# New Shimano Alfine 11-Speed



## othu (Aug 20, 2008)

Hi,

in german only, sorry:
http://www.radfahren.de/news/detail...ie-sensation-shimano-bringt-11-gang-nabe.html

google translate:
http://translate.google.com/transla...-shimano-bringt-11-gang-nabe.html&sl=de&tl=en

- Shimano SG-S700
- 11Speed
- 409%
- September 2010

Regards
Otto


----------



## bsdc (May 1, 2006)

Wow! I'm looking forward to that. I've got an Alfine 8 and a Rohloff. The Rohloff has a little too much range. I rarely find myself in the top few gears. The Afline 8 is fine most of the time but a little extra range would be nice. The Alfine 11 sounds just right. I hope they've made the steps between the gears more even.


----------



## EGF168 (Aug 13, 2007)

Thanks for the link, that's fantastic news! :thumbsup:


----------



## othu (Aug 20, 2008)

More (new) details from the german website:


Price: about 300 - Euro (420$)
Weight: approx 1600 grams
Gear ratio: 409%
Jumps: 2 x 17% and 8 x 13%
Oil lubrication: 25 milliliters


----------



## baker (Jan 6, 2004)

This could be great...I wonder if it'll receive endorsement from Shimano for mountain bike usage...


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

I bet the SRAM marketing person in charge of promoting the i-Motion 9 broke down and cried 



baker said:


> This could be great...I wonder if it'll receive endorsement from Shimano for mountain bike usage...


I don't need an endorsement, I just need it to withstand mountain bike usage


----------



## Schmucker (Aug 23, 2007)

Will all the shifter options still suck? It is unlikely Jtek will be making a new model any time soon.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

The oil bath lubrication is exciting news. That, in and of itself, should prove to be a great step forward.


----------



## Deserteagle99uzi (Sep 15, 2008)

OMG i can't believe shimano is moving a project such as this forward. An affordable version of the Rohloff with TRIGGER SHIFTERS. Now I HAVE to build that FS 29er i've been salivating over. Please post any developments in this direction. I have scanned the IGH forum for something like this for months. PLEASE let this hub enter production.


----------



## Eddiecycle (Jun 25, 2009)

http://thelazyrando.wordpress.com/2010/02/02/11-speed-shimano-alfine/


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

"Affordable version of the Rohloff" is _probably_ an overstatement, given Shimano's history to date. I hope it'll be as durable as the current Alfine, but for $400, doubt it'll measure up to the Speedhub's legendary reliability.


----------



## ulcerpentacidis (Sep 27, 2006)

Ah, this is perfect timing. I'l likely be picking this up for my commuter/bikepacking 29er setup. I've found my nexus 8 to be a little high for slogging up hills with a load, and I'm not really down for lowering the gear ratio below 2/1. Here is to hoping this version is as durable as the alfine 8 and nexus models..


----------



## bikeny (Feb 26, 2004)

Excellent news!!! 25% more range, oil bath lubrication and the same weight. Where do I sign? 

Mark


----------



## themanmonkey (Nov 1, 2005)

Speedub.Nate said:


> "Affordable version of the Rohloff" is _probably_ an overstatement, given Shimano's history to date. I hope it'll be as durable as the current Alfine, but for $400, doubt it'll measure up to the Speedhub's legendary reliability.


Nate I know what you're saying, but at 1/4 the price if it's even 1/3 as reliable it's a better deal in the end. Even at wholesale the Rohloff is more than I spend on non-consumables in 3 years, so the Shimano could really fill a spot for we cheap a$$es.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

Oh, I don't disagree. Between my wife and myself, we have 4 Speedhubs, but I also have a Nexus 7, a Sram Spectro 7, an iMotion 9 and now a Nuvinci. Three of the Speedhubs I purchased used (and relatively cheap), without much concern or hesitation. But I'd never feel comfortable buying a use Sram or Shimano hub, unless it was incidental to a bike purchase.

All hubs have their place and I'm sure this new Shimano will be right up there. But I'll take the Speedhub's gear range and reliability off road at approximately 2x the price (used) vs. a new of the other. At least until the Alfine 11 hits the scene and proves itself reliable.


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

I was thinking some day I'd own a Speedhub, if this Alfine 11 turns out as nice as the Alfine 8, I don't think there'll be any reason to own one, esp for 3x the cost.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

Bikerumor has a good writeup. Looks sweet, lighter, less rolling resistance, increased range. And the shifter looks awesome!


----------



## krolik (Jun 9, 2006)

I currently run an Alfine in a C'dale BadBoy and a Rolo in the Nomad2
The thing I like most about the Alfine is the silence. It realy makes the BadBoy stealth.
This year I'll switch the BadBoy for a Mojo and the A11 sounds just perfect as I was a tad worried if th A8 will do. It was just fine in a flatland/winter BadBoy but I plan a bit more for the Mojo as my Nomad will be replaced with something little more FR.


----------



## hellocook (Nov 5, 2006)

what is included in the weight besides the rear hub? cog? shifter? cables?


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

hellocook said:


> what is included in the weight besides the rear hub? cog? shifter? cables?


I would imagine just the hub, since the shifters, cog, cables and installation accessories are usually sold separately.


----------



## mountaingoatepics (Jan 30, 2004)

Looking forward to its intro to the US. Just spoke to my Shimano Dealer who says he'll look into getting me one sooner then later.


----------



## JoeandEaston (May 3, 2004)

Looking forward to the new Alfine 11 more than I can say. Very good news as I was contemplating another A8. I need the build specs so I can get my rim and spokes ready.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

Here's the first hands-on test I've read of the new hub:

http://road.cc/content/news/13981-shimano-alfine-11-speed-hub-car-park-test


----------



## themanmonkey (Nov 1, 2005)

Dammit, dammit, dammit. . . I had re-purposed my S3X funds for a Alfine 8, but now I'm thinking I may have to hold out for the 11.


----------



## hellocook (Nov 5, 2006)

i have been planning tu use a rohloff, but this alfine 11 looks like a promising alternative. sufficient range for me, less money, better cabling looks to me (as i understand just 1 cable on the drive side, may work with normal cable stops) and most important i can stick to rapidfire i am used to. 

also looks like far less weight. 120g less for the hub, no additional external shifting box (-120g), no axle plate (-35g), just one cable with cable stopper (-100g). probably some extra weight for the shifer (+50g). alltogether close to 1lbs. less weight than rohloff and in combination with a belt drive i should be on par with a regular XTR set up ...

i assume centerlock disc brakes and normal spline shimano cog like for shimano cassettes. can somebody confirm? also, what is the best frame design for these hubs? i assume i also need a way to tighten the chain (or in my case belt drive)?


----------



## Deserteagle99uzi (Sep 15, 2008)

Double Post sorry


----------



## Deserteagle99uzi (Sep 15, 2008)

Writeup looked promising from road.cc but I wonder just how MTB conditions they tested it in. After all the article is from a road bike mag and smoother more reliable or faster shifting even under load in a parking lot is quite a bit different than having to drop 2 or 3 gears halfway up a rocky hill. 

I am still holding my breath for a review done by a more abusive rider and ultimately I would like to see a true torque limit test like the one done on the alfine 8 on this forum to figure out how low you can push the ratios. 

On the upside the fact that shimano is so sure of there product is a very good indicator and the technical changes they mentioned did seem to be following in the steps of the rohloff which is the model standard in the IGH market. I just hope durability isn't sacrificed for a few grams as I know most users on this forum aren't overly concerned about saving 15-20grams when the tradeoff is possibly breaking a $600 (shipped) component. Hopefully the price stays reasonable as well. I was very happy to see the efforts made to integrate the hub with existing rapidfire shifters as that is the ONLY reason I have held off a rohloff purchase.


----------



## swift (Apr 3, 2007)

Very exciting news!

I've been on a Rohloff for almost 3years and would never go back to derailers on my mt. bike! It's nice to see some more options coming to market. As much of an advocate as I am for the Rohloff, the price is still what it is...HIGH! 

When I last rode derailers, it was with a broken right thumb and trigger shifters. Every down-shift was very uncofortable but I toughed it out since I love to ride. After moving to the Rohloff, I learned to appreciate twist shifters in very short order. Everyone has their preference and I hope Shimano offers twist shift as an option with their new hub.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

Cook, your weight analysis looks about right. An installed, disc brake-ready QR Speedhub with shifter, OEM2 axle plate & Speedbone is going to hit 2059g (not including brake rotor, cables or chain tensioner). Speedhub weight worksheet

I believe Shimano normally sells the axle bolts and no-turn washers as separate kit, so they're probably not figured into the weight, but those are relatively minor items.

One thing I am curious about is how this hub handles torque. (I see something funky when I zoom in on the drive side dropout in this photo.) I've seen pictures of horizontal dropouts that the Speedhub has pried open like pistachio shells due to the insane amount of torque generated in the lower gears. Shimano must be getting close to that danger zone as the gear spread increases, so I wonder if they'll be sticking with their traditional methods of anchoring the hub to the frame, and whether there'll be any implications for frames with vertical dropouts.

As for the parking lot test vs. off-road, I think it's going to take some long term usage to determine whether this hub is up to the task. Lesser hubs have felt good initially, failing only after a handful of rides were put in. One item in particular to watch out for is that this hub is supposedly a complete redesign from the proven Alfine 8, so dirt-worthy success there isn't a guarantee of the same for the Alfine 11. But I doubt Shimano would take a backwards step in this respect, despite the fact that they're still not officially sanctioning these hubs for off-road use and abuse.

Yes, things are looking up in the IGH world!


----------



## hellocook (Nov 5, 2006)

thanks a lot nate!

i guess i will wait some more weeks to order my custom frame and see what shimano comes up with.


----------



## jdrds17 (May 8, 2006)

Not to be too negative, but on the weight, I wouldn't expect a big savings compared to the Rohloff. I reported in an old post:

Though Shimano claims 1590 grams, this must be for the bare hub. On a calibrated scale I measured 1847 grams for the whole rear hub assembly including: hub, dust cap, inner chain guard, 20T sprocket w/guard, snap ring, driver cap, cassette joint, cassette joint fixing ring, 1pr no turn washers and 1pr acorn axle nuts. If you go with the trigger shifter, you also have to add 223 grams for: shifter, cable, full length housing and cable fixing bolt.

Comparing these numbers to those posted by Speedub.Nate and others, the weight between the Speedhub and Alfine looks about the same and the Speedhub can actually be lighter depending on what configuration you run.

Granted the new shifter will hopefully save a few grams, but we'll see.

Also, we are seeing conflicting info on the steps between gears. The OP reports 2 x 17% + 8 x 13% and the road.cc report says constant 17-18% but neither of those will give you 409% overall range, so it looks like we'll see in this regard also.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

jdrds17 said:


> ...we are seeing conflicting info on the steps between gears. The OP reports 2 x 17% + 8 x 13% and the road.cc report says constant 17-18% but neither of those will give you 409% overall range, so it looks like we'll see in this regard also.


I agree, not adding up. There might be a couple more 17-18% in there, and a few less 13's?

I found a couple more "hands on" writeups posted today, but neither add anything to the piece posted on road.cc.

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/first-look-shimano-alfine-11-speed-hub-gear-24930

http://www.singletrackworld.com/201...-shimano-alfine-11-speed-internal-geared-hub/


----------



## elgordo (Jan 13, 2005)

*stars aligning*

ah .... this news just as my Milk Money is being built ; )))

Not that I'll run a IGH all the time but that fact that the Alfine 11 will offer a wider range is great news!!!!


----------



## pureslop (Jul 28, 2008)

Anyone know about the engagement speed? Quick is good!


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

pureslop said:


> Anyone know about the engagement speed? Quick is good!


With those roller clutches they switched to mid-stream on the Alfine 8, isn't it more or less instant engagement?


----------



## lil hillbilly (May 18, 2005)

*milk money*

talked to Devin today about the Milkmoney. so which one of ya is gonna give up you hub for next to nothin so I can afford the Lenz.

Its great to see advancement on the IGH front.

IGH hubs are the new black!

this bike w/ the new KH hoops and a DUC36....fat!


----------



## Surestick Malone (Jan 24, 2004)

Speedub.Nate said:


> With those roller clutches they switched to mid-stream on the Alfine 8, isn't it more or less instant engagement?


Seems to be instant engagement according to this:
http://road.cc/content/news/13981-shimano-alfine-11-speed-hub-car-park-test

Edit: Just saw Speedhubnate already posted the same link.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

lil hillbilly said:


> talked to Devin today about the Milkmoney...


Gah! IGH: the single best arguement for Devin's BB-centric pivot designs!

You know who else? Haro! Haro needs to get a jump on this and begin building their VLS suspension with sliding dropouts. The could make a lot of gear hubbers and singlespeeders very happy.


----------



## elgordo (Jan 13, 2005)

lil hillbilly said:


> talked to Devin today about the Milkmoney. so which one of ya is gonna give up you hub for next to nothin so I can afford the Lenz.
> 
> Its great to see advancement on the IGH front.
> 
> ...


Hey!!!

Thats what mine is going to look like too!!!! Except with a Reba maxle, XTR crank, TI luvs and a Brooks Swift ..... other than that identical :thumbsup:


----------



## lil hillbilly (May 18, 2005)

*now I hate you*

sounds like its gonna have an IGH


----------



## elgordo (Jan 13, 2005)

lil hillbilly said:


> sounds like its gonna have an IGH


Yeah ... eventually. The plan is to build it up SS first. Got a new King SS 36H Flow rear being built :thumbsup: When the bike fund recovers and the Alfine 11 comes out I'll build up a Alfine Flow rear wheel!!!! Should be sweet. Gears with none of the chain slapping derailleur out of alignment nonsense!!!!!!!

Now I just need the MM ...:madman: Patience ...... Patience


----------



## Sometimes (Jun 21, 2009)

I'll take my Rohloff any day over my (former) Alfine 501 & current Nexus red-band.

I've been using the Nexus red-band exclusively until recently & it just doesn't compare to the Rohloff. Which I bought used. Sure, the Rohloff is more expensive but I bought mine used already built-up into a wheel with some extra goodies at a great price. It was still more than twice the price of just a Alfine/Nexus red-band hub but as far as I'm concerned it's more than worth the price premium.

And I basically prefer having one do-it-all bike that I ride on-road & on-trail & definitely need the range of the Rohloff to do both comfortably. Even here in flatland Florida.

I suppose I could have two bikes, one with an Alfine set up for road use & the other with an Alfine set up for trail use but I prefer just having one bike that does it all. I don't do group rides on-road so have no need to keep up with anyone on-road & on-trail that's a non-issue.

Definitely prefer the shifting of the Rohloff over the Alfine/Nexus. The Alfine/Nexus has an occasional irritating lag before shifting sometimes. It's actually more than irritating on-trail as it sometimes means working unnecessarily harder trying to maintain speed. Or completely impossible depending on the section of trail. Definitely in marked contrast to a derailleur system. Even an inexpensive one. Difference was obvious to me when I went back to a derailleur equipped bike recently.

I just bought a pair of new (used) 26er folding bikes that I wasn't sure I'd like so didn't bother with switching anything in the drive trains out. Both of the bikes are identically equipped with an Alivio level group & Grip Shift & are 'only' 21 speeds. Even with this set up I was able to ride faster than I had been able to using my Nexus red-band. Tried to make the comparison a bit more equal by only using the big chain ring so I was basically riding a 7 speed & even so I was still able to ride faster on-trail. The bike(s) isn't(aren't) exactly new either, dating back to '96. And I was slightly handicapped by the slacker steering on the bikes. From what I remember, the HT angle is 69*. But, even so, once I made the adjustment, I was still faster. 

I've gone back to 26ers because they make a more practical travel bike. My Rohloff is currently laced to a 29er wheel so I haven't had a chance to ride it much lately.

I've been trying to find another inexpensive used Rohloff hub that I can build up into a 26er wheel but so far haven't had any luck but with the Alfine 11 on the horizon I might just give it a shot instead. The price is definitely right. But if it shifts in the same way as the current Alfine/Nexus red-band I'll definitely take a pass & stick with a Rohloff. Even though it is more expensive.


----------



## maxtheheathen (Feb 27, 2007)

I'm pretty excited about this hub,

I've got a friend at Shimano that rode it to lunch. He said it shifted like XTR.

One interesting thing, it uses helical gears. These would theoretically handle more torque, run quiter, and mesh more smoothly. This comes at the price of efficiency, but the oil bath replacing grease might cancel that out. I'm thinking this hub might be even more suitable to offroad use than the 8sp.

Another interesting bit, the shifting is opposite of existing nexus/alfine hubs. This should mean less hesitation to shift into lower gears. That's my only complaint about my 8sp.


----------



## Sometimes (Jun 21, 2009)

Forgot to ask, anyone know if it's going to be available in a QR version? That's another advantage (AFAIC) of the Rohloff. I do like my QR. :thumbsup:


----------



## themanmonkey (Nov 1, 2005)

maxtheheathen said:


> One interesting thing, it uses helical gears. These would theoretically handle more torque, run quiter, and mesh more smoothly. This comes at the price of efficiency, but the oil bath replacing grease might cancel that out.


Interesting that they're going that direction with the gears. One thing to remember about efficiency. Deraileured bikes are only more efficient when it's all clean and new. IGH have about 92% efficient and deraileurs about 96%. The problem is when your gears get muddy you loose efficiency really quickly and the figures can drop down into the 80s. With IGH gearing you won't loose too much, but you will loose some.

All this info comes from studies done long ago (early '90s or so), but shouldn't have changed that much. I would like to see similar studies done with the newer modern parts and IGHs. Alas the efficiency thing is the buggaboo causing companies not to adopt IGH bikes throughout their lines.


----------



## Sometimes (Jun 21, 2009)

I don't buy the argument that IGHs are more efficient than derailleur systems in poor riding conditions.

When I was racing ATBs, I raced in some hellaciously muddy conditions & never noticed any drop in efficiency with my derailleur equipped bikes.

Not even in clay mud mixed with pine needles which in the process of drying basically becomes something like adobe if you're unfortunate enough to start a race when it's wet but then continue long enough for conditions to dry up. Which I did. The only trouble I had was with shifting the front derailleur because of the accumulation of pine needles & clay in that area which wouldn't allow the front derailleur to return to the smaller chain rings. But that's the only race that's ever happened to me. There were a lot of DNFs in that race though. Psychological for the most part.

I've had other races in which competitors wore thru a fresh set of XTR v-pads in one ~2 hr race. My old XTR center pull pads did just fine :thumbsup:. But no issues with my derailleur equipped bike. Or, far as I know, anyone else's derailleur equipped bike.


----------



## themanmonkey (Nov 1, 2005)

Sometimes said:


> I don't buy the argument that IGHs are more efficient than derailleur systems in poor riding conditions.


You don't have to believe anything you don't want to, but there have been a lot of studies done in Europe on such things. The best article I remember was in the old Bike Culture magazine I believe. If I remember correctly there is also information on this stuff in the Bicycling Science book and the old Bike Tech periodical.

