# Real World Riding IGH vs Derailleur



## EssexBoyUK (Oct 16, 2014)

I’m currently running my Pugsley 29+ with an Alfine. Finding the Alfine ok but back end feels really heavy and climbing is becoming a chore.
Found lots of posts regarding weight etc but not a lot about the feel of a bike when comparing the two drivetrains.
If I swap out to derailleur how will the ride feel? Will I really notice the difference? Cheers. Chris


----------



## fokof (Apr 24, 2006)

IGH are heavier , you'll have to get used to the different weight in the back , I'm not saying that it's better or worst , you'll have to change the gravity center of our bike more to the back.

You'll probably appreciate the fact that you can apply a certain amont of pressure while shifting.

But after a while , you'll miss the direct shifts , not having t pedal to shift , lack of time on the bench to fine tune , etc....


(I have 3 bikes with Rohloff and one with Shimano)


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

EssexBoyUK said:


> ...If I swap out to derailleur how will the ride feel? Will I really notice the difference? Cheers. Chris


If you have got into the habit of venturing into "interesting" places with your Pug, you'll have to watch you don't hang up your derailleur on part of the scenery. The ride will feel crap then. 

Basically if you have a derailleur, you have to ride as if the bike was wider and avoid tough vegetation (like heather) on the likes of deer tracks.

Derailleurs are for roadies IMO.

I'm not biased or anything....


----------



## ladljon (Nov 30, 2011)

No way would I ever go back to a derailleur, only on the road bike....two Rohloffs CX and MTBike.


----------



## manensky (Aug 22, 2011)

It took some time to adjust increased weight at the rear hub, when changed from derailleur to IGH (Rohloff). After couple of rides it wasn't problem anymore.
Thanks to tight time schedules, I won't go back to derailleur gears on my MTB bikes since with Rohloff I can use my time more to ride those bikes instead of cleaning & tuning derailleurs. I have derailleur gears on my CX bike to remind me actively, why I won't put those into my MTBs anymore 

And what comes to Rohloff weight compared to derailleurs.... I am not picking the lightest weight in the gym when I am doing workouts


----------



## gatouille (Aug 17, 2009)

If you want to feel light, choose derailleur.
If you want to feel faster and climb faster, choose derailleur.
IGH are heavier and less efficient ; you feel weight on rear wheel, you feel drag.
You will really notice the difference.
But IGH have advantage : easier gear adjustement, light maintenance, low wear, ...
Neither is better, it's different.

I'm happy with my IGH. Alfine on urban bike and Rohloff on mountainbike.
I feel light with a derailleur MTB but with my Rohloff I can take the bike when I want, without tools, and I'm sure to be confident for my trip. And I go slower but I have pleasure like that.


----------



## Mr Pink57 (Jul 30, 2009)

I rode an IGH for a few years. And here is my take on them, this is only using a Nuvinci N360.

1. They are heavy
2. They require more maintenance than you might think
3. Parts are never in stock, order everything
4. Great in winter
5. Less chains needed
6. Cheap chains
7. Less efficient than a derailleur
8. Cheap cogs/chainrings

To be honest I am glad to be on a derailleur system now, bigger range and much more efficient. More power to you IGH guys. If anyone is looking for a Nuvinci N360 laced to a Salsa Gordo 29 using a Rohloff shifter pm me.


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

Mr Pink57 said:


> ....
> 2. They require more maintenance than you might think...
> 7. Less efficient than a derailleur...


A normal hubgear requires much less maintenance than a derailleur though.

The difference in efficiency between a derailleur and a hubgear is measured in clean conditions which is fair enough for road users.

But for mtbs, I very much doubt there would be much if any difference once you got the derailleur system into loose dirt, sand or mud. Certainly I'd sooner pedal a hubgear through deep mud/sand or freezing slush than a derailleur.

