Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

HOW NEVER TO CLEAN ANOTHER CHAIN WHILE TRIPLING YOUR CHAIN MILEAGE by Andre Jute

299 views
Skip to first unread message

Andre Jute

unread,
Jan 13, 2015, 1:10:09 PM1/13/15
to
HOW NEVER TO CLEAN ANOTHER CHAIN WHILE TRIPLING YOUR CHAIN MILEAGE
by Andre Jute
Lateral Thinker & Sideways Cyclist

I never even see my chain between fitting a new one and fitting the next new one. If you cycle smart, you don't ever clean a chain. The required drivetain components are:

1. A hub gearbox. I recommend Rolloff, and also like Shimano) or a single speed or a fixie.

2. A good quality chain. I use KMC X8 but the Z8 is supposedly cheaper and is designed for this purpose but it's less common, so I buy my X8 in bulk from a discounter for much less than Z8; the pricey X1 supposedly lasts almost infinitely. The key is not only the quality of the chain but of the factory lube as well. KMC in my experience has the best of both.

3. Best quality sprocket, preferably stainless steel.

4. Stainless steel chainring; the Surly is available in a wide range of PCD fitments and tooth counts, and fits inside the Chainglider.

5. Hebie Chainglider.

The Chainglider keeps out road and ambient and global warming crud, the stainless cogs don't wear enough to make a grinding paste like the cheap ali beloved of the weight weenies does, and the whole drivetrain assembly runs happily on the factory lube for the entire life of the chain.

Here's the kicker. On Shimano chains, inside big plastic Dutch chain cases, on aliminium gears I used to get about 1000m/1600km per chain even with religious chain maintenance. With the KMC/chainglider/stainless gears setup above I do zero chain maintenance and my last chain made 4506km, near enough three times the distance I ever made on a chain before. (And I replaced it early because at the time I was too ill to lift the bike up on the workstand and fitting a new chain was easier and quicker than messing around with the rear wheel in the sliders to adjust chain tension.)

I got the idea for this setup on reading that Sheldon Brown thought the factory lube good for 700m on his open chains, which led me to wonder how long it would last inside my protected drivetrain on my low-tending-to-zero-maintenance development bike. I wish Sheldon were here so I could share the success of my setup with him.

Copyright © 2015 Andre Jute but free for reproduction in non-profit media as long as the entire article including this copyright and permissions notice is reproduced.

avag...@gmail.com

unread,
Jan 13, 2015, 3:16:10 PM1/13/15
to
if I read this, I'll find a humor piece ?

Sir Ridesalot

unread,
Jan 13, 2015, 5:10:26 PM1/13/15
to
Just get rid of the chain and pedals then drop the saddle so that feet can be flat on the ground when butt is on the saddle and then run like hell to give butt a ride.

Cheers

Andre Jute

unread,
Jan 13, 2015, 11:30:27 PM1/13/15
to
Is this the Jeff Daniels who whines that I don't post any of my technical articles on RBT?

On Tuesday, January 13, 2015 at 8:16:10 PM UTC, avag...@gmail.com wrote:
> if I read this, I'll find a humor piece ?

Now we know why.

Andre Jute

Andre Jute

unread,
Jan 13, 2015, 11:31:23 PM1/13/15
to
Or you could do it right, Ridealot. There are numbered instructions included, just for you.

Andre Jute

Andre Jute

unread,
Jan 16, 2015, 8:46:12 AM1/16/15
to
In reply, two smartarse posts.

Oh well, I suppose there is forward-looking tech and dumpster-dive tech, and now we know which is suitable for rec.bicycles.tech.

Andre Jute

Frank Krygowski

unread,
Jan 16, 2015, 3:11:44 PM1/16/15
to
Hmm. We can replace a $30 chain every year, or we can instead install a
thousand dollar hub, plastic chainguards, and a special chainring so we replace
the chain less often. (Yes, we can save hundreds by choosing fewer speeds,
but most of us have an idea of what we want for gearing.)

Sorry, Andre, most of us are capable of simple calculations of payback
periods. Your solution isn't forward-looking. It's affected, prissy and for
most of us, unnecessary.

- Frank Krygowski

Andre Jute

unread,
Jan 16, 2015, 5:31:02 PM1/16/15
to
Gee, Frank, even for an engineer you have amazingly little soul. A Rohloff gearbox is worth having by itself as fine engineering, a very useful gear range with equal spacing between 14 gears which you can change at standstill without regard to order of gears, effectively a lifetime warranty, miniscule service requirements, etc. And the grand it costs in Euro is less than half of what a DuraAce 9000 setup costs. I checked, and had to climb off my treadmill and sit down until the shock passed when the headline on the first article Bing found informed me "Shimano Dura-Ace 9000 groupset £1814.92"; that's around three thousand dollars.

So, if you have the hub gearbox already, for about about eighty or ninety bucks you can cut your chain service to nil, triple the chain life, and spend that time riding, which surely you know is worth much more in health benefits than eighty bucks.

By the way, it appears that you think I have a great big clanking Dutch chaincase; it's really difficult to answer your constant judgemental ignorance without being rude. Before you call the Chainglider "affected and prissy", you should inform yourself. At http://tweewieler.v2.vs12.blueskies.nl/public/image/artikelen/20060601-rohloff_chainglider.jpg you can see that it is an elegant, silent, thin chain cover of hard rubber, as fitted to all the best European bikes.