From personal experience if you can't tell the difference between a clean and dirty drive train, your drivetrain isn't getting very dirty. That or you're too busy worrying about other things to notice during a race.


----------



## bsdc (May 1, 2006)

I'm somewhat with you in that I don't think traditional derailleur efficiency falls off that much in real world muck. That said, I think the small amount of inefficiency of an IGH is mitigated by extraordinary quick, reliable shifting of an IGH. 

I had the opportunity to switch bikes back and forth on the same trail, on the same day, with same friend who is similarly skilled and fit. We did this on multiple rides on twisty, hilly singletrack. One bike was a derailled 26er (Kona Bear w/ XT). The other was a Rohloffed 29er (GF HiFi 29). We both agreed that we were working harder to keep up on the derailled 26er and more relaxed and fresh on the Rohloffed 29er. Both bikes were FS bikes with 4" of travel front and back. While we both felt that the bigger, more stable wheels on the 29er helped, timed lapse by others suggest that wheel size is insignificant. That leaves me feeling as though the IGH was at least as effient if not more so in the real world.

I'd like to do a better comparison by renting a derailed GF HiFi29.


----------



## Sometimes (Jun 21, 2009)

themanmonkey said:


> ...SNIP...
> From personal experience if you can't tell the difference between a clean and dirty drive train, your drivetrain isn't getting very dirty. That or you're too busy worrying about other things to notice during a race.


I'm still not buying it. At least from my personal experience.

That's just it, the drivetrain simply never gets dirty enough for there to be a significant (noticeable) fall-off in efficiency. At least the drivetrains on my bikes didn't. Despite conditions that the average rider wouldn't be riding under on-trail. There aren't any riders that I know of that will voluntarily elect to ride during rain on-trail. Let alone in clay.

There are just two extra toothed pulleys compared to a IGH system so I just don't see how it's possible for the efficiency to be that much less under poor conditions. Short of purposely packing the rear derailleur & cogs with mud/debris.


----------



## Sometimes (Jun 21, 2009)

*"Extraordinary quick, reliable shifting of an IGH"?*

H'mm.

Not AFAIC. At least not yet.

Definitely not true of the Alfine/Nexus red-band. Perhaps I need more break in time but I think the shifting sucks compared to a properly tuned derailleur system. At least so far. I'm willing to give it more time. And I will. Probably at least a year before I decide yay or nay. Or until I can replace it with the Alfine 11.

As for the Rohloff. Definitely better, IMO, than the Alfine/Nexus red-band in terms of shifting but my new (used) Rohloff might be slightly broken in. Or completely broken in. I don't know the exact mileage on it. But I was told less than 1K miles when I bought it & I've only put ~200 miles on it so far. And that's it for now because it's on a 29er rim & I'm currently riding a 26er with the Nexus red-band. With the price, even used, I'm inclined to really, really want it to work for me.

Unlike the Alfine which I had no qualms passing on to a relative. And which may be the same fate of the Nexus red-band.

Actually will be the same fate, if I can get my hands on an Alfine 11.  :thumbsup:

Yeah, I've got the IGH fever. At least for the time being.


----------



## john_dalhart (Nov 6, 2009)

themanmonkey said:


> All this info comes from studies done long ago (early '90s or so)...


Anyone who wants to speak intelligently on this subject and be taken seriously should be conversant with the Kyle/Berto study, beginning on page three of:

http://www.ihpva.org/HParchive/PDF/hp52-2001.pdf

Best,
JD


----------



## bsdc (May 1, 2006)

Have you ever had a shifting problem with an IGH that wasn't corrected with a momentary pause in your pedal stroke? IGHs tend to not shift well under load. Once you get the rythm, shifts are almost flawless. There's no doubt, IGHs have their own bit of awkwardness, but they definitely beat the dropped chains, grinding, popping, slipped gears, ghost shifting, etc. of derailleurs.


----------



## lil hillbilly (May 18, 2005)

*gotta love it*

its great when these threads go wrong!! I cant wait till I dont have to worry about wrapin sticks up in a stupid der. or that same stupid der. not workin cause its full of mud.

when these guys say that their derailleurs work just great no matter the nasty conditions it just makes me crazy! they are a peice of junk when it comes to muddy nasty weather.


----------



## themanmonkey (Nov 1, 2005)

john_dalhart said:


> Anyone who wants to speak intelligently on this subject and be taken seriously should be conversant with the Kyle/Berto study, beginning on page three of:
> http://www.ihpva.org/HParchive/PDF/hp52-2001.pdf


Thanks John I hadn't seen that one. That's the first one I've ever seen that has efficiencies that go that high or that low. The lower high end I've seen might be an average based on highest and lowest efficiencies caused by cross chaining on geared drivetrains.

Alas it's only laboratory testing and real world conditions aren't taken into account. I wonder if using a SRM crank with various rear wheels you could imitate real world riding. Maybe I'll chat with the guys I know from Bicycle Quarterly and see if they can figure out a real world test.


----------



## themanmonkey (Nov 1, 2005)

Sometimes said:


> I'm still not buying it. At least from my personal experience.


Again you you don't have to believe anything, but try this.
1. Get a rear der and make sure it's clean and run a chain though it.
2. Pack the rear der with mud around the cage and pulleys.
3. When you run a chain though it you'll notice the resistance.
Any resistance against the chain and pulleys is a decrease in efficiency. If the dirt gets between the inner and outer plates of the chain and reduces flex you loose efficiency.

Most riders don't "notice" a loss in efficiency. Can you notice a change inefficiency when riding in your middle ring and middle cog and when you ride in your large ring and large cog?

One of the other problems is that the bikes people compare things to are different and not ridden side by side. I did some real world testing in the '90s with a CX bike built up using 3 different hubs. One wheel was a 7 speed cassette, one was a S-A AW3, and the last was another IGH that I don't remember (Sachs Duomatic most likely). We would ride for a while then switch the wheel. The "noticeable" loss of efficiency wasn't that noticeable. Sure there was some, but not as great as expected.


----------



## EGF168 (Aug 13, 2007)

- Derailleur drivetrains fill up with mud
- Mud makes the bike heavier
- Mud often causes ghost shifting and sometimes causes the gears to stop shifting completely 
- Being able to shift while not pedalling is very useful in muddy conditions 
- Derailleur drivetrains grind and rattle like a vintage paint mixer in muddy conditions
- A derailleur drivetrain loses more efficiency than a gear hub when dry conditions turn to wet and muddy
- Washing mud out of the cassette and other places often does damage to the rear hub, bottom bracket and pivots


----------



## lil hillbilly (May 18, 2005)

*news flash!!!!!!!!!*

derailleurs suck


----------



## Sometimes (Jun 21, 2009)

bsdc said:


> Have you ever had a shifting problem with an IGH that wasn't corrected with a momentary pause in your pedal stroke? IGHs tend to not shift well under load. Once you get the rythm, shifts are almost flawless. There's no doubt, IGHs have their own bit of awkwardness, but they definitely beat the dropped chains, grinding, popping, slipped gears, ghost shifting, etc. of derailleurs.


Well ... I seem to be having those on a too regular basis. And it's not something I particularly like. So far, none of my IGHs compare too favorably to derailleurs. Even those part of a low-level component group. I'm currently (well ... not exactly ... but you know what I mean) riding a '96 ATB with an Alivio group & Grip Shift that shifts flawlessly in comparison to all my IGHs. Past & present. Rohloff included (much as it pains me to write that). But I'm willing to give it time. I really want my IGHs to work for me as I prefer the external simplicity of an IGH.

Dropped chain -- nyet!
Grinding -- nyet!
Popping -- nyet!
Slipped gears -- nyet!
Ghost shifting -- nyet!

At least for me. But I've been riding for a very long time, & I've worked on bikes just as long.

Sure, derailleurs take some initial tuning but once they're dialed in, they stay that way or at the most require additional occasional fine-tuning at the adjusting barrel of the shifter. It's not exactly rocket science.

I've been lucky enough to have never, ever damaged a rear derailleur. The worst thing that's happened to a rear derailleur on any of my bikes is I had one of the pulleys fall off because I neglected to loctite the pulley bolt. The only other time I've had a problem with a rear derailleur is when I tried 'supposedly' sealed bearing rear derailleur pulleys. Those quickly ceased. Literally. Ceased rotating.

I suppose, one explanation, for my lack of problems with derailleur systems is that I must have been riding in some sort of protective bubble in my 40+ years of riding. Seems as good as any.

But I'll continue using IGHs until I've satisfied myself that they're just not working for me. Considering what I paid for my (used) Rohloff, that might take a couple of years. It will be hard to let go of something that I paid so much for. And had really high hopes for.

Only time will tell.


----------



## Sometimes (Jun 21, 2009)

themanmonkey said:


> Again you you don't have to believe anything, but try this.
> 1. Get a rear der and make sure it's clean and run a chain though it.
> *2. Pack the rear der with mud around the cage and pulleys.*
> 3. When you run a chain though it you'll notice the resistance.
> ...


Maybe I've just been lucky, but that's just never happened on any of my derailleur equipped bikes. Front derailleur yes. But it doesn't have any pulleys so the only result is a 7-8-9-10 speed depending on the rear cogset.

Will admit to having 'junk' get tangled up in the cogset at times when I've been unfortunate enough to accidentally veer off-trail into undergrowth. Now, that, definitely affected shifting! And I sometimes had to stop to get it out. After waiting a bit to see if would either work its way out or become embedded deeply enough between the cogs that it wasn't an issue. So ... I'd just ease up a bit on the pedals until I decided whether I needed to stop or not.

For me, at least, the efficiency of an IGH is a non-issue. I like them (for now) & I ride what I like.


----------



## bsdc (May 1, 2006)

Well, no need to suffer. You seem to be trying to convince us that derailleurs are better but you seem unwilling to give up IGH. A used Rohloff sell for just a bit less than a new one. If you bought yours used, you should be able to get all your money back. Then you can ride what you really like. 

FWIW, I don't think IGHs are better. I think they're about equal to derailleurs. There's just a few ever so slight trade offs. I just prefer the attributes of IGHs, and if they are a tiny bit less efficient, my old, fat butt can't seem to perceive it. In fact, it would seem that my ham-fisted mechanical and riding skills make the simplicity of IGHs more efficient for me. 

To each his own.


----------



## lil hillbilly (May 18, 2005)

*there we go*

real it back in brother. thanks:thumbsup:


----------



## Deserteagle99uzi (Sep 15, 2008)

Bending the Rear Deraillur cage or the Rear deraillur hangar is what I would be going with an alfine-11 or rohloff (if they ever make non twist shift) for. The efficiency and weight arguements are all well and good but I ride FS and I weigh 210lb naked. A bit of efficiency or weight isn't going to break the camel's back but a bent rear deraillur hangar renders the perfectly dialed in rear deraillur nigh useless. I have gone through 3 deraillur hangars in a year. 1 to crunching on a rock garden, 1 due to a medium sized stick in the trail kicking up just right to grind the hell out of the rear derail. till the hangar bent (something had to give) and 3 was some unnoted obstacle on the trail which I discovered on the next hill as my rear deraillur proceeded to dump my chain and break a spoke. 

Granted I live in Missouri so the trails are FAR from nice clean hardpack. While there isn't the epic climbs that colorado or pisgah might have, we do have very narrow flowy singletrack littered with rock gardens and debris. If I never have to replace or bend back that damned deraillur hangar again I will be ecstatic. I really feel eliminating the whole rear mech siginificantly increases the durability of the entire drivetrain as well. It just seems so archaich to have the whole drivetrain extrenal taking the abuses of the trail and weather. Cars found an easy solution to this somewhere back around 1900, why the hell has it taken so long for bikes to follow? I can't help but feel that eliminating the rear mech pulleys increases efficiency a bit as well as they never seem to stay too lubricated for too long.

I also have to say I would love to be able to grind the last bit of a hill when shifting late instead of popping the chain and dumping it off the front gears. A late shift on a hill is a bad decision period but when it is made I feel the typical response of a derailled system (dumping your chain instantly) is about the worst possible choice. 

My 2 cents


----------



## bsdc (May 1, 2006)

Thanks for putting the image of a naked 210 pound guy in my head. :eekster:

I was real put off with going with twist shifters when I finally decided I really wanted a Rohloff. Now I find I like them just as well as trigger shifters.

An IGH doesn't necessarily eliminate snapped derailleur hangers and such. Most FS bikes require a chain tensioner. FWIW, I've never had a problem with my tensioner. Chain tensioners are usually smaller and tuck in tighter so I think they tend to grab less debris.

Here's something to cleanse everyones minds:


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

EGF168 said:


> - Derailleur drivetrains fill up with mud
> - Mud makes the bike heavier
> ...


As much as a fanboy I am for gear hubs, I feel it's important to not pull any punches. Geared hubs ARE heavier -- generally 600 to 700g with the Rohloff, and it looks like about the same with Alfine.

As impressive as those pics are, I think it's safe to say that that much is abnormal for most riders. Nevertheless, it doesn't take much muck (rather, it doesn't take THAT much muck) to foul a derailleur drivetrain.

Cool shots, BTW.


----------



## EGF168 (Aug 13, 2007)

Thanks!

Still doesn’t change the fact that derailleur drivetrains can gain a big amount of weight (in mud) that SS and IGH bikes can’t. Maybe it is abnormal for most of the world’s riders but here in the UK it isn’t, and I know a couple of local riding groups who’ll back me up on that. 

What are the conditions like in Florida Sometimes? :skep:


----------



## Sometimes (Jun 21, 2009)

EGF168 said:


> Thanks!
> 
> Still doesn't change the fact that derailleur drivetrains can gain a big amount of weight (in mud) that SS and IGH bikes can't. Maybe it is abnormal for most of the world's riders but here in the UK it isn't, and I know a couple of local riding groups who'll back me up on that.
> 
> What are the conditions like in Florida Sometimes? :skep:


And here I thought your muddy drivetrain pics were staged. Definitely some nice pics. And I can see why you'd prefer an IGH.

But that just hasn't been my experience. But the only time I purposely rode in the rain/mud was during a race. Or more recently, if I happen to get caught in a rainstorm during a ride. Even so, my worst mud race ever didn't have any effect on the rear part of the drivetrain. Just the front. The accumulation of clay mud & pine needles at the front derailleur prevented it from shifting down without having to stop long enough to clear the clay/pine needle mixture. But I did that for the whole bike at times during that race because of the added weight & because the clay/pine needle mixture was slowing tire rotation as it was drying.

Conditions in Florida vary depending on the course & weather. But generally it's considered bad trail etiquette to ride a trail here while it's still muddy. Exceptions being races. Or those folks that just don't give a darn. I know folks in the UK & other wet parts of the world don't have much choice, otherwise they wouldn't be doing much trail riding.


----------



## themanmonkey (Nov 1, 2005)

So let me get this straight you don't actually ride in mud and it seems like you've only experienced it a few times. Your also now say that your shifting was affected by the mud contrary to your previous statements. Can you see how this shows that you have little idea about the affect of mud on a drivetrain and all your earlier posts can be designated as trolling?

Many of the rest of us posting have extensive experience with various drivetrains in the mud. Should we take the words of someone who has little experience in mud have the same weight as someone who has a couple decades of PacNW riding under their belt?


----------



## fokof (Apr 24, 2006)

bsdc said:


> Have you ever had a shifting problem with an IGH that wasn't corrected with a momentary pause in your pedal stroke?


Very often with my Shimano IGH , never with my Rohloff.
THE biggest problem with the Shimano IGH is their shifting , a spring loaded , derailleur like system that is entirely shifter and cable tension dependant. Also the moving part on the Shimano hub is prone to mud/ice jamming , just like a conventional derailleur. Something you won't have on a Rohloff.
I use Shimano IGH hubs since they came out on my commuters and they are not reliable in snowy/icy conditions.

Still ride Shimanos , as I don't have the budget to ride a Rohloff on my commuter , so this 11 speed is a very good news. But I'm not a beleiver on my MTB since I already tasted the shifting of the Rohloff......


----------



## Sometimes (Jun 21, 2009)

themanmonkey said:


> So let me get this straight you don't actually ride in mud and it seems like you've only experienced it a few times. Your also now say that your shifting was affected by the mud contrary to your previous statements. Can you see how this shows that you have little idea about the affect of mud on a drivetrain and all your earlier posts can be designated as trolling?
> 
> Many of the rest of us posting have extensive experience with various drivetrains in the mud. Should we take the words of someone who has little experience in mud have the same weight as someone who has a couple decades of PacNW riding under their belt?


Reading comprehension doesn't appear to be your strong suit so you don't have any credibility with me.

Try again.


----------



## V02 deficient (Dec 12, 2004)

Speedub.Nate said:


> Gah! IGH: the single best arguement for Devin's BB-centric pivot designs!
> 
> You know who else? Haro! Haro needs to get a jump on this and begin building their VLS suspension with sliding dropouts. The could make a lot of gear hubbers and singlespeeders very happy.


I've emailed Haro twice in the past year (once regarding horiz or custom dropouts and once regarding EBB) in terms of my desire to run their design with an IGH and no tensioner -- they currently have no plans to go there, so I stopped looking at their new 650b. My local dealer wouldn't sell frame-only either... lots of roadblocks.

Milk$ ... but why does Devin's headtube/downtube/toptube junction have to look so fugly?


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

V02 deficient said:


> I've emailed Haro twice in the past year (once regarding horiz or custom dropouts and once regarding EBB) in terms of my desire to run their design with an IGH and no tensioner -- they currently have no plans to go there, so I stopped looking at their new 650b. My local dealer wouldn't sell frame-only either... lots of roadblocks.


I'm not sure an EBB would work well with that design -- the spindle to be at the center of the pivot to run tensionerless, and an EBB would offset it. But horizontal or sliding drops would be tits. I'm convinced Haro is missing out on an untapped market, even if they'd do a short run of slider-equipped rear triangles to sell aftermarket.

As for frame only, I've never let it stop me before. Some brands let you buy their frame only for $1200+, but it always works out to be much cheaper to buy a complete mid-range bike and sell off all the components. This has covered the entire cost of the bike on occassion, and at other times brought the price down into to the $300-$400 range.

With the popularity of singlespeed, and now this increasing market of IGHs, there has got to be some demand for tensionerless fullies.


----------



## SmilMick (Apr 9, 2006)

V02 deficient said:


> I've emailed Haro twice in the past year (once regarding horiz or custom dropouts and once regarding EBB) in terms of my desire to run their design with an IGH and no tensioner -- they currently have no plans to go there, so I stopped looking at their new 650b. My local dealer wouldn't sell frame-only either... lots of roadblocks.
> 
> Milk$ ... but why does Devin's headtube/downtube/toptube junction have to look so fugly?


I know the saying "it never hurts to ask" but most big name bike companies are gonna just shrug their shoulders or ignore you when you ask about stuff that doesnt really concern their reputation, financial benefit, or warranty policy. The bikes are built in Taiwan. (or some place in asia) And customer service is customer service. Not riders.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

SmilMick said:


> I know the saying "it never hurts to ask" but most big name bike companies are gonna just shrug their shoulders or ignore you when you ask about stuff that doesnt really concern their reputation, financial benefit, or warranty policy. The bikes are built in Taiwan. (or some place in asia) And customer service is customer service. Not riders.


