[HN Gopher] Campagnolo's revolutionary new gearing system from 1946
___________________________________________________________________
Campagnolo's revolutionary new gearing system from 1946
Author : giuliomagnifico
Score : 98 points
Date : 2021-11-13 06:42 UTC (2 days ago)
(HTM) web link (cyclingtips.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (cyclingtips.com)
| top_sigrid wrote:
| While this is amazing, I keep wondering, why - even though in the
| 1940s - they didn't come up with the idea of a chain tensioner to
| compensate for different sprocket sizes. Instead they used this
| wheel suspension quick release mechanism which needed to be
| operated while driving, which just seems insane.
|
| Weren't chain propelled systems a thing in other machines back
| then and a chain tensioner a known solution? Or were they just
| not suitable for a bike back then for some reason? Does anybody
| know something about this?
| usrusr wrote:
| Dropouts without chain tensioning slot were simply unheard of
| at the time and if you happen to be the inventor of the quick
| release it's not really surprising that you make it a key
| element of the shifting process.
|
| I was wondering for a while about the purpose of the teeth on
| the axle/dropout, because clearly with bearings between cogs
| and axle there's no way to force the wheel forwards pulling on
| the chain (you force the wheel backwards for higher tension by
| applying a little braking force), but the teeth on the axle are
| what makes the movement in the dropout symmetric, so your wheel
| will remain aligned to the frame center line. Really clever!
| jzwinck wrote:
| It's because there was no freewheel. A chain tensioner only
| works well when there is driving force applied in one
| direction, not the other. Put any force backward into the
| pedals (e.g. to slow down) and the tensioner will be forced to
| its most slack position (or broken off).
| mauvehaus wrote:
| The article describes it as four sprockets on a freehub. One
| would hope that cyclingtips.com would get that fairly
| material detail correct.
|
| It also mentions the rider having to pedal backwards to shift
| the chain among the sprockets. That would not be possible on
| a fixed hub without slowing to a stop and reversing. One
| suspects that would rather negate any benefits of this system
| over a flip-flop wheel.
| jzwinck wrote:
| The freehub was not invented for another 30 years. But I
| see that the Cambio Corsa did have a freewheel (similar
| idea). I was wrong to think it used four fixed gears. So
| indeed it could have used a chain tensioner!
|
| Video showing it in action (skip to the middle):
| https://youtu.be/MQe0fLEQ2jY
| mauvehaus wrote:
| Yeah, I kind of let that one slide since it makes no
| difference from the standpoint of somebody trying to
| change gears while simultaneously not dying :-)
|
| And let's be honest: it's entirely possible that the
| author has never changed a cassette or freewheel or seen
| a freewheel if they have. I'm almost 40, and I've only
| ever seen freewheels on pretty old 10 and 12 speeds
| (that's 2x5 and 2x6. Not a modern 1x drivetrain). And
| only because I volunteered at a place that fixes up
| bikes.
| Cockbrand wrote:
| I think there's a mixup between two things here. A
| _freehub_ contains both the cassette body and the
| _freewheel_. The former has been invented in the 1930s
| and popularized by Shimano in the late 1970s [1], the
| latter has been around since the 19th century [2].
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freehub
|
| [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freewheel
| ptha wrote:
| Just a link skipping to the gear change:
| https://youtu.be/MQe0fLEQ2jY?t=165
| xattt wrote:
| At the risk of this turning into an episode of Connections
| with James Burke playing out in text, why was there no
| freewheel at that point in time yet?
| jacquesm wrote:
| There was, the article mentions the cyclist having to pedal
| backwards in order to allow the chain slack to be taken up
| when gearing 'up' (smaller sprocket). That would be
| impossible without a freewheel, unless they mean to say
| 'exert some pressure backwards' rather than backwards
| pedaling, I don't see how a fixed linkage would be
| compatible with this system, it would behave terribly bad
| during a gear change because the system would always be
| under tension.
|
| Freewheels were in use in the tour since 1936 at least, and
| possibly even earlier:
|
| https://hizokucycles.bigcartel.com/single-speed-history
| analog31 wrote:
| A cycling historian could clear up whether freewheels were
| allowed in racing during that time period. They were
| forbidden in the original Tour of France. Variable gearing
| already existed, in enclosed gear hubs, and remained a
| preferred choice for non competition cycling for at least
| into the earl 1970s.