In any event, your claim of being able to calculate the opportunity cost of not having my near-zero chain-service setup is way off the mark. A worn chain doesn't wear only itself, it takes down with the chainring and the sprocket, especially if they're of aluminium.

Andre Jute
Ride tall!

Jeff Liebermann

unread,
Jan 16, 2015, 9:38:41 PM1/16/15
to
On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 10:10:07 -0800 (PST), Andre Jute
<fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>HOW NEVER TO CLEAN ANOTHER CHAIN WHILE TRIPLING YOUR CHAIN MILEAGE
>by Andre Jute
>Lateral Thinker & Sideways Cyclist

>I never even see my chain between fitting a new one and fitting the next new one.

I presume that you're confident enough that there's no chain stretch
that it's not necessary to look for problems. I'm not that confident
about my bicycle components and would probably inspect the chain.

>1. A hub gearbox. I recommend Rolloff, and also like Shimano) or
>a single speed or a fixie.

I would love to have a $1,000 hub gearbox. However, all of my
bicycles are old and worth at most $300 each. Adding a $1,000
component to save a few dollars for a new chain, or a few minutes for
a chain lube job, does not seem like a good return on the investment.
A KMC X8 chain is about $16 retail. I can buy about 60 retail chains
for the price of one Rolloff hub gearbox. I will concede that it will
accomplish the desired goal, but unless one finds chain cleaning
somehow demeaning of a proper cyclist, one can do better by simply
replacing the chain when needed.

>3. Best quality sprocket, preferably stainless steel.
>4. Stainless steel chainring; the Surly is available in a wide
>range of PCD fitments and tooth counts, and fits inside the Chainglider.

I dunno if stainless is going to be very useful. It's good for rust
resistance, but is not as hard as the usual high carbon steel. I
suspect that stainless teeth might wear quicker.

>... the stainless cogs don't wear enough to make a grinding paste
>like the cheap ali beloved of the weight weenies does,...

Yep. I guess that's an advantage for stainless. The rust that
collects on high carbon gears is what creates the abrasive compound.
However, road dirt makes a good substitute so I don't see an advantage
to stainless here.


--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Frank Krygowski

unread,
Jan 16, 2015, 11:12:24 PM1/16/15
to
I've never seen any evidence that the wear of the aluminum contributes
significantly to the grit. I suspect that during the life of a typical
wet lube bike chain, several ounces of grit mix with the lube to make
that black mess. If that were mostly aluminum, a chainring wouldn't
last 500 miles.

I believe almost all the grit comes from the road. Aluminum is very
common in most soils, in the form of aluminum oxide, which is a pretty
effective abrasive.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Jeff Liebermann

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 12:09:53 AM1/17/15
to
Emery cloth is aluminum oxide grit set in iron oxide.
<http://homeguides.sfgate.com/emery-cloth-vs-sandpaper-96632.html>

I once had an argument with a friend about the constitution of the
black goo on my bicycle chain. I don't happen to have a mass
spectrometer in the office, so I settled for some chemistry and a
magnet. I won't go into the chemistry right now, but suffice to say
that when the grease was dissolved off, it was mostly the local clay
(alumina and silica) with a fair amount of organic matter.

My theory was that if the chain was shaving metal, the grease and oils
would prevent them from oxidizing, thus NOT forming abrasive iron
oxide. I collected as much black goo as I could smear off the chain,
dissolved most of it in acetone, and dumped a cellophane wrapped
magnet into the much before the acetone evaporated. There was quite a
bit of iron collected on the cellophane. The problem was that I had
no idea if it was coming from the chain, or was in the local dirt.
There seemed to be quite a bit of iron collected on the cellophane,
but without measurements, I could be sure of even a bad guess.

Andre Jute

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 1:34:54 AM1/17/15
to
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 2:38:41 AM UTC, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 10:10:07 -0800 (PST), Andre Jute
> <xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >HOW NEVER TO CLEAN ANOTHER CHAIN WHILE TRIPLING YOUR CHAIN MILEAGE
> >by Andre Jute
> >Lateral Thinker & Sideways Cyclist
>
> >I never even see my chain between fitting a new one and fitting the next new one.
>
> I presume that you're confident enough that there's no chain stretch
> that it's not necessary to look for problems. I'm not that confident
> about my bicycle components and would probably inspect the chain.

I did, originally, at 500 and then 1000km intervals and then, finding nothing amiss, not at all.

> >1. A hub gearbox. I recommend Rolloff, and also like Shimano) or
> >a single speed or a fixie.
>
> I would love to have a $1,000 hub gearbox. However, all of my
> bicycles are old and worth at most $300 each. Adding a $1,000
> component to save a few dollars for a new chain, or a few minutes for
> a chain lube job, does not seem like a good return on the investment.
> A KMC X8 chain is about $16 retail. I can buy about 60 retail chains
> for the price of one Rolloff hub gearbox. I will concede that it will
> accomplish the desired goal, but unless one finds chain cleaning
> somehow demeaning of a proper cyclist, one can do better by simply
> replacing the chain when needed.

Oh dear. No one says you have to have a Rolloff gearbox. You can make a complete Shimano hub gearbox installation for little more than a hundred bucks if you use eBay.de wisely. I already had the Rohloff gearbox when I set out on this road of making a zero-maintenance bike. (More specifically, lest some literal idiot calls me a liar for not dotting all the ts and crossing all the eyes, I had already on earlier less expensive hub gearboxes tried all the Dutch forms of the chaincase and found them too clumsy, and so ordered my Rohloff bike with a Utopia Country chaincase, which is a sort of very upmarket Chainglider workalike -- don't even think of asking how much: you'll have a stroke.)

