gauvins

It is a bit like malaria. Every once in a while, because of a post, a picture, a comment somewhere, I am struck by rohloff fever. Ruled out when I have my mind to myself because of its obscene price, I nonetheless daydream, because, true, this is an amazing feat of engineering. And in my worst days I can rationalize investing 1500$ to save 60$/year.

I've downloaded and read the owner's manual. And now have one question: has anyone tried their suggested half-step setup (say, 39-42 chainrings)? The rohloff has 14 uniform 13.5% gear-inch increments. A half step setup would provide 28x6.75% steps. Which would weaken my major argument against getting one (my modest setup provides 5% increments across most of the mid-high range, something I really appreciate; 13% is a lot when shifting from 13 to 14).

If you run a rohloff half step, does it imply a chain tensioner (I'd assume yes).

alan s 

I’ve not found the need for smaller steps between gears. In fact, sometimes I’ll shift 2 or more gears at a time. You’ll be taking away from the simplicity and longer chain life of a straight chain line, which is one of the main benefits of a Rohloff.

staehpj1

I am not a Rohloff fan, but moving between two chain rings isn't really very much of a compromise in chain line. Assuming you set the chain line straight between the two rings you are talking about the chain line being off by a pretty minuscule amount. What? About 1/8" of so for either ring. It will still be essentially straight for all practical purposes. I'd bet most don't bother to get their chain lines any closer than that any way and that small difference will show no noticeable difference.

If you are really particular the difference in chain line may worry you, but I doubt it will make any noticeable difference at all in actual practice.

It will have the disadvantage of a tensioner. I probably wouldn't find it worth the trouble to get steps that small, but if you want/need them it may be worthwhile.

As I said I am not a Rohloff fan and can find a number of other reasons to avoid the setup, but chain line wouldn't be one of them.

Happy Feet

Have you considered the poor mans Rohloff.. the Shimano Alfine 8 or a Sturmey Archer?

They say it's equal in range to an 11 -34 cassette and more reliable than an Alfine 11. I've been thinking about it for my off road tour bike as the one thing it can't handle reliably now is singletrack in long grass. It gets caught in the derailer quite a bit. An IGH would solve that but I won't buy a Rohloff unless I come into a lot of disposable income.

Combine the Alfine 8 with a compact double and it may provide a fairly usable gear range for road touring.

MoulTommy

Honestly until you ride a rohloff for a while you may not understand how different it is to have even steps across the entire range. If you get the gearing right it's almost imperceptible, you don't even think about the shifting. That was the point for me, to enjoy my movement and the world around me instead of thinking about cross chaining or planning my next shift. It just happens.

John N

I have two bikes with Rohloffs with about 15k miles between them. The best thing about it is lack of maintenance. Part of that maintenance deals with the chains. Without a tensioner, you can get a get in the mud and not worry about it getting mucked up. Yes, you would have to have a tensioner to have a half-step with any IG hub.

While I have thought about a half-step for obvious reasons, I personally feel I don't want to mess with the tensioner and the associated risks since I do some off-road touring, regardless of weather.

If I was sticking to paved and/or non-wet unpaved roads 95% of the time, I would pass on a Rohloff. Doing off-road touring or world touring where the simplicity is nice (until the hub bites you in the ass), then I would consider. I have as low a gear as allowed (and maybe then some) and like the range but would of course enjoy the equivelent of a 28-gear hub also, or maybe just a 21-gear with the half-step in the mid-range.

Anyway, if you decide to buy a Rohloff, buy a used hub/bike as you can typically get for at least 1/3 off.

Tailwinds, John

rifraf

My multi-surface tourer utilises a 34 tooth front chainring and a Rohloff with 18 tooth offering a range of 15.3 to 80.2 inches.

My aging knees find this perfect and whilst I've tried a split shift system on a friends Rohloff bike, I couldn't see any benefits to my own riding style and thus opted for the single shift.