| ubermonkey wrote:
| Worldwide, enclosed-gear hubs are STILL vastly more popular
| than derailleur-style gearing implementations, btw.
|
| They're part of what we might call the divide between
| "cycling" and "riding a bicycle." The cycling hobby is
| mostly about go-fast or go-far for its own sake, but in
| much of the world a bicycle is just transportation. In
| those places, you trade away efficiency or speed or weight
| in favor of the "it just works forever" bulletproof-ness
| that the enclosed hub provides.
| yodelshady wrote:
| Given a totally free choice, I'd love to try building up
| a racing frame with a modern hub gear. All those moving
| parts exposed to road grime, gone.
| nradov wrote:
| Well you can do it if you have the money. They're
| slightly less efficient than a regular cassette and
| derailleur, but if you're not racing it probably doesn't
| make much difference.
|
| https://www.rohloff.de/en/products/speedhub
| usrusr wrote:
| The gravel sub-genre has spawned a few frames built for
| the Pinion drive gearing solution (located in the bottom
| breaker area, like a central ebike motor, started by car
| gearbox engineers). Arguably that could be considered the
| next level of hub gears.
| amluto wrote:
| I have only personally had two serious failures of a
| bicycle transmission system, and both were on a rather
| new high end Rohloff hub. One was a mechanical failure
| (seal failure causing an oil leak). The other was a
| complete e-shifting failure caused by the most excellent
| engineers at Bosch's failure to allow the shifting system
| to operate independently of the ebike drive.
|
| (The latter is such a severe design error that I think no
| one should purchase the Bosch+Rohloff system until or
| unless it gets fixed. Use something else. An ebike is not
| a car, and it should be operable as a rider-powered
| bicycle even in the event of an electrical fault.)
| analog31 wrote:
| Indeed, my daily driver is a Sturmey Archer AW from 1963.
| But I must say, contemporary derailleur systems with
| indexed shifting work pretty darn well.
| ubermonkey wrote:
| They need maintenance that sealed-hub bikes can mostly do
| without, though.
|
| My road bike has SRAM eTap on it. It's beautiful, sleek,
| and shifts perfectly almost every time. BUT that
| performance starts to suffer if I let the drive train get
| dirty, especially if I let gunk accumulate on the jockey
| wheels.
|
| Your Sturmey can be ridden without such concerns. I mean,
| I'd never be able to keep up on my group rides on it, but
| for a general use bicycle it's probably superior.
| top_sigrid wrote:
| Ok, this makes perfectly sense and is actually quite easy to
| understand. Thanks from a mechanical noob.
| antihero wrote:
| This is the thing that seemed most crazy to me. They are
| actually adjusting the wheel in the dropout whilst zipping
| along in a scrunched over position. Seems like if you messed up
| couldn't the axle pop out of the dropout with horrendous
| results?!
| usrusr wrote:
| Likely, if they didn't include some equivalent of "lawyer
| tabs" on the dropout. Compared to the general level of risk-
| taking of doing things like competitively descending Galibier
| or Tourmalet on wooden rims that added risk is probably a
| rounding error.
| pmontra wrote:
| My father had one of those bikes when he was 20. He told me
| that he never managed to switch gear uphill like pros. He
| always had to stop, switch gear and start again. So it was
| not easy to master.
| usrusr wrote:
| Pardon the climb nerd-out, but about that historical photo that
| claims to show Bartali climbing Galibier in the 1948 Tour de
| France: the horizon line in the background doesn't strike me as
| any you could see on the Galibier ascent. And according to that
| year's stage plan, Galibier was the first climb of the day and
| you'll have a hard time finding any spot in the climb were the
| rider would climb left to right through a view like that with the
| morning from that angle.
| lonelyasacloud wrote:
| Given the UCI's normal pace of innovation it's somewhat
| surprising that pro cyclists aren't still stuck with this.
| jacquesm wrote:
| Two words: disc brakes.
| TremendousJudge wrote:
| I'm pretty sure that they don't run disc brakes because they
| are too heavy
| gerbilly wrote:
| Also disc brakes can give you brake fade. I have a
| hydraulic disc with a 203mm rotor, and even that huge disk
| sometimes fades on long descents.
| walrus01 wrote:
| The advantage of disc brakes on the medium to high end
| _consumer_ road bike, however, is that you wear out the
| cheap and consumable pads and rotor, not the rims on what
| might be a $2000-by-itself 700c wheelset.