You could turn one of your bikes into a single speed and the Chainglider would give you the same protection.

> >3. Best quality sprocket, preferably stainless steel.
> >4. Stainless steel chainring; the Surly is available in a wide
> >range of PCD fitments and tooth counts, and fits inside the Chainglider.
>
> I dunno if stainless is going to be very useful. It's good for rust
> resistance, but is not as hard as the usual high carbon steel. I
> suspect that stainless teeth might wear quicker.

Not the case on my bike, nor on the bike of many who, since I wrote on the subject elsewhere, have copied my installation.

> >... the stainless cogs don't wear enough to make a grinding paste
> >like the cheap ali beloved of the weight weenies does,...
>
> Yep. I guess that's an advantage for stainless. The rust that
> collects on high carbon gears is what creates the abrasive compound.

Perhaps in an open transmission. But I had plain steel gears on an Amar crankset made in India in use for more than three years inside several different chain cases, including the Chainglider, and they did not rust.

> However, road dirt makes a good substitute so I don't see an advantage
> to stainless here.

No dirt gets into the Chainglider. That's its function, to keep dirt out. It works. Others have duplicated my experience, and amazement. You, and obstructive Krygowski, are thinking of the clanking, perforated Dutch chain cases.

Andre Jute

Andre Jute

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 1:53:23 AM1/17/15
to
Well, in that case, since the Chainglider very effectively excludes dirt, the is nothing to wear it but the chain rubbing on itself. On ali drivetrains with Shimano chains in full Dutch chain cases, I achieved about 1600km on a chain. With admittedly better KMC chains running on stainless gears I'm getting a minimum of 4500km. That's three times as far. I can see that the added lube in the first case(s) added a grinding paste with whatever dust came into those big chaincases. But, by your logic, in the closefitting Chainglider, the chain should last forever, if it doesn't destroy itself, not just three times as long.

It would be ironic if I were to conclude that what destroys transmissions is the lube, which provides a carrier for grit, that it is another of cycling's counterproductive street corner myths that real cyclists suffer to clean their chain.

I seems to remember Jobst saying that abrasive paste, such as you can buy in a tin, is nothing but sand mixed with oil.

None of that on my bike.

Andre Jute

John B. Slocomb

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 7:01:21 AM1/17/15
to
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 18:38:37 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:
There are varsities of "stainless" alloys that are hardenable. the 400
series and if you want to go further there the AUXs series - series
contain from 0.65% carbon for the AUX-6 and 1.1% for the AUX-1010

>>... the stainless cogs don't wear enough to make a grinding paste
>>like the cheap ali beloved of the weight weenies does,...
>
>Yep. I guess that's an advantage for stainless. The rust that
>collects on high carbon gears is what creates the abrasive compound.
>However, road dirt makes a good substitute so I don't see an advantage
>to stainless here.
--
Cheers,

John B.

Sir Ridesalot

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 8:33:59 AM1/17/15
to
I get at least that much @5,000 km on my derailleur bikes sans stainless cogs and also sans enclosed or any chain cover. makes changing a tire or patching a tube very easy too.

Plus I can either repair everything myself or have it done at nearly any bicycle shop anywhere.

Cheers

Joe Riel

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 11:42:09 AM1/17/15
to
How does it simplify changing a tire? My initial thought is that
it would make it more complex, but don't know. A video would be
helpful.

--
Joe Riel

AMuzi

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 11:50:56 AM1/17/15
to
Mr Jute has the Rohloff with chain cover and stainless bits.
Sir has a simple derailleur system without covers on which
tire changing is unimpeded.

Neither system is 'best' IMHO and as always we celebrate
diversity of taste and equipment here at RBT.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


Ralph Barone

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 12:16:46 PM1/17/15
to
If my GPS is to be believed, I've got just short of 9,000 km on my Surly,
and it's still on the factory chain. Maybe it's time to take the chain
gauge to it.

Joe Riel

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 12:41:07 PM1/17/15
to
Andre suggested that his setup make changing a tire easier. I'm
wondering how. I have no experience with a Hebie chainglider; my first
thought is that getting the wheel off, and then back on, might be more
difficult, compared to a bike with rear derailer and quick releases.
It's not obvious [I'm imagining] how one gets the chain off the cog
considering it is enclosed by the chainglider. Does one first take the
chainglider off? How much a pain is that? I've seen a video of one
being installed. My experience with disassembling lightweight plastic
structures that snap together is not good.

--
Joe Riel

jbeattie

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 12:41:56 PM1/17/15
to
Might get reasonable if the Euro keeps crashing.

Apart from weight and price differences, the deal with the all-in-one approach is that you're stuck with it -- the gear range (can't go out and fuss with chain rings or cassettes), the shift method (twist shift), the fact that if you bash the wheel, your bike is out of service until you can rebuild the wheel rather than just popping in a spare. I don't know what tire/flat changes are like, but I have to assume that they're more difficult with a internal gear hub.

With all that said, and if you like the twist shift/gear range, the Speedhub is really sturdy and a low maintenance drive train -- and does save some costs on disposables like cassettes, chains, chain rings. The weight penalty on a mountain bike is supposedly only about 300 grams (after cutting a chain ring, rear derailleur and big cassettes). You'll loose 300 grams off your wallet, so no real weight penalty for a mountain bike.

