Rohloff real world efficiency — especially for steep hills

Does anyone have any data on this from their own rides? I mean, how your average speed varies with a Rohloff and with standard external gears, and if the difference is any higher for hilly rides?

I converted my gravel bike to Rohloff before leaving the UK last year. On my local Yorkshire loops, all seemed good — I was about 5% slower as I expected. Riding was no less enjoyable.

Now I live in Switzerland, and on really hilly rides, my average speed is plummeting more than I expected. So I wonder if the Rohloff is not so great in the lower half of the range.

The go-to figure for efficiency is the below, as far as I’m aware. That suggests that, on average, efficiency in the lower gears is only a couple of % lower than in the higher gears.

Maybe this is right, and I’m just slow. But I wouldn’t mind some real-world data if anyone has it? Otherwise, I’ll probably end up spending £300 on a 1×10 setup and riding it a few months on the same routes.

I had a commuter bike with an older Alfine, glad the only riding I did on it was the flat mile or so to the station…

TBH put me off even trying a Rohloff.

rohloff is a lot less draggy than an alfine

I don’t notice it at all particularly when climbing steeply.  Trailrat of this parish found it very draggy.  I think its more efficient at lower power / high cadence so pottering along you do not notice but climbing at hundreds of watts power then you do.

I had dual xtr 3*9 and rohloff set ups on the same light weight titanium bike.

No surprises the xtr 3*9 was both quicker and more pleasant to ride.

The crashy rear end hooked up on everything and contributed heavily on the slower average speed for a given power.

My rohloff is wasted on a trailer towing fat bike that gets out to play in winter when both fatness and rohloffness come into their own

Used a rohloff for 3 years on a nice light bike.

It just seemed harder at everything….. if you get what I mean.

Slower gear change slower uphill noisy in the top or bottom half of gears just not a nice experience.

Now on 8 spd claris on my gravel bike and 9 spd on my tourer. Both are far better to use.

Deffo won’t use a rear hub internal gear again… ….. maybe try a pinion.

Out of interest what ratio are you using on your Rohloff set up? (Sprocket and chain ring)

@Ton, from what I’ve read, people seem to feel like the Pinion is less draggy, even though the above testing suggests the Rohloff is actually more efficient. This is actually how I justified keeping my bike and getting a Rohloff (when I really wanted a Tout Terrain Scrambler with a Pinion…) But it does feel more of a drag over here than it did in the Dales.

@trail_rat, yea, I wouldn’t use it on anything more than a long distance XC bike for that reason.

@letmetalktomark, I’m running 42/16. It’s nearly equivalent to running a 38t cog and 10-50t cassette.

yea, I wouldn’t use it on anything more than a long distance XC bike for that reason.

What’s your definition of long distance.i was using mine for 24 hour racing at the time and had planned for the tour divide on it. The tour divide never happened but the rohloff would be the last bike I’d take.

I did different tours instead and ended up on 3*9 claris like ton.

If I get my shit together as planned and end up in Banff by the time I’m 40 it’ll be in grx 810. The rohloff still won’t be the weapon of choice

A long day out, so maybe 100km or so. Perhaps multiday offroad rides if I ever get myself together enough to organise them.

Not racing though…

I really fancy the Tour Divide one day, but I’d def do that single speed.

Could be wrong, but I believe the lower 7 gears use an additional gear that adds a layer of drag compared to 8 to 14.

I had a Rohloff for 3-4 years, and in maintenance terms it was how biking should be. It just works, protects the grindy bits from the mud and so on. But like ton and trail_rat I ended up switching back to 3×9, it just feels easier to ride.

@legometeorology … will the frame allow you to try a larger chainring? I run the same ratio on my Rohloff. In the lowest three gears would need a nigh on vertical approach to make use of that ratio – to the point that they just don’t get used. In fact I barely make it out of the top 7 but I do live in a baron hill-less wilderness!

I would be inclined to try a larger chainring.

@letmetalktomark, tbh, with the hills around here, I’ve found myself using the bottom couple of gears. My last ride involved a hill that felt pretty similar length and steepness to the Hardknott Pass in the Lakes, i.e., 300m climbing at 15-25% nor something, but that came straight after a 5-10% gradient 1600m climb!

Can’t work out that graph lego….