You're out-of-pocket on that, Mick. I'm not a Haro customer, and never have been, but they have some of the more active and responsive company presence here on the forums (in particular the Haro forum) by Downhill Jill, their brand manager.

Just because they have their frames manufactured in Taiwan does not make them a faceless Taiwanese company. As with Niner and Surly and other similarly positioned brands, they're a US company owned and operated by real human beings and -- from what I've gathered over the years -- open to customer suggestions and new ideas.

In short, exactly the type of company I expect might act on such a request, given enough interest from the customer base.


----------



## bsdc (May 1, 2006)

Well, here's my message to Haro:

Number of Threads on MTBR:

650b, 69er, and New Wheel Trends: 1,812.

29er: 30,818

SingleSpeed: 19,655

Internal Gear Hubs: 363

Now, I hate to use a cliche but "650b is an answer to a question that (almost) nobody asked." Drop it and move on. 26ers and 29ers should make 99+% of the market happy. 3x9s are hear to stay for quite some time. Make plenty. SS's are obviously popular. If you are looking for a niche, being the first on the block with a production FS SS frame would really make Haro a standout, and I think you'd sell quite a few. Don't want to fully commit to a FS SS frame? Just put a sliding dropout with a derailleur hanger on all the frames. Call it "Haro Adjustable Geometry" or HAG. Make a 26er and a 29er so everyone is happy. As a bonus, those of us IGH freaks can have our fun, and you will be cued up to be the first company to have Shimano's up and coming mountain bike approved IGH.


----------



## john_dalhart (Nov 6, 2009)

Deserteagle99uzi said:


> Cars found an easy solution to this somewhere back around 1900, why the hell has it taken so long for bikes to follow?


Actually, the first commercially successful cycling IGH came on the market in 1898. Admitedly, some _riders_ are late to the party...

JD


----------



## C.P. (Sep 17, 2005)

bsdc said:


> Well, here's my message to Haro:
> 
> being the first on the block with a production FS SS frame would really make Haro a standout


What about the Kona A?


----------



## bikecop (May 20, 2004)

Speedub.Nate said:


> The oil bath lubrication is exciting news. That, in and of itself, should prove to be a great step forward.


hey nate, please explain. they didn't have oil lubrication before??


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

bikecop said:


> they didn't have oil lubrication before??


Nope, just great big glops of grease. Or some time none at all, depending on how long you ran it. Actually, you should see my Sram i9 -- it's bleeding grease through the (poor excuse for a) seal!


----------



## swift (Apr 3, 2007)

C.P. said:


> What about the Kona A?


Good design for keeping the chainstay length a constant but not a good design with regard to pedalling and suspension performance. The tensioned run of chain/belt induces squat.


----------



## 20.100 FR (Jan 13, 2004)

i have a bunch of bikes and have been riding for 20 years
I have a full XTR and a full XX setup, and I love the way my alfine shifts !

Will for sure try to get an Alfine11 for test ASAP


----------



## pureslop (Jul 28, 2008)

Surestick Malone said:


> Seems to be instant engagement according to this:
> http://road.cc/content/news/13981-shimano-alfine-11-speed-hub-car-park-test
> 
> Edit: Just saw Speedhubnate already posted the same link.


Sorry, I was asking about quick crank engagement, not quick gear change engagement. You know, like how a Chris King rear hub has quick engagement.


----------



## Surestick Malone (Jan 24, 2004)

pureslop said:


> Sorry, I was asking about quick crank engagement, not quick gear change engagement. You know, like how a Chris King rear hub has quick engagement.


I thought that's what they were talking about. 
On re-reading the review I don't see where I got the impression they said it was instant engagement so disregard what I said I guess! :skep:


----------



## zombinate (Apr 27, 2009)

So, anyone know if any companies are already working on a brifter for this? I'd love to do a monstercross drop bar set up.


----------



## FishMan473 (Jan 2, 2003)

I second zombinate's question, I smell a good monster cross set-up here, as long as I could shift it with drop bars.

Also, can anyone tell me what a 409% gear range is equivalent to? Is it like, say a (hypothetical) 11-40 cassette? Can someone give me a number I could plug into Sheldon Browns gear calculator to play around with what gearing might work for me?


----------



## dru (Sep 4, 2006)

FishMan473 said:


> I second zombinate's question, I smell a good monster cross set-up here, as long as I could shift it with drop bars.
> 
> Also, can anyone tell me what a 409% gear range is equivalent to? Is it like, say a (hypothetical) 11-40 cassette? Can someone give me a number I could plug into Sheldon Browns gear calculator to play around with what gearing might work for me?


Even the 8 speed is nearly equivalent to the mythical 11-40...

Actually with a 20 tooth 5th (1:1) the gear range is ~38 31 27 23.5 20 16 14 12.......

Drew


----------



## rdhfreethought (Aug 12, 2006)

Is Sept 2010 still the official release date? I am interested in converting my 2/8 to a 1/11, though I love the Hammerschmidt.


----------



## john_dalhart (Nov 6, 2009)

rdhfreethought said:


> Is Sept 2010 still the official release date?


There's an "official" release date? I know Shimano showed some 11-speed hubs to a few European cycle journalists - including at least _one_ working model - but I never saw so much as a press release from the company themselves.

Hey, I could have missed it. Beyond innumerable websites quoting each other, does anybody have a link to anything about this 11-speed hub direct from Shimano?

JD


----------



## bsdc (May 1, 2006)

rdhfreethought said:


> Is Sept 2010 still the official release date?


I don't think there is an official release date. I think it's more of "We hope hope to have it availible in Europe in September 2010." To me that means Europe might get some in October or November.


----------



## othu (Aug 20, 2008)

22-sep-10: Interbike 2010 Expo


----------



## helicomatic (Nov 20, 2009)

We're expecting them in October. "Official" release date would probably be Interbike, like othu said.


----------



## shirk (Mar 24, 2004)

Where can I put my name on a list to get one of these bad boys the minute they come out?

Must have, must have.


----------



## irrah (Dec 18, 2008)

shirk said:


> Where can I put my name on a list to get one of these bad boys the minute they come out?


http://www.shop.18bikes.co.uk/products.php?plid=m9b0s475p681 , but you have to pay full list price. Hub, shifter,fitting kit and sprocket £ 445 ($ 650).


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

Universal will have them as soon as QBP has them, %15 discount for orders over $300 too. Late Fall might as well be Spring where I live


----------



## EGF168 (Aug 13, 2007)

Madison (UK Shimano distributor) has been taking pre-orders from dealers for a while now. 

Does anyone know what size chainring/sprocket the new Alfine needs to make the gear ratios useful for mountain biking?


----------



## Wombat (Jan 25, 2004)

CyclesportsUK has them listed on their site, but not yet available. About US$470 (with VAT removed) before shipping.

http://www.cyclesportsuk.co.uk/product_info.php?products_id=8738

Tim


----------



## sir_crackien (Feb 3, 2008)

does anyone know if there is anyway to make it 130mm compatible?


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

EGF168 said:


> Does anyone know what size chainring/sprocket the new Alfine needs to make the gear ratios useful for mountain biking?


By my calculations I think you would want a ratio of about 1.3 between front and rear sprockets if you want the lowest gear on the alfine to be similar to the lowest gear on a "normal" 3x9 setup (e.g. 22 front x 34 back).
That means something like 32 on the front and 24 on the back. 
That is what I'm going to try first anyway 

(note: I am assuming 26 inch wheels here).


----------



## rasse1977 (May 16, 2008)

Paco Loco said:


> That means something like 32 on the front and 24 on the back.
> That is what I'm going to try first anyway


What will the highest gear be with this combination...?


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

I read somewhere online that the ratios for the new 11-speed Alfine are going to be 0.527 for the lowest gear and 2.153 for the highest.
Now I don't know for sure that it is true and I don't think Shimano have officially released the specification data yet so I suppose those numbers could turn out to be wrong.
However they seem right to me and I am assuming that they are.

So, assuming that is correct then using a 32/24 sprocket combination is going to give you a high gear of 2.871 and a low gear of 0.703

I have been comparing these numbers to the gearing on my "standard" 3x9 setup which has 22/32/44 chainrings and an 11-34 cassette, and it seems to be pretty much equal to the spread I currently get with the middle and granny rings. 
The highest gear I have in the middle ring is 2.909 and the lowest in the granny ring is 0.647

I guess if you live in a pretty flat area, do a lot of road riding, or are super fit then you might want to go for slightly higher gearing.
I however am not that fit and ride in Wales a lot so I don't want to lose my low gears!


----------



## xbrian (Sep 24, 2007)

anyone know what the cable stop situation is on this hub? I'm getting prepped to build up a Ventana and I need to tell the builder whether or not to add rohloff specific cable stops to the frame if i went that route, but I'm leaning towards waiting on this hub. I'm hoping they fit in the normal stops but really have no clue (first IGH).


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

Same as the current Alfine. i.e. A single cable which goes into an adapter on the drive side of the hub. Usually routed along the chainstay, but can alternatively be routed down the seatstay if desired.


----------



## krolik (Jun 9, 2006)

Alfine 11 delayed till october - technical issues - says Shi distributor.


----------



## tommignon (Jan 27, 2010)

Any new News?


----------



## nzbiker (Apr 11, 2010)

*Got mine last week,*

so they're out there. I can get more, but I'm in NZ and I don't want to be seen as spamming. But PM me for more details if you're interested. Price is perhaps a bit expensive here at NZ$950 (A$760, US$690, Euro 520, all approx.prices) including shifter and fitting kit.

I haven't built it into a wheel yet but I'll probably fit it to my Surly KM, which currently is running the Nexus 3 sp. w/disc brake.

I'm thinking it could work also well on the likes of Surly Truckers, Salsa Vaya's, Fargo's and other gravel/mud backroad bikes and re-define the transmissions on these bikes, as well as on MTB's.

Disclaimer: I sell bikes and parts


----------



## crank1979 (Feb 3, 2006)

nzbiker said:


> so they're out there. I can get more, but I'm in NZ and I don't want to be seen as spamming. But PM me for more details if you're interested. Price is perhaps a bit expensive here at NZ$950 (A$760, US$690, Euro 520, all approx.prices) including shifter and fitting kit.
> 
> I haven't built it into a wheel yet but I'll probably fit it to my Surly KM, which currently is running the Nexus 3 sp. w/disc brake.
> 
> ...


How well do you think it would cope being paired with Hammerschmidt cranks?


----------



## danthesoundman (Jun 29, 2006)

[email protected] said:


> How well do you think it would cope being paired with Hammerschmidt cranks?


I think 22 speed IGH is a great idea. :thumbsup:


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

I don't understand why people would want to combine an Alfine 11 with a Hammerschmidt. The Alfine 11 already gives you an almost as wide range of gears as a 3x9 derailleur setup. Who could possibly need more range than that?


----------



## byknuts (Aug 9, 2008)

same mentality as the people who want 11-38 cogsets and 20-48 chainrings...
maybe their local loop involves the matterhorn?  

i'd do it on a cargo bike... once your load reaches over 200 pounds those extra gears will come in handy


----------



## Guest (Aug 11, 2010)

byknuts said:


> same mentality as the people who want 11-38 cogsets and 20-48 chainrings...


11-38 is only 345%, though. Nothing wrong with wanting an 11-38, 20-48 front is different story.

I can't see the desire to pay the weight and drag penalty of two IG transmissions either. I can't see wanting the HammerSchmidt at all considering the weight and what little it does.


----------



## Surly29 (Jun 8, 2009)

I think the idea behind a HammerSchmidt is to "get lower gearing". But this is unnecessary, with the 8-speed version I can't run anything lower than a 26x20 without spinning all over the place. I can't imagine a 20x22.

Also remember that a HammerShmidt/Alfine combination would give you multiple duplicate gears, just like a traditional drivetrain.

IMO, a HammerShmidt would be best with a singlespeed hub, maybe even a 3-speed internal, but anything more would be overkill.

Honestly, unless the HammerShmidt is significantly stronger than an IGH, I think it is already obsolite. I'd rather have my gearing in the hub than in the bottom bracket.


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

Surly29 said:


> I think the idea behind a HammerSchmidt is to "get lower gearing". But this is unnecessary, with the 8-speed version I can't run anything lower than a 26x20 without spinning all over the place. I can't imagine a 20x22.
> 
> Also remember that a HammerShmidt/Alfine combination would give you multiple duplicate gears, just like a traditional drivetrain.
> 
> ...


It's in the crank, not the bottom bracket.


----------



## crank1979 (Feb 3, 2006)

Paco Loco said:


> I don't understand why people would want to combine an Alfine 11 with a Hammerschmidt. The Alfine 11 already gives you an almost as wide range of gears as a 3x9 derailleur setup. Who could possibly need more range than that?


Just to try something different.


----------



## Deserteagle99uzi (Sep 15, 2008)

Can't see much use for a hammerschmidt + alfine 11 except "just cause". The gear range is pretty ideal even for AM riding and certainly enough for XC or DH if mated to the correct front gear. 

I've had my gear spreads up on excel for months now for the alfine-8. I'd love to hear details about how much abuse they can take, cog sizes, how water sealed the case is, and any technical details about it at all. Hoping to build an AM FS 29er bike soon around this hub and I'm curious to see if it can hold up to my 210lb bag'o'bones torquing on it daily.


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

Anyone ridden one of these yet?


----------



## Dikkie (Dec 16, 2005)

How do you guys cope with the possibility of flat tires?
Do you cary an extra pair of wrenches in the backpack to unscrew those bolts?
As soon as they offer a quick release version, I'll order one.


----------



## danthesoundman (Jun 29, 2006)

Dikkie said:


> How do you guys cope with the possibility of flat tires?
> Do you cary an extra pair of wrenches in the backpack to unscrew those bolts?
> As soon as they offer a quick release version, I'll order one.


Surly makes the Jethro Tule: http://surlybikes.com/stuff/jethro_tule/

Park makes the SS-15 Single Speed Spanner: http://www.parktool.com/products/detail.asp?cat=17&item=SS-15

And there are others, but yeah, run ghetto tubeless for flat preventions, and yeah - carry a 15mm.


----------



## baker (Jan 6, 2004)

Dikkie said:


> How do you guys cope with the possibility of flat tires?
> Do you cary an extra pair of wrenches in the backpack to unscrew those bolts?
> As soon as they offer a quick release version, I'll order one.


Well, you only need one. I carry a small wrench. Sometimes just a simple cone wrench, sometimes a small dumbell wrench. No big deal. Also, I run tubeless to reduce the chances of needing the wrench on the trail.


----------



## Surly29 (Jun 8, 2009)

Already carried one. 15mm is the same as a pedal wrench and included on my Park multi-tool.


----------



## rdhfreethought (Aug 12, 2006)

I rarely carry a wrench. I usually run tubeless, so either the Stans fills the leak, or I shredded the tire. When I use tube, I just patch the tube and finish the ride.


----------



## rdhfreethought (Aug 12, 2006)

Surly29 said:


> I think the idea behind a HammerSchmidt is to "get lower gearing". But this is unnecessary, with the 8-speed version I can't run anything lower than a 26x20 without spinning all over the place. I can't imagine a 20x22.
> 
> Also remember that a HammerShmidt/Alfine combination would give you multiple duplicate gears, just like a traditional drivetrain.
> 
> ...


I have extensive experience with HS+Alfine-8 on my Freeride bike.
-Hammerschmidt is much much stronger
-Hammerschmidt has much faster shifting
-Hammerschmidt in regular gear has less drag than the Alfine, but in "overdrive" it is much worse than the Alfine
-Alfine will not shift at 10 degrees or less, and is sluggish starting at about 20 degrees, the HS shifts to 0 degrees F
Neither Alfine or HS have an advantage with water repellancy. They are about the same as a regular BB or hub, which is hit or miss.

This is my second full season at Whistler on this combo. I have also done a 100 mile century with this bike (weight 45-48 lbs, depending on tires)

Why I chose to get the HS/Alfine combo
- only way to get the range and have a perfect chainline, since I hate broken chains
- much improved shifting over traditional

Things I would change:
- Make the hub stronger. The shell is strong enough, the internals I think I could smash to bits if I really powered down. I would accept greater weight to make this happen.
- Change to from low normal shifting to traditional shifting. This is the biggest PITA, seriously. Everybody has said "oh ***** that is a steep hill, I need to downshift, and NOW." No one has ever said, oh shoot, I suddenly accelerated from 5mph to 25mph without even knowing it, I should upshift, and NOW." (I heard rumors the A-11 is high normal)


----------



## finch2 (Nov 13, 2009)

I like your setup and bike, but what made you go for the two systems intead of one rohloff?


----------



## rdhfreethought (Aug 12, 2006)

Hey, thanks. I love it too.

The reason is that HS ($600), Alfine (350) << cost of a Rohloff. And if I didn't like it, or it broke, I was only out 1 part. I figured the HS was a must have, it is nearly perfect aside from the drag in overdrive. 
Also, for a freeride bike, the BB clearance is massively better. Helps when the rocks like to jump up and bite you.


----------



## finch2 (Nov 13, 2009)

makes sense....you certainly give the gear a thrashing looking at the weather you get.


----------



## mdyply (Dec 20, 2009)

For all those counting on the hub coming out in late Sept. looks like your hopes have been dashed. I buddy of mine working at a shop recently called Shimano for a customer ready to buy and upon this request they grunted and said that it would released _no earlier than early next year. In bicycle industry speak that means look for it sometime in the spring early summer. Too bad eh?_


----------



## valetz (Jul 5, 2010)

So how come are they available in NZ....?


----------



## fraal (Mar 19, 2009)

My LBS (in Australia, no less) said, and I quote, 

"We were up at the trade show yesterday and got word that the Alfine 11 is only a couple of weeks away."

Woohooooo!


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

^ Excellent. I'd better get my back order in with Shimano Oz ASAP!!!


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

So.... do we know the actual cost yet?


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

UK list prices are as follows:
Hub £375
Shifter £55
Fitting kit £10
Some online shops already have them listed at 10% lower than that.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

^ That's getting closer to Rohloff prices than I'd expected. I guess that at least I can get the Shimano hub though, whereas I've never been able to contact the local Rohloff agent.


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

Cost of Rohloff disc hub and all the necessary components in the uk is ~£1000, so the Alfine is well under half the price...


----------



## mdyply (Dec 20, 2009)

Well to add further confusion in the USA... Qbp the distribution monolith has an est arrival date of nov the fourth. When this was brought up to shimano they still said next year. Well...


----------



## valetz (Jul 5, 2010)

I've seen that Nov 4th data also but didn't post it as I'm not sure if it's valid.

The guy my LBS here in Minneapolis used to work @ QBP.
He said that their system requires a date to be entered when they enter the product info so it could be an random date. 
I'm still crossing my fingers for sooner as my Pugs is a single speed until it shows up.

They (the LBS) have it on the watch list so as soon at it's in stock they'll get emailed.
I'm hoping to have it on my Pugs the next day.


