# EX Gear Mech & Long Torque Arm



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

A friend wants to get a Thorn Nomad S&S, but will first be buying a Rohloff and using it with his Surly Cross Check first while he saves some $$$. This frame has no disc tabs so he'll need to use the long torque arm until his Nomad arrives next year. He'll want the EX gear mech version of the Rohloff for the Thorn Nomad, but I seem to recall the EX gear mech and the long torque arm are incompatible. Is that correct?

cheers,

Vik


----------



## ALMEIDA (Mar 23, 2008)

vikb said:


> A friend wants to get a Thorn Nomad S&S, but will first be buying a Rohloff and using it with his Surly Cross Check first while he saves some $$$. This frame has no disc tabs so he'll need to use the long torque arm until his Nomad arrives next year. He'll want the EX gear mech version of the Rohloff for the Thorn Nomad, but I seem to recall the EX gear mech and the long torque arm are incompatible. Is that correct?
> 
> cheers,
> 
> Vik


No, that is not correct.
But I wouldn't prefer that combination because herewith you have only 2 axle plate alignment possibilites. Therefore you have to route the cable in direction of the seatpost. The better chainstay direction cable routing is not possible.


----------



## itsdoable (Jan 6, 2004)

The after market torque arm and external shifter box work fine together:









And all orientations of the shift box are possible, you can place it along the chainstay - the torque arm sits inboard.


----------



## ALMEIDA (Mar 23, 2008)

Hello itsdoable,

I don't agree.
The only thing you can place under the chainstay are the cables but that causes an ugly fishing cable bend. It's not possible to place the gear mech down so that the cables go horizontal along the chainstay.
The cable routing like on your photo is possibe but not the perfect way. 
My recommendation is to forget this hub type.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Thanks guys. The issue is he'll be using the hub on a Cross Check for less than a year and then switching over to a Thorn Nomad S&S. He might be willing to put up with a less than optimal cable routing on the Cross Check as long as he gets a good setup on the Nomad.

Can you buy a hub with the internal gear mech and then buy some parts to convert it to the external gear mech?


----------



## swift (Apr 3, 2007)

ALMEIDA said:


> Hello itsdoable,
> 
> I don't agree.
> The only thing you can place under the chainstay are the cables but that causes an ugly fishing cable bend. It's not possible to place the gear mech down so that the cables go horizontal along the chainstay.
> ...


I wouldn't want my ex gear mech hanging down on my mt. bike. I like to have drivetrain components out of harm's way as much as is possible. I also happen to prefer TT/SS cable routing over DT/CS routing for various reasons.

The details come down to personal preference sometimes and I don't think the OP will have any problem using the Rohloff with either frame. It's an impressively adaptable system.

Good luck!


----------



## ALMEIDA (Mar 23, 2008)

vikb said:


> Can you buy a hub with the internal gear mech and then buy some parts to convert it to the external gear mech?


Yes, no problem :thumbsup:


----------



## itsdoable (Jan 6, 2004)

ALMEIDA said:


> Hello itsdoable,
> 
> I don't agree.
> The only thing you can place under the chainstay are the cables but that causes an ugly fishing cable bend. It's not possible to place the gear mech down so that the cables go horizontal along the chainstay.
> ...


OK, I'll have to check mine. I remember setting a bike with a aftermarket torque arm and a direct chain-stay cable run, but I may have had the torque arm on the seat stay. However, like swift, I prefer the mech above the chainstay.


----------



## ALMEIDA (Mar 23, 2008)

swift said:


> I wouldn't want my ex gear mech hanging down on my mt. bike. I like to have drivetrain components out of harm's way as much as is possible.


But isn't your style of cable routing a harm's way too? In my view the problem is the great cable bend regardless in which position it is. Not the gear mech. I would be afraid of getting caught somewhere.
If the gear mech is bent - it is possible to rebent it.

But you are right. All depends on peronal references.


----------



## itsdoable (Jan 6, 2004)

ALMEIDA said:


> But isn't your style of cable routing a harm's way too? In my view the problem is the great cable bend regardless in which position it is....


Not if your most common error is slipping off a skinny / log and bashing the mech...



ALMEIDA said:


> ..If the gear mech is bent - it is possible to rebent it.
> But you are right. All depends on peronal references.


BTDT, my mech is still slightly bent, but works fine.

Personally I like the lines with the cable running under the chainstay, unless I can put the caliper between the CS & SS. And in practice, the shift box under the CS has been pretty trouble free.


----------



## ALMEIDA (Mar 23, 2008)

itsdoable said:


> Not if your most common error is slipping off a skinny / log and bashing the mech...
> 
> BTDT, my mech is still slightly bent, but works fine.
> 
> Personally I like the lines with the cable running under the chainstay, unless I can put the caliper between the CS & SS. And in practice, the shift box under the CS has been pretty trouble free.


O.K. I understand your point of view. Nevertheless I prefer the lines with the cable running under the CS. And that will be always my advice.
I don't understand the relation between the caliper and the cable routing?:madman:


----------



## ALMEIDA (Mar 23, 2008)

I've got a photo for you - found on the internet.


----------



## swift (Apr 3, 2007)

Are those V-brake noodles? 
That looks like a pretty clever idea.


----------



## itsdoable (Jan 6, 2004)

ALMEIDA said:


> I don't understand the relation between the caliper and the cable routing?:madman:


This is my prefered cable routing / caliper placement.









Otherwise, it depends on the cable run, sometimes it's difficult to keep them clear on the cs between the tire & crank.


----------



## ALMEIDA (Mar 23, 2008)

swift said:


> Are those V-brake noodles?
> That looks like a pretty clever idea.


Yes, think so.


----------



## ALMEIDA (Mar 23, 2008)

itsdoable said:


> This is my prefered cable routing / caliper placement.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ohhh, yes, looks great!!
I agree with: this is the best solution.
But bad if you don't have an OEM dropout.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

itsdoable said:


> This is my prefered cable routing / caliper placement.
> 
> 
> 
> ...












How would this position of the EX mechanism compare to the under the CS position in terms of getting water/dirt into the external cable box? It seems like the under the CS position would keep this component a lot cleaner.

I did several hundred KMs of dirt road touring in the rain this summer, The whole rear end of the bike incl Rohloff was covered in mud, but the external gear box under the CS was quite clean and only needed to be wiped down. The mud seemed to be deflected by the CS.

My use of the Rohloff is for touring and non-technical XC MTbing where a crash isn't super likely.


----------

