View Poll Results: Good Idea
Yes
5
27.78%
No
13
72.22%
Voters: 18. You may not vote on this poll
Non crosschaining cassette concept
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Non crosschaining cassette concept
What do you guys think of this telescoping cassette concept I came up with?
It would eliminate cross chaining, and thereby:
1. Improve efficiency
2. Allow for more gears on the cassette then is possible with a derailleur
3. And theoretically offer smoother shifting
Is this worth pursuing or just too out there?
Thanks for checking this out
Paul
#2
Senior Member
It would eliminate cross chaining, and thereby:
1. Improve efficiency
2. Allow for more gears on the cassette then is possible with a derailleur
3. And theoretically offer smoother shifting
Is this worth pursuing or just too out there?
Thanks for checking this out
Paul
1. Improve efficiency
2. Allow for more gears on the cassette then is possible with a derailleur
3. And theoretically offer smoother shifting
Is this worth pursuing or just too out there?
Thanks for checking this out
Paul
A big part of why derailleurs are so popular is that considerations like chain angle turn out to not actually matter that much. Especially with modern laterally-flexy chains.
Likes For HTupolev:
#3
Disco Infiltrator
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom CA
Posts: 13,446
Bikes: Stormchaser, Paramount, Tilt, Samba tandem
Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3126 Post(s)
Liked 2,102 Times
in
1,366 Posts
There’s a patent for a sliding chain ring too
#4
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
The problem is that it dramatically increases mechanical complexity.
A big part of why derailleurs are so popular is that considerations like chain angle turn out to not actually matter that much. Especially with modern laterally-flexy chains.
A big part of why derailleurs are so popular is that considerations like chain angle turn out to not actually matter that much. Especially with modern laterally-flexy chains.
But when you factor in that the rear derailleur is eliminated as well as the entire front shift gear, it comes out at least wash in parts count and weight, could be better in favor on the telescoping approach
Last edited by Paulc; 07-22-19 at 05:51 PM. Reason: added quote
#5
Expired Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 11,507
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3657 Post(s)
Liked 5,394 Times
in
2,739 Posts
Sell your idea to highest bidder! Shimano, Campy, SRAM. Retire and ride lots more
#6
~>~
Call when the functional prototype has 10,000 flawless miles on it and all of your patents have been approved.
Otherwise: It's a combination of Hot Air and yet another answer to a question that no one asked.
-Bandera
Otherwise: It's a combination of Hot Air and yet another answer to a question that no one asked.
-Bandera
Likes For Bandera:
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Hollister, CA (not the surf town)
Posts: 1,734
Bikes: 2019 Specialized Roubaix Comp Di2, 2009 Roubaix, early 90's Giant Iguana
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 641 Post(s)
Liked 1,517 Times
in
549 Posts
no rear derailleur? Don't quite see how that would work from the video. I see the smaller cogs fitting into the larger ones but you still need something to move the chain unless the chain is stationary and in that case, you need bits to keep the chain from moving and that would be more parts and plenty of friction.
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Mich
Posts: 7,355
Bikes: RSO E-tire dropper fixie brifter
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 2,947 Times
in
1,906 Posts
I like to be a xchain rebel. Sometimes little little determines if the terrain is ridden on or walked on.
__________________
-Oh Hey!
-Oh Hey!
#10
Senior Member
no rear derailleur? Don't quite see how that would work from the video. I see the smaller cogs fitting into the larger ones but you still need something to move the chain unless the chain is stationary and in that case, you need bits to keep the chain from moving and that would be more parts and plenty of friction.
Obviously this doesn't eliminate the rear derailleur, though. It makes it far more complex! You still need the pivoting cage to tension the chain and keep it flowing onto the cogs, and the simple parallelogram joint has been replaced by a complex sliding/telescoping mechanism within the cassette.
#11
Senior Member
Good idea, and as already pointed out, one that has seen prime-time and drifted into history. Working out the details will be the key to success. There are a lot of new comers to the shifting market with hydraulic der. and knock-off shifters, but changing the way the whole thing operates is an interesting idea. If used with already available shifting mechs will be a bonus, because it will simply involve a hub design and not a shifter design. If all it takes is a couple of fixed jockey wheels and a hub with gear cluster, it could be a viable alternative. With that said, develop a working prototype and concept model, put a bunch of miles on it, accurately estimate tooling costs, and manufacturing costs, then sell it to one of the big 3.
No way would I take it to market myself.
No way would I take it to market myself.
#12
Senior Member
The way I see it, the most problematic aspect with this concept is that the cogs would slide along where the actual torque transfer happens, which would make it quite tricky to make it work well and last long. It would most probably need some clutch mechanism of sorts, making it quite sophisticated and costly.
#13
Advanced Slacker
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,210
Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2761 Post(s)
Liked 2,534 Times
in
1,433 Posts
https://youtu.be/aZaK-7sMiTQ
What do you guys think of this telescoping cassette concept I came up with?
It would eliminate cross chaining, and thereby:
1. Improve efficiency
2. Allow for more gears on the cassette then is possible with a derailleur
3. And theoretically offer smoother shifting
Is this worth pursuing or just too out there?
Thanks for checking this out
Paul
What do you guys think of this telescoping cassette concept I came up with?