A NuVinci N360 is hardly a normal hubgear - it works on balls rotating in a viscous liquid and depends on friction rather than using internal gears, so there are much more internal losses. It is also considerably heavier than the general run of hubgears.

I don't know any cyclist who has persisted with a DeVinci, but where they shine is on an eBike .


----------



## fokof (Apr 24, 2006)

Yep , and now , with 1 X 11 and 1 X 12 drivetrain the chain twists more and more making the difference in efficiency less of a difference.
I doubt that a 1X12 drivetrain in the first or last gear in mud is more efficient than a Rolloff in mud.

http://www.ihpva.org/HParchive/PDF/hp52-2001.pdf
That was made in 2001,they say the Rohloff is 2% less efficient. 
They compared a Rolloff to a 3 X 9 drivetrain , wich chain twists a lot less than 1 chainring modern drivetrain.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

I'm a couple thousand miles in on my Alfine/belt experiment, and really have no plans to change back to derailleur/chain.

The drag thing just isn't true in my experience. I can only guess that the people who complain about this don't know how to set up their cone bearings. Once you get it dialed in, there just isn't a difference. I have a derailleur/chain bike that's set up almost identically to my alfine/belt bike, and aside from just riding perception, Strava tells me there's no difference too.

On the weight thing....they are heavier. I installed a frame bag that sits inside the front of the front triangle near the head tube, and I run a water bottle on the downtube, and those two things balance out the bike quite well. I would imagine that a suspension fork would have the same effect (I run a rigid fork).

What I really like is the instantaneous no-pedal shifts, no dropped chains, and not having to worry about sloppy conditions, or branches and stuff ripping a derailleur off.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

Velobike said:


> A normal hubgear requires much less maintenance than a derailleur though.


I think it depends on where you ride. Where I live the trails vary from smooth and sandy to very rocky and technical but not much vegetation on them and rarely muddy, plenty of stream crossings though.

In those conditions derailleurs have been extremely reliable and low maintenance for me, I never have broken a derailleur or a hanger and spend practically zero time adjusting them.


----------



## Ptor (Jan 29, 2004)

J.B. Weld said:


> I think it depends on where you ride. Where I live the trails vary from smooth and sandy to very rocky and technical but not much vegetation on them and rarely muddy, plenty of stream crossings though.


Sounds like my riding conditions, without the stream crossings. After 12 years of exclusively being on a Rohloff and single speed for off-road riding I added a 1x11 derailleur bike to the stable. In 500 miles I had two episodes of bad shifting due to a bent hanger. Neither the fall or the rock scrape would have been an issue for the SS or Rohloff. That being said, I'm loving the light weight and lack of pedal feedback of the 1x11 compared to the Rohloff and am willing to put up with the occasional shifting issue.


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

Ptor said:


> ...In 500 miles I had two episodes of bad shifting due to a bent hanger. Neither the fall or the rock scrape would have been an issue for the SS or Rohloff...


In time you'll learn not to head into interesting stuff, then you'll be able to say like all the other derailleur riders "I never have a problem." 

I thought I had solved those sort of problems by fitting a hub gear, but no. A bit of heather managed to wangle its way into the disk calliper, jammed it, bent the return spring, and generally made for a time consuming off piste repair because I didn't have a pair of tweezers with me. There was always just one last bit I didn't see.



I later solved that problem by removing the hubgear, reverting to single speed, but with drum brakes. No problems since.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

Velobike said:


> In time you'll learn not to head into interesting stuff, then you'll be able to say like all the other derailleur riders "I never have a problem."


One mans "interesting" is another's "This looks great for hiking!" different strokes and all. Besides, the heather in my part of the world is probably a bit different than yours, off-trailing generally won't get you far here, and an IGH won't help.


















It is plenty interesting though and I'm sure your riding is too, enjoy!


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

J.B. Weld said:


> One mans "interesting" is another's "This looks great for hiking!" different strokes and all. Besides, the heather in my part of the world is probably a bit different than yours, off-trailing generally won't get you far here, and an IGH won't help.
> 
> It is plenty interesting though and I'm sure your riding is too, enjoy!