|
| the large bike manufacturer sponsors of the pro teams of
| course want their team to ride the equipment that they're
| selling to consumers as the current and next model year.
| or at least something that very closely resembles it and
| sells for $2500+ at retail. look at how many trek carbon
| fiber madones were sold to enthusiastic amateurs during
| the peak armstrong years.
| mikestew wrote:
| I'll take brake fade over rim brakes overheating the
| tubular glue and my tire rolls off, which has happened in
| the past on several occasions in pro races. Even on
| clinchers that stay attached to the rim, I've had rim
| brakes get kinda fady on long descents. It's not the same
| as disc fade (probably because the causes are different),
| but a bit unnerving nonetheless.
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| They do run disc brakes because it's been forced on
| everybody. The weight is irrelevant when you already have
| to find ways to make the bike heavy enough to meet the
| minimum limit.
| lonelyasacloud wrote:
| "The weight is irrelevant when you already have to find
| ways to make the bike heavy enough to meet the minimum
| limit."
|
| Exactly, and the minimum weight limitation comes from :-)
| danw1979 wrote:
| > Early indications suggest the highly complex and somewhat
| controversial system consists of two levers mounted on the rear
| of the frame. The longer of these two levers operates the rear
| wheel quick-release retention mechanism. The shorter lever guides
| the bicycle chain across a revolutionary four sprocket cluster on
| the rear freehub.
|
| An interestingly early example of a dangerous "dark UI".
| prova_modena wrote:
| I own a late 40s Italian bicycle equipped with Cambio Corsa. It's
| now a display piece because I don't want to maintain the glued on
| tubular tires or risk breaking something irreplaceable. However
| in the past I have taken it out on a couple short, flat rides to
| test the system, enough to make a couple observations about using
| it.
|
| When changing gears, it doesn't feel like there is much risk of
| the wheel slipping forward out of the dropouts. The dropouts
| themselves are angled up and back, which helps prevent that.
| Also, when changing gears you are sitting back, putting weight on
| the seat and changing the weight distribution of the bike to
| favor the rear. This also counteracts the tendency of the wheel
| to come forward. The action of the chain only pulls the axle
| forward in the dropouts when shifting to a lower gear (higher
| tooth count cog on the freewheel, closer to the wheel spokes).
| There isn't much risk of "overshifting" the chain to a point
| where it will pull the axle out of the dropouts, simply because
| the chain would just contact the spokes or a spoke protector and
| slide back down into gear (unless something is really broken).
|
| Also, you can see from the photos in the article how differently
| the dimensions of racing bicycle frames were fitted to riders
| back then. Modern racing bikes tend to have a lot of seatpost
| extension and longer handlebar stems, which shift the rider's
| weight forward on the bike. A simplified explanation is that this
| improves aerodynamics and certain handling characteristics, at
| the cost of requiring the rider have better core strength and
| flexibility. In contrast, the photos in the article show typical
| mid-20th century bicycle fit, with much less seatpost extension
| and shorter stems. Compared to modern racers, Coppi and Bartali
| sit father back, with their butt closer to the top tube. This
| puts the Cambio Corsa system in closer reach and the weight
| distribution has a more stable, rearward bias. The action of
| reaching back to change gears would feel treacherous and
| destabilizing on a modern racing bike, but would be a bit more
| comfortable on the bikes of the time.
|
| This is all said with the big caveat that I have never ridden my
| Cambio Corsa bike in a long distance or competitive scenario.
| Undoubtedly it's still a challenging system to master. I can
| imagine the extreme difficulty of operating it on the unpaved,
| bumpy climbs typical of that era.
|
| Edit: Here is a link to scans of the original patent drawings for
| the Cambio Corsa. It shows the mechanical details- click on the
| "Pages" tab to see all the scanned pages of the patent.
|
| https://www.disraeligears.co.uk/site/french_patent_899402_-_...
| jacquesm wrote:
| 'Cambio Corsa' -> exchange while on the course, in case you were
| wondering. The lack of idler gears is the interesting part
| because that makes this a very efficient system. Once it is in a
| particular gear there is no difference between just having the
| one gear other than a little bit of extra weight. Derailleurs
| with idler gears were already in use in the TDF long before this.