It would eliminate cross chaining, and thereby:
1. Improve efficiency
2. Allow for more gears on the cassette then is possible with a derailleur
3. And theoretically offer smoother shifting
Is this worth pursuing or just too out there?
Thanks for checking this out
Paul
Also in the form shown, the cassette is going to take up just as much room on the hub as it does now. So I don’t see how this is going to allow more gears.
And why would this lead to smoother shifting?
#14
Advanced Slacker
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,210
Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2761 Post(s)
Liked 2,534 Times
in
1,433 Posts
I think what we are seeing here is all of the weight and complexity of an IGH, but without any of the benefits.
How is this an improvement over an IGH?
How is this an improvement over an IGH?
Last edited by Kapusta; 07-23-19 at 10:55 AM.
#15
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
That seems a lot of engineering complexity to get rid of the very minor problem of cross chaining.
I think you would have to change the name of the non-cog part from derailleur to railleur, or maybe just rail.
I think you would have to change the name of the non-cog part from derailleur to railleur, or maybe just rail.
#16
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#17
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 4,077
Bikes: Velo Orange Piolet
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2228 Post(s)
Liked 2,011 Times
in
972 Posts
That video illustration is physically impossible with current or near future engineering.
If the small cassette is small enough to slide into the big cassette, there will be a massive jump between the biggest cog on the small cassette and the smallest cog on the big cassette.
If the small cassette is small enough to slide into the big cassette, there will be a massive jump between the biggest cog on the small cassette and the smallest cog on the big cassette.
#19
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
That video illustration is physically impossible with current or near future engineering.
If the small cassette is small enough to slide into the big cassette, there will be a massive jump between the biggest cog on the small cassette and the smallest cog on the big cassette.
If the small cassette is small enough to slide into the big cassette, there will be a massive jump between the biggest cog on the small cassette and the smallest cog on the big cassette.
#20
Disco Infiltrator
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom CA
Posts: 13,446
Bikes: Stormchaser, Paramount, Tilt, Samba tandem
Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3126 Post(s)
Liked 2,102 Times
in
1,366 Posts
I had an idea a while back for a 1x front ring that would somehow yaw to stay in line with each cog... like with maybe a CV joint. I could see how to control the yaw with a swashplate controlled by a second cable from the rear shifter, but was trying to figure out how to make it automatic. That's how I found and know about the patent for the sliding front chain ring.
This was before I had much time on a 1x system. Now that I do... it's fine, really. Not something that needs to be fixed. Especially if using a steel ring, like NX. The real problem with cross chaining has to do with rubbing on the FD, and ghost front shifting due to skate in small/small gears with short chain stays, and both are better on 11 than 10 speed because they moved the rings further apart and the chain is narrower.
This was before I had much time on a 1x system. Now that I do... it's fine, really. Not something that needs to be fixed. Especially if using a steel ring, like NX. The real problem with cross chaining has to do with rubbing on the FD, and ghost front shifting due to skate in small/small gears with short chain stays, and both are better on 11 than 10 speed because they moved the rings further apart and the chain is narrower.
__________________
Genesis 49:16-17
Genesis 49:16-17
#21
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
The complexity is going to be immense. The part about telescoping the cassette is only half of the equation. The other part is going to be adjusting the position of the upper jockey wheel as you change gears ( though this may become easier with electric shifting)
Also in the form shown, the cassette is going to take up just as much room on the hub as it does now. So I don’t see how this is going to allow more gears.
And why would this lead to smoother shifting?
Also in the form shown, the cassette is going to take up just as much room on the hub as it does now. So I don’t see how this is going to allow more gears.
And why would this lead to smoother shifting?
It allows for more gears because there is only so much of a cross chain angle possible before the chain will chatter at the exit point of the cassette sprocket of fall off the crank sprocket. Also removing the derailleur gains about an inch of side clearance
It could have smoother shifting because without cross chaining cogs could be ground down much more to create easy transition shift points
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 4,077
Bikes: Velo Orange Piolet
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2228 Post(s)
Liked 2,011 Times
in
972 Posts
Suppose the big cog on the small cassette is the 21t and the small cog on the big cassette is 24t. Look at a 21 tooth cog and look at a 24 tooth cog. Can the 21t cog even fit within the outline of the 24t cog?
#23
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Typical mountain bike cassette, let's say 11-42: 11-13-15-17-19-21-24-28-32-37-42.
Suppose the big cog on the small cassette is the 21t and the small cog on the big cassette is 24t. Look at a 21 tooth cog and look at a 24 tooth cog. Can the 21t cog even fit within the outline of the 24t cog?
Suppose the big cog on the small cassette is the 21t and the small cog on the big cassette is 24t. Look at a 21 tooth cog and look at a 24 tooth cog. Can the 21t cog even fit within the outline of the 24t cog?
The image attached is a 21t with internal clearance for an 18t
#24
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Typical mountain bike cassette, let's say 11-42: 11-13-15-17-19-21-24-28-32-37-42.
Suppose the big cog on the small cassette is the 21t and the small cog on the big cassette is 24t. Look at a 21 tooth cog and look at a 24 tooth cog. Can the 21t cog even fit within the outline of the 24t cog?
Suppose the big cog on the small cassette is the 21t and the small cog on the big cassette is 24t. Look at a 21 tooth cog and look at a 24 tooth cog. Can the 21t cog even fit within the outline of the 24t cog?