Before anyone waffles about my gearing being too low, I rarely ever get anywhere near top gear and find no issues crawling up steep hills in low at a not indecent cadence.

Suits me fine whether laden with trailer or not.

Tourist in MSN

I was off on a trip when this thread started, so I did not see it until now. (Backpacking on the Superior Hiking Trail.)

I built up my Rohloff bike in 2013. Initially I thought that the 13 percent difference in gears would be toooo much. And I bought a frame that was specific to the Rohloff, it did not have a derailleur hanger, so I could not install a spring type chain tensioner, instead the frame had a eccentric bottom bracket for adjusting the chain. Thus, with no derailleur hanger, a half step system would be rather complicated to install.

But now that I have had the bike for six years, I am quite content with the 13 percent jumps in the gearing. I would not try to add a dual chainring setup.

That said, I have three touring bikes, two are derailleur bikes. When I did my two week bike tour in Southern Florida (February 2017), I was really happy that I had one of my derailleur bikes because everything was flat. There were approaches to bridges that required a lower gear, but other than the up and down slopes associated with bridges, I only used three gears because it was so flat. Why three instead of one? Wind varied, so I occasionally shifted to adjust for wind. Some days I rode for over an hour without a single shift. But if I had my Rohloff bike I probably would have been a little frustrated by not having the perfect gears at times, thus I was happy I had one of my derailleur bikes with closer gear ratios for that trip.

But, this past early summer I did a five week tour in the Canadian Maritimes. Some days I chose to ride on one of their rail trails for most of the day, those were reasonably flat. (The Confederation Trail on PEI is great.) The days when I was on paved highways, I was shifting all the time because it was up and down so much. And I much prefer to shift a Rohloff over a derailleur bike. There were days when I said to myself that I was really happy I had my Rohloff bike on that trip because of the ease of shifting.

Bottom line - when on flat ground that goes for great distances without a change in slope, that large jump in a Rohloff is clearly noticeable if you do not have the perfect gear. But other than my Florida trip, all my touring has had enough ups and downs that I am not bothered at all by the size of the jumps between gears.

Around home I run a 44T chainring and 16T sprocket, that gives me a range from 19.8 to 104.0 gear inches (26 inch wheels, 57mm wide tires). Around home, I am carrying no more than a load of groceries and my gym bag so that gearing is just fine, the steepest hills near home are 7 percent grade.

But touring I change the chainring to 36T, remove four links and that gives me a range of 16.2 to 85.1 gear inches which is much better for climbing steeper hills with my camping gear. What bothers me more than the 13 percent gear increment on the Rohloff is that when I gear it that low for a trip, my highest gear is also geared down lower. And on the downhills I spin out and end up coasting when I would be pedaling if I was on a derailleur bike.

So, there are compormises. To me the bigger compromise is the loss of higher gears when it is geared down for serious hill climbing. But I am willing to live with it. But this does suggest that if you wanted to run a double, maybe a one and a half step setup would make more sense than half step system.

***

Chainline was mentioned above. I intentionally have a chainline error of about 5mm. When I built up my bike I wanted my Q factor (pedal width) to be about the same on my Rohloff bike as on my derailleur bikes. Thus, I used a bottom bracket spindle that is 10mm shorter than I should have used for optimum chainline. I find with a 5mm chainline error I have zero problems and I do not think it impairs my chain wear at all. But I would not want to have a chainline error greater than about 5mm, then chain wear could become an issue. I am running the chainring on the inner position on a double crankset with a bashguard in the outer position. If chainline concerned me that much I would use the chainring in the outer position where it would be spot on.