In the alps I’m running an absoluteblack supercompact 46-30 chainrings, and a 11/34 cassette. That gives me enough to keep spinning on long climbs when I would get bogged down if I stayed with a standard 50-34.

If your rohloff doesn’t go low enough, that might be your challenge.

I run 32 / 16 gearing on mine and “A long day out, so maybe 100km or so. Perhaps multiday offroad rides” is what I use mine for.  I’ll take the little big of drag that I do no t notice in exchange for the reliability.  The gearing means I am in 11th direct drive when just rolling along a flat gravel track.  riding to Spain ( 3000 miles|) I lubed the chain once – and the drivetrain was not worn out when I got back.

I had one for a 3 or 4 years on a custom bike. I did like it ,but it never felt efficient.

No real data. The low gears were useful as i was not fit and heavier than i am now. I did LeJog on it and the odd winter audax and some bike packing.

It was slow changing down as u went up a hill ,trying to keep momentum , on gravel , i would think moving your hands off the bars ( to change gear) on a fast roughish descent be dangerous , you can get trigger shifters now , or u could when i had mine. But were very expensive.

Maintenance is a joy and the whole point really, sold mine to fund a proper gravel bike with disc brakes!

I do regret it a bit.

As long ownership helps make the expensive purchase worth it.

1x and the Classified Hub is the future! ?

@susepic, range def isn’t my problem, my low two geras are a little lower than your set up I think, I just loose a little range at the top

https://www.gear-calculator.com/?GR=RLSH&KB=42&RZ=16&UF=2215&TF=90&SL=2.6&UN=KMH&DV=teeth&GR2=DERS&KB2=30,46&RZ2=11,13,15,17,19,21,23,25,27,30,34&UF2=2215

As for the graph, I should have posted the link:

Which Bicycle Gearbox Has The Highest Drive Efficiency? Rohloff, Pinion, Shimano

@tjagain, my problem over here is that on really hilly rides, I spend literally 80% of the ride in the lower 7 gears, 10% coasting down steep hills, and am only pedelling in the more efficient gears 10-12 for the remaining 10%

@aggs, I would love a Classified hub for my SS mtb… that would be fabulous.

Any inefficiency will show up more in speed on steeper stuff than on the flat, as air resistance isn’t taking a chunk out of your performance. A 10% drop in power at 10kmph will cost you 1kmph, but a 10% drop in power at 20kmph might only cost you 1.2kmph as the rest of the inefficiencies are covered up by drag

What he said

I used mine for over a decade on an off road all year round commuter. Was it efficient? Well I was probably 2 minutes slower on every ride but saved 10 times that on cleaning and maintenance. Just great in winter to have a bike that’s filthy the whole time you barely have to touch

I have one on my bikepacking / gravel bike.  I find it more efficient overall, as I’ve geared it to the lower side to take advantage of the higher gears more.  It’s also well worn in.

That’s the thing about the roly, it’s very subjective depending on individual experience.

I still believe the inefficiency thing in lower gears is largely psychosomatic because of the grinding noise = drag.  If it was silent, I think there would be fewer complaints.

Again, just my opinion.  I love the lack of faff though.  Granguanche earlier this year with a freshly waxed chain meant not having to touch the drivetrain for the whole week with 12000M climbing.

I wouldn’t have it on a proper mountain bike, the slow freewheel pickup and rear weight bias is too annoying.

I still believe the inefficiency thing in lower gears is largely psychosomatic because of the grinding noise = drag.  If it was silent, I think there would be fewer complaints.

Yea, I assumed that, especially given the graph I posted. But now I’m in the Alps I’m really not so sure and would love to see some real world data.

I’ve another thread on hilly rides and what speed to expect — my most recent big road/gravel ride over here had my average speed down to 13.5 km! It was only 110km, but it had 3500m of climbing… so I’m wondering if the Rohloff is having some significant effect.

To be fair, a 10sp Deore rear mech and cassette + bar end shifter is barely more than £100, so it’ll be fairly cheap for me to do a few months testing myself. It’s a just quite a faff to change it all.

I suspect that it gets more inefficient the more power you are putting in.  That would make sense to me.

I’d agree with TJ’s last post. I was using mine similarly to trailrat, and couldn’t bear the drag. We were both XC racers and presumably putting out decent power. Your graph shows a drop of nearly 5% in some gears – 5% of 250 Watts is 12.5W, while 5% of 100W TJ might have been spinning on his long Spain trip is only 5W. So a rider putting out more power should notice the difference more. My experience of Rohloff owners suggests this is the case.