| The lack of a detent before the rear wheel can drop out would
| give me the willies about operating this system at any speed, you
| are supposed to peddle forward while changing the gear to a
| smaller gear ratio (larger rear gear), and backwards when gearing
| 'up' to maintain constant chain tension.
|
| Modern idlers are quite efficient, but back then the materials
| science that allowed both a light weight idler wheel yet strong
| enough and friction free to be 'in play' all the time wasn't
| really there yet, derailleur itself had been invented decades
| ago. But that didn't take all that long though, a few years later
| technology had caught up.
|
| See:
|
| https://www.velonews.com/gear/road-gear/how-tour-de-france-e...
|
| Which I think is a much better article on the subject.
|
| https://www.disraeligears.co.uk/site/who_invented_the_derail...
| freediver wrote:
| Also back in the day, bicycles didn't have the freehub on the
| read wheel, so going downhill meant you always had to turn pedals
| to match wheel speed, no exception, you couldn't just stop and
| idle like today.
|
| Proud owner of a Campagnolo groupset on a custom made bicycle,
| wanted it for heritage reasons.
| giva wrote:
| I think they did have a freewheel however. Here's some footage
| from 1946:
|
| https://youtu.be/k0AUknbBZ3U
| analog31 wrote:
| Freewheel was a thing by the 1890s.
| Lio wrote:
| This is how track bikes work. It's quite a shock the first time
| you go to a velodrome if you've never ridden one before.
| xchaotic wrote:
| also proper fixie/messenger bikes. I used to use one when
| commuting in London, due to low price it was relatively
| unattractive to bike thieves and it was very simple to
| maintain - no brakes, no gears (you had to skid/backpedal to
| stop quickly)
| jacquesm wrote:
| This was mostly a fashion thing though, super dangerous and
| illegal in traffic to boot. You _really_ shouldn 't drive a
| fixed gear bicycle in traffic unless you have at least one
| and better yet two additional brakes. But according to
| purists that spoils the lines of their bikes, apparently
| fashion trumps safety.
| jasonwatkinspdx wrote:
| Yeah, I rode one for years when I was younger but stopped
| due to issues with my knee. I ride a dutch style bike with
| an internal hub on the rear these days, but do miss how the
| track bike is so light and fluid once you're used to it. It
| becomes like an appendage instead of being a bike you ride.
|
| For anyone unfamiliar the reason they're popular with
| messengers and such is in urban traffic it becomes very
| smooth and simple to keep pace with the cars surrounding
| you. And some people just ride them because they like doing
| the skid stop or bar spins or such. These days messengers
| favor hot rod e-bikes though because they're just
| dramatically faster and that directly corresponds to more
| income.
| sleavey wrote:
| Didn't they get banned or there was a campaign to ban them
| after someone was killed by someone riding a fixie, in
| London?
| andylynch wrote:
| You're probably thinking of Charle Alliston who killed
| someone on Old St and got 18 months for it - to be road
| legal, fixed-gear bikes must still have a front brake,
| and have at least since the fifties, A fixed gear counts
| as a back brake but you must have two for redundancy.
| de_keyboard wrote:
| Charlie Alliston should have been using a front brake,
| but a few things got lost in the media frenzy:
|
| - More pedestrians are killed by motor vehicle than bikes
| in London BY FAR
|
| - More cyclists are killed by motor vehicles than bikes
| in London BY FAR
|
| - More motorists are killed by motor vehicles than bikes
| in London BY FAR
|
| It was incredibly depressing to watch people spend so
| much attention on one (pretty rare!) case rather the real
| sources of road danger in the city.
| saila wrote:
| On top of that, the associated pollution kills far more
| people, contributes to climate change, and causes tons of
| respiratory illness.
| oriolid wrote:
| It's not news when dog bites man. And based on Wikipedia,
| it seems that men bite dogs more often than cyclist kill
| other people in accidents.
| xchaotic wrote:
| This. Most cyclist fatalities in London are caused by
| Heavy Good Vehicles illegally overtaking and then turning
| and therefore trapping the poor cyclist in the blind
| spot. Nothing to do with the wheel hub design or bicycle
| braking system.
| matsemann wrote:
| Tried the same in Norway, the hills absolutely destroyed me
| haha. Going up was hard because of no gearing. Going down
| was even harder, a struggle of working against the pedals
| to not spin too fast.
| wiredfool wrote:
| Yeah. Apparently, it's pretty common to lock your rear leg
| when sitting down after a sprint. This is... not advisable on
| a track bike, and one of the things that needs to be trained
| out of riders in the track class.