-- Jay Beattie.

Lou Holtman

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 1:53:39 PM1/17/15
to
It is extremely wet the last weeks here. Off road is extremely muddy as a
result. In these conditions my Rohloff equipped ATB excels. Rohloff? Use is
wisely...
--
Lou

Frank Krygowski

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 4:00:18 PM1/17/15
to
On 1/17/2015 12:41 PM, Joe Riel wrote:
> AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> writes:
>
>> Mr Jute has the Rohloff with chain cover and stainless bits.
>> Sir has a simple derailleur system without covers on which tire
>> changing is unimpeded.
>>
>> Neither system is 'best' IMHO and as always we celebrate diversity of
>> taste and equipment here at RBT.

And, since this is a technical discussion group, we should consider
ourselves free to discuss the benefits and detriments of the various
technological choices.

>
> Andre suggested that his setup make changing a tire easier. I'm
> wondering how. I have no experience with a Hebie chainglider; my first
> thought is that getting the wheel off, and then back on, might be more
> difficult, compared to a bike with rear derailer and quick releases.
> It's not obvious [I'm imagining] how one gets the chain off the cog
> considering it is enclosed by the chainglider. Does one first take the
> chainglider off? How much a pain is that? I've seen a video of one
> being installed. My experience with disassembling lightweight plastic
> structures that snap together is not good.

I'd be curious how many flat tires Mr. Jute incurs in a typical year.
And whether he fixes them, or has his mechanic (or perhaps chauffeur?)
fix them for him. I suspect that there are very few flats, none of them
occuring more than a few km from his house.

There's nothing wrong with that, of course.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Lou Holtman

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 4:11:22 PM1/17/15
to
A chaincase makes a flat more difficult to fix not a Rohloff hub. IIRC a
hebie chainglider is (much) easier than a typical Dutch closed chaincase
which are the work of Satan in that respect to cite Sheldon.

--
Lou

(PeteCresswell)

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 5:03:40 PM1/17/15
to
Per jbeattie:
>With all that said, and if you like the twist shift/gear range, the Speedhub is really sturdy and a low maintenance drive train -- and does save some costs on disposables like cassettes, chains, chain rings. The weight penalty on a mountain bike is supposedly only about 300 grams (after cutting a chain ring, rear derailleur and big cassettes). You'll loose 300 grams off your wallet, so no real weight penalty for a mountain bike.

My experience is that it added 1.9 pounds to a bike where it replaced a
SRAM 9.0 setup with twist shifters.

Here's a review I wrote a looooong time ago:
=======================================================================

Pros:

- Wide shifts:
Probably a substitute for proper technique, but I can clean inclines
that I couldn't before. Hammer in to it in, say, gear 8, then jump down
to 4, then to 1 as needed.

Also, on long climbs I like to alternate in and out of the saddle which,
for me, is a 3 or 4 gear shift on each change. With the der I used to do
it a lot less frequently that I really like and in the spirit of "Gee, I
sure hope I don't miss this shift and take the saddle horn up my butt
(again...)".

Now I just snap those wide shifts without even thinking about it. Any
time, any place.- I'm always in the right gear, since shifting is
essentially trivial; seems like shifts take less than a fiftieth of a
second.


- No more rear cog problems: no taco'd cogs, no more vines/small
branches/grass wrapped around the cog/der.


- It *seems* pretty-much bombproof. Time will tell, but I was spending
more time than I cared to adjusting my der and bending a cog wheel while
riding was a PITA.


- Greatly-reduced frequency of missed shifts. "Reduced" and not "Zero"
because there is a 'gotcha' between 7 and 8 dumps you into gear 14 if
you forget and shift under load.

It pops back into the intended gear as soon as the load comes off, but
it's nothing you want to make a habit of doing. As I write this
little addendum, I cannot remember the last time that happened to me...
so, with a little experience, I'd say it becomes a non-issue.


- Ability to shift down when stopped. I think I make more than my share
of unplanned stops and I used to have to lift up the rear wheel and
rotate the cranks to get down to a starting gear.

Also, my technique sucks and probably won't get any better and it's nice
to be able approach an object and slow way, way down before negotiating
it without worrying about getting stuck in too high a gear to get over
it.


- I don't have to keep mental track of which chain ring I'm on. Sounds
trivial, but I don't have any brain cells to spare.


- Maybe not so much of a strength, but it should be mentioned somewhere
that 14 speeds are enough.

My original 44-32-22 der setup took me from 18.5 to 104.

With the Rohloff on a 44 I get 19.9 to 104.9 in nice even, uniform 13.8%
increments. That's only one less gear and, since I never used 104 it's a
wash for me.

With the 38 that I've since gone over to it's 17.2 - 90.6.
I don't get spun out in 90.6 until about 25 mph - and there's no way I
can hold that speed for very long anyhow.

I left the old 32 in the middle position just because it weighs next to
nothing and, on a big bump sometimes the chain drops (you're supposed to
have a front-der-like dingus up there to keep it from doing that ....but
I never go around to getting one) the 32 catches the chain. Also
allows shifting down to a usually-ludicrous 14.something if things get
really bad....

Cons:

- It costs an arm and a leg.

If my wife ever finds out I spent close to a grand on a rear wheel,
she'll start to doubt my sanity.