----------



## vili13 (Aug 31, 2010)

http://bike.shimano.com/publish/con...ts/0/alfine/product.-code-SG-S700.-type-.html


----------



## fraal (Mar 19, 2009)

Cool, they've officially endorsed 23T sprockets! Must be tougher than the Alfine 8


----------



## forestek (Jul 19, 2009)

I'm getting interested to try this new Alfine but not sure about the Gear ratios. I'm using very often the 22*34 on my XTR group and I wonder if I can have such gear with the Alfine and if yes what combination of chainring/sprocket size should I use???

Many thanks for your help.


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

> I'm using very often the 22*34 on my XTR group and I wonder if I can have such gear with the Alfine


I too have been looking at gear ratios as I also wanted my lowest gear to be the same as the lowest gear on my 27-speed setup - which would be 22*34 same as you.

By my calculations using a 22 tooth sprocket on the front and a 16 tooth sprocket on the back should give pretty much the same lowest gear.
If you wanted to use larger sprockets then 32x24 gives almost the same ratio, but a 24 tooth sprocket on the back looks pretty goofy and weights a fair bit too.


----------



## rasse1977 (May 16, 2008)

Paco Loco said:


> and weights a fair bit too.


So if your counting grams maybe the Alfine isn't the way to go...


----------



## Guest (Aug 31, 2010)

(22 / 34) / 0.527 = 1.228

So 1.228 is what you should shoot for to get similar gearing to a 22/34 combo. An 18/22 combo would do it. So would a 22/27 or a 23/28.


----------



## Surly29 (Jun 8, 2009)

*Service Instructions*

http://blog.harriscyclery.com/servi...able-for-shimano-alfine-11-speed-hub-sg-s700/


----------



## emp? (Sep 8, 2009)

also tried it out at the bike show, just jumped omnto shimano australia then and the have silver and black 32 & 36 hole in stock, all with centrelock disc mount
the shifters are listed in black and silver as well


----------



## fraal (Mar 19, 2009)

my LBS got one in! $750ish (Aust) hub only. Limited supply in Aust right now apparently.


----------



## rohloffdude (Aug 4, 2008)

*I saw Alfine 11*

Yes they are out there. I saw Alfine 11 in St Kilda Cycles (Australia) $750 AUD hub. $175 AUD shifter and small parts kit. Silver or Black available 32 or 36h. Made in Japan too.


----------



## e.gellie (May 3, 2008)

my old friend Steve at St Kilda Cycles had the 11 speed Alfine hub on back order for 6 months, so got the first one in the country...they're now available through retailers here, through Shimano Australia.... I'll be making a custom frame with one soon....
Ewen


----------



## inzane (Jun 20, 2006)

rdhfreethought said:


> - Change to from low normal shifting to traditional shifting. This is the biggest PITA, seriously. Everybody has said "oh ***** that is a steep hill, I need to downshift, and NOW." No one has ever said, oh shoot, I suddenly accelerated from 5mph to 25mph without even knowing it, I should upshift, and NOW." (I heard rumors the A-11 is high normal)


Can someone tell me if the new 11 Speed is still low normal (i.e. same as rapid rise)? I would really prefer traditional shifting, as having been used to shifting that way for over 15 years, and having a bunch of other bikes that shift traditional, I dont want to have to remember to change my shifting habits?

If the 11 Speed is rapid rise is there any way to convert the shifting?


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

inzane said:


> Can someone tell me if the new 11 Speed is still low...If the 11 Speed is rapid rise is there any way to convert the shifting?


I assume it's like the Alfine 8, pulling on the cable will up-shift, releasing the cable will downshift, no tension is 1st gear, 11th gear is max cable tension. Is that rapid rise?

There's not a way to change existing Alfine 8 shifters, it's unique to the Alfine 8, different than derailleur shifters.


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

No, the Alfine 11 shifter will work in the opposite way to the Alfine 8 one. So it will work in the same way as 'normal' shifters (i.e. not rapid rise).


----------



## inzane (Jun 20, 2006)

Paco Loco said:


> No, the Alfine 11 shifter will work in the opposite way to the Alfine 8 one. So it will work in the same way as 'normal' shifters (i.e. not rapid rise).


:thumbsup: That is great news 

Hmmmm very keen to try one out now!


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

interesting


----------



## wingstar (Jun 18, 2010)

hi there

is there any news when alfine 11will be available , thanks.


----------



## jmpg (Sep 17, 2008)

I'vehad a chance to ride a Mamasita set-up with the 11 speed today. It shifted so much better than my 8.


So I guess the hubs are available in Australia at least.


----------



## junktrunk (Apr 17, 2010)

The alfine-11 sounds promising and sounds like it's likely going to knock Rohloff out, which was pretty inevitable anyhow, since they didn't think anyone would come along and topple them.

I'm thinking about doing this eventually. Gotta work out the ratios, figure out if the long term is good, and drag and other issues are solved.


----------



## valetz (Jul 5, 2010)

The stock date at QBP (US) was Nov, then it was pushed out to Dec, and know I believe it's Nov again.


----------



## fokof (Apr 24, 2006)

junktrunk said:


> The alfine-11 sounds promising and sounds like it's likely going to knock Rohloff out, which was pretty inevitable anyhow, since they didn't think anyone would come along and topple them.
> 
> I'm thinking about doing this eventually. Gotta work out the ratios, figure out if the long term is good, and drag and other issues are solved.


If they are 100 times more durable than Alfine 8 , maybe they could knock Rolhoff out but until then......


----------



## junktrunk (Apr 17, 2010)

Outside of durability, the Rohloff has nothing, and it looks like Shimano will likely get the Alfine perfect before Rohloff will. Rohloff is a hub made for commuter bikes in Europe, then adapted to mtb. Inherently it is an imperfect product, durability aside. It is not compatible with modern mountain bikes and they are kind of lazy there, electing to keep the same product out there. However, Alfine is taking the commuter and touring market away from Rohloff in a big way starting in December, and entire lines, even in Germany, are no longer going to offer Rohloff, in favor of the new Alfine. That should light a fire under their asses because that is the only thing that Rohloff has, not the mtb market.


----------



## bsdc (May 1, 2006)

junktrunk said:


> Outside of durability, the Rohloff has nothing, and it looks like Shimano will likely get the Alfine perfect before Rohloff will. Rohloff is a hub made for commuter bikes in Europe, then adapted to mtb. Inherently it is an imperfect product, durability aside. It is not compatible with modern mountain bikes and they are kind of lazy there, electing to keep the same product out there. However, Alfine is taking the commuter and touring market away from Rohloff in a big way starting in December, and entire lines, even in Germany, are no longer going to offer Rohloff, in favor of the new Alfine. That should light a fire under their asses because that is the only thing that Rohloff has, not the mtb market.


I'm currently on a Rohloff and very much looking forward to the A11. I tried going with an A8, and I still have it on a secondary ride, but in the end, it just wasn't quite up to the task. If they work out a few kinks, and all goes well with the A11, you might be right.

Rohloff is going to need to put it in high gear if they don't want to be religated to around the world travelers and back country epic riders willing to pay extra for the ultimate in durability.


----------



## junktrunk (Apr 17, 2010)

After spending several years in Europe, including meeting those epic riders, I have still never seen a Rohloff on an mtb here. They are out there, but I've never seen one on the trails, only on touring bikes and 26' mtbs rigids designed for urban use, like Rotor bikes. They also charge an incredible premium, with minimum prices being just under €2000 for many companies. Alfine is going to be hundreds less and destroy Rohloff.


----------



## bikeisbetter (Aug 15, 2009)

junktrunk said:


> Outside of durability, the Rohloff has nothing


Oh, please.

It has. Namely, it offers a true granny gear that is completely safe for the hub and endorsed by the manufacturer. With lowest allowed chain wheel/sprocket teeth count ratio being 2.35 and lowest hub gear ratio of 0.279, the lowest underdrive ratio is 0.65, exactly what the strongest granny gear of 22/34 offers.

The lowest ratio on the Alfine 11 is the same as on the Alfine 8 and equals 0.527. Many discussions about how much can the Alfine handle were carried over here with conclusions that a 32/20 setup is likely the lowest acceptable. This renders the lowest total ratio of 0,84. Seems close but in fact you'll get 30% less torque at the rear wheel with it. This is significantly less, a deficit immediately to be experienced when climbing a really steep hill, plowing through thick snow, crawling through dense mud or over sandy area. All of these make some of the points of mountain biking - the capability to go anywhere, right?

To make matters worse, the tallest ratio on an 8 hub will barely suffice for a bit higher than average speeds over flat lands. Forget any faster sections, not to mention any downhills.

The 11 hub will address the top gear problem, but the lack of powerful low end is here to stay. Also remember that 32/20 puts the hub under serious input torque stress. A guy here run his Alfine 8 under 26/20 and ripped its clutch apart.



junktrunk said:


> and it looks like Shimano will likely get the Alfine perfect before Rohloff will.


But Rohloff has got almost perfect already. The only thing missing on it is, in my opinion, a roller (silent) clutch.

They even made sure users don't destroy the internals because of cable misalignment (this is how I damaged my Nexus 7) by installing the indexing inside the hub.



junktrunk said:


> Rohloff is a hub made for commuter bikes in Europe, then adapted to mtb.


True. Most of the used (and new) bikes on sale in Europe, equipped with a Rohloff, are some sort of commuters and touring machines. Which is pointless, in my opinion. This hub is way to expensive for the purpose, offers too much, theft risk is too high as well.

Its true application is obviously serious (and trouble-free) MTB.



junktrunk said:


> It is not compatible with modern mountain bikes and they are kind of lazy there, electing to keep the same product out there.


Sorry, but you're making this up. The torque arm solves the problem.



junktrunk said:


> However, Alfine is taking the commuter and touring market away from Rohloff in a big way starting in December, and entire lines, even in Germany, are no longer going to offer Rohloff, in favor of the new Alfine.


Really? I'm not so sure.

I also waited for the Alfine 11 to come and I'm currently a bit disappointed with the price. Together with the shifter, chain tensioner and fittings kit it will be around EUR 450. And EUR 500-550 is what you pay for a used *non-disc brake* Rohloff on eBay Germany, ready to go, all things included, in most cases still under warranty (to run it on a MTB bike, v-brake plate/adapter is necessary - I could live with that). The used disc brake version will sadly set you back a bit more, 650 EUR to be precise.

Still, not that far away. I'd really rather pay a tad more and be sure I can use the true granny gear forever, instead of accepting the much higher low end gear ratio while putting the hub under serious stress.

The brand new Rohloff hub is yours for 800 GBP. The Alfine 11 - 400 GBP, while being significantly inferior. Not as much bargain as one could expect.


----------



## junktrunk (Apr 17, 2010)

Your arguments are severely limited in grasping realities thrown at you about the Rohloff. It is not a transmission with a true application for mtb. It was adapted for such. Touring and commuters were the first priority. Torque arm? Yeah, elegant, especially when they break chainstays. Offers too much? It offers high weight, drag, and a price that will pay for itself not too often. I will start believing when I see transalp riders in mass numbers using them. For now, they are still anomolies out there and in the alps for normal riding.

What is painfully obvious is that you're seeing Alfine move in a step in the right direction, and you know if they have this coming and manufacturers are already jumping ship, ratios aside, then Rohloff will have some problems because they have NOTHING in the pipeline. Not even this vaporware lighter version. Alfine 11 is coming out and in a more refined package, and you bet that they have another coming soon to address the ONLY advantage Rohloff has at this point (outside of invested fanboys)- the ratios. The 11 is a huge step towards the Rohloff and will likely trump it for refined installation and behavior. The next one, I'm betting, will far exceed the Rohloff, at which point they are done.


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

bikeisbetter said:


> ... Many discussions about how much can the Alfine handle were carried over here with conclusions that a 32/20 setup is likely the lowest acceptable.....


You made that up, there's lots of riders using 32x23 and 32x25. No ill effects, for lots of miles.


----------



## KobaltBlau (Jun 3, 2005)

bikeisbetter said:


> To make matters worse, the tallest ratio on an 8 hub will barely suffice for a bit higher than average speeds over flat lands. Forget any faster sections, not to mention any downhills.


You mean when the lowest ratio is set up to be as low as possible? The tallest ratio can be made really tall if the corresponding increase in the low end can be tolerated, right?


----------



## TimT (Jan 1, 2004)

Biggest thing Rohloff has going for it that the Alfine does not is the chain line. Try adding a belt drive to a Alfine with big fat tires and your asking for trouble. Besides Shimano is using obsolete threads on the axle. 3/8 26 with a step up to 7/16 26. (its something like BSC try finding a tap and die for it) Come on how hard is it to go to 10mm and 12mm? Also Shimano put the shift cable right next to the chain? I'd rather have the room with it on the non-drive side like the Rohloff. Personally I'm saving my money for a Rohloff and will be ditching my Alfine 8.

Yes I have a Alfine belt drive 29er. The pain the pain.

Tim


----------



## fokof (Apr 24, 2006)

junktrunk said:


> . The next one, I'm betting, will far exceed the Rohloff, at which point they are done.


I really really really wish the Alfine 11 will be good , as I have a couple of MTB and I can't use standard drivetrain anymore. But I've a bit "burnt" by Shimano's IGH lately with a major lack of reliability , I'm on my third Shimano in 6/7 years. 
That's why I hope that the 11 is far more reliable than the 8 because changing the hub once every 2-3 years isn't more economic than a Rolhoff for 20 .....


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

I'm very very seriously considering switching to this hub. I like the rholoff, but I just can't justify the price. And the gripshifts. I used gripshifts for years before switching to shimano. I'll never go back. And I've never had one of those strange 'break a shift lever' incidents either. I emailed rholoff about trigger shifters, and the response was 'theres no interest, we're not working on it'. Fair enough. Shimano is. 

So my bike is a dual 6.5" travel Maverick, currently with a 3x9 XT. I'm one of those rare riders that uses all three gears when riding. Most riders in my group have long ditched their big ring, and lots also ditched their granny. But I use em all. Knowing that the Alfine 11 has normal shifting, a normal (trigger) shifter, and disk brake plus 36 spokes really makes it a perfect fit for almost all the bikers I ride with - assuming its durable enough to last 4 or 5 years. But for me, it's going to be tough making the adjustment since I do everything from crazy technical singletrack, to long distance urban rides on my bike. 

So I need to figure out the ratios.
On my bike, my big gear is 44/11, 4:1.
My low gear is 22:34 ~0.65:1
So how do I do gear math for the alfine? It has it's own internal gears, plus the two external. What I really want to see is, if I make the alfine's top gear close to 4:1, what will it's low end be? And what is that equivalent to on my 3x9? I figure I'll go hit my favorite trails, keep it in this gear, and see if I can manage. 

Earlier in the thread, there was lots of derailer talk. One guy that said he never had a damaged derailer, and he must ride in a bubble. I guess that's true. I go through about a derailer a season. (xt shadow, pre-shadow, I went through about 4 regular XTs every single season). I go through anywhere from one or two, to four or five derailer hangers per season. Sometimes a stick takes them out, and you really can't prevent that. But about half my breaks have been landing a drop, where as soon as my back wheel hits the ground, the hanger just explodes. Beyond that, I get plenty of chain stretch and usually replace my casette, chainrings, and chain once a season. Beyond all that, having all that extra chain means my chain is constantly bouncing all over the place. Doing drops, I have to shift into my big ring just to get rid of all the slack. This is especially problematic when downhilling. Big Ring/Big Cog keeps the chain nice and tight so you have no problem rolling over bumps, but it's such a low gear ratio, you can't even pedal. You get nothing but air. Having a singlespeed chain on my bike, I suspect, will totally change my world. I just hope I don't have to give up long distance urban rides, to be able to still do good climbs. Like some other guy said, the next IGH will be called an XT, and have 15 speeds and be perfect for all bikers. 

But anyway, can someone explain to me how to do gear math with this, relative to my 3x9 26". Then I can start crunching numbers and see what's up.


----------



## Surestick Malone (Jan 24, 2004)

fellsbiker said:


> But about half my breaks have been landing a drop, where as soon as my back wheel hits the ground, the hanger just explodes.


Have you checked your chain is long enough when the suspension in fully compressed?


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

Yup it's long enough. If I added a few links, that might put a little less pressure on the hanger, but i have os much chain movement as is, i can't deal with any more.


----------



## fokof (Apr 24, 2006)

Fellsbiker , your replies made me think of something :
If there is a trigger shifter available for the Alfine 11 , will it be able to jump from 1 to 11 on a single trig ? 


I absolutly hate grip shifts too , but that's one advantage they have.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

I believe I read that the alfine 11 trigger will be able to go 2 at a time if you push hard. I think my XT can do 3 or 4 at a time. Grip shifts require you taking your hand off the brake, which I don't like. And with shifts that are essentially instant, , it should be pretty easy to just tap through the gears.


----------



## dru (Sep 4, 2006)

fellsbiker said:


> And with shifts that are essentially instant, , it should be pretty easy to just tap through the gears.


I have the 8 speed, and yeah, it's no issue, even with only one gear at a time.

The new 11 is normal, unlike the 'rapid rise' of the Alfine 8. I don't know if I'll like that. As it is now it is really effortless to fly into a corner or climb popping the trigger with your pointer finger.

Drew


----------



## rdhfreethought (Aug 12, 2006)

dru said:


> I have the 8 speed, and yeah, it's no issue, even with only one gear at a time.
> 
> The new 11 is normal, unlike the 'rapid rise' of the Alfine 8. I don't know if I'll like that. As it is now it is really effortless to fly into a corner or climb popping the trigger with your pointer finger.
> 
> Drew


Thank god for that (Normal shifting instead of Rapid Rise). It is the one thing I hate about my Alfine 8. I think Shimano was thinking it would be a more durable solution. But it makes no sense in moutain biking, since you normally are going 'oh crap I am in too high a gear, and I am having a hard time downshifting on this hill' than 'oh crap, I am in too low a gear and I can't upshift going down this hill.'

I do agree with you in that it does make for super fast downshifts though.


----------



## junktrunk (Apr 17, 2010)

fellsbiker said:


> I believe I read that the alfine 11 trigger will be able to go 2 at a time if you push hard. I think my XT can do 3 or 4 at a time. *Grip shifts require you taking your hand off the brake*, which I don't like. And with shifts that are essentially instant, , it should be pretty easy to just tap through the gears.


That's a lie.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

Yeah lets argue about how grip shifts suck instead of talking about the Alfine 11.


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

bikeisbetter said:


> Many discussions about how much can the Alfine handle were carried over here with conclusions that a 32/20 setup is likely the lowest acceptable


This is not true. Although Shimano give some recommended ratios that is all they are - there is no limit on gearing. There is a thread on here where a guy actually phoned up Shimano tech support to find out the limit and was explicitly told "no limit".



bikeisbetter said:


> A guy here run his Alfine 8 under 26/20 and ripped its clutch apart.


Don't think this is true either. There have been a couple of threads where people initially thought they had broken the clutch, but all have turned out to be user setup issues in the end.

