LC2024

Recently inherited an old Nishiki road bike with Shimano HB1050 rear hub 6sp. The axle is broken and only part of the axle is found. I've determined that I need a 10mm [o.d] axle but I am unsure of the overall length. Would appreciate any info available. ty in advance! nevermind...found it with google AI. 137mm. ty!

Bill Kapaun

That sounds like a 126mm spaced FH-1050.
Typically, HB is a front hub and would use a 9mmx1mmx111 axle, NOT a 10mmx1mmx137.

Usually, you can just add 11mm to the OLD to determine axle length for QR axles.

70sSanO

Just measure the width between the dropouts and add 11mm as Bill Kapaun said.

John

Edit added: it just occurred to me that if you are missing part of the axle you might also be missing the spacers and lock nut. Maybe even the cone.

dedhed

https://www.kstoerz.com/freespoke/hub/409

​​​​​​https://www.loosescrews.com/product/...et-10x1x137mm/

KCT1986

105 freewheel hub. Shimano used the 'HB' model # for both front and rear, for freewheel rear hubs too.

Should take a standard 10X137mm axle for a quick release setup.

LC2024

Thank you for the guidance everyone!! Terrific community and I'm lucky to find this forum.

Duragrouch

Just FYI: Freewheel hubs put more bending stress on the axle, versus more modern freehubs with cassettes, the latter having the drive side bearing much closer to the dropout (so the axle more in shear, and less in bending). My point being, try to find a replacement of decent quality steel, though I'm not sure how, though someone who services older (classic and vintage) touring bikes (heavily loaded) might have recommendations. I know, they used freewheels for eons before the advent of freehubs, but this (axle breakage) is the main reason the latter was invented. It's not like a cassette was faster for switching gears for a race bike, axle loading is the big improvement.

dedhed

​​​​​​https://wheelsmfg.com/products/hub-parts/all-axles.html

Duragrouch

Thanks! Not at all cheap, but I like what I'm reading. 4130 has excellent strength and toughness when properly processed.

Kontact 

I would rather doubt that a 126mm frame could contain 137mm worth of axle when the dropouts are only 6mm thick. That seems like the number for a 130mm spaced dropout.

Duragrouch

Not my forte of knowledge, but I would imagine those numbers changed a whole lot, with the advent of aluminum frame bikes. As I recall, the rear dropouts on my Cannondale were especially thick, although that year and model had cantilevered rear droputs, the seatstays a bit forward of the rear axle, so possibly additional thickness due to that. Maybe it had the same amount of axle overlap in the dropouts, with just the QR skewers longer, but given the lower hardness of aluminum versus steel, I would have designed it for more axle overlap. The bike's been in storage for almost a couple decades now, I can't remember the setup exactly.

andrewclaus

I think MTBs broke and bent more axles and may have driven the development of a stronger hub. The advent of the freehub was just a couple of years after the advent of mountain biking, but that may be coincidental--I can remember replacing a bent axle on my own road bike back in the 70s, probably from impact. I volunteer in a non-profit shop that recycles old bikes, and It seems to me I see more broken and bent axles on old MTBs, but there are also a lot more old MTBs still in service than old road or touring bikes.

dedhed

An axle can always be shortened, lengthened not so much.


https://www.sheldonbrown.com/frame-spacing.html​​​​​​


Overall axle length for quick release hubs is commonly 11 mm longer than the overlocknut distance listed, 5.5 mm on each side.

In practice, the axle can be quite a bit shorter than this...even 1-2 mm protrusion past the lock nuts will suffice to locate the axle properly, so, when converting a hub to the next wider spacing, it is usually unnecessary to replace the axle.

Duragrouch

You're probably right. The hub rotates, the axle doesn't, so it's not fully-reversing bending stress (one of the ways that fatigue strength of a material is tested, IIRC). So peak bending loads may be a greater factor than fatigue loads. No question that mountain bikes, especially early ones with no suspension so very high shock loads and impulse, would increase axle stress by multiples.