- This hub weighs a *lot*. It added 1.9 pounds to my already-heavy bike
- same rim/tube/tire/spoke gauge.
Anybody who says it only adds a pound must be using a really, *really*
heavy cog/hub/der/shifter setup. I was using SRAM 9.0 with twist
shifters.

- The installation instructions could use a re-write. I'm no rocket
scientist, and after studying them long enough I pulled it off - but it
could have been a *lot* easier.

- It's heavy. Are you ready for an 8-pound rear wheel?

- The torque arm mounting that came with it was decidedly un-German
(downright kludgy, I'd say...). Hose clamps!

Also sometime during the first hundred miles the little clevis pin that
held it all together disappeared. Wasn't a catastrophic failure because
the normal riding pressure pushes everything together.... I probably
installed the c-ring keeper wrong or something - but it seems like a
weak point. Replaced it with a marine shackle set in LocTite.

I have since discovered that there is a more elegant torque arm setup
that Rohloff calls the "SpeedBone". Uses the disk brake mount and does
not interfere with using a disk brake.

- Evenly-spaced shifts: From me, this is strictly a theoretical "con",
but if somebody were in good enough shape to be riding in/having to keep
up with a pace line, they would want closer spacing in the upper gears.
It's no problem for me, bco my pathetic physical condition and riding
style (or lack thereof), but it's pretty sure tb an issue with a more
competitive rider.


- It's heavy.


- It's noisy, especially in gears 1-7. Supposedly this mitigates with
age, but it is still an issue with me at 1,000 miles.

Late breaking news: After 5,000+ miles the noise has mitigated, my
hearing has deteriorated, or I've been drinking less coffee or something
bc the noise is no longer an issue with me.


- It's definitely less efficient in gears 1-8.

There's a web site somewhere (in German) that supposedly graphs a
Rohloff against one of the Shimano's and claims no loss in most gears
and 1-2% in the lower gears.

I would disagree with that web site's figures.


- Did I mention that it's heavy?
------------------------------------------------
Bottom Line:

This is definitely not for everybody and the torque arm thing bugged me
until I got the more elegant replacement.

Having said that, I find that me and the Rohloff are a good match.

I've quickly gotten so used to getting any gear I want any time I want
and never having to stop and pull brush/branches out of my rear der that
I can't imagine going back.

It also appeals to the exhibitionist in me...

You, on the other hand, might hate the thing.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot: it's heavy.
=======================================================================
--
Pete Cresswell

Andre Jute

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 5:43:53 PM1/17/15
to
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 1:33:59 PM UTC, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
> On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 1:53:23 AM UTC-5, Andre Jute wrote:

> > On ali drivetrains with Shimano chains in full Dutch chain cases, I achieved about 1600km on a chain. With admittedly better KMC chains running on stainless gears I'm getting a minimum of 4500km. That's three times as far.
>
> > Andre Jute
>
> I get at least that much @5,000 km on my derailleur bikes sans stainless cogs and also sans enclosed or any chain cover.

So, perhaps you'd get 15000km if you fitted a hub gearbox, stainless gears and a Chainglider, and you'd have the time you saved from transmission maintenance to ridealot, as your monicker claims.

>makes changing a tire or patching a tube very easy too.

First of all, cyclists who have flats do it to themselves by choosing flat-prone tyres. I'm not a masochist. I ride on belted tyres. I haven't had a flat for getting on for two decades now. Secondly, my bike, as can be seen from that detail, represents a systems approach to making the bike attention-free, not only near-zero maintenance but ultra-reliable.

In any event, I don't see how having a hub gearbox makes removing the wheel more difficult. If you buy the right Rohloff model -- the EXT one, not the one that has exposed cables to save two grammes and make roadies feel at home -- you undo one thumbscrew to remove the cable box, and you drop the wheel out the same way as you drop out a wheel on a road bike.

Nor does the Chainglider make removing the wheel more difficult. You just pull off the rear part of Chainglider, one smooth movement, a fraction of a second, and that's it. Refitting might take a second.

You haven't looked at what you're discussing, Ridealot. You're just, like Krygowski, coming up with mindless objections based on your personal dislike of the proposer. I don't care shit whether you like me, but it is tiresome having to straighten out your lazy misconceptions.

> Plus I can either repair everything myself or have it done at nearly any bicycle shop anywhere.

Sure you can. So can I on the Rolloff, with the aid of widely available videos, if it should ever be necessary. But, since the Rohloff is virtually indestructible, and outrageously reliable, I have no need of repairs.

And I'll tell you something else. You have to pay your bicycle shop. If my Rohloff ever breaks, I'll send it to the factory, and they'll fix it free of charge and return it to me at their cost, regardless of the fact that it is years and years out of guarantee. Rohloff has an established history of fixing gearboxes that have been maintained (one oil change every year or 5000km, permitted to overrun if you're touring outside civilization) entirely free of charge on turnaround schedules that are the next best thing to instant. When you spend German money on German engineering you get German service. For life.

Andre Jute

jbeattie

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 5:59:32 PM1/17/15
to
I'll defer to someone who actually owns one -- this fanboy site has the difference under 300g: http://www.bikestation.fi/info/en/brands/rohloff/speedhub/weight/ It's even lighter than the Alfine system!

-- Jay Beattie.