If there is a thread where someone has actually broken their Alfine by running a low gearing then please post a link - I would like to read it.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

SO back on topic. So can any confirm that the proper way to calculate drive ratio is to simply take your big ring/cog ratio, and multiply by the listed ratios on shimano's alfine11 tech page?

ALSO how do you straighten up your chain with a system like this? I have a single speed park bike that I use spacers where the cassette would go, to line up the cog with the chainring. This cog looks fully fixed in location. And my crank arm isn't adjustable, other than being able to put the gear where the middlering would go or where the bigring would go. How do you avoid a tweaked drivetrain?


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

fellsbiker said:


> SO back on topic. So can any confirm that the proper way to calculate drive ratio is to simply take your big ring/cog ratio, and multiply by the listed ratios on shimano's alfine11 tech page?


Yes



> ALSO how do you straighten up your chain with a system like this? I have a single speed park bike that I use spacers where the cassette would go, to line up the cog with the chainring. This cog looks fully fixed in location. And my crank arm isn't adjustable, other than being able to put the gear where the middlering would go or where the bigring would go. How do you avoid a tweaked drivetrain?


Cog flips and gives 43mm or 47mm chainline. You can have the chainring on the inner or outer crank posistion. Finally, you can buy 1mm spacers that go between the fixed cup and the bb shell to fine tune the chainline. I've been able to keep the chainline within 1mm on 4 IGH bikes.


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

pursuiter said:


> Cog flips and gives 43mm or 47mm chainline.


Exact chainline is actually 41.8mm or 46.8mm. You can also use a non-dished cog to get a chainline of 44.3mm

Another alternative for fine tuning is to use washers to space out the chainring itself.


----------



## junktrunk (Apr 17, 2010)

Paco Loco said:


> This is not true. Although Shimano give some recommended ratios that is all they are - there is no limit on gearing. There is a thread on here where a guy actually phoned up Shimano tech support to find out the limit and was explicitly told "no limit".
> 
> Don't think this is true either. There have been a couple of threads where people initially thought they had broken the clutch, but all have turned out to be user setup issues in the end.
> 
> If there is a thread where someone has actually broken their Alfine by running a low gearing then please post a link - I would like to read it.


With all due respect, this being mtbr, we can't take a phone call off someone else as proof. We have to make our own, or get shimano's internal publications.

However, I'm hopeful and I'm betting this will put Rohloff out, and the next generation will see way more refinement and torque capacity. It can not be argued that the OEMs are already turning over to Alfine 11, even in Rohloff's home market, so something has to be good about it, and it's not only on high end touring bikes now.


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

junktrunk said:


> With all due respect, this being mtbr, we can't take a phone call off someone else as proof.


Fair enough. However I have read everything Shimano have published on the Alfine 8 and 11 and no-where do they list any minimum/maximum sprocket combinations or gear ratios, or give any warnings at all about torque. I'd say that's conclusive proof that they do not see it as an issue.


----------



## bikeisbetter (Aug 15, 2009)

pursuiter said:


> You made that up, there's lots of riders using 32x23 and 32x25. No ill effects, for lots of miles.


If the ultimate destruction of sprocket alignment tabs and likely also the sprocket mounting on the axle cause by excessive torque applied in spikes is not considered an ill effect, then you're right.

http://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php?p=6018065&postcount=4
http://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php?p=6027165&postcount=8



KobaltBlau said:


> You mean when the lowest ratio is set up to be as low as possible? The tallest ratio can be made really tall if the corresponding increase in the low end can be tolerated, right?


Yes.



fellsbiker said:


> SO back on topic. So can any confirm that the proper way to calculate drive ratio is to simply take your big ring/cog ratio, and multiply by the listed ratios on shimano's alfine11 tech page?


Yep. That's exactly how you do it.



Paco Loco said:


> If there is a thread where someone has actually broken their Alfine by running a low gearing then please post a link - I would like to read it.


See my response to pursuiter's post.



Paco Loco said:


> Fair enough. However I have read everything Shimano have published on the Alfine 8 and 11 and no-where do they list any minimum/maximum sprocket combinations or gear ratios, or give any warnings at all about torque. I'd say that's conclusive proof that they do not see it as an issue.


Not true. Shimano defines allowed input ratios, only implicitly, by offering both Nexus and Alfine hubs as complete sets of components.

http://bike.shimano.com/publish/content/global_cycle/en/us/index/products/0/nexus.html
http://bike.shimano.com/publish/content/global_cycle/en/us/index/products/0/alfine.html

Both come with cranks designed to be compatible with the hub. Additionally, there is always a list of available sprockets for any hub. So we habe 39/20~=2 for the Alfine and 38/23~=1.65 for the Nexus (including the SG-8R38). I believe we can assume the lower ratio to be valid and allowed for both hubs as they are nearly identical.

23 teeth sprocket is to be seen as often as UFO.

Please also notice two essential things. 
1. Almost any bike equipped with Alfine or Nexus hubs comes with cranks designed for them.
2. Both hubs have chainline which is not compatible with MTB cranks. Just to make sure these things are combined together.

This official ratio (1.65) is still pretty low and impressive, allows one to realize how strong and how well engineered the hub is. This is also the reason why Alfine hubs do not explode immediately after some IGH cowboys start riding them under the combination of 26 teeth chainring/20 teeth sprocket.

1.65 is much lower when compared with what other makers allow:
Rohloff: 2.35
Falbrook: 1.8 (NuVinci)
SRAM: ~2.0
Sturmey: ~2.0



junktrunk said:


> Your arguments are severely limited in grasping realities thrown at you about the Rohloff. It is not a transmission with a true application for mtb. It was adapted for such. Touring and commuters were the first priority.


Whatever. It works anywhere, on any bike. By the way, its original purpose was to serve in just any application, that's why it offered true granny gear from day one. Commuters and touring bikes need no 22/33 lowest gear.



junktrunk said:


> Torque arm? Yeah, elegant, especially when they break chainstays.


Only the short one may break anything. That's what there the long torque arm is for - to prevent such risk.

http://www.rohloff.de/en/info/faq/f...icle/Why_is_the_torque_arm_so_long/index.html

Not to mention frames snapped by Rohloff induced torque are really exceptions.



junktrunk said:


> I will start believing when I see transalp riders in mass numbers using them. For now, they are still anomolies out there and in the alps for normal riding.


Maybe transalp riders are weight weenies, drilling through their carbon forks. Globetrotters use Rohloff hubs very frequently. Additionally, it's an expensive stuff, still.



junktrunk said:


> What is painfully obvious is that you're seeing Alfine move in a step in the right direction, and you know if they have this coming and manufacturers are already jumping ship


Just trying to assess the value of the new Alfine 11 does not mean being against it.



junktrunk said:


> , ratios aside, then Rohloff will have some problems because they have NOTHING in the pipeline. Not even this vaporware lighter version. Alfine 11 is coming out and in a more refined package, and you bet that they have another coming soon to address the ONLY advantage Rohloff has at this point (outside of invested fanboys)- the ratios.


Again, please stop. True granny gear? Rohloff yes, Alfine no. Capability to work 10+ years? Rohloff yes! Alfine seriously unlikely. Ratios? As you said.

Rohloff already made the ultimate hub. They do not need to improve it almost at all.



 junktrunk said:


> The 11 is a huge step towards the Rohloff and will likely trump it for refined installation and behavior. The next one, I'm betting, will far exceed the Rohloff, at which point they are done.


At the moment they can't get the current version right, so I'd hide my crystal ball in the pocket for some time and make no predictions about the "next one".



junktrunk said:


> Offers too much? It offers high weight, drag, and a price that will pay for itself not too often.





fokof said:


> I really really really wish the Alfine 11 will be good , as I have a couple of MTB and I can't use standard drivetrain anymore. But I've a bit "burnt" by Shimano's IGH lately with a major lack of reliability , I'm on my third Shimano in 6/7 years.
> That's why I hope that the 11 is far more reliable than the 8 because changing the hub once every 2-3 years isn't more economic than a Rolhoff for 20 .....


Exactly my line of thinking.

Nexus 7 I used previously destroyed itself during the very first ride after repairing flat tire and forgetting to realign the cable, when I upshifted under power. Something like this would NEVER happed to the Rohloff hub as it is indexed internally and cable tension makes no difference.

I ride the Nexus 8 now, the newest model, most similar to the Alfine. Shifting after easing off is perfect. So is the silent roller clutch. So is its efficiency, especially in 6th and 7th gear, these barrel bearings on satellite gears are really there doing their job.

But downshifting under power barely works. After upshifting under power the hub likes to jump out of gear and downshift on its own.There are already some issues with switching from 2nd to 3rd. All this with cable alignment being perfect.

These things do not inspire confidence and I just can't see this thing working 15 years. And it takes 10 years already for Rohloff warranty just to expire.

So we are back at the 11. Some serious money is to be shelled on one (hub+shifter+the rest). No wonder the option of spending some 15% more and getting a used Rohloff (non disc brake) is very tempting. Or just paying twice the Alfine 11 price, getting a brand new Rohloff and solving the IGH problem once and forever. Two Alfines 11 (assuming the one will not hold up 15 years) will cost the same but will never provide the same features and confidence.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

So on shimano's tech page, is lists the sizes of cogs. 
( http://bike.shimano.com/publish/con...ts/0/alfine/product.-code-SG-S700.-type-.html )

"18, 20, 21, 22, 23T (18T; for outward assembling only)"

What is this "outward assembling only" business? I'd want the smallest cog possible so I could use the smallest chainring possible, and get some increased BB clearance out of this deal.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

So now that I have the math right, I banged out a little spreadsheet with a lot of chain options on an alfine, with how they compare to a regular 27 speed XT setup. 32/20 is the one I like on the alfine. You basically lose your very top gear, and two lowest gears. I'll miss all three but I can get by. This is based on an 11-34 casette too, so if you have an 11-32, it's even closer. I'll miss that 4.0 when I'm on the street but to get it with an alfine, I'd need to do nearly 1.0 as my lowest gear. Thats a bit too high. Anyway, I'm sure anyone considering this hub will find this doc very useful:
http://www.fellsbiker.com/docs/alfine_11_ratios.pdf

All those people who have given up front shifting, and run just a middle ring, this hub is going to have no downside (assuming it's durable enough to survive serious mountain biking). For people that ride a granny and middle, a 28/20 will be a nice ratio.

Now that I did the math, I need to try to get out soon and really ride around some of the more technical trails I know, in 22/26 on my bike and see if it's really doable or not. I suspect I'll do fine on all but the most gnarly climbs. Exciting!!!

Now I just wish azonic would send me back my old wheel so I could salvage the rim to be built around this hub.

So far, every bit of info I've found out about this hub, is exactly what I want to hear. Especially trigger shifter, single cable, 36h. The only question mark now is toughness. Can it really handle the world of technical trail riding/freeriding? I hope so, cause based on the math, (including price), this hub could be a significant turning point for the sport.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

Also, an interesting tidbit about the rholoff. You only gain two more gears running the speedhub over the alfine11 (based on the 27 speed XT chart). The numbers on Rholoff's website comparing the speedhub to gears, use unrealistic gear ratios that make the speedhub's range look a bit better than it really is. 
So again, it all comes down to the question of durability.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

One last comment for the night... Hammerschmidt doesn't work well with the rholoff because rholoff does more reduction, and needs a bigger input chainring. The Alfine doesn't do as much reduction, so it works with smaller chainrings. So a hammerschmidt would be a perfect combo to the alfine11. Run it with an 18t cog, and you'd get a 22/18 low range, and about a 35/18 high range. That would give you even more range than a 27 speed XT. Approximately the same 22/34 granny combo, but a top gear about 4.2:1. And some seriously serious BB clearance! 

And an alfine 11 + hammerschmidt still costs less than a rholoff  I'd do it (if my bike had the mounting points).


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

bikeisbetter said:


> If the ultimate destruction of sprocket alignment tabs and likely also the sprocket mounting on the axle cause by excessive torque applied in spikes is not considered an ill effect, then you're right.


In that case, as the OP himself states, the damage was most probably due to the combination of high torque and a bad chain line, not high torque alone. Also this seems to be an isolated case - I cannot find any other reports of it happening to anyone else.

Regarding the Shimano recommended ratios, I have emailed the Shimano distributor here in the UK and asked for the official word on this, so hopefully we will know for sure soon and can stop speculating. I will post their reply here when I get it.



bikeisbetter said:


> What is this "outward assembling only" business?


The Shimano sprockets are dished and can be run either way round to achieve different chainlines (see earlier in this thread for a full explanation). However, the smallest 18T one can only be run dished outwards, as it would foul the hub if you tried to run it inwards.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

Paco Loco said:


> The Shimano sprockets are dished and can be run either way round to achieve different chainlines (see earlier in this thread for a full explanation). However, the smallest 18T one can only be run dished outwards, as it would foul the hub if you tried to run it inwards.


That means the 18tooth would be lined up with the big ring of a 3ring crank then right? Hmm that might effect my hammerschmidt dream plan


----------



## finch2 (Nov 13, 2009)

Paco Loco said:


> Fair enough. However I have read everything Shimano have published on the Alfine 8 and 11 and no-where do they list any minimum/maximum sprocket combinations or gear ratios, or give any warnings at all about torque. I'd say that's conclusive proof that they do not see it as an issue.


That may have been me. I asked shimano in detail till I got the answer I was looking for. The guy told me there was no limit. Yay! Well, it sounds very very good doesn't it? It would put that hub in contention for me as a replacement for the Rohloff. The thing is that I still don't believe it. I think I will really need to see how long they last in the field under small chainrings before I venture there. I really can't believe that there is NO limit at all, and suspect that Shimano's view of durability is just different to Rohloff's. I would like to be proved wrong though as there should be another competitor on the market.


----------



## junktrunk (Apr 17, 2010)

I'm also not clear on a couple things- what are the services to be performed on the alfine, can they be done at home, and can the hub be torn down for repairs and service by the user. I know the mystery was taken out of the rohloff recently...


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

JT, this is silly, you're selecting isolated post out of context as proof Alfine sucks. There wasn't any destruction of the hub, he never showed a single photo of the failed tabs. You should be more secure in yourself and all the $$ you spent on that overpriced piece of tectonic junk. 2%-10% out of box failure rate, crummy seals on the first 50K hubs. Enjoy


----------



## junktrunk (Apr 17, 2010)

pursuiter said:


> JT, this is silly, you're selecting isolated post out of context as proof Alfine sucks. There wasn't any destruction of the hub, he never showed a single photo of the failed tabs. You should be more secure in yourself and all the $$ you spent on that overpriced piece of tectonic junk. 2%-10% out of box failure rate, crummy seals on the first 50K hubs. Enjoy


Huh? If you make a joke up, then make sure others know what you're talking about.


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

JT, the joke is you trolling on an Alfine thread making false claims and acting like you have a clue. Get lost, trollboy.


----------



## junktrunk (Apr 17, 2010)

What claims have I made?


----------



## Dibbs_ (Feb 17, 2009)

Jerk_chicken, you still haven't given me the details of your local xc trail - you remember, the Whistler video you compared them too. A few of us are keen to ride with you, I'm just down the road from you. We are keen to meet the legend behind the keyboard.


----------



## junktrunk (Apr 17, 2010)

Dibbs_ said:


> Jerk_chicken, you still haven't given me the details of your local xc trail - you remember, the Whistler video you compared them too. A few of us are keen to ride with you, I'm just down the road from you. We are keen to meet the legend behind the keyboard.


Didn't you claim to not be a homer, but it appears that you're following them, triggered by a round of anti-Turner homer posts that had nothing to do with you, in a thread about failed Turners and getting warranties. Good show, non-homer.

If you're down the road, then come over, sweetie.


----------



## bikeny (Feb 26, 2004)

Some interesting, and plenty of not-so-interesting discussion here lately! So here is my experience. I have been running an 8 speed Alfine for while and love it. I started out with a 34-24 ratio, and ran that all last fall and winter. This worked OK, but I really wanted the lower gear to be the same as on a traditional drivetrain. On my 29er, I used a 20-32 as my low gear with a traditional drivetrain, so that was my target: 20/32=0.625. So I calculated a 28t chainring would get me where I wanted to be: 28/24*0.527= 0.615.

SO, I had someone fabricate a 28t chainring to fit my splined XTR M950 crank. Mounted it up and the first few rides were great. Nice low gear to spin up the hills, and on my trails, I still rarely, if ever, use 7th and 8th gears, so the range is fine. So fourth ride in, I stand up to get up a short steep pitch, and CRUNCH! My first though was crap, I killed the hub. I look down and see my fancy Ti chainring folded up. So I rumaged my parts bin and found a 30t 94bcd chainring and mounted that up instead. First hill, first ride I get some skipping, and again thought I killed the hub. I stopped and checked the alignment of the yellow lines, and they were way off. Maybe something changed when I changed my ratio? Not sure, but I adjusted it, and it is good as new.

Sorry for the long story, but just sharing my experience. Short term use with a very low ration seems to be fine. I will be riding it all fall and winter and will post any updates if I have problems. I ride singlespeed all summer, so I am certainly not going easy on the hub. BUT, and I think this is the most important thing with an IGH, you MUST let up on the power when shifting, especially downshifting. If the hub is going to self destruct, it will happen when shifting under power.

And, because I know someone is going to ask, here is where I got the 24t cog from, I think it's an SRAM part:

http://www.sjscycles.co.uk/hub-gear-sprocket-fits-sram-and-shimano-hub-gears-prod2825/

Mark


----------



## Dibbs_ (Feb 17, 2009)

junktrunk said:


> Didn't you claim to not be a homer, but it appears that you're following them, triggered by a round of anti-Turner homer posts that had nothing to do with you, in a thread about failed Turners and getting warranties. Good show, non-homer.
> 
> If you're down the road, then come over, sweetie.


How come you replied? Are you JC?


----------



## junktrunk (Apr 17, 2010)

No, because you are a typical homer acquainted with me through the homer forum in the same fashion, and posted something that had nothing to do with anything and asked me out on a date, so if you're down the road, as you claim, come over.

Since we've had run ins, and you only come out when there's a homer issue on the turner forum, then I have to assume you were talking to me.

Oh, the "I got you now hand-wringing" is only being celebrated by you and a couple other nincompoops like yourself, who get butthurt about defending Turner, and now for some reason see the need to invade a productive thread about an IGH? 

Would Turner endorse your behavior?


----------



## Dibbs_ (Feb 17, 2009)

junktrunk said:


> No, because you are a typical homer acquainted with me through the homer forum in the same fashion, and posted something that had nothing to do with anything and asked me out on a date, so if you're down the road, as you claim, come over.
> 
> Since we've had run ins, and you only come out when there's a homer issue on the turner forum, then I have to assume you were talking to me.
> 
> ...


Keep taking the pills JC  I hear you hucked a curb once  
You still on the old RFX? Is that why you have sand in your vaj? To think you were once the elite homer, defending Turner whatever board you e-rode 

If being a Homer makes your blood boil - I'll join the club! Careful out there - those pavements and fireroads are extreme places. Always wear your helmet :nono:


----------



## junktrunk (Apr 17, 2010)

I advise others in this thread to not answer this troll.  He and his buddies already got two threads closed on the Turner forum, which was likely their goal.