Duragrouch

That last part, I remember reading that on sheldonbrown. Makes me nervous, for an aluminum frame. I know the axle is supposed to stay in place due to clamping loads, but I still think it can slip over time, especially with a QR. For an aluminum frame, I'd want more than 1-2mm area. Especially since the outside diameter is threaded, so really, very little actual contact area. Maybe I'm being too cautious.

Kontact 

I stand corrected. Thank you.

Kontact 

Aluminum, being softer, is less likely to slip than steel. The axle ends dig in more, and aluminum has a "stiction" property.

70sSanO

If the OLD is 126mm get the 137mm axle. 11mm (5.5mm per side) has been the standard for decades. The 131mm is for 120mm OLD hubs.

I cannot recall ever hearing that hub manufacturers use axles that need to be shortened when used on the correct QR designed dropout. The standard lengths are 131, 137, 141, 146.

John

Duragrouch

Yeeeeaaaah... but... That dropout is the perfect size from the factory. Any deformation from that, is a negative in my opinion. With a very short overlap, steel threads on aluminum, my feeling is that over time you might wear a step in that dropout radius, and that can cause a number of issues, like end clamping force on both the axle and the locknuts, switching to different wheels which have a longer axle, the threads digging in causing reduced clamp force on the locknut, etc. Clamping force seems to be sufficient friction to hold axles in place, so I accept the designs. But if I were designing something from scratch, I would have a steel sleeve (tube), either smooth ID or threaded, slip over that threaded end, and that smooth sleeve OD sitting in the dropout. Stuff designed for high shear loads, generally is tried to be designed with a smooth shoulder on the bolt to take the shear loads. Then again, I know of some critical automotive applications, where it's a bolt inside a larger or elongated hole for adjustment for alignment, and bolt clamping force is all that is holding things in place, and it stays put. But big bolts and high torque. Knowing what I know now, I feel better with nutted axles, than quick-release axles, most especially with disc brakes (a known problem of pulling front QR axles out of forks under braking, the driver for thru-axles).

Kontact 

I'm sorry, we are talking about two different things.

The axle ends and QR caps are going to dig into the sides of the aluminum dropouts in a way that will even more effectively keep the hub from moving.

The actual axle will only ever have minor contact. The axle ends are what do the work, as anyone who has had a hub move in a horizontal dropout from drivetrain force.

79pmooney

Simple math. (Rode 50 miles today on my fix gear, anything more ain't happening.)

126 + 2 x 6 = 138mm. One mm over the 137mm axle. Most QR nuts and mech are recessed so the axle can protrude a touch. With reasonable care, the OP should have little trouble getting a 137 to work just fine.

Edit: 70SsanO beat me to it. Shoulda read all the posts.

Duragrouch

OK got it, thanks. I agree. I just don't like to rely too much on "grippy patterns", as over time, the softer material that they are gripping into, over many years of off and on, can get sorta hammered flat. But the grooves are there for a reason. In design practice, I like to have "matching" grooves on each mating part, like a sawtooth pattern, fine pitch, with several positions for adjustability, but once engaged, they fit together, nested. But that would require more manufacturing precision. But I see that on items that don't need precision alignment, just a length/position adjuster, that won't require very high clamp force.

Garthr

The aftermarket heat-treated Wheels Mfr. axles are worth the investment for FW hubs. I've installed a couple of them and of course, they just work ! I prefer FW hubs myself as I only need 6 or 7 cogs and I like that the FW is independent of the hub.

The OP has these hubs : https://www.velobase.com/ViewCompone...2-0c50c852983d

70sSanO

My main issue with freewheels is the lack of high quality and the ability to customize them.

I “build” my cassettes by mixing and matching; even different mfg’s. There is a definite weight penalty, especially for weight weenies, because I have to use full cogs and not ones that use a carrier. Just take them apart and put them back together the way I want.

A younger me would just opt for a compact crank and 11 speed, or even a 1x. But at this stage I’m fine with what I have.

John

KerryIrons

A quality axle is made of hardened steel, so shortening it (and keeping the threads in usable shape) is not for the faint of heart.