1 at 5th so all the extra range of the 11 is above the 1:1 point. As one of my main reasons for changing would be to get more range low down I would be forced to use a silly pair of chainring and sprocket and completely blow the recommended ratio out of the water (not that I'm sure that it would make much difference going to less than 1.9).
Interesting info on Rohloff on Wikipedia -
On the 1996 IFMA in Cologne, Rohloff announced a 14-speed gear hub with a weight of 1700 grams. At the time, the gear hub with the greatest number of speeds was the fragile 3700 gram 12 speed Sachs Elan (discontinued by 2000), made by the hub-gear manufacturer Sachs (later acquired by SRAM). A year later Rohloff presented a workable prototype at the 1997 IFMA and won a crate of champagne from the employees at Sachs, who had bet against them the year before. The managing director of the dominant cycling component manufacturer Shimano approached Rohloff and asked: "Shimano could release a 14 speed gear hub onto the market tomorrow, but it would weigh double as much as yours" - "How do you manage this?"[1]
I've got a Rohloff on my Helius but, TBH, I think I could make do with one with say 4 widely spaced gears, not 14.
Would make a huge weight saving.
Rachel
The only thing I don't like about my Alfine hub is that I tend to puncture a lot
I don't really understand why as it's not that much heavier, especially when you factor in my bodyweight
3700 gram
wow
[quote=convert ] As one of my main reasons for changing would be to get more range low down I would be forced to use a silly pair of chainring and sprocket and completely blow the recommended ratio out of the water (not that I'm sure that it would make much difference going to less than 1.9).
I've used an Alfine 11 on my fatbike and have just ignored that recommendation. I was initially a bit concerned (given the potential torque loadings of a fatbike) but it's never been an issue.
You do hear a lot of reliability problems (actually it's usually about the pawls slipping which seems to be a result of cable slippage or dirt in that part of the system) but I've not had much problems with mine. Since everything is in one unit rather than distributed as in a derailleur system it's easy just to say "it's the hub" rather than one of the subsystems within the hub.
Having the 1:1 ratio where it is is probably due to how they (Shimano) developed it, to get the 11 gears there's a funny double shift between 6 & 7 - you can feel a different "clunk" when you change gear - I think it's due to there being a second planetary gear for the extra (upper) gears.
I found the gap between gears to be too big with the recommended 1:9 ratio but swapped out for a larger sprocket and it's fine, even though I'd spin out on downhills but then I'd prefer to coast at those speeds. I don't use mine off-road, it's on the commuter where high speed isn't what I'm after. A couple of years in and about 4K Km and I'm happy with it. Not sure if I'd get another one but it's likely to last me a good few years yet.
Problem was that it would end up double the price for a couple of hundred g in weight saving, and it wouldn't be as strong
I'm don't think it would be anywhere near double, if you've got the machines to make the shafts in steel, you only have to add the extra cost of the raw materials & buying in Ti fasteners wouldn't be much extra, I recon cost to Rohloff would be less than £100 per hub easily & getting the weight below a deraileur group would be kudos & a selling point.
cost to Rohloff would be less than £100 per hub
Even if this was true, (and I think Ti needs new tooling which wears out more quickly and I suspect the increase would be more - a ti bolt is at least 4 times the price of a steel one), then that's more like £250 by the time you've added on their margin, distributor margin and retailer margin.
And they used to claim to be no heavier than a (heavy) conventional set up - there was a marketing image with a balance scale that I can't seem to find on the web now. However, there will always be a lighter conventional setup that someone can use to beat them with - you can always drill more out of a conventional kit.
Titanium is a whole lot harder to machine than steel, so it's not just the materials cost - and probably couldn't just do like-for-like parts, probably had to change some too.
Years ago I did a like-for-like weight test - my bike had a normal XT derailleur system, which I took off and replaced with a Rohloff, keeping only the cranks and big ring, and I weighed everything. The weight increase was about 150g I think.