Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Folding Bikes
Reload this Page >

Folders and Shimano IGH

Notices
Folding Bikes Discuss the unique features and issues of folding bikes. Also a great place to learn what folding bike will work best for your needs.

Folders and Shimano IGH

Old 03-21-18, 01:39 AM
  #1  
JohanNeeda
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Folders and Shimano IGH

I have a folder with an IGH, Shimano C300-7R. Front chainring is 44T rear cog is 17T (factory standard). The gear ratio is 2.58. The Shimano recommendation is max 2.1.


Any of you have similar gear ratios? How does the IGH work in the long run. I know that IGH cannot be really forced as they get damaged, therefore my question.
JohanNeeda is offline  
Old 03-21-18, 06:52 AM
  #2  
rhenning
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,311
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 272 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 16 Times in 12 Posts
I would try it before modification of any kind. It may work perfectly for you. Crunching numbers and real world experience are not always the same thing. Let us know how it works. Roger
rhenning is offline  
Old 03-21-18, 08:25 AM
  #3  
sweeks
Senior Member
 
sweeks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicago area
Posts: 1,189

Bikes: Airborne "Carpe Diem", Motobecane "Mirage", Trek 6000, Strida 2, Dahon "Helios XL", Dahon "Mu XL", Tern "Verge S11i"

Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 524 Post(s)
Liked 27 Times in 22 Posts
Originally Posted by JohanNeeda View Post
[FONT=Calibri][SIZE=3]I have a folder with an IGH, Shimano C300-7R. Front chainring is 44T rear cog is 17T (factory standard). The gear ratio is 2.58. The Shimano recommendation is max 2.1.
I *could* be wrong here, but I think the Shimano recommendation is a *minimum*. A larger chainring will not over-torque the hub; however, a larger rear sprocket might. This was discussed here: https://www.bikeforums.net/bicycle-m...speed-igh.html
IGHs are very reliable when used within specifications and maintained properly.
Steve
sweeks is offline  
Old 03-21-18, 09:24 AM
  #4  
Bonzo Banana
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Merry Old England
Posts: 713

Bikes: Muddyfox Evolve 200, Bicycles4u Paris Explorer, Raleigh Twenty Stowaway, Bickerton California, Saracen Xile, Kona Hoss Deluxe, Vertigo Carnaby, Exodus Havoc, Kona Lanai, Revolution Cuillin Sport, Dawes Kingpin, Bickerton, NSU & Elswick Cosmopolitan

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 274 Post(s)
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by sweeks View Post
I *could* be wrong here, but I think the Shimano recommendation is a *minimum*. A larger chainring will not over-torque the hub; however, a larger rear sprocket might. This was discussed here: https://www.bikeforums.net/bicycle-m...speed-igh.html
IGHs are very reliable when used within specifications and maintained properly.
Steve
I think you have that reversed. You can have a larger rear cog or a smaller front chainring as this will put less torque on the IGH but require a higher cadence by the rider to maintain the same speed.

So for example if you had 46T chainring and 22T rear cog you are at Shimano's exact recommendation 2:1 but if you went for 38T chainring and 22T rear cog you would be at 1.73:1 comfortably below 2:1 so the hub would have an easier time of it. This is the recommendation for 26" wheels I think. I'm unsure how much gain ratio you can get away with 20" wheels or larger 700c wheels although I have seen a 700c bike with a nexus hub and I think the front chainring was only 33T. You'd think something like 50T x 19T would be ok for 20" wheels however that is a complete estimate on my part as I haven't calculated the circumference difference. Apologies if I have misunderstood anything.

http://si.shimano.com/pdfs/dm/DM-SG0003-06-ENG.pdf
Bonzo Banana is offline  
Old 03-21-18, 09:35 AM
  #5  
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Posts: 41,396

Bikes: 8

Mentioned: 188 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6921 Post(s)
Liked 245 Times in 203 Posts
2.1:1 is the low limit.. [Rohloff is 2.35:1] higher than that is no problem.. my bike friday 20" wheel is 53:16. Koga WTR, 26" wheel 38:16.. (at low limit)

over the road, ratio range, the same..

Torque strain against gravity, going up hill, is greater than the effort done on the flat, against air resistance to go faster..


[because It's gear ratio X wheel diameter a smaller wheel gives you a lower gear using the same ratio ]







...

Last edited by fietsbob; 05-03-18 at 10:39 AM.
fietsbob is offline  
Old 03-21-18, 10:01 AM
  #6  
Tourist in MSN
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 6,007

Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, Perfekt 3 Speed -age unknown, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.

Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1351 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 36 Times in 31 Posts
Originally Posted by Bonzo Banana View Post
I think you have that reversed. You can have a larger rear cog or a smaller front chainring as this will put less torque on the IGH but require a higher cadence by the rider to maintain the same speed.
...
Nope.

A smaller chainring means that you can put more tension on the chain, that would then cause more (not less) torque on the hub internals.
Tourist in MSN is online now  
Old 03-21-18, 12:39 PM
  #7  
Bonzo Banana
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Merry Old England
Posts: 713

Bikes: Muddyfox Evolve 200, Bicycles4u Paris Explorer, Raleigh Twenty Stowaway, Bickerton California, Saracen Xile, Kona Hoss Deluxe, Vertigo Carnaby, Exodus Havoc, Kona Lanai, Revolution Cuillin Sport, Dawes Kingpin, Bickerton, NSU & Elswick Cosmopolitan

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 274 Post(s)
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Tourist in MSN View Post
Nope.

A smaller chainring means that you can put more tension on the chain, that would then cause more (not less) torque on the hub internals.
The normal granny gear arrangement is the chain running between the smallest chainring at the front and the largest cog of the cogset at the back which is super easy to turn enables you go up hills at low speeds. Also on many cassettes and freewheels the largest rear cog can be aluminium or lower grade metal but the smallest cog will be highest grade or heat treated metal possibly a decent steel alloy. Wouldn't that indicate the level of strain and wear?

Admittedly I'm not really factoring how internal hubs work because I'm not too knowledgeable with regard planetary gears but assume it is similar situation to a derailleur based gear system.

Besides isn't it how Shimano configures nexus/alfine hubs if you have a smaller rear wheel (20") you can have a larger front chainring but if you have a larger rear wheel (700c) you need a smaller front chainring?
Bonzo Banana is offline  
Old 03-21-18, 01:33 PM
  #8  
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Posts: 41,396

Bikes: 8

Mentioned: 188 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6921 Post(s)
Liked 245 Times in 203 Posts
4th is almost 1:1 (0.989 :1) so 3 overdrive 3 reduction gears... I looked it up http://www.sheldonbrown.com/nexus7.shtml






...

Last edited by fietsbob; 03-21-18 at 01:40 PM.
fietsbob is offline  
Old 03-21-18, 05:32 PM
  #9  
Tourist in MSN
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 6,007

Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, Perfekt 3 Speed -age unknown, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.

Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1351 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 36 Times in 31 Posts
Originally Posted by Bonzo Banana View Post
The normal granny gear arrangement is the chain running between the smallest chainring at the front and the largest cog of the cogset at the back which is super easy to turn enables you go up hills at low speeds. Also on many cassettes and freewheels the largest rear cog can be aluminium or lower grade metal but the smallest cog will be highest grade or heat treated metal possibly a decent steel alloy. Wouldn't that indicate the level of strain and wear?

Admittedly I'm not really factoring how internal hubs work because I'm not too knowledgeable with regard planetary gears but assume it is similar situation to a derailleur based gear system.

Besides isn't it how Shimano configures nexus/alfine hubs if you have a smaller rear wheel (20") you can have a larger front chainring but if you have a larger rear wheel (700c) you need a smaller front chainring?
When you said "The normal granny gear arrangement is the chain running between the smallest chainring at the front and the largest cog of the cogset at the back which is super easy to turn enables you go up hills at low speeds.", that is correct. But, keep in mind you need high torque to go up hills. I have spun out (lost traction) when climbing steep hills because my rear wheel torque was high enough to spin on the ground surface.

When a cassette manufacturer uses a softer metal for a larger sprocket, perhaps they do not expect that sprocket to be used as often? Or perhaps they wanted to make it lighter? But if you are using the smallest chainring on a bike you are maximizing the chain tension and that would put more torque on the sprocket than if you were on a larger chainring.

I can't comment on specifics on Shimano IGH hubs, the only IGH hubs I have are a Rohloff, Sram Dual Drive and a vintage Sturmey Archer 3 speed.

The point with a IGH is that if you put too much torque on the sprocket, it could damage the inner gearing components. That is why Rohloff sets minimum ratios for the chainring to sprocket ratio. For my weight, that ratio that Rohloff sets is 1.9, but I use a range of 2.25 to 2.75 depending on where I am and how much weight I plan to have on the bike, it is a touring bike.