| Lio wrote:
| Gino Bartali, mentioned in the article, has the most amazing back
| story.
|
| He used his bike training to smuggle secret documents for the
| Italian Resistance and was awarded Righteous Among the Nations
| for helping Jews escape the Nazis.
|
| Like many he stayed quite about his wartime exploits and was only
| recognised for them after his death.
|
| A quite remarkable man.
| gpderetta wrote:
| Thanks for the pointer, I did not know about that. From his
| wiki page:
|
| "The good is done, but it is not said. And certain medals hang
| on the soul, not on the jacket".
| ubermonkey wrote:
| My two favorite largely unknown cycling stories from history
| are (1) this one and (b) the story of Major Taylor.
| 1-more wrote:
| I'm in the middle of The Fastest Man in the World about
| Taylor right now. It's a gripping read, and it does a lot to
| tie in the politics of the era, what the bicycle boom meant
| for New York before the advent of the personal car, and the
| wider ripple effects of the bicycle boom such as on the Free
| State of the Congo.
|
| My fun fact about Taylor is this: In November 1898 he set a
| world record 1/4 mile time at 22.2s averaging 40.5 mph. The
| earliest land speed record by a car that I could find (on
| wikipedia so I'm not that thorough) was set by an electric
| car(!) on Dec 18 1898 at 39.245 mph. So he threw down a
| gauntlet and a month later cars failed to pick it up. A hero
| in the war on cars.
| usrusr wrote:
| > and was only recognised for them after his death.
|
| Yeah, that was a painful day when you considered yourself a
| Coppist ;) "damn, turns out the other guy was even more
| awesome!"
| Lio wrote:
| I always thought of myself as a big Coppi fan too.
|
| When you look at riders like Bartali, Coppi or Monsieur
| Jacques the only thing I can conclude is that these guys led
| more "interesting" lives back then.
| CalChris wrote:
| My favorite modern shifting tech is SRAM's Force 22 Yaw front
| derailleur. Well ok, index shifting is there too.
|
| Yaw rotates the front derailleur cage slightly as you shift
| rings. This keeps the cage inline with the chainline and makes
| for a quiet FD with no trimming necessary.
|
| It's supposed to be Force 22 specific but I have SRAM SL700 2x10
| and Shimano 105 10s cranks on that bike. I installed it but then
| had my LBS adjust it.
|
| It is the first FD I've ever had that I like.
| suprfnk wrote:
| > Furthermore, from our calculations, _this is the most advanced
| a racing bicycle will ever be or can ever be._ The very nature of
| the 1 /8'' wide sprockets means four is the maximum one freehub
| can carry.
|
| Ah, the "640k ought to be enough for anybody" of the bicycling
| world. These days you can get 13 speed on the back derailleur
| alone -- not even taking into account the front derailleur.
| xchaotic wrote:
| yup - even Campagnolo's own EKAR is 1x13
| usrusr wrote:
| Well, if you do go to 13, you _are_ not taking into account any
| front derailleur. True for both the wire-operated tredici as
| well as the hydraulic trece.
| devb wrote:
| That was written to be tongue in cheek. This is not actually
| copy written in the 1940s.
|
| > this is to be enjoyed and imagined, not taken for fact. Read
| with a speedy wartime radio advert voice.
| stefs wrote:
| one of the more recent developments is combining a rear
| derailleur with a internal gear hub (both electronically and
| wirelessly shifted) and a single front chainring. some upsides,
| some downsides, but definitely something to watch.
| mcntsh wrote:
| Actually, internal gear hubs predate the derailer system, but
| in the past 20 years IGHs have gotten much better and are
| making a come back.
| stefs wrote:
| yes, i meant combining an IGH with a rear derailer (instead
| of a front derailer). afaik there's only one supplier of
| those currently (and the system is a bit half-baked, i.e.
| no DI2 compatibility for reusing the existing shifters).
| hocuspocus wrote:
| The biggest issue is the complexity, weight and poor
| efficiency compared to a derailleur. And also fewer and
| unevenly graded gears, though that's probably less true
| with Pinion hubs.
|
| It's not that hard to avoid shifting under heavy load
| (higher-end IGHs shift fine under _some_ load). And on a
| commuter bike, being able to shift gears at a standstill is
| _great_.