Andre Jute

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 6:07:43 PM1/17/15
to
See the Rolloff EXT installation at http://coolmainpress.com/AndreJute'sUtopiaKranich.pdf by scrolling down to the large photos of the hub's non drive side which also show the torque retainer in it's slot (the little two-screw black nub in the same vertical slot below the axle nut) and the straight-down drop of the wheel. It's a one-second job to detach the black cable box with it's thumbscrew. Then you just drop the wheel, same as on a road bike.

On a proper installation there is no separate torque arm. Pete's installation with a separate torque arm called a Speedbone is a factory makeshift to allow adaptation of the Rohloff to existing frames with vertical dropouts, unnecessary on frames with sliders or long horizontal dropouts.

Nor does a Chainglider detain the wheelchanger long. It's a one second job to pull off the rear end before you drop the wheel.

Even Ridealot could probably manage to do the two one-second jobs at once with his left and right hand.

I notice that a lot of racers now have winter practice bikes with Rohloff rear ends to reduce maintenance and cost, but nobody's suggesting that road racers use Rohloff boxes. It's a fast touring sort of transmission, a commuting transmission, a utility transmission, and of course an offroad transmission for both entertainment and competition (this last is its primary and intended function).

> Neither system is 'best' IMHO and as always we celebrate
> diversity of taste and equipment here at RBT.

Some of these clowns demonstrate an exceedingly negative way to "celebrate".

Andre Jute

Lou Holtman

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 6:27:17 PM1/17/15
to
jbeattie <jbeat...@msn.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 2:03:40 PM UTC-8, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>> Per jbeattie:
>>> With all that said, and if you like the twist shift/gear range, the
>>> Speedhub is really sturdy and a low maintenance drive train -- and does
>>> save some costs on disposables like cassettes, chains, chain rings. The
>>> weight penalty on a mountain bike is supposedly only about 300 grams
>>> (after cutting a chain ring, rear derailleur and big cassettes). You'll
>>> loose 300 grams off your wallet, so no real weight penalty for a mountain bike.
>>
>> My experience is that it added 1.9 pounds to a bike where it replaced a
>> SRAM 9.0 setup with twist shifters.
>>
>> Here's a review I wrote a looooong time ago:
>> ======================================================================>
>> ======================================================================> --
>> Pete Cresswell
>
> I'll defer to someone who actually owns one -- this fanboy site has the
> difference under 300g:
> http://www.bikestation.fi/info/en/brands/rohloff/speedhub/weight/ It's
> even lighter than the Alfine system!
>
> -- Jay Beattie.

Another data point
http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-c4xMxzpF3VY/UdXMVHhF-FI/AAAAAAAAEjw/uaDxkuEGRq8/s2048-no/IMG_2122.JPG
Why couldn't it be lighter than a Alfine system?
The whole issue of weight is ridiculous considering the intended use of a
Rohloff hub so is the discussion of the costs.

--
Lou

Andre Jute

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 6:31:02 PM1/17/15
to
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 5:41:07 PM UTC, JoeRiel wrote:
> AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> writes:
>
> > On 1/17/2015 10:42 AM, Joe Riel wrote:

> Andre suggested that his setup make changing a tire easier.

I did? Where?

Changing the tyre is not something I would even consider, Joe. It is decades since I last had a flat. I run on low pressure belted balloons (Schwalbe Big Apple Liteskin 60x622 tyres with the T19 Ultraleicht tubes), ultra-comfortable, ultra-secure on my bad roads for both roadholding and handling, ultra-flat-resistant. As far as I'm concerned, flats are something unnecessary the less bright cyclists do to themselves because cyclists have always done it to themselves, and they don't have the brains to discover that there are alternatives to suffering.

> I'm
> wondering how. I have no experience with a Hebie chainglider; my first
> thought is that getting the wheel off, and then back on, might be more
> difficult, compared to a bike with rear derailer and quick releases.
> It's not obvious [I'm imagining] how one gets the chain off the cog
> considering it is enclosed by the chainglider. Does one first take the
> chainglider off? How much a pain is that? I've seen a video of one
> being installed. My experience with disassembling lightweight plastic
> structures that snap together is not good.

You're still confusing the Chainglider with those big Dutch plastic chaincases. I have considerable experience of those as well, and wrote the definitive article on them, and their more modern successors. But I recommend only the Chainglider. My articles and discussion with informed parties elsewhere are on the net; link on request. Forget what you know about plastic clip-together bits/; those are irritating crap and they ain't the Chainglider.

To answer your question: the Hebie Chainglider isn't brittle plastic at all but a thick, quite heavy rubbery concoction, more like a thin square-cornered tyre than any other chaincase you may ever have seen. It consists in use of two U shapes that plug together and adjust on a row of serrations in/on their ends, a long front piece and a short rear piece; together they cover the chain, cog and chainring, and they have no other support than the chain.

To drop the rear wheel, you pull the rear section out. That's it. It takes less time to do than to read the first sentence of this paragraph. Refitting is the reverse: you just push it in. In tens of thousands of kilometers neither I nor anyone who fitted the Chainglider on my recommendation has had one shift a single millimeter. Mine is like new every second year when I wipe the dust off it. (My bike's ten year guarantee depends on washing and waxing the frame every six months!)

The Rolloff, in a dedicated installation, by the way, demonstrates its competition ancestry (it's a mudplugger's competition box, because that's Bernd Rohloff's sport) by having in a proper installation, seen in the link I already gave Andrew Muzi, a single thumbscrew to undo before the wheel drops out loose, also a second's work.