***

I bought my Rohloff from Germany, saved maybe $500 USD compared to buying it in USA. I expected to pay about 4 percent in customs duty but I was pleasantly surprised that the mail carrier delivered it duty free. (I had to pay duty on the frame that the Rohloff went onto.) If you buy a hub, make sure that the person that builds up the wheel reads the instructions. The flange diameters are so big that you should not use 3 cross spoke pattern, 2 is what Rohloff recommends for 26 inch or 700c wheels. I made a mistake and used a credit card with a 3 percent currency transaction fee to buy the hub, I will not make that mistake again.

Photo was taken on June 16, chilly enough that there was snow on the side of the road in middle of June. Cabot Trail in Nova Scotia.

gauvins

Interesting comment. Why so? Would it be because you can shift without moving your hands? (vs bar-ends shifters)

gauvins

Well, matter of opinion I suppose. My setup provides for 5% increments. XT rapid-fire shifters can move three cogs at once, very easily, very fast. So the small increments are not a problem. The (big) upside is that you can tune your gear-inch quite precisely. You can keep the same rhythm (cadence) on flat terrain and adjust to small grade differences or wind. I find that a 10%+ increment at the high end of your gear-inches is quite a lot to absorb.

gauvins

As I was afraid. Oh well...

John N

This is what I have and totally agree. In 5 years, I have only wished for a higher gear once, for about 30 minutes. Unfortunately, I am in my low gear much more often than my high gear.

Tailwinds, John

Tourist in MSN

My comment essentially was that I preferred shifting my Rohloff compared to a derailleur bike.

Photo of my cockpit on my Rohloff bike on my Canadian Maritimes trip this past June and July, the shifter is located on the right end of the handlebar using the Hubbub Adapter. I have three bikes with bar end shifters, so moving my hand to the end of the handlebar is second nature to me.




The Rohloff hub was originally intended to be used for mountain bikes, thus the shifter was designed for the smaller handlebar diameter common to flat bars, that is why an adapter is needed to fit it to the end of a drop bar. There are other aftermarket shifters made that allow you to fit it on a drop handlebar near the stem, made by Co-Motion and also by a French company (I do not recall the name of the Company).

Initially I had my shifter closer to the steerer tube on a different mount. But there were times on my Iceland tour when I was crawling up steep hills on unpaved roads with lots of cobbles and I decided that I should move my shifter to the bar end because on difficult terrain I wanted both hands on the parts of the handlebars where I had some leverage for steering while simultaneously being able to shift. Thus, I moved my shifter to the end of the handlebar after my Iceland trip.

To answer your question, why do I find it easier to shift a Rohloff? Derailleur bikes have two shifters, one front and one back. Rohloff has one shifter, it is a continuous twist grip shifter from top to bottom. It is easy to shift 1 or 2 or 3 shifts all at once, that takes more time on a derailleur bike and on a derailleur bike if you are shifting several gears at once you likely are shifting both front and back. And on a derailleur bike you probably are thinking about which shifter to shift each time you shift. It does not take a lot of brain cells to figure out which shifter to shift, but it still is something that takes a bit of thought and a bit of time when you have two shifters.

You have to let up on the pedal pressure when you shift a Rohloff, just like you should with a derailleur bike, but it is a bit more important to let up on the pedal pressure when you shift a Rohloff. But the Rohloff shifts much quicker, you twist the grip and it is done, you already are in the new gear and can start pedaling hard right away again instead of waiting for the chain to wrap half way around the cassette like on a derailleur bike. After you have had a Rohloff for a while, you get used to letting up on the pedal pressure for an extremely brief period of time for your shift, but when I am shifting a derailleur, I wait longer for the chain to get around the cassette before I start pedaling hard again. And on a derailleur bike, if I am making two or three shifts in the back it takes more time for the chain to get wrapped around the cassette in your final gear.

Yes there are 1X setups without the front derailleur so you have one shifter with a lot of gears. But as noted above when I am on a bike tour with lower gearing, I spin out on long shallow downhills with the Rohloff. The total range of the Rohloff is about 525 percent. The 1X setups have an even smaller range than the Rohloff, so I do not see a 1X as the solution.