|
| Edit: you completely changed the content of your message
| and my reply doesn't make a lot of sense now.
| jacquesm wrote:
| Both Rohloff and Shimano have been making pretty sturdy
| internal gear hubs for a long time, efficiency is
| fantastic. Ditto for the venerable Sturmey Archer
| internal gear hub, which goes back to the dark ages.
|
| Efficiency sucks for the continuous variable kind, like
| the Enviolo and other variations on that theme.
| hocuspocus wrote:
| With the Shimano 8 and 11 speed hubs you can tell that
| some gears have a poor efficiency, it's really
| noticeable!
|
| Apparently the Pinion and Rohloff fare better: https://bi
| keshed.johnhoogstrate.nl/bicycle/drivetrain/shiman...
| jacquesm wrote:
| I have a Shimano 8 here, which gears do you notice this
| with? I'd love to see if I can replicate that.
| hocuspocus wrote:
| The gear #4 is really bad especially in comparison with
| the #5 (the 1:1, direct-drive gear).
| jacquesm wrote:
| Ok, thank you!
| justinator wrote:
| I think Sturmey Archer is no more except in name so don't
| expect quality from new SA stuff.
| mcntsh wrote:
| I find the shifting in the IGHs to be super annoying
| because it destroys your cadence. You have to stop
| peddling, then shift, then start peddling again.
| Weight/efficiency are also definitely noticeable.
|
| Complexity is a weird thing. For the vast majority of
| owners the most you'll need to do is change the oil every
| 10k kilometers, but for the unlucky ones that do need it
| serviced, that requires shipping your hub across the
| world.
|
| I'm hoping that their growing popularity improves the
| technology and makes them cheaper. I tour bikes as a
| hobby and make pretty okay money, but I still can't
| justify the price point of a Rohloff system.
| hocuspocus wrote:
| It's not a particularly recent idea, I believe Brompton has
| been doing that for decades. And it fills a very specific
| niche.
|
| On most bikes I don't really see the point.
|
| Either you want the convenience of an internal gear hub and
| you have plenty of options that offer a pretty wide range.
| For instance the Nexus/Alfine 8 feels plenty enough for a
| commuter bike even if you live in a hilly place. If you're
| rich you can go with an Alfine 11, Rohloff, or Pinion.
|
| Or you don't want the weight/cost/inefficiency, nowadays you
| can get affordable and reliable 1x10 or 1x11 groupsets. And
| of course on a proper road bike you'll still want a double
| chainring.
| stefs wrote:
| that combination system i've been talking about is for
| proper road bikes.
|
| > And of course on a proper road bike you'll still want a
| double chainring.
|
| why? the IGH replaces the front double chainring. weight
| and price might be a bit higher but it's probably more
| robust, less maintenance and you can shift under full load.
|
| https://cyclingtips.com/2020/07/this-rear-hub-
| has-2x-wireles...
| hocuspocus wrote:
| I wasn't aware!
|
| Still, I'll believe it when I see it at amateur cycling
| clubs. At pro-level I don't think anyone would take the
| performance hit (even though they claim it's compensated)
| just to avoid having a front derailleur.
|
| For gravel, cyclocross or even casual road biking, if a
| double chainring really bothers you, then 1x12 groupsets
| exist.
|
| Edit: https://www.rosebikes.com/rose-backroad-
| classified-2x11-2696...
|
| Nice bike but the price bump compared to the other
| electric-shifting models is pretty steep!
| mauvehaus wrote:
| The Brompton system is ... weird. Owing to the fact that
| the bike folds and the length of the chain line changes
| dramatically when you fold it, a traditional parallelogram
| linkage derailleur wouldn't work.
|
| Instead, they have a crazy custom thing that runs the chain
| through a little pivoting fork that shifts the chain left
| and right on the two speed freewhatever[0]. The six speed
| adds the three speed internally geared hub. You can also
| get one or the other alone.
|
| I believe they developed that combination when the supply
| of 5 speed hubs that fit their highly non-standard read hub
| spacing dried up.
|
| I have a two speed Brompton and love it, but their
| engineers are next-level crazy in the best possible way.
|
| [0] I wouldn't even care to guess. Everything they do is
| insane.
| trhway wrote:
| >The very founder of the Tour de France bicycle event himself,
| Henri Desgrange, deplored such technology. "I still feel that
| variable gears are only for people over forty-five," he said.