The reason you use a larger chainring on a folding bike with small wheels is because if you don't you spin out.
Tourist in MSN is online now  
Old 03-21-18, 05:58 PM
  #10  
Abu Mahendra
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Bali
Posts: 2,231

Bikes: In service - FSIR Spin 3.0, Bannard Sunny minivelo, Dahon Dash Altena folder. Several others in construction or temporarily decommissioned.

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 891 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
i run a SRAM DualDrive II with a 47T chainring and a 11-36T cogset. Lowest ratio is 47/36, or 1.3


Originally Posted by JohanNeeda View Post
I have a folder with an IGH, Shimano C300-7R. Front chainring is 44T rear cog is 17T (factory standard). The gear ratio is 2.58. The Shimano recommendation is max 2.1.


Any of you have similar gear ratios? How does the IGH work in the long run. I know that IGH cannot be really forced as they get damaged, therefore my question.
Abu Mahendra is offline  
Old 03-21-18, 07:06 PM
  #11  
Nightdiver
7ft of Cet-Bak
 
Nightdiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Out and about
Posts: 494
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bonzo Banana View Post
I think you have that reversed. You can have a larger rear cog or a smaller front chainring as this will put less torque on the IGH but require a higher cadence by the rider to maintain the same speed.
No, Steve has it right. As you gear lower you're relying on mechanical advantage to move your bike, instead of your own muscles. 2.1 is the recommended minimum ratio quoted by Shimano for their Nexus/Alfine hubs. But, not all the hubs are built/designed equally, and there are many Nexus/Alfine 8 users who run ~1.5 ratios with no issues. While the Alfine 11 is known to be pretty sensitive to high torque.

Originally Posted by Bonzo Banana View Post
Besides isn't it how Shimano configures nexus/alfine hubs if you have a smaller rear wheel (20") you can have a larger front chainring but if you have a larger rear wheel (700c) you need a smaller front chainring?
That's just a matter of creating equal development metrics between two differing wheel sizes. The smaller wheel bike requires a larger gear ratio to achieve the same speed at a given cadence.

edit: whoops. Just noticed that Tourist already said the same stuff.
Nightdiver is offline  
Old 03-22-18, 01:38 AM
  #12  
JohanNeeda
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thank you Steve. Spot on! I have followed the link and the links in the link. I think the whole confusion small/large cog comes from the fact that everybody thinks from its own (biker) perspective: small cog = hard, large = easy. Nobody think from the bike's perspective :-).


Thanks a lot.
JohanNeeda is offline  
Old 05-03-18, 09:11 AM
  #13  
JohanNeeda
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Conclusion

I have change the original 17T to a 20T cog. Iím above the minimum Shimano recommendation at 2.2 (44/20) For my hilly ride this made a world of difference as I have more range in the low gear. Probably a 19T would have been perfect.
JohanNeeda is offline  
Old 05-03-18, 10:29 AM
  #14  
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Posts: 41,396

Bikes: 8

Mentioned: 188 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6921 Post(s)
Liked 245 Times in 203 Posts
FWIW http://si.shimano.com/pdfs/dm/DM-SG0003-06-ENG.pdf
fietsbob is offline  
Old 05-03-18, 04:43 PM
  #15  
Schwinnsta
Schwinnasaur
 
Schwinnsta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: New Orleans, LA
Posts: 944
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 170 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
The largest force that can be put through the hub will be the one with the largest rear cog. Why, because of leverage. For all riders, all have a max force they can produce. When that force acts on the largest cog, torque is maximized for that rider. I would assume the engineers have knowledge of that force. Perhaps max force a very strong rider can make on a hill start. my 0.02
Schwinnsta is offline  
Old 05-04-18, 11:42 AM
  #16  
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Posts: 41,396

Bikes: 8

Mentioned: 188 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6921 Post(s)
Liked 245 Times in 203 Posts
Originally Posted by Abu Mahendra View Post
i run a SRAM DualDrive II with a 47T chainring and a 11-36T cogset. Lowest ratio is 47/36, or 1.3
Actually that is just true, if the internal gears are in 2nd, the 1:1, hub shell and cassette moving as one.

but because of the Cassette/IGH combination
in 1st, internally reduction geared, that ratio is X 0.73:1. cog driver rotating at a different rate than the hubshell.
fietsbob is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
munklefish
Bicycle Mechanics
8
07-18-17 09:20 PM
Sincitycycler
Singlespeed & Fixed Gear
56
06-05-14 10:44 PM
Shahmatt
Bicycle Mechanics
10
12-03-13 12:15 PM
HoraceLai
Bicycle Mechanics
12
08-07-13 03:55 PM
harrier
Bicycle Mechanics
1
06-28-11 11:34 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.