That's the great things about this forum. We get to see where we all ride, and there's some awesome country out there.

I'm not averse to a bit of hiking. I regard any ride where I don't have to carry the bike over part of it as somewhat lacking.


----------



## EssexBoyUK (Oct 16, 2014)

Thanks for the replies and sharing your thoughts. Have decided to stick with the Alfine on the Pug and just rebuilt the wheels swapping out rabbit holes to marges.
Have a Wednesday frame tucked away which I will build up when time and funds allow so will have a derailleur driive to compare to the IGH. Although I have found myself checking out the new fat bike Rohloff just lately.....


----------



## fokof (Apr 24, 2006)

I'm here to help you


----------



## ladljon (Nov 30, 2011)

I have ripped off a few derailleurs, and have bent, and or broken hangers. Also just plain wore out derailleurs. I have two Rohloffs and one Alfine 8. The A-8 is ok for commuting, but would never use for off road. The difference between the Rohloff and A-8 is night and day. The two are no way equal in comparison. Yes the Rohloff is expensive, but to me so worth every dollar. I do not notice the heaviness or the so-called drag. Still very capable of staying up to speed with friends....and they cannot hear me shift....Now if only the CX hub was as broken in as the mtb hub; will eventually get there.


----------



## EssexBoyUK (Oct 16, 2014)

Quick update. I decided to stick with the Alfine and have swapped out the 29 Rabbit Holes for Marges and gone 26" full fat.
Wow. What a difference. The bike feels much more nimble on 26" with quicker handling, acceleration and much better on the climb.
I originally thought the Alfine was weighing me down but changing wheel sizes has really made a difference. Love the IGH and think its great for a novice off roader like me with bad gear selection. Daily commuting just got a load more fun.


----------



## Rob_E (Nov 22, 2010)

EssexBoyUK said:


> Quick update. I decided to stick with the Alfine and have swapped out the 29 Rabbit Holes for Marges and gone 26" full fat.
> Wow. What a difference. The bike feels much more nimble on 26" with quicker handling, acceleration and much better on the climb.
> I originally thought the Alfine was weighing me down but changing wheel sizes has really made a difference. Love the IGH and think its great for a novice off roader like me with bad gear selection. Daily commuting just got a load more fun.


Good to hear. I'm sure the Alfine is heavier than a derailler set-up, but I went to Alfine from a Nuvinci, which is considerably heavier, so the Alfine has always felt pretty light to me.

I don't imagine I spend enough time off-road to speak to ruining my derailler, but I do love my hub gears. I love switching to my preferred starting gear when stopped at a light or before I shove off in the morning. And I find adjusting the hub to be pretty simple compared to derailers, and maintenance isn't a big deal. Once I got used to disconnecting the hub from the bike, it became pretty easy. Although I agree with MrPink that the Nuvinci is a different animal, maintenance-wise. The hub isn't user-serviceable, but the attachment system was never perfected to my liking. I used to jump through hoops to avoid removing the rear wheel because it could be a hassle. Not so with the Alfine.


----------



## TraxFactory (Sep 10, 1999)

The Rohloff is sweet for sure. Rohloff'd Turner Sultan was my main bike for several years, very fun and still have it.

I did switch back a derailleur. Only due too no different axle support at that time for a new bike build. First 1x11 then 12. The thing I miss the most are the super fast last moment shifts. Maintenance was simple as well.


----------



## rifraf (Dec 22, 2012)

I've a Rohloff and like it well enough.
However I think its an acquired taste that has taken me time to decide to stick with it.

I found it embarrassing noisy when I first started using it.
I'm not sure it has quietened down any but I'm now used to its racket compared to my last bike and don't notice the noise like I used to.

Due to its cost, I'm too scared to park it outside anywhere for even a second out of my sight which makes it a bit of a burden and less of a relaxed joy to own.