| "Isn't it better to triumph by the strength of your muscles than
| by the artifice of a derailleur? We are getting soft. Come on,
| fellows."
|
| In my teen-age years in 198x USSR i, like pretty much everybody
| there back then, had a fixie because "sport" bicycle with gears
| cost double (64 vs. 130 rubles with engineer salary being 200),
| and i envied the lucky few "sport" owners especially when i had
| to cycle my fixie uphill :). Now living in US I was really
| surprised how fixies became the trend as supposedly being
| superior to the gears.
| angled wrote:
| At the mere cost of destroying your knees...
| oriolid wrote:
| Citation needed.
| jacquesm wrote:
| Or the lives of other users of the commons.
| spamizbad wrote:
| The irony is that a version of this exists today: Lance
| Armstrong teased Chris Froome's larger rear cassette (Froome
| used lower ratios on climbs to maintain a higher pedaling
| cadence)
| jacquesm wrote:
| It's a fashion statement, nothing more than that. Like a towel,
| when a man has a fixed gear bicycle others will immediately
| assume the presence of expendable income, a recent model
| iPhone, a loft apartment and a high bandwidth connection.
| oriolid wrote:
| Also, if a man passes you on a climb with a fixed gear bike,
| you should assume that they could do it faster on a geared
| bike.
| jacquesm wrote:
| That won't happen because I'll be doing it faster on a
| geared bike ;)
| TremendousJudge wrote:
| I'm told fixed gear bicycles are very fun to ride as well
| rhinoceraptor wrote:
| It's like the difference between driving a manual
| transmission versus driving an automatic. You're way more
| connected to the machine, especially when you're out in the
| country where it's quiet, because fixed gears are a lot
| quieter than normal bikes.
|
| There are a lot of cliches people use to describe it, but
| you just kind of have to experience it to get it.
| jacquesm wrote:
| It's the difference between driving a regular car and one
| without a gearbox, brakes and clutch, in other words, not
| something suitable for use in traffic.
| Lio wrote:
| Not necessarily "better", just different.
|
| There is no one bike that will excel in all conditions. If you
| live somewhere relatively flat then trading off the flexibility
| for the reliability, low cost and light weight of a derailleur
| free gearing system might be worth it.
|
| Same goes for hub gears. You trade heavier weight and
| efficiency for not having the gear box exposed.
|
| Personally I like the rang of a compact crank and a double up
| front when on tarmac or gravel and a 1x when on single track
| but that's just me.
| jjt-yn_t wrote:
| bicycle [expense] [luxury] phrase from the 1970s: "full campy"
| jamesfisher wrote:
| Yet another website to add the user-scalable=0 sin bin
| Cockbrand wrote:
| Bicycle gear shifting technology has come a long way since then,
| with very reliable, even electronic systems. But we're still
| messing with dirty, grubby chains that need to be maintained
| properly and are worn out after 5000km at best. I think that the
| bicycle drivetrain is quite rife for disruption. Someone has yet
| to solve the problem of efficiency - a new drivetrain is supposed
| to have less than 1% power loss. But a new concept could really
| change the entire industry, and it's quite a big industry.
| gertrunde wrote:
| I recall reading about https://www.ceramicspeed.com a few years
| back, which sounds a bit like what you're describing, but I've
| no idea how much it has/hasn't taken off.
| Cockbrand wrote:
| I've seen this, but while I muchly appreciate the creativity
| and engineering effort, it doesn't seem sturdy enough to be
| practical. Also, it's huge and still very exposed. It might
| even in its current incarnation be feasible on a road bike,
| but surely not on an MTB or gravel bike which may become
| dirty and muddy. The website seems not to have been updated
| since 2019, so I assume development is at least on a hiatus,
| if it hasn't ceased at all:
| https://www.ceramicspeed.com/en/cycling/d3
| selectodude wrote:
| I found a link from 2021 essentially saying they've gone
| nowhere since 2019.
|
| https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/ceramicspeed-driven-
| opens-u...
| top_sigrid wrote:
| Totally agree. Drive belts are becoming a thing more and more,
| which I would deem to be a disruption. Far less maintainence is
| needed, no oil involved, no chain links, they last way longer
| than chains etc.
|
| But these obviously only work on single speeds or enclosed-gear
| hubs. For derailleur-style gearing a change away from chains
| with the properties you described would actually really be a
| good thing, although I do not see it coming. With regards to
| power loss, chains get better and better, though.