----------



## finch2 (Nov 13, 2009)

bikeny said:


> Some interesting, and plenty of not-so-interesting discussion here lately! So here is my experience. I have been running an 8 speed Alfine for while and love it. I started out with a 34-24 ratio, and ran that all last fall and winter. This worked OK, but I really wanted the lower gear to be the same as on a traditional drivetrain. On my 29er, I used a 20-32 as my low gear with a traditional drivetrain, so that was my target: 20/32=0.625. So I calculated a 28t chainring would get me where I wanted to be: 28/24*0.527= 0.615.
> 
> SO, I had someone fabricate a 28t chainring to fit my splined XTR M950 crank. Mounted it up and the first few rides were great. Nice low gear to spin up the hills, and on my trails, I still rarely, if ever, use 7th and 8th gears, so the range is fine. So fourth ride in, I stand up to get up a short steep pitch, and CRUNCH! My first though was crap, I killed the hub. I look down and see my fancy Ti chainring folded up. So I rumaged my parts bin and found a 30t 94bcd chainring and mounted that up instead. First hill, first ride I get some skipping, and again thought I killed the hub. I stopped and checked the alignment of the yellow lines, and they were way off. Maybe something changed when I changed my ratio? Not sure, but I adjusted it, and it is good as new.
> 
> ...


great! I'll look forward to hearing progress...:thumbsup:


----------



## TimT (Jan 1, 2004)

fellsbiker said:


> One last comment for the night... Hammerschmidt doesn't work well with the rholoff because rholoff does more reduction, and needs a bigger input chainring. The Alfine doesn't do as much reduction, so it works with smaller chainrings. So a hammerschmidt would be a perfect combo to the alfine11. Run it with an 18t cog, and you'd get a 22/18 low range, and about a 35/18 high range. That would give you even more range than a 27 speed XT. Approximately the same 22/34 granny combo, but a top gear about 4.2:1. And some seriously serious BB clearance!
> 
> And an alfine 11 + hammerschmidt still costs less than a rholoff  I'd do it (if my bike had the mounting points).


No Alfine chain line is something like 42 (even with the cog flipped out)or so, out board triple front is something like 51 or 52.

Tim


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

TimT said:


> No Alfine chain line is something like 42 (even with the cog flipped out)or so, out board triple front is something like 51 or 52.


wrong:



Paco Loco said:


> Exact chainline is actually 41.8mm or 46.8mm. You can also use a non-dished cog to get a chainline of 44.3mm....


----------



## valetz (Jul 5, 2010)

*Stock Date Update*

The date in the QBP system in currently Dec 8th.
(Yeah I'm getting sick of waiting and I'm almost ready to buy a Nuvinci.)


----------



## wobbem (Jul 19, 2009)

Cheers for the pdf fellsbiker ,debating the 22/18 or 24/18 combo working for me one my 29er.
Use my 22/34 in XT a lot, sigh, perhaps I should just get stronger legs.


----------



## decipher (Aug 17, 2007)

You might have not noticed, but Shimano requires a chaingring to sprocket ratio of approx. 1.9 for the Alfine 11 in its tech documents [there is no mention of a (similar) constraint for the 8 speed version]. The same constraint for the Rohloff is 2.35 for normal use and 2.50 for heavy riders and/or heavy loading.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

^ Please post a URL for this document. So far the evidence is otherwise.


----------



## decipher (Aug 17, 2007)

satanas said:


> ^ Please post a URL for this document. So far the evidence is otherwise.


Too bored to look it up yourself I suppose. After all I mentioned "shimano tech documents" which is a well known and official source for all things Shimano tech. Anyway, this is the link for the aforementioned document (the constraint is mentioned in framed the section on the left):

http://techdocs.shimano.com/media/t...0A/SI-37R0A-002-ENG_v1_m56577569830728103.pdf


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

Thank for posting the link. I was hoping for more info than is contained in this instruction sheet. Seems like this is all there is so far. <sigh>


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

decipher said:


> You might have not noticed, but Shimano requires a chaingring to sprocket ratio of approx. 1.9 for the Alfine 11 in its tech documents [there is no mention of a (similar) constraint for the 8 speed version]. The same constraint for the Rohloff is 2.35 for normal use and 2.50 for heavy riders and/or heavy loading.


Requires ≠ Recommends

That basically completely kills this hub for mountain bike use. If the lowest gear you can get out of this hub is ~1:1 (34/18 * 0.527). Unless they aren't talking about a torque limit, but just what they think is "ideal" use. The doc referenced says:

"It is recommended that the gear ratio of the front chain ring be set to approx. 1.9. Example: 34/18, 39-20, 45/23"

That's kind of a big deal. Will using a 32/20 really kill this hub? I was so hyped up about getting rid of my derailers next spring. Don't steal that dream away from me, Shimano!


----------



## decipher (Aug 17, 2007)

fellsbiker said:


> Requires ≠ Recommends
> 
> That basically completely kills this hub for mountain bike use. If the lowest gear you can get out of this hub is ~1:1 (34/18 * 0.527). Unless they aren't talking about a torque limit, but just what they think is "ideal" use. The doc referenced says:
> 
> ...


Well a recommendation of this sort could be regarded as a requirement.The difference in technical wording between Shimano and Rohloff dictates the difference in scale between the two companies. I would agree with you about the limitation this sort of constraint poses on MTB use. On the other hand the Alfine 8 became popular amongst UK mountain bikers with a low gear end similar to that of the 11 and despite a less durable internal design. IMO Shimano should have better managed the internal gear ratios to cater for different uses or alternatively introduce a specific version for each use.

Nevertheless, I agree that Shimano should shed light on this matter. In the meanwhile you might want take a look at a spreadsheet I've made (see thread in this sub-forum) which compares gearing between the Alfine and Rohloff hubs and derailleur gearing (road standard and road compact).


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

Price-aside, Shimano's trigger shifters, single shifter cable, and 36 spokes make it much more appealing than the rholoff.


----------



## decipher (Aug 17, 2007)

fellsbiker said:


> Price-aside, Shimano's trigger shifters, single shifter cable, and 36 spokes make it much more appealing than the rholoff.


... and furthermore the shifter mechanism is on the left and can be used with existing cable stops and also you can use standard CenterLock rotors instead of the Rohloff proprietary ones.

Nevertheless, I don't think the Rohloff can be matched for mechanical efficiency and gear range/ratios. It actually outperforms SRAM Apex (50-34 & 11-32) by far, so it can only be compared to 3 x 9/10 MTB gearing.


----------



## fokof (Apr 24, 2006)

fellsbiker said:


> That's kind of a big deal. Will using a 32/20 really kill this hub? I was so hyped up about getting rid of my derailers next spring. Don't steal that dream away from me, Shimano!


There is still the Rolhoff :thumbsup:



decipher said:


> ..... also you can use standard CenterLock rotors instead of the Rohloff proprietary ones.


Please correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Centerlock a proprietary standard from Shimano ?


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

The rohloff is just too expensive. I can justify $800, but I can't justify $2000. And once you're actually on the trail, the rholoffs range is barely bigger than the alfines. The roholoff is more like a 3 x 8 with a large granny ring. I did the math on the rohloff too and you get like one more lower gear, and like half a higher gear and thats about it. I might just have to go against shimano's recommendation and use the alfine with 32/20 anyway. Unless shimano is planning an XT version of this hub. Of course the paint they use to write XT on it, will double the price. It must be expensive paint.


----------



## decipher (Aug 17, 2007)

fokof said:


> Please correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Centerlock a proprietary standard from Shimano ?


http://www.sram.com/avid/products/cleansweep-x-center-lock

http://www.bikeradar.com/gallery/ar...nsion-forks-and-wheels&mlc=news/article/image

http://www.dtswiss.com/Products/Accessories/Hub-Accessories/Center-lock-IS-adaptor.aspx

In a few words you are not (at all) limited in your choices with CenterLock the same way you are with the 4-bolt system. Now please tell me why I had to explain this to you.


----------



## itsdoable (Jan 6, 2004)

decipher said:


> http://www.sram.com/avid/products/cleansweep-x-center-lock
> 
> http://www.bikeradar.com/gallery/ar...nsion-forks-and-wheels&mlc=news/article/image
> 
> In a few words you are not (at all) limited in your choices with CenterLock the same way you are with the 4-bolt system. Now please tell me why I had to explain this to you.


Similarly Rohloff rotors are available from a few sources (i.e.: not proprietary), but they are obviously not as common. However, you cannot convert to 6-bolt like you can with a CenterLock hub.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

I'm not so sure I'd read 1.9:1 as a hard limit, but it also depends on the use and the user. If you're a testosterone-poisoned 17 year old, weigh 150kg and plan to huck 20m cliffs, that's different to if you're me - 17++, 63kg, careful, keep wheels on the ground most of the time, etc.

I'd have no qualms about running 34x23, and that's what I'll be doing as soon as I have the cash. I also agree with fellsbiker about not being able to justify 2.5x the Alfine price! As far as I can see, the Rohloff and Alfine have the same gaps between ratios, apart from a 2x larger jump into the lowest gear with the Alfine 11, so the Alfine is really equivalent to a 12 speed Rohloff. I can easily live with a slightly smaller range as long as most of it comes off the top end...

While Rohloff say that 2.whatever is a hard limit, but there seem to be plenty of people running slightly lower gearing, and I haven't yet seen any reports of exploding hubs.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

Speaking of hard limits. Didn't someone say the rohloff has a hard limit, but that limit is lower if you're using a tandem? So then how is that in any way a hard limit. Are suggested starting places for gear sizes being misinterpreted as limits? Even shimano's 1.9 suggestion, it doesn't say that a minimum or a maximum. It just says approximately 1.9. Something smells fishy here, I think we're over-reacting for nothing.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

According to Rohloff (http://www.rohloff.de/en/products/speedhub/sprocket/):

"If mounted on a tandem or if the rider weighs over 100kg, the following sprocket ratios must not be undercut: 32/13, 38/15, 40/16, 42/17."

Otherwise: "The higher the chainwheel/sprocket revolution ratio, the lower the torque transmitted to the gearbox. For this reason you must not use a chainring/cog ratio of less than 2.35. The smallest permittable chainring/cog ratios are: 42/17, 38/16, 36/15 and 32/13." (I think there's a typo and they mean 40/17 - that's what used to be on their site.)


----------



## bsdc (May 1, 2006)

satanas said:


> According to Rohloff (http://www.rohloff.de/en/products/speedhub/sprocket/):
> 
> "If mounted on a tandem or if the rider weighs over 100kg, the following sprocket ratios must not be undercut: 32/13, 38/15, 40/16, 42/17."
> 
> Otherwise: "The higher the chainwheel/sprocket revolution ratio, the lower the torque transmitted to the gearbox. For this reason you must not use a chainring/cog ratio of less than 2.35. The smallest permittable chainring/cog ratios are: 42/17, 38/16, 36/15 and 32/13." (I think there's a typo and they mean 40/17 - that's what used to be on their site.)


FWIW, those ratios have been undercut but lots of people for lots of years. I'm not aware of any problems reported. I've got a friend that's been running one with 34/16 for three years now. I think the Rohloff hub is WAY overbuilt and their recommendations are conservative.


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

Spoke to a couple of shops here in the UK about the Alfine 11 today. None of them have received their orders yet and all are now expecting to receive them in January.


----------



## fokof (Apr 24, 2006)

decipher said:


> Now please tell me why I had to explain this to you.


Shimano is the king of the proprietary standard.

It's just funny that you don't want to go for a standard because as you said , it is "proprietary" when you want to go for another standard wich is , guess what , also proprietary.


----------



## decipher (Aug 17, 2007)

fokof said:


> Shimano is the king of the proprietary standard.
> 
> It's just funny that you don't want to go for a standard because as you said , it is "proprietary" when you want to go for another standard wich is , guess what , also proprietary.


This is a really trivial use, but have it your way. Yes, CenterLock is patended, but guess what: all big brake companies now make CenterLock rotors because of the prevalence of Shimano hubs, and you can use a 6-bolt rotor with a CenterLock hub via an adaptor (which practically makes it non-proprietary). Hence, you are not at all limited in your choices... like with the 4-bolt standard! It's not like you don't know or understand this, but even if you didn't I had links in the post you quoted. Perhaps you like to amuse yourself by playing with words, but this thread is about the Alfine 11 and not your personal playground.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

Wow someone woke on up the douchéy side of the bed this morning... and apparently every morning lately.


----------



## bikeisbetter (Aug 15, 2009)

Well, knowing the gear ratios and the recommended input ratio, we can safely assume that Alfine 11 is an utter disappointment from the perspective of what has been expected here. Moreover, the entire design of this hub seems pointless, making its value very low. By no possible standards is this new hub any competitor to the Rohloff Speedhub.

Why?

1. As Fellsbiker already said, minimum combined ratio is 1:1. Granny gear in the Rohloff is 0.658, just a tad higher than 22/34~=0.647. This makes Alfine 11 useless in any MTB application.

2. With the 1.9 input ratio, the new hub, when compared with the Alfine 8, adds gear ratios that almost none of its potential users needs.

Let's look at speeds achieved at specific gears, assuming 28/29 inch wheel size and 70 rpm cadence, the one most frequently observed.

Alfine 8
1. 9,6 kph ~= 6 mph
2. 11,7 kph ~= 7,3 mph
3. 13,6 kph ~= 8,5 mph
4. 15,4 kph ~= 9,7 mph
5. 18,2 kph ~= 11,3 mph
6. 22,2 kph ~= 13,9 mph
7. 25,8 kph ~= 16,1 mph
8. 29,3 kph ~= 18,3 mph

Almost perfect range and enclosing top end, considering capabilities of average bikers, qualifying as commuters and recreational cyclists. 1st gear is enough to climb bike ramps or some typical slopes to be found in urban or suburban area.

And the Alfine 11?
1. 9,6 kph ~= 6 mph
2. 12,4 kph ~= 7,7 mph
3. 14 kph ~= 8,7 mph
4. 15,9 kph ~= 10 mph
5. 18,1 kph ~= 11,3 mph
6. 20,6 kph ~= 12,9 mph
7. 23,5 kph ~= 14,7 mph
8. 26,5 kph ~= 16,6 mph
9. 30,3 kph ~= 18,9 mph
10. 34,3 kph ~= 21,4 mph
11. 39,1 kph ~= 24,4 mph

Who needs 40 kph? Who can hold this sort of speed over a longer period? Same with 35 kph. Such pace is mostly (if not only) achieved on road bikes, and when going 40 kph every little bit of efficiency counts so internal gear hubs with their -10% efficiency drop for a kickoff are out of question. Drivetrain on road bikes gets far less dirty than on bikes traveling on unpaved or sandy or muddy roads by the way.

To make matters even worse, the neutral gear #5 is set too low. Obviously, this can be corrected by higher input ratio but then you obviously loose the low end.

As we are at this topic, let's look at the Rohloff gearing and speeds achieved, this time using the lowest allowed input ratio of 2.35, setting the hub for MTB use.

1. 6,3 kph ~= 3,9 mph
2. 7,1 kph ~= 4,4 mph
3. 8,1 kph ~= 5,1 mph
4. 9,2 kph ~= 5,7 mph
5. 10,4 kph ~= 6,5 mph
6. 11,9 kph ~= 7,4 mph
7. 13,5 kph ~= 8,4 mph
8. 15,3 kph ~= 9,6 mph
9. 17,4 kph ~= 10,9 mph
10. 19,8 kph ~= 12,4 mph
11. 22,4 kph ~= 14 mph
12. 25,5 kph ~= 15,9 mph
13. 29 kph ~= 18,1 mph
14. 32,9 kph ~= 20,6 mph

This is how you do perfect ratios. Granny gear is there where you need it, the top end is very sensible and, just a tiny little gift from Germany, the 1:1 neutral gear #11 delivers the speed most riders will spend in most of their time.

Considering that Alfine 11 adds gearing which will be used for < 1% of the time by 95% of the riders, it becomes pretty hard to justify the almost 2.5x higher price.

Why Shimano failed so badly? Two explanations come to my mind.

1. They didn't wanted to harm their cash cow dérailleurs. Dérailleurs are the most terrible way of transferring power on a bicycle, a point neatly proven by they fact they last a fraction of bicycle lifetime while transmissions in cars are life-long, but they are accepted by customers and generate much higher revenue streams after selling a bike than internal gear hubs would ever do. Rohloff Speedhub, for instance, generates barely any cash for its manufacturer after the sale, that's why it costs so much upfront and they try to make some living by selling oil at very high price.

2. Shimano was unable to build a product competing with the Rohloff. I once read a very interesting article about history of this hub, how its inventor was cheated by Campagnolo and how he very carefully sealed the Speedhub with numerous patents. I find this scenario far less likely than the former one, however.

Naturally, some Alfine believers will suggest that ignoring the recommended ratio is the way to go. Take into account however one of the secrets of Rohloff longevity - low internal loads. Only one set of gears inside this hub, namely the last one serving as reducer, transfers high torques. Planetary set of gears doing the actual shifting (7 ratios) are little loaded because of high input ratio. That's one of the factors on how to last > 10 years trouble free.


----------



## batorok (May 7, 2007)

That has to be the best comparison of the alfine/rohloff I've seen, thank you very much. Looks like an affordable internal transmission is some time off yet.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

bikeisbetter said:


> Well, knowing the gear ratios and the recommended input ratio, we can safely assume that Alfine 11 is an utter disappointment from the perspective of what has been expected here. Moreover, the entire design of this hub seems pointless, making its value very low. By no possible standards is this new hub any competitor to the Rohloff Speedhub.......Naturally, some Alfine believers will suggest that ignoring the recommended ratio is the way to go. Take into account however one of the secrets of Rohloff longevity - low internal loads. Only one set of gears inside this hub, namely the last one serving as reducer, transfers high torques. Planetary set of gears doing the actual shifting (7 ratios) are little loaded because of high input ratio. That's one of the factors on how to last > 10 years trouble free.


I totally agree with you if the 1:1.9 is truly the limit. But that number may not be set in stone yet. Also another thing to consider is that, even if I ignore the recommendation and my hum doesn't last 10 years, it only has to last about 3 years, for it to pay for itself. Shimano needs to make some statements and let people know what this hub is really capable of.


----------



## junktrunk (Apr 17, 2010)

Pure propaganda, and on top of that, it seems almost like they missed the point at what these things are made for. Go on any European bike manufacturer's website and look at how sophisticated their touring bikes are becoming, then it might be clear to see how someone would need to hold 40. Sorry, these things are adaptations from commuting and touring bikes, nothing else. You idiots are acting like they were designed first with mtb in mind just because they have disc mounts? Sorry to tell you, touring bikes are being put out with disc now. ANd have been for years.

Rohloffs mostly last because the vast majority are being used on commuter bikes. Go around Europe, and you will see exactly that, and never will you see one out on the trails.


----------



## bikeisbetter (Aug 15, 2009)

junktrunk said:


> Rohloffs mostly last because the vast majority are being used on commuter bikes. Go around Europe, and you will see exactly that, and never will you see one out on the trails.