Andre Jute

Andre Jute

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 6:46:01 PM1/17/15
to
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 9:00:18 PM UTC, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 1/17/2015 12:41 PM, Joe Riel wrote:
> > AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> writes:
> >
> >> Mr Jute has the Rohloff with chain cover and stainless bits.
> >> Sir has a simple derailleur system without covers on which tire
> >> changing is unimpeded.
> >>
> >> Neither system is 'best' IMHO and as always we celebrate diversity of
> >> taste and equipment here at RBT.
>
> And, since this is a technical discussion group, we should consider
> ourselves free to discuss the benefits and detriments of the various
> technological choices.

So tell us, Franki-boy, what's technical about your personal attacks like "Your solution isn't forward-looking. It's affected, prissy" etc, etc.

Do you grasp, you thickly insensitive clown, how your consistent conflation of your personal dislikes with negative technical judgements on those you don't like undermine every single word you say? After a few years of everyone expecting you to lie, your opinion becomes worthless.

[Snip remarks by Joe Riel I've answered where they first appeared.]

> I'd be curious how many flat tires Mr. Jute incurs in a typical year.

None.

> And whether he fixes them, or has his mechanic (or perhaps chauffeur?)
> fix them for him.

I've been car-free since 1992. I practice what I preach, unlike you, Franki-boy.

>I suspect that there are very few flats, none of them
> occuring more than a few km from his house.

There are none whatsoever. The same way I have my mind in gear about the transmission, I have my mind in gear about the tyres, with the net result that there are no flats, and none expected.

> There's nothing wrong with that, of course.

They why raise it in this sourly negative manner? Surely it is a matter for praise and jubilation when a cyclist reports that he had no flats for many years.

> --
> - Frank Krygowski

Smile when you say that, feller.

Andre Jute
Defining the cutting edge

Andre Jute

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 6:50:27 PM1/17/15
to
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 9:11:22 PM UTC, Lou Holtman wrote:

> a typical Dutch closed chaincase
> which are the work of Satan in that respect to cite Sheldon.

Invented by Leopold von Sacher-Masoch.

Andre Jute
Not to forget the Marquis de Sade

avag...@gmail.com

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 7:13:03 PM1/17/15
to
Jeff's PROB Scotch. I'm not. The Scotch Daniels are a hardy self reliant lot. Jeff works(ed) in TV ?

Riders not cleaning the chain are indescribbable.

Joe Riel

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 7:20:17 PM1/17/15
to
Thanks, that's informative. I was thinking it was the brittle plastic
stuff that makes life miserable.

--
Joe Riel

avag...@gmail.com

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 7:28:58 PM1/17/15
to
Thanks, that's informative. I was thinking it was the brittle plastic
stuff that makes life miserable.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$

never saw one. I will consult OVERFLOW and backup.
however, in the course if these mechanisms, one would imagine the GLIDER functions best with a clean freshly oiled chain....oil not wax/oil...maybe Teflon/wax or the yellow stuff with plastic marbles ?

not old gunk left on by a gadabout.



avag...@gmail.com

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 7:39:44 PM1/17/15
to
On Tuesday, January 13, 2015 at 11:30:27 PM UTC-5, Andre Jute wrote:
> Is this the Jeff Daniels who whines that I don't post any of my technical articles on RBT?
>
> On Tuesday, January 13, 2015 at 8:16:10 PM UTC, avag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > if I read this, I'll find a humor piece ?
>
> Now we know why.
>
> Andre Jute

LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

I wasn't trying to annoy you god forbid

I suggested in context that developing a mechanism qualified for RBT status...that is not buying stuff n boltin it on yet this is a grade up from not bolting stuff on...but not by much

(PeteCresswell)

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 9:52:11 PM1/17/15
to
Per jbeattie:
>
>I'll defer to someone who actually owns one -- this fanboy site has the difference under 300g: http://www.bikestation.fi/info/en/brands/rohloff/speedhub/weight/ It's even lighter than the Alfine system!

I don't know what to say about that.

I weighed every part... even used a balance scale.

Either I messed up big-time or they're comparing the Rohloff to a much
heavier der system than SRAM 9.0.... or maybe they left something out.

Dunno...
--
Pete Cresswell

(PeteCresswell)

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 9:57:41 PM1/17/15
to
Per Lou Holtman:
>The whole issue of weight is ridiculous considering the intended use of a
>Rohloff hub so is the discussion of the costs.

The weight is nothing to me. But a guy I talked to who races said that
the extra two pounds on the hills would take him out of the competition
for the first few places.

OTOH, I'm older than dirt and when I was riding in Valley Forge with a
guy who looked to be in this thirties and not in all that bad shape he
volunteered that I was killing him on the hills.

What was really going on, of course, was that he was not getting the
gears he needed while I was. If he had the same access to any gear any
time, he would have had to stop and wait for me at the crest of each
hill.
--
Pete Cresswell

(PeteCresswell)

unread,
Jan 17, 2015, 10:17:19 PM1/17/15
to
Per (PeteCresswell):
>Either I messed up big-time or they're comparing the Rohloff to a much
>heavier der system than SRAM 9.0.... or maybe they left something out.
>
>Dunno...