If you’re constantly riding up steep hills and putting reasonable effort in rather than spinning, losing 5% of your power, you’re going to notice it.

Did you sell the Kindernay in the end? Was that similar feeling to the Rohloff or not ridden enough to notice the difference?

There is also the German 3×3 hub – no idea what that is like.

I was looking at a Classified in June – tempting to make a 2 speed with one but can’t justify the cost for a single extra gear.

@mick_r, I really liked the Kindernay, and it felt pretty efficient considering it was barely worn in.

Unfortunatately, the (hydraulic) shifter kept getting super mushy two rides after bleeding, and the hub itself kept leaking enough oil onto my rotor to leave my rear brake useless. Then Kinderday went bust…

Pretty annoying — I’m not normally an early adoptor of anything, and typically buy things secondhand.

I’ve another thread on hilly rides and what speed to expect — my most recent big road/gravel ride over here had my average speed down to 13.5 km! It was only 110km, but it had 3500m of climbing… so I’m wondering if the Rohloff is having some significant effect.

Lego – one of the suggestions on that thread was to use strava to see where the greatest impact on your average speed happens? That way you will have a sense of whether it’s the resistance of the hub, or gravity on the climbs.

@susepic, I’m afraid I don’t have a GPS or even a smartphone… Although I could just time my ascent and descent separately on some of these routes, as they really are rides of two parts (well, four, given there’s normally two hills.)

I suspect that it gets more inefficient the more power you are putting in. That would make sense to me.

It’s generally the torque that gives the efficiency hit in epicyclic gear trains. Not power.

So anything with high force and low/lower cadence will amplify any inefficiencies in the gears themselves.

All those meshing teeth, deforming slightly, smushing the lubrication out from the load bearing faces…

IIRC some epicyclic hubs have/had a lowest permissable ratio to try and limit the applied torque. Doubt it makes much difference.

@mert, that may be my problem. I’m generally quite a low candence rider on hills, prob due to single speeding so much

Lego – it feels that you’re trying to understand your perceived slowness on hills, but it may be down to 2 or maybe 3 different factors (gravity, cadence/gearing, gearbox inefficiency, or interaction of all three). Without performance data for those long alpine climbs and flats, and historical info on your UK rides, it becomes very difficult to compare what is going on now versus what was going on in the UK and hence where the opportunities to change things lie.

if you’re not changing to derailleur gears to avoid the inefficiencies, I’d just do more climbing to get fitter, admire those stunning views you posted on the other thread, and eat more spaetzle when you get to the bottom.

@susepic, yea, it is very difficult to work out what’s going on without data, all I have is anecdotes. But they are quite compelling…

I mean, on my mtb rides over here, I’m typically faster than I expect, while on my road/gravel rides I’m always slower. Also, I’m overtaken by basically every roadie I encounter on road climbs (that wasn’t the case in the UK), yet on my mtb rides everyone at the top of the hill congratulates my for riding a motorless bike…

I typically average 13-14.5kmph on my mtb — that’s on 70-90km rides, 1,500m or so of climbing, on a single speed with 29 x 2.6″ tyres, but with relatively little technical riding (they are probably less than 50% singletrack). My hillyest road rides have perhaps 50% more elevation gain per km, but nonetheless it seems very weird to me that my average speeds are dropping to the same level as my mtb rides.

I’d agree with TJ’s last post. I was using mine similarly to trailrat, and couldn’t bear the drag. We were both XC racers and presumably putting out decent power. Your graph shows a drop of nearly 5% in some gears – 5% of 250 Watts is 12.5W, while 5% of 100W TJ might have been spinning on his long Spain trip is only 5W

I think it may be worse than that ie the drag increases exponentially as the torque and thus the loading of the gears goes up.  so I am losing 3% – insignificant – but you are losing 7%.  very noticeable.  Spinning a higher cadence will also be less draggy than mashing a low one.

I think this is how it works

I have a shand daunder rohloff. Been using it for 3 years for holidays, day rides and sometimes commuting. I live in a wet and hilly place ,it’s all uphill from work to home and I have found the low gears not low enough, plus the extra weight is significant on steep hills so the ebike comes out when it is wet, windy or dark . Sorry I don’t have any stats .