Mine has the cranks spinning when I have to push the bike for any reason.
This is my pet hate and many is the bruise I've sported on my ankles and calves when my attention has wandered and I've forgotten about the cranks rotating when pushing my pannier laden tourer up a steep hill.
The air is frequently blue from my language as it takes some concentration when pushing your bike to pay strict attention to not stricking the peddles when walking.

Still I do love the lack of maintenance which pretty much equates to an occasional wiping of the chain with a kerosene soaked rag to rid any gunk.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

I'd assume that if you ask the question in this forum you'll find support for internal gears ;0) 

I have two friends who had internal-gear hubs and they both got fed up with them and switched to dérailleur bikes. Nether has mentioned internal gears ever again.


----------



## PlutonicPlague (Jan 19, 2014)

Nice. I have both wheel sets. I like the full fat on Marge Lites for the beach, the dunes, and pine forest trails with lots of tight turns and narrow gaps between trees. 
I prefer my RHs with Bombolonis for logging roads, wider trails, any pavement. I have noticed a better (more pronounced) flywheel effect with the 29"+ wheels when cruising a rolling paved bike path at about 10mph...my Pugsley seems to roll up out of the dips without losing as much speed as it does with my 26" fatter tires. This might translate to more work when on any longer climb, after the momentum is gone, but I don't really notice.



EssexBoyUK said:


> Quick update. I decided to stick with the Alfine and have swapped out the 29 Rabbit Holes for Marges and gone 26" full fat.
> Wow. What a difference. The bike feels much more nimble on 26" with quicker handling, acceleration and much better on the climb.
> I originally thought the Alfine was weighing me down but changing wheel sizes has really made a difference. Love the IGH and think its great for a novice off roader like me with bad gear selection. Daily commuting just got a load more fun.


----------



## PlutonicPlague (Jan 19, 2014)

Were their bikes fat bikes, or road bikes? I prefer SS or a derailleur for a skinny tire (700c x 40mm) road bike. Would not have a derailleur for the beach or woods.



Mr Pig said:


> I'd assume that if you ask the question in this forum you'll find support for internal gears ;0)
> 
> I have two friends who had internal-gear hubs and they both got fed up with them and switched to dérailleur bikes. Nether has mentioned internal gears ever again.


----------



## PlutonicPlague (Jan 19, 2014)

I needed to slow myself down when cycling. Too fast "closing speeds" and being unseen are less of a worry, now. I'm too old to crash, plus I'm on a blood thinner. I like to ride the beach and dunes, and keep maintenance to a minimum. Hence the fat bike and IGH.
Perfect combo for me!


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

PlutonicPlague said:


> Were their bikes fat bikes, or road bikes?


One was a flat-bar road-type bike and the other a 26'' hybrid type.


----------



## PlutonicPlague (Jan 19, 2014)

Ah, yes. I understand. My Giant TranSend is a flat-bar urban "commuter" that can double as a country day cruiser. It would be a bit of a dog on a group ride with roadies, but I don't do that. I just cruise solo at slower speeds and enjoy the silence and mindless simplicity of the A-8.
I took my SS road bike (1975 Motobecane frame with 700c x 40mm wheels) out for a quick 5-mile spin yesterday, and it was like it had wings in comparison to the TranSend.
The single speed is about 10 lbs lighter, and its gearing set up to be almost the same as high gear (8th) on the TranSend's A-8.



Mr Pig said:


> One was a flat-bar road-type bike and the other a 26'' hybrid type.


----------



## fokof (Apr 24, 2006)

Mr Pig said:


> I have two friends who had internal-gear hubs and they both got fed up with them and switched to dérailleur bikes. Nether has mentioned internal gears ever again.


Were these Shimano or Rohloff ?


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

fokof said:


> Were these Shimano or Rohloff ?


Both Shimano I think. Once definitely was and I'm fairly confident the other one was too.