A fourth possibility: maybe Rohloff hubs made today are lighter than
those made 10 years (or however long I've had mine) ago.
--
Pete Cresswell

AMuzi

unread,
Jan 18, 2015, 12:04:00 PM1/18/15
to
On 1/17/2015 5:07 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
> On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 4:50:56 PM UTC, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/17/2015 10:42 AM, Joe Riel wrote:
>>> Sir Ridesalot <i_am_cyc...@yahoo.ca> writes:
>>>> On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 1:53:23 AM UTC-5, Andre Jute wrote:
>>>>> On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 4:12:24 AM UTC, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/16/2015 9:38 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 10:10:07 -0800 (PST), Andre Jute
>>>>>>> wrote:
-snip snip-

>> Neither system is 'best' IMHO and as always we celebrate
>> diversity of taste and equipment here at RBT.

> Some of these clowns demonstrate an exceedingly negative way to "celebrate".

That was an attempt at humor mixed with a call to civility.

There's no reason to come to blows or spew invective over
which end of the eggshell one breaks first. Or over bicycle
equipment.

AMuzi

unread,
Jan 18, 2015, 12:14:47 PM1/18/15
to

jbeattie

unread,
Jan 18, 2015, 2:17:30 PM1/18/15
to
You're so literary! Andre should appreciate the reference to his (Anglo)Irish homeboy.

Apart from differing tastes, people have different needs and budgets. The OTC bikes with IGH (particularly belt-driven) typically lack a high end, and you need to dump a lot of money to get the same range as a derailleur bike. The same goes with dynomo lights (although you never get the output of a mid-priced LED battery light). Most people don't have the cash or the need for a Rohloff hub, but it is clearly superior for certain applications. Same goes with the Schmidt hub. But if you have the money, go dog go! Keep the Euro strong. I could see building a hard-tail 29er with a Rohloff hub when my kids gets out of college.

Even more O.T., I just saved $10-12 USD when I found and NOS leather washer for my Silca track pump among my spare parts. I probably bought it for $1 a million years ago. I'm doing clean-up and equipment restoration today -- and probably a ride when someone calls. Yesterday was two hours in pouring rain on a non-Rohloff drive train -- and a chain that sounded like walking on gravel. No chain case would have kept it dry/lubricated: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jo-XnPJRJVg

A conventional system just means more clean-up time, but it works fine except for the brakes. I had some really terrifying moments on the water-slides down the local hills. I wish my CAAD 9 rain bike had discs -- but otherwise, it is a lot of fun for fast rides in the rain.

-- Jay Beattie.



Ralph Barone

unread,
Jan 18, 2015, 6:06:09 PM1/18/15
to
Agreed, unless you're one of those heathen Big-endians.

James

unread,
Jan 18, 2015, 6:25:28 PM1/18/15
to
On 18/01/15 08:43, Andre Jute wrote:
>
> So, perhaps you'd get 15000km if you fitted a hub gearbox, stainless
> gears and a Chainglider, and you'd have the time you saved from
> transmission maintenance to ridealot, as your monicker claims.

According to my Strava records, I'm within 1000km of hitting 15,000km
using 2 chains and one cassette, and cooking in a wax based lubricant.
Paraffin wax and EP gear oil.

I used to get about 5000km from a single chain and cassette and oil and
messy cleaning.

Now I take a chain off, put it in the pot and cook it while I install
the other chain, then take the cooked chain out, let it cool and put it
in a zip lock bag for about 3 months.

--
JS

Andre Jute

unread,
Jan 18, 2015, 7:56:45 PM1/18/15
to
On Sunday, January 18, 2015 at 5:04:00 PM UTC, AMuzi wrote:
> On 1/17/2015 5:07 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
> > On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 4:50:56 PM UTC, AMuzi wrote:
> >> On 1/17/2015 10:42 AM, Joe Riel wrote:
> >>> Sir Ridesalot <i_am_cyc...@yahoo.ca> writes:
> >>>> On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 1:53:23 AM UTC-5, Andre Jute wrote:
> >>>>> On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 4:12:24 AM UTC, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>>>> On 1/16/2015 9:38 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 10:10:07 -0800 (PST), Andre Jute
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> -snip snip-
>
> >> Neither system is 'best' IMHO and as always we celebrate
> >> diversity of taste and equipment here at RBT.
>
> > Some of these clowns demonstrate an exceedingly negative way to "celebrate".
>
> That was an attempt at humor mixed with a call to civility.

I noticed the call to civility. You won't have much luck with those clowns. They're were born anti-social trash and they'll die anti-social trash.

> There's no reason to come to blows or spew invective over
> which end of the eggshell one breaks first. Or over bicycle
> equipment.

Quite. You tell that scum, Muzi.

Andre Jute
Careless comma, moi?

Andre Jute

unread,
Jan 18, 2015, 8:07:35 PM1/18/15
to
See, it's people like you, bragging about 7500km from a chain, making me feel I was doing something really badly wrong to reach only a fifth that far on a chain (a Shimano rep told my LBS, "He's mashing those chains to death" -- rubbish!), who set me off on this path of seeing whether technology is any help in extending transmission life. There was one guy on another forum who routinely got 10,000km from a chain, commuting in British wet weather; he too had several chains used in rotation. From there it was but a short step to wondering how good the factory lube in chains really is, which is where I'm now at. Next it might be smart to see if a tempered stainless chain lives three times as long as my current setup with KMC steel chains of good quality, but nowhere near the top of their price tree.

Duane

unread,
Jan 18, 2015, 8:10:39 PM