Often when I get to the top of a steep hill, as I crest the hill I find that I am going down the other side in a very short distance. Often that means that I turn the crank two or three revolutions, shift a few gears, turn two or three more revolutions, shift a couple more gears, and keep repeating until I have gone from gear 1 up to gear 14 in a very short distance.

Same thing when I start out from a stop light that turns green. I usually start out in gear 8, so I put it in that gear after I come to a stop, but if it is a slight uphill I might set it at gear 7. When I start accelerating from a stop, my speed changes quite quickly, I can pedal a few revolutions on the crank, quickly upshift a gear, pedal a few more revolutions, upshift another gear, on the flat I am usually in gear 10 or 11, but if I have a strong wind it might be a lower or higher gear.

As has been mentioned, each up shift increases your gear ratio by about 13 percent. With those nearly equal shift increments on the Rohloff, it is really predictable so that when your cadence gets to a certain point you know that is when to shift to get your cadence to a more preferred rate. But derailleur bikes do not have as predictable shifting, each shift will be a different percentage jump than the previous shift.

I also like how you can shift when not moving. But in a way it promotes lazy shifting. When I got home from my five week tour, I was so used to not shifting until I came to a stop at a red light that when I got back onto a derailleur bike I was having to re-learn the importance of having to anticipate my down shifts and make my shifts before I needed them.

And I think everyone has found themselves climbing a hill that got steeper than they expected and wished that they had downshifted the front derailleur in advance because once you are really cranking on the pedals at a low cadence, it is too late, you can't shift the front. But, you could quickly down shift the Rohloff.

I do not have a full suspension mountain bike, I do so little mountain biking that I do not want to add such a bike to my collection. So, when I had an opportunity to go to the White Rim in Canyonlands, since my Rohloff bike frame can take a 100mm suspension fork, I bought a low end RockShox suspension fork on Ebay and turned my expedition bike into a hardtail (with drop bars) and used that when my other nine friends on that (van supported four day) mountain biking trip all had full suspension mountain bikes. And that really reinforced for me how much of an advantage the quick shifting with a Rohloff with one continuous shifter is.



In the photo, you see I have a small Carradice saddle bag. I will never understand why mountain bikers always want to wear a backpack instead of carrying the weight on the bike. But that is far off topic.

gauvins

Interesting comments. Unfortunately it brings me closer to pulling the trigger and invest irrationally

WRT shifting. Frankly I rarely consciously pull back on the pedals prior to shifting. Maybe I do it instinctively... Maybe XT drivetrains are good at handling shifting under load. Maybe I never push hard enough, or always keep my cadence above (60?). Bottom line is that idle shifting isn't, for me, important.

Will take a look at shifters -- I use butterfly handlebars. Not entirely clear what is involved.

This will be a long winter

ricrunner

You have explained the use of the IGH, better than anyone has ever done for me, so I intend to go ahead and buy a specific bike that like that has the IGH

rifraf

It may be of interest (or not), but I believe when you mention a French company, you may be referring to Gilles Berthoud

https://www.cyclemonkey.com/shifters...-twist-shifter

I'm a fan of their polished stainless mudguards (fenders)

https://berthoudcycles.fr/en/

Tourist in MSN

Glad i could help. And, I really hope you are happy with that decision.

I noted above that I use drop bars with the Hubbub Adapter to put the shifter on the right side bar end on my drop bars. But there are many other options if you do not use a normal flat mountain bike handlebar for mounting the shifter.
https://www.cyclingabout.com/rohloff...op-handlebars/

That link has an error, it shows some wooden thing in the photo for the Hubbub Adapter, the Hubbub Adapter is metal. I have heard some complain that the Hubbub Adapter can come loose from the handlebar, I cranked mine down really tight when I installed it and it has stayed there.

When I installed my Hubbub Adapter, I used some V brake cable noodles to route my cables forward, they are more out of the way that way.