----------



## fokof (Apr 24, 2006)

Mr Pig said:


> Both Shimano I think. Once definitely was and I'm fairly confident the other one was too.


I can understand their feeling.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

fokof said:


> I can understand their feeling.


One of the guys got a puncture miles from home and realised that he had no idea how to get the back wheel off. We left him :0)


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Mr Pig said:


> One of the guys got a puncture miles from home and realised that he had no idea how to get the back wheel off. We left him :0)


Obviously the hub's fault.

.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

_CJ said:


> Obviously the hub's fault.


That it makes it harder to remove the rear wheel from the bike? Yeah, I think it is.


----------



## PlutonicPlague (Jan 19, 2014)

Once you get the wrist action down pat, freeing the cable nut requires just a simple twist with some needle-nosed pliers while pulling "just so" on the cable end. I turn my Pugs upside down for this, and release tension on the shifter (I put it in 1st gear for the 500 and 501, and in 8th for the 7000). Then I free the cable from the A-8's shifter arm, position the cable out of the way, and slide my wheel out of the droppers. Piece of cake! No problem at all!



Mr Pig said:


> That it makes it harder to remove the rear wheel from the bike? Yeah, I think it is.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

I can remove my rear wheels without tools.


----------



## PlutonicPlague (Jan 19, 2014)

Well, that's certainly a benefit of having quick release axles. Carrying a small needle nose pliers and a light 15mm wrench isn't a problem with me. I use tubes. 
Why wasn't the rider you mentioned running tubeless? If he'd been doing that, a puncture might not have sidelined him.
I'm actually running belted touring tires and slime tubes in my old SS road bike, and don't carry any tools for my rides on that relic. Only a water bottle. Never had a flat on it, yet.



Mr Pig said:


> I can remove my rear wheels without tools.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

Mr Pig said:


> That it makes it harder to remove the rear wheel from the bike? Yeah, I think it is.


No, it was the mechanically inept owner/rider.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

PlutonicPlague said:


> Why wasn't the rider you mentioned running tubeless?


Or using solid tyres, that would work too.


----------



## tidelag (Oct 6, 2005)

HT MTB, usually on rought slow, wet, muddy tracks:
I felt the rear part with Rohloff was heavier, but it was easy to compensate for, and it made it better uphills and in rought terrain, the rear wheel did seems to have a better grip/tracking on roots. After a while, it felt natural. Felt more stable, especially in rought, slow terrain. Less maintenance. Faster gearing, I didn't expect that, no need to wait for the chain to move it's *ss. Feels like a tank, plowing thru ****, I felt
more focused and relaxed.

Disadvances?
Sure, I almost felt that I got a hernia each time I lifted my bike... 
The "coolness"-factor disappears when the bike feels like a tank.
Since one rides harder, accidents can happen more easier, be careful.
The rear wheel buzzes, it's not as "silent" as derailler, I don't get annoyed by it. Easier to sense it at the lower gears.

There was some issues in the beginning, as a learning phase, adjusting/lubricating, the gear wire, all the small crap, so just be patient with yourself in the first 3-6months.
I am very happy with Rohloff, it just works, even on bad days (tm)


----------



## rmeixner (Jun 14, 2017)

*Selecting an internal geared hub*

I am new to this forum, so Hi!

I am trying to select a gear, hub and sprocket combination that replicates the gears that I typically use on my 21 speed derailleur geared bike. I ride in a fairly hilly area, so I am pretty sure that 3 speeds is not enough. My most used front gear is 38T and my cluster is 11,12,14,16,18,21,26 and 32T. I have looked at Sheldon Brown's site and done a lot of my own calculations, but need a little help. Thanks in advance for any suggestions.