No. Rohloffs last because many years ago their inventor, Bernhard Rohoff, asked himself a question - what can possibly cause failures of an internal gear hub, answered it and came up with mitigation means.

So let's try to follow Bernhard's thoughts... what might possibly lead to the destruction of an internal gear hub and how to address it?

1. Intruding sand, dirt, water or moisture: so seal the hub as good as you can.

2. High torque loads (in form of spikes as human beings do no produce continuous torque): so divide and conquer then. Two first set of planetary gears in the Speedhub transfer low, safe torques due to required high input ratio. Only the third reducing one has to be particularly strong.

And you can see just that on the video done by climbercraig66: 



 At 5:57 sun gears of first two sets can be seen, they are fairly narrow and light. At 8:38 the sun gear of the third reducing set appears, and it's very wide to handle higher load. Additionally, by arranging the sets in this way, only one of them has to be heavy.

3. Cable misalignment causing non-precise shifting action: so make sure cable tension is no longer relevant in determining actuation driving the shift. Speedhubs are indexed internally so cable movement only triggers the shift, but does not drive it - the internally controlled actuation which is always the same, however, does.

At the same time, I annihilated my Nexus 7 when once forgetting to realign it after repairing a flat which required taking off the rear wheel. And my current Nexus 8 let me hear a terrible grinding complaint a couple of times already when the shifting cable happened to jump out of the cable stop right at the shifter, thus misaligning the hub suddenly. Doesn't look like hub lifetime expansion mean, does it?

4. Neglected serice: so make sure everyone who buys your product knows what service requirements (oil change only in this case) are.

5. Bits of worn gears staying inside the hub, accelerating wear of working gears in a positive feedback fashion: so require cleaning oil flushing them out to be applied before actual oiling of the hub.

It's true most Speedhubs lead their life installed on touring/commuter bikes, but there is also a significant fraction of them doing an MTB job and no tendency of Speedhubs failing in this application has been observed anywhere. And if the hub is allowed to produce granny gear ratios, then it will withstand them as they're part of its normal operating mode.


----------



## junktrunk (Apr 17, 2010)

Yeah, so Rohloff made an overweight product, which anyone can, but meanwhile, they are still overpriced and not compatible with modern mtb, merely adapted.

There's no significant fraction, like you're claiming, being used in mtb. Even in Rohloff's home country, it has not, and never will be favored for mtb. Only a couple companies offer such customization, in terms of dropouts, but the drawbacks to Rohloff use are clear, especially when someone can invest that huge weight jump into the frame and more durable components.

This is still escaping the fact that the only place I've ever seen Rohloffs throughout Europe, especially in Germany, has ONLY been on commuters/touring/urban mtb. Never have I seen a Rohloff in action at any bike parks, trails, etc. On top of that, it's telling that even German bike companies are abandoning the Rohloff for the Alfine 11. You can make these nice charts all you want, but you're still speaking from the point of view, and an ignorant one, that Rohloff and Shimano care for the mtb market and they were developed for the mtb market, when all facets of their operation, including ratios (remember, you can't fathom anyone doing 40kmh???) is made for touring and commuter bikes first. Maybe if they work on mtb, then that is a plus. However, if even fiercely nationalistic German bike companies (and fiercely nationalistic buyers) are jumping ship to Alfine 11, then Rohloff has a big problem. It could be price, but they're not going to risk losing money in this market by jumping from a known commodity to a new one unless it will do the job as well or better. Rohloff hasn't made any updates in god knows how long, so just wait, and you'll see Alfine all over.


----------



## bikeisbetter (Aug 15, 2009)

junktrunk said:


> Yeah, so Rohloff made an overweight product, which anyone can, but meanwhile, they are still overpriced and not compatible with modern mtb, merely adapted.


You seem not to quantify how much adapting effort the hub requires but only that it does require any. Pretty pointless. You also seem to forget about how many problems setting up cranks for Alfine non-standard chainline causes.

Weight? Yawn. When you consider the weight of all things that are thrown away completely (one shifter, front dérailleur, two chain rings, rear dérailleur, part of the chain), the total difference drops to some pound, two at best, and only for top notch setup like XTR. Pretty irrelevant, to be honest.



junktrunk said:


> There's no significant fraction, like you're claiming, being used in mtb. Even in Rohloff's home country, it has not, and never will be favored for mtb. Only a couple companies offer such customization, in terms of dropouts, but the drawbacks to Rohloff use are clear, especially when someone can invest that huge weight jump into the frame and more durable components.
> 
> This is still escaping the fact that the only place I've ever seen Rohloffs throughout Europe, especially in Germany, has ONLY been on commuters/touring/urban mtb. Never have I seen a Rohloff in action at any bike parks, trails, etc.


Just a quick reality check: http://fotos.mtb-news.de/search/index?q=rohloff

Some 16 pages, with 16 photos each, of Rohloff Speedhub in MTB application, on a single popular German website. You may try to offer the owners consolation services after their bikes weight increased by some one pound and they had to tighten few screws on their Speedbones or long torque arms.



junktrunk said:


> On top of that, it's telling that even German bike companies are abandoning the Rohloff for the Alfine 11. You can make these nice charts all you want, but you're still speaking from the point of view, and an ignorant one, that Rohloff and Shimano care for the mtb market and they were developed for the mtb market, when all facets of their operation, including ratios (remember, you can't fathom anyone doing 40kmh???) is made for touring and commuter bikes first. Maybe if they work on mtb, then that is a plus. However, if even fiercely nationalistic German bike companies (and fiercely nationalistic buyers) are jumping ship to Alfine 11, then Rohloff has a big problem. It could be price, but they're not going to risk losing money in this market by jumping from a known commodity to a new one unless it will do the job as well or better. Rohloff hasn't made any updates in god knows how long, so just wait, and you'll see Alfine all over.


1. Appearance of Alfine 11 models does not mean demise of Rohloffs.

2. Rohloff does care about the MTB market as their product is fully usable in heaviest, most demanding MTB applications. And it makes most sense there. Whether you accept it or not is your problem. At the same time, the same Rohloff also works anywhere else, a nice feature which you try to use against it.

3. Shimano, imposing 1.9 limit on the Alfine 11 and 2.1 limit on the Nexus SG-8R36 (right frame in this document http://bike.shimano.com/media/techd...A-001_SG-8R31_36-EN_v1_m56577569830638076.pdf) at the same time does not care about MTB market at all. Go buy stone-age dérailleur drive train (which is exactly the same as in 50ties, only has more gears), preferably the expensive XTR one, then pour sand and water with mud on gears and chain and pay for the replacement setup after two seasons.

4. I consider the Alfine 8 being far stronger and more dangerous competitor to the Rohloff than the 11 is. The 8 simply suffices for commuting and touring and offers unrivaled value. The 11 costs a lot more and delivers ratios which will be barely used by anybody.


----------



## junktrunk (Apr 17, 2010)

Do you work for Rohloff? It really seems like you do. In fact, I'm betting on it.

I love the weight consideration, because that's always the excuse, and even with middle level components I was looking to replace, the Rohloff still came in much heavier.

You conveniently overlooked my point that for some, that one pound is better served in a heavier duty frame, or other components, but instead, you talk up a hub that will outlast the frame it's on, but meanwhile, you're overlooking the aspect of an appropriate frame.

"16 pages of Rohloff in mtb". Wow, compared to hundreds of thousands of pages for non-Rohloff. 16 pages, on one website, in the corner of the internet and we have definitive proof of Rohloff being EVERYWHERE. Sorry, 16 pages mean there are few. However, the giveback I've thrown out there was that I see Rohloff often, but only on touring bikes. Nearly 3 years in Germany, and have not seen a Rohloff outside of on the street. Not a single one at a bike park, not a single one on the trails, not even in their hometown.

1. I never said Alfine meant Rohloff's demise. However, while Rohloff was not putting anything in the pipeline, thinking they had the standard due to their tens of their customers acting as advocates or zealots, like you're presenting yourself as, other companies are putting together more refined products and alternatives and will have the better IGH before Rohloff will.

2. Since you know what Rohloff thinks, how about you speak like you're from the company, because it's obvious you're from there. Rohloff doesn't care about mtb, and that's because it's got a miniscule share of it. If it wasn't for touring bikes having disc mounts, Rohloff wouldn't have them either. That's the fact and the only reason they are still barely current.

Stone age derailleur? It might be stone age, but the fact is, IGH can't kill them off because they work. Plus weight-wise, they are a better solution. Hell, you talk about the derailleur, but if you ride FS, you need a derailleur like tensioner that hangs down just like an RD. And nowhere have I said that I'd want to stay with them, but Rohloff has not presented anything outside of reliability. Sorry, Muncie m22 and Rockcrushers are brutally strong, but shift like ass and are heavy and clunky, just like the Rohloff.

Pay for replacements? Typical Rohloff advertising. Everyone has done the math, and you're bringing the most extreme of situations, such as XTR. How about anything x7-x9/slx-lx-XT level. There is still a big weight difference there, but at the same time, the fact that one will never pay for a Rohloff with the ring, chain, and cassette changes is the reality. I almost bought one 5 years ago, and I still would not have been able to come to half of paying it off. That is fact. I use steel rings, $13 Shimano chains, and 990 cassettes and it would be closer to 12-13 years before the Rohloff paid itself off.

Oh yeah, where is the lighter speedhub that was supposed to come out 100 years ago? Even Rohloff acknowledged that the hub needed a freshening.

And again with the ratios. You can't fathom it, but again, you're a Rohloff employee, so of course you'll slag on the competition when you can't come up with something yourself, like updating your own product. Sorry, but this reeks of shilling and fear.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

carry on, unsubscribing, I'll find a thread with real information


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

slocaus said:


> What is the point of this fighting? No one is going to win. This crap does not diminish my interest in the Alfine at all. But I am really tired of your childish bickering. Take it offline, please.


Dangit, thanks for ruining my entertainment. Now I'm going to have to eat this popcorn while I look at, i dunno, porn or something.


----------



## finch2 (Nov 13, 2009)

fellsbiker said:


> Dangit, thanks for ruining my entertainment. Now I'm going to have to eat this popcorn while I look at, i dunno, porn or something.


+1  Jokes aside, and bickering aside, I still find there is interesting stuff in the arguements. So far, the rohloff is the only major working component on my bike that has not given me trouble...touch wood.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

It'll be interesting to revisit this in 12 months or so when people have some time on the Alfine 11 hubs. Until then, it's all hearsay and guesswork...


----------



## wobbem (Jul 19, 2009)

satanas said:


> It'll be interesting to revisit this in 12 months or so when people have some time on the Alfine 11 hubs. Until then, it's all hearsay and guesswork...


+1:thumbsup:


----------



## gilesjuk (Dec 13, 2007)

The 1.9 limit is probably due to helix cut gears. When I read that they were going to use helix cut gears I automatically thought that it could be a bad idea.

Gearboxes on cars are helix cut for quietness, but if your engine is kicking out a lot of torque (touring car) then you need straight cut.

What happens with helix cut is the gears may try to repel each other at high torque due to the helix shape. So the limit on this hub is largely down to the decision to use helix cut gears IMHO.


----------



## gilesjuk (Dec 13, 2007)

junktrunk said:


> Rohloffs mostly last because the vast majority are being used on commuter bikes. Go around Europe, and you will see exactly that, and never will you see one out on the trails.


That's odd, all the people checking out my Rohloff while I was off roading last sunday must have been seeing things then.

There's quite a few people here who run Alfine 8s. Our winters are very muddy and wet, a dérailleur soon seizes up or mis-shifts. Plus there's the dreaded chain suck.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

gilesjuk said:


> The 1.9 limit is probably due to helix cut gears. When I read that they were going to use helix cut gears I automatically thought that it could be a bad idea.
> 
> Gearboxes on cars are helix cut for quietness, but if your engine is kicking out a lot of torque (touring car) then you need straight cut.


I'm not so sure that's correct.

From: http://www.calverst.com/M-articles/1999-10 straight cuts and noise.htm

"Design. The original idea behind straight-cut gears (cut at 90 degrees across the gear) was really ease of manufacture. Where limited numbers of gears are made for development - be it standard or motorsport - straight-cut gears are far cheaper and easier to produce. A multitude of gear ratio options being available by 'correcting' proper tooth profiles to suit - excruciatingly difficult and not economically viable with helical teeth where very much more expensive tooling's needed. Other bonuses were reduced loads and drag inherent in the helical (cut at an angle across the gear) design - therefore leaving more power to drive the car. That straight-cuts are stronger than helical gears is a myth. Helical cut teeth run quieter as they're almost constantly engaged, also eliminating shock loads. They're stronger through better tooth root design and more load-bearing area - the helical angle increasing overall tooth length and surface area by a small but appreciable amount."

Below from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gear

"Helical gears offer a refinement over spur gears...The angled teeth engage more gradually than do spur gear teeth causing them to run more smoothly and quietly. With parallel helical gears, each pair of teeth first make contact at a single point at one side of the gear wheel; a moving curve of contact then grows gradually across the tooth face to a maximum then recedes until the teeth break contact at a single point on the opposite side. In spur gears teeth suddenly meet at a line contact across their entire width causing stress and noise. Spur gears make a characteristic whine at high speeds and can not take as much torque as helical gears. Whereas spur gears are used for low speed applications and those situations where noise control is not a problem, the use of helical gears is indicated when the application involves high speeds, large power transmission, or where noise abatement is important."


----------



## LukeSPOOK (Aug 27, 2007)

Great information there satanas.


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

bikeisbetter said:


> ...You also seem to forget about how many problems setting up cranks for Alfine non-standard chainline causes....


You're clueless. If you can't figure this out, you're a fool too. 47mm chainline is easy to configure on MTB and road cranks. Do you even work on your bike or do you just pay some lacky at the LBS?


----------



## Climbercraig66 (Oct 16, 2010)

First of all, I am a Rohloff owner, but not at all against the Shimano 11. I welcome any advances in the IGH world, and if Shimano can do it better than Rohloff, then kudos to them. An earlier poster said it best, because all we can do is speculate right now. But from what we do know:

Gear Numbers: Rohloff wins (Facts are facts: 14 is better than 11)
Gear Range: Rohloff wins (My preferred rides involve the entire 526% range, yours may not.)
Price: Shimano wins (Noboby likes how much a Rohloff costs)
Durability: Rohloff by TKO (Because we just don't know yet)
Efficiency: Rohloff by TKO (Because we just don't know, but Shimano has to have a trick up their sleeve if they want to use helical gears and BREAK EVEN with a hub using spur gears)
Design Intent: Rohloff by TKO (I am skeptical about Shimanos choice of gear cut, recommended lowest sprocket ratio and have yet to see their endorsement or what market they will push towards (city, comfort, commuter, mtn biker).

Here is my take on gears from what I have learned while working in the world of industrial machinery.

Spur gears are:
-Noisier because of the entire width of the tooth face making contact at one time 
-More efficient because of narrower tooth widths (compared to a helical gear of the same size) and because the gears are happy to roll along with each other (forward rotary motion from the chain/sprocket remains forward rotary motion throughout the gear transmission)

Helical gears are:
-Quieter because the tooth engagement is gradual i.e. 10%, 20%, 30% etc.
-Less efficient because not only is there more tooth width and thus contact surface compared to a spur gear of the same size, but because helical gears want to seperate axially, or the cut of the teeth make them want to repel or thrust away from each other during meshing (or, the forward rotary motion of the chain/sprocket becomes forward rotary motion and also side-to-side thrust motion throughout the transmission). I will be very interested to see what method Shimano chose to handle this thrust loading. Typically a thrust washer with needle or ball bearings is used to cancel or lessen the load, but if Shimano is relying on the oil bath and a simple shim washer, I would be disappointed. (But on a side note, Rohloff uses this method (oil bath and shim washer to seperate contact faces rotating at different speeds) BUT, since they use spur gears, there is no thrust load to disperse or offset anyway)
-Helical gears are also stronger than spur gears, but I think this is a moot point given the relatively low power a bicyclist is transmitting, even during the nastiest hill climb. Not to mention, we are not just talking about single gears, but moreso gears arranged in a planetary fashion, which in itself distibutes and handles load better than a single gear of either tooth profile. And the clincher: I've stripped my hub after thousands of miles of hard mountain riding, and the wear patterns on the tooth surfaces are simply not discernable, besides being clean of oil residue.







[/URL][/IMG]

So to sum this up, on a bicycle level, where efficieny level is crucial, I would choose spur gears. In your automobile, where quietness is important, and you have power to spare, helical gears are the answer. The majority of automobiles with standard transmissions use helical gears for forward drive, and a spur gear for reverse; Hence the characteristic "whine" when operating the transmission in reverse.

If Shimano choose helical gears simply for noise cancellation, as opposed to spur gears for efficiency.......... Shame on them. If that is the case, then IMO this hub was designed and engineered for and will probably be marketed to the city/comfort/commuter crowd. Not a bad thing in itself, but a bit of a bummer for the mountain crowd.

And finally:
-I am not an engineer for Shimano, but am very interested in seeing their exploded diagram of the hub
-I do not work for Rohloff, but I do love my hub
-I have seen quite a few Rohloffs out on the trail, and never one on a touring, city or commuting bike


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

Climbercraig66 said:


> Gear Numbers: Rohloff wins (Facts are facts: 14 is better than 11)itself, but a bit of a bummer for the mountain crowd.


No, no, this is incorrect. Everybody knows 11 is better! See here: 



 or here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Up_to_eleven (Triple J here in Oz even had a show called "Eleven" to celebrate this well-known fact: http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/)

To be serious, the gaps between the gears are very similar to the Rohloff - apart from the double-sized jump into bottom gear - so the range is more equivalent to 12 of the 14 Rohloff gears. No contest that the Rohloff is better, but it's just too expensive and, in Oz at least, very hard to come by unless you are one of the three shops the local importer deals with.



Climbercraig66 said:


> And finally:
> -I am not an engineer for Shimano, but am very interested in seeing their exploded diagram of the hub


You are not alone...



Climbercraig66 said:


> -I have seen quite a few Rohloffs out on the trail, and never one on a touring, city or commuting bike


FWIW, I've seen exactly one on a MTB here in Oz, but quite a few in the Himalayas on touring bikes owned by Germans.


----------



## Climbercraig66 (Oct 16, 2010)

Funny video Santanas. Looks like Spinal Tap knew what was coming all along. Although I once heard of an amp that went all the way to 14, when 11 just wasn't loud enough 

Well, I was hoping to not sound like a Rohloff sales pitch, :madman: but I think I did bring up some valid issues for debate.