| jgys wrote:
| They also only work with frames that have been specially
| designed to allow fitting a belt, as I understand it. Chains
| can be easily broken and joined in the shop (or even on the
| roadside), but not so with belts, so the frame must come
| apart to get the belt going through the rear triangle, which
| substantially complicates frame building and design.
|
| I don't mean to suggest this tradeoff isn't worthwhile to
| people who want clean, low-maintenance bicycle drivetrains
| for working or commuting, but the extra cost of manufacturing
| makes it harder to persuade cost-conscious consumers.
| usrusr wrote:
| These days you have Veer who offer a split belt that unlike
| the closed loop Gates belt can also be used with closed
| frames. But they still need to be manufactured to a
| specific length, unlike chains which are sold one size
| easily adjusted to all.
| top_sigrid wrote:
| This is true and a good point, but: It is hopefully only a
| matter of time until belts can also be joined and opened.
| Veers split belt [1] system already does this, hopefully
| this becomes more common, so the need for a belt specific
| bike-frame disappears.
|
| - [1] https://www.veercycle.com/products/split-belt-pro
|
| Edit: As pointed out in another comment, the fixed size of
| a belt remains though, unlike with a chain.
| Cockbrand wrote:
| Absolutely! For commuter bikes, a belt drive is fantastic in
| it being very clean and low maintenance. And it's amazing how
| smooth the ride feels compared to a chain drive. But as you
| said, it's either single speed or has a gear hub with less
| efficiency.
| dont__panic wrote:
| And for touring as well -- nothing like completely
| eliminating chain lube and cleaning equipment from your
| panniers. Plus, drive belts last something like 10-20k
| miles, so the price difference quickly pays off. Plus you
| don't have to worry about anything snagging on and breaking
| a derailleur, and belts work better in cold conditions,
| too.
|
| I see them as the drivetrain equivalent of disc brakes --
| sure, rim brakes are still around. But the tradeoffs are so
| worthwhile that you effectively can't buy a high-end bike
| with rim brakes any more (disclaimer: I know that certain
| touring bikes come with cantis by default, but they're
| rarer and rarer each year).
|
| The only difference I see is that internal shifter hubs can
| cost 5-10% efficiency compared to derailleurs. In the
| commuting and touring communities, that's no big deal --
| it's comparable to dynamo loss, which is considered a
| totally acceptable tradeoff for always-on lights in those
| communities.
|
| But in the racing community, chains will probably stick
| around for a long time, at least until internal hubs lose
| that efficiency loss. There's just too much to lose in that
| 5-10% for racers, even if it's totally worth it for me.
| SavantIdiot wrote:
| A company called "Dana" made crank-mounted 10-speed internal
| transmissions for bikes in the 60's and 70's. They also had a
| 3-speed that was more popular. I had an opportunity to work on
| one in the early 80's, similar to the one pictured in Fred
| DeLong's seminal book on bicycle repair. It weighed a ton and
| was extremely labor intensive.
|
| Granted, we have access to better materials today, but the
| cost/complexity cannot compete with the weight, simplicity, and
| rapid repairability of chain+derailleurs.
| mitchbob wrote:
| With a chain case that fully encloses the chain to keep it
| clean together with an oil bath to keep it lubed, a
| conventional bicycle chain can last almost forever. But as it's
| been done in the past, this approach adds quite a bit of weight
| and makes getting off the rear wheel to repair flats and
| replace tires much harder. If there's a way to keep the good
| parts of this and address the shortcomings, it would be real
| progress.
| analog31 wrote:
| In addition, if you have an old Sturmey Archer hub, it
| automatically lubricates the chain by leaking oil.
|
| I've thought about how to make a modern practical chain case.
| xadhominemx wrote:
| It's not going to happen. Bicycle drivetrains are a very simple
| system and the engineering is very mature. The trade offs of
| alternative systems are well understood and have been for
| decades. Most innovation these days is finding ways to reduce
| the cost of well understood means of improving efficiency, eg
| reducing mass.
| toqy wrote:
| I was looking at one of these[1], which is both more complex
| and heavier. I liked the idea of it being potentially lower
| maintenance though, and just the cool factor of having
| something unusual.
|
| 1. https://www.prioritybicycles.com/products/the600
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-15 23:03 UTC)