----------



## _CJ (May 1, 2014)

rmeixner said:


> I am new to this forum, so Hi!
> 
> I am trying to select a gear, hub and sprocket combination that replicates the gears that I typically use on my 21 speed derailleur geared bike. I ride in a fairly hilly area, so I am pretty sure that 3 speeds is not enough. My most used front gear is 38T and my cluster is 11,12,14,16,18,21,26 and 32T. I have looked at Sheldon Brown's site and done a lot of my own calculations, but need a little help. Thanks in advance for any suggestions.


Just multiply the primary drive ratio by the hub ratio. I posted a thread about this a while back.

If using an Alfine8, you'll need a primary ratio of 2.253:1, which is approx 38x17, to achieve a final drive range that's roughly equivalent to a 38F with an 11-32 rear.


----------



## PlutonicPlague (Jan 19, 2014)

My math abilities are temporarily anesthetized, but I thimk you might need a 33t chainring, if you want to achieve a decent range for the A-8. Choose either end of the range of gear ratios...you are going to have to sacrifice on either the low or the high end, since the A-8's range is considerably narrower than your derailleur's range. 
The biggest sprocket I have found for my A-8 is 23t.
My SS Pugs came set up with 33/19, which is nearly equivalent to my A-8's 6th gear on a 30/21 configuration.
Hope that gibberish helps!



rmeixner said:


> I am new to this forum, so Hi!
> 
> I am trying to select a gear, hub and sprocket combination that replicates the gears that I typically use on my 21 speed derailleur geared bike. I ride in a fairly hilly area, so I am pretty sure that 3 speeds is not enough. My most used front gear is 38T and my cluster is 11,12,14,16,18,21,26 and 32T. I have looked at Sheldon Brown's site and done a lot of my own calculations, but need a little help. Thanks in advance for any suggestions.


----------



## tidelag (Oct 6, 2005)

rmeixner said:


> I am new to this forum, so Hi!
> My most used front gear is 38T and my cluster is 11,12,14,16,18,21,26 and 32T.


You don't write which IGH hub you have/want, these have different requirment of gear ratio (big chainring / small cog = XX:xx ) . This number should not be taken lightly, it's pure destructive force on the hub, by your legs. Higher is better/safer than lower, one'll be less able to destroy it. Then the hub has a internal gear range which I'll cover later.

So your derailler gearrange is 38:32T and 38:11T, which is 1.187 and 3.454
"fairly hilly area," means that 1.187 cannot be higher, it's an absolute number.

(do not bother about gearing inch, and metre per revolution, you're not switching wheel size. no need to over-complicate things!)

https://www.rohloff.de/en/technology/workshop/sprocket-ratios/index.html
Let's say that you're using Rohloff, so you'll use 38T chainring with 16T cog, the gearingratio is 2.375.
The lowest allowable gearratio is 1.900 if one weigth less than 100kg.
Rohloff began with recommendation of 2.375-2.400 which is a good beginning, one are on the safer side. No need to play with physics? 
The lowest and highest gearingratio of the hub is 0.279 and 1.467. Gear 11 is 1.000.
Do not bother about these gears in the middle, it's a flat rate of 13.6% increments, which equals to two-three teeth on the cassette.

Rohloff Low - 2.375*0.279 = 0.663
Rohloff G11 - 2.375*1.000 = 2.375
Rohloff High - 2.375*1.467 = 3.484

Derailler Low - 38 / 11T = 1.187
Derailler High - 38 / 32T = 3.454

*Why did I mention gear 11 of Rohloff?*
Because it's the most silent and has lowest friction so it's smart to adjust it's gearingratio into the "marching speed" on the flat. Yes, that one when one have a good day.  I use now 53:16, and Gear 11 comes too late, so I'll change it to 48T,
and it'll be more usable. And I'll avoid bottoming out in the winter.

*0.663 is too low, I wanna 1.187, so how big should the chainring be?*
(g = gearratio, I set up an equation and find(isolate) g.)

g * 0.279 = 1.187 --> g = 1.187 / 0.279 --> g = 4.2544

Cog is 16T, so g * 16T = 68.07 = 68T 
Nice. Good luck to find one!


----------