I agree with you on the parts availability and limited distribution of the Rohloff, but thinking more about it, while I am more likely to see an Alfine 8 mounted to a bike in a bike shop near me, finding a bike shop with Alfine 8 service parts and shop knowledge, let alone a standalone hub for sale is probably just as much of a crapshoot than with the Rohloff. However, I do remember thumbing through a QBP book at my local shop and seeing most "consumable" Rohloff parts listed for sale, and in the rare circumstance that I did order through a bike shop, I never had problems getting what I needed. Overall, I get around the issue by relying on the reliability of the hub itself, and ordering (myself, online) in advance any "consumable" parts that I figure may need replacing in the near future. That, and I, along with most other IGH'ers it would seem, probably do most of our wrenching ourselves. Meaning that if you have an IGH problem, it is either something you can fix yourself, or it is something that warrants a trip back to the manufacturer. Seems like there is very little "middle ground" for your local bike shop to be involved in, especially since the art of dismantling or tweaking IGH's is not something that seems to be actively taught to your typical bike shop employee (apologies to those rare bike shop wrenches that DO know what an IGH is and how to work on it)

And when thinking about availability, one of the major advantages of any IGH is that you are betting on the hub not needing anything. After many years and thousands of miles, I have only replaced the shift cables, a stripped screw and gear oil. The cables are common shift cables, and I order "next years oil" immediately after doing the current years oil change. I did have to order the stripped screw replacement, and although we in the US only have 1 certified Rohloff distributor that I know of, making contact and ordering the part was not a big deal by any means. And if something were to go horribly wrong with the hub, I would feel better about only having two choices (USA or Germany) to send the hub back to. With a mega-company like Shimano, where do you even start that process?? It has been my experience, that the larger a company gets, the harder it is to track down reliable, trustworthy aftermarket service and support. You get transformed from a living breathing customer into a sticky-back RMA #.

Dammit! I'm sorry. Turned into another sales pitch, didn't it? :madman:

All in all, I'm really excited to start seeing some Shimano 11's on the trail. The reality is that Shimano needs years of cumulative real-rider abuse before we can accurately gauge the worth of this new hub, or compare it to the current market offerings. I hope it does well, and wish all you test pilots the best of luck.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

If anyone here hasn't seen "This is Spinal Tap," they should. Some of the "inspiration" can be found in the documentary about Cream (sorry I cannot remember the title) and the very long(!) Led Zeppelin concert film.

Back to the topic: I agree with you re Rohloff (by all accounts) being reliable enough not to be an issue as long as one has spare cables, etc.

Re Alfine: You're right about the chances of finding anyone in a shop with experience repairing these things being zilch.

AFAIK, nobody here in Oz has much experience with post-3 speed Shimano IGHs. Few have been sold here on bikes, and even less as parts, I'd guess. I have some experience repairing Shimano/Sturmey 3 speeds and the like, but I suspect most shops would throw up their hands in horror or contact the local Shimano agent. I'm not aware that servicing IGHs is taught to anyone, anywhere - but if it is I'd be interested to hear it! (The 1950s Sturmey service manuals are probably still the best resource for non-Rohloff hubs.)

So far, Shimano has released no useful documentation on the Alfine 11; we don't know what's inside, what parts might be available, what tools are required, there's no information on the sequence to disassemble/reassemble, special techniques required, etc, etc. Hopefully, they'll get around to releasing service info before the hub is superseded and parts become unavailable.


----------



## Climbercraig66 (Oct 16, 2010)

satanas said:


> So far, Shimano has released no useful documentation on the Alfine 11; we don't know what's inside, what parts might be available, what tools are required, there's no information on the sequence to disassemble/reassemble, special techniques required, etc, etc. Hopefully, they'll get around to releasing service info before the hub is superseded and parts become unavailable.


To be fair, even the Rohloff manual only instructs how to remove the gear mechanism from the hub shell, and anything beyond that equals a voided warranty (with good reason). Everything from that point on is only learned from like-minded dismantlers that share information.

Never the less, I found this lack of info for the Shimano 11 to be odd and annoying as well. I can't even find much on their website. As far as bicycle components go, this seems like a pretty major deal for Shimano, and I'm surpised they aren't advertising more through bike magazines or their website. If I was in charge over there, I'd have all shorts of pop-ups, flash animations and demos galore on the website. It's almost like THEY don't even know what market they are going to target.

Attention: Shimano Marketing and Technical Publications Employees:

YOU'RE FIRED!


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

Rohloff hubs are known to be reliable, and to need virtually no servicing apart from oil changes - like old Sturmey 3 speeds - so the lack of service info isn't such a problem. Also, my impression is that they've been around long enough that there's stuff out there on the net.

The Alfine 11 speed hub is as yet an unknown quantity, and Shimano's recent IGHs have used grease lubrication, but this one runs on oil. Shimano have prior experience with oil with their old 3 speed hubs, but these have been extinct for quite some time and, presumably, Shimano had some issues or wouldn't have switched to grease for the Nexus/Alfine series. (Maybe the hubs didn't always make it to the end of the warranty period without being oiled?)

Seems to me that lots of people would potentially be interested in the Alfine 11 if they knew about it and could afford it:
1. technophobes 
2. casual riders
3. off-roaders
4. remote area tourers

I expect Shimano will sell lots of them in Northern Europe, but may not bother telling the rest of the world they exist. Presumably, there's somewhere in Germany/Netherlands, etc where they can be serviced.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

3. off-roaders - You have no idea. Well maybe you do but, there is HUGE demand in the mountain bike world, for an internal hub that is durable enough for MTB use, has reasonable range, and reasonable price (sub $1000). I'd say 90% of the riders I see are only riding 2x9 or 1x9 setups anyway. And EVERYBODY hates their derailers. They're a never-ending cause of headaches. Even people who know how to get them dialed in just right, one 5 foot drop and they're out of whack again. I know I already said it in this thread but, if this hub is off road capable, it could be HUGE off road.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

^ Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that MTBers would be less interested than cyclophobes. I just typed them in the order they sprang to mind, remembering that so far Shimano marketing has aimed the Nexus/Alfine hubs at casual riders, not us. MTB take up has happened with zero encouragement from Shimano. I personally would also really like to avoid derailleurs for MTB and non-first-world touring use. I'm not too worried about 5 foot+ drops though as I'm more a "keep the rubber-side down" type of person.


----------



## wadester (Sep 28, 2005)

*A comment on gear efficiency*



Climbercraig66 said:


> First of all, I am a Rohloff owner, but not at all against the Shimano 11.
> Here is my take on gears from what I have learned while working in the world of industrial machinery.
> 
> Spur gears are:
> ...


First, you have to realize that all gears are cams - check out the animation here: http://science.howstuffworks.com/transport/engines-equipment/gear8.htm Cut straight, helical or hypoid, they rub and slide as they engage. A quote from the link: "To reduce the noise and stress in the gears, most of the gears in your car are helical. "

Spur gears are louder and cheaper - and have only a small amount of side loading (incidental only). Stronger thrust bearings add weight and cost, along with the cost of cutting helical teeth.

From http://www.roymech.co.uk/Useful_Tables/Drive/Gear_Efficiency.html

A simple table is provided below showing the efficiencies of various gear types. These efficiencies related to tooth friction losses only for single tooth meshes. For drive trains the efficiencies or each mesh in the line is multiplied together ( 2 gears pairs of 90% efficiency result in a gear train efficiency of 81%.

Spur 98-99%
Helical 98-99%
Double Helical 98-99%
Bevel 98-99%
Worm 20-98%
Crossed Helical 70-98%


----------



## Climbercraig66 (Oct 16, 2010)

I don't buy it. When you are transmitting torque through a set of axially unrestrained helical gears, and they want to slide apart from each other, that is not efficient, and I don't know how that can be argued against.


----------



## wadester (Sep 28, 2005)

Climbercraig66 said:


> I don't buy it. When you are transmitting torque through a set of axially unrestrained helical gears, and they want to slide apart from each other, that is not efficient, and I don't know how that can be argued against.


This does not exist. If you don't provide for side load (thrust) even the spur gears will walk apart.

Efficiencies are listed as 98-99% for all. Bad design/bad manufacture is probably the cause for the "low" 98% number.


----------



## Climbercraig66 (Oct 16, 2010)

Still not convinced. :nono:

My favorite, that says it all:
http://www.brighthub.com/engineering/mechanical/articles/33535.aspx

To quote your own source, from a different page:

http://science.howstuffworks.com/transport/engines-equipment/gear3.htm

Or, wiki "thrust bearing" and read this:

"Thrust bearings are used in cars because the forward gears in modern car gearboxes use helical gears which, while aiding in smoothness and noise reduction, cause axial forces that need to be dealt with. André Citroën invented a double helical gear which neutralized the thrust caused by normal helical gears."

Or, the first paragraph here:
http://www.ehow.com/how_6513778_calculate-thrust-load-helical-gear.html

Or here:
http://www.rushgears.com/Gear_Types/helicalGears.php

And here:
http://www.engineersedge.com/gears/gear_types.htm

I still don't understand where you are coming from.  
I'm not trying to be a jerk or know-it-all, but your gear summaries simply don't make much sense. If after exploring the above, you still disagree, then we may just have to agree to disagree.


----------



## wobbem (Jul 19, 2009)

fellsbiker said:


> 3. off-roaders - You have no idea. Well maybe you do but, there is HUGE demand in the mountain bike world, for an internal hub that is durable enough for MTB use, has reasonable range, and reasonable price (sub $1000). I'd say 90% of the riders I see are only riding 2x9 or 1x9 setups anyway. And EVERYBODY hates their derailers. They're a never-ending cause of headaches. Even people who know how to get them dialed in just right, one 5 foot drop and they're out of whack again. I know I already said it in this thread but, if this hub is off road capable, it could be HUGE off road.


+1:thumbsup: 
Rode today in the mud & slosh, new chain, new chain ring, same old sh*tty chain suck. IF the Alfine works it WILL be huge in the MTB world.......... I' d buy shares now.


----------



## wadester (Sep 28, 2005)

Climbercraig66 said:


> Still not convinced. :nono:
> 
> I still don't understand where you are coming from.
> I'm not trying to be a jerk or know-it-all, but your gear summaries simply don't make much sense. If after exploring the above, you still disagree, then we may just have to agree to disagree.


I think we've got a bit of this going:









All things have trade-offs. I'm getting flashbacks to rolling resistance discussions where the slower turning speed of the hub was given as an advantage to taller wheels. A matter of degree, I think.

Let me qoute your original statement:



Climbercraig66 said:


> First of all, I am a Rohloff owner, but not at all against the Shimano 11. I welcome any advances in the IGH world, and if Shimano can do it better than Rohloff, then kudos to them. An earlier poster said it best, because all we can do is speculate right now.


I am in complete agreement with this. 'Nuff said. I think I'll join Slocaus in unsubscribe land.


----------



## Climbercraig66 (Oct 16, 2010)

wadester said:


> I think we've got a bit of this going:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


LOL! Thank you for the good laugh. That's a funny picture and I'll eat my humble pie now. So we agree to disagree. Big deal. Don't unsubscribe on account of me. Now I feel like a cyber bully. C'mon dude, you are "Dr Gadget" and you have a science slogan for your signature. I did not mean to get your helical gears in a bind, but if I did, I'm sorry. 
Lets keep rolling forward........... :thumbsup:


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

Rather than all this speculation, we should plan an "attack" on Shimano, meaning we should all inundate them with questions about this hub. Force them to release more info, so we can stop speculating and start planning for next season. 

Yes No?

Unless anyone here is an 'in', or has an 'in' with Shimano? If so, fork over the details!


----------



## irrah (Dec 18, 2008)

I found this picture to my hard drive. I dont know is it final product or prototype.


----------



## Climbercraig66 (Oct 16, 2010)

Awesome! Thanks for sharing the pic. 

Interesting to see that only 1 side (drive side?) seems to have the helical gears.


----------



## LukeSPOOK (Aug 27, 2007)

Good picture.
Looks like a lot of solid metal in there - no plastic to be seen.


----------



## UN-COG-KNEE-TOE (Mar 7, 2008)

*8 Speed Hub?*



irrah said:


> I found this picture to my hard drive. I dont know is it final product or prototype.


Isn't this a cross section of the 8 speed Alfine?


----------



## LukeSPOOK (Aug 27, 2007)

The picture shows a step about 2/3 along the hub which looks like the step on the Alfine 11.


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

Yeah it's definitely an 11, you can see from the external body shape.


----------



## john_dalhart (Nov 6, 2009)

I'm less interested in the spur/helical thing and more interested in ~how~ Shimano is creating the ratios in the A-11.

Shimano has weighted smoothness and quiet operation over efficiency in the design/construction of their IGHs to date. Available information would indicate the silky Nexus 7 hub, with its dual stage compound 3-4-5 ratios, has industry worst efficiency.

This is a legitimate design choice, especially for their comfort bike parts groups (Nexus and Alfine). It probably wouldn't be the design weighting they'd use for Dura-Ace or XTR.

Like the Nexus 7, published info to-date says the A-11 has no unity (direct drive) ratio. The 5th gear's 1/.995 ratio is almost certainly created by dual stage compounding. It will be interesting to see how the Shimano engineers create all those other even-step ratios and how much dual- and triple stage compounding they resort to.

Rohloff has some interesting info/videos out about the dual and triple stage compounding their hub uses. AFAIK no SRAM IGHs use any dual or triple stage compounding.

JD


----------



## john_dalhart (Nov 6, 2009)

wadester said:


> A simple table is provided below showing the efficiencies of various gear types.


Actually, that table indicates the _maximum_ efficiency that might be achieved. There are many other variables - accuracy of tooth profiles, accuracy of meshing geometry, materials used, bearings used, surface finish, lubrication, ratio, etc. It all takes money.

On the other side of the balance is how much the consumer will pay and what kind of maintenance the IGH will receive.

It would be possible to design an IGH that was both expensive and inefficient (but - why bother?) Unfortunately, it's functionally impossible to produce an IGH that is both relatively inexpensive and efficient.

JD


----------



## irrah (Dec 18, 2008)

Paco Loco said:


> Yeah it's definitely an 11, you can see from the external body shape.


Yes, and helical gears .


----------



## itsdoable (Jan 6, 2004)

irrah said:


>


Something is not right with this cut-out, there are planetary gears that are not meshing with anything (unless I can't see the ring gears) and the 2 middle sun gears are not meshing with any gear. It looks like the model was miss-assembled.


----------



## Scott H. (Jun 4, 2010)

bsdc said:


> Well, here's my message to Haro:
> . . . If you are looking for a niche, being the first on the block with a production FS SS frame would really make Haro a standout, and I think you'd sell quite a few . . .


What about the Kona Bass?


----------



## bsdc (May 1, 2006)

Scott H. said:


> What about the Kona Bass?


Nice bike, but it's a "slope style, dirt jumping bike" 26er. I'm looking for more of a cross-country, trail, 29er.

I just picked up a Milk Money. It should arive in the next day or two. I'll run it single speed for a while and see how that goes. An Alfine 11 will probably find its way onto that bike as soon as I can get my hands on one.


----------



## zombinate (Apr 27, 2009)

The GT sensor 29 would likely work as the chainlength would be held in place by their linkage system.


----------



## GTR-33 (Sep 25, 2008)

bikeisbetter said:


> Well, knowing the gear ratios and the recommended input ratio, we can safely assume that Alfine 11 is an utter disappointment from the perspective of what has been expected here.
> Let's look at speeds achieved at specific gears, assuming 28/29 inch wheel size and 70 rpm cadence, the one most frequently observed.
> 
> Alfine 8
> ...


I'm completely ignorant to what this information displays. Well actually I kind of get it but I don't really understand why the A11 is worse or better than the Rohloff for mountainbiking. The Rohloff has more granny and less top end?

How do both the Rohloff and the Alfine compare to a traditional drivetrain? Say a 32 chainring and a 11-34 cassette (11,13,15,17,20,23,26,30,34)?


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

GTR-33 said:


> I'm completely ignorant to what this information displays. Well actually I kind of get it but I don't really understand why the A11 is worse or better than the Rohloff for mountainbiking. The Rohloff has more granny and less top end?
> 
> How do both the Rohloff and the Alfine compare to a traditional drivetrain? Say a 32 chainring and a 11-34 cassette (11,13,15,17,20,23,26,30,34)?


 Check my pdf i posed further back. I don't list speeds at a given RPMs, just regular overall gear ratios of the alfine 11 vs a 3x9 setup. They really match up pretty well, except that the 11 apparently requires a 1.9:1 input, not something more reasonable like a 1.6:1


----------



## GTR-33 (Sep 25, 2008)

Well... After more reading I understand it. I found the PDF you made. I also read the tech doc. for the Alfine 11 hub. It recommends that you use a 1.9 ratio but says nothing about requiring it. I think I'll call Shimano tech and ask. Shimano usually isn't very vauge about what will and will not void the warranty and/or break components. 

Everyone is assuming the recommendation of 1.9 is a preventive measure to protect the hub from damage. I don't see it referenced anywhere else, not that there is much literature on this product. As far fetched as it may be it could simply be a recommendation for whomever is building the bike to help pick an appropriate gear combination for the most common use of the hub; Touring. 

It was my understanding that this hub was being specifically targeted to the mountain bike audience.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

GTR-33 said:


> Well... After more reading I understand it. I found the PDF you made. I also read the tech doc. for the Alfine 11 hub. It recommends that you use a 1.9 ratio but says nothing about requiring it. I think I'll call Shimano tech and ask. Shimano usually isn't very vauge about what will and will not void the warranty and/or break components.
> 
> Everyone is assuming the recommendation of 1.9 is a preventive measure to protect the hub from damage. I don't see it referenced anywhere else, not that there is much literature on this product. As far fetched as it may be it could simply be a recommendation for whomever is building the bike to help pick an appropriate gear combination for the most common use of the hub; Touring.
> 
> It was my understanding that this hub was being specifically targeted to the mountain bike audience.


^^^ i hope all of that is correct, let us know what you hear.

Also I did hear one anecdote that one guy already got one of these hubs set up on his bike and road it on Highland Mountain and blew it up. I was assured it was the 11 speed, but the story went through a few people to get to me, so I wonder if it was the old 8 speed.


----------



## john_dalhart (Nov 6, 2009)

GTR-33 said:


> ...for the most common use of the hub; Touring.
> 
> It was my understanding that this hub was being specifically targeted to the mountain bike audience.


Touring? Mountain biking? _Alfine_ is Shimano's top comfort bike parts group.

I certainly have no idea what was going through the inscrutable mind of Shimano as they planned and designed this product, and a lot of different kinds of cyclists are excited by the possibilities of this IGH, but the official marketing is for comfort bikes.


----------



## GTR-33 (Sep 25, 2008)

john_dalhart said:


> Touring? Mountain biking? _Alfine_ is Shimano's top comfort bike parts group.


I know how Alfine 8 is marketed in the US. Fortunately for some of us the American bike market isn't the only market in the world.

The Alfine 11 as far as I know was intended as a cheaper competitor to Rolhoff. Which is used mostly for touring and commuting. At 800 USD retail for the hub alone, comfort bikes is likely not the market for this. How many comfort bikes retail for over $1500?


----------



## UN-COG-KNEE-TOE (Mar 7, 2008)

*Shimano IGH's*



GTR-33 said:


> I know how Alfine 8 is marketed in the US. Fortunately for some of us the American bike market isn't the only market in the world.
> 
> The Alfine 11 as far as I know was intended as a cheaper competitor to Rolhoff. Which is used mostly for touring and commuting. At 800 USD retail for the hub alone, comfort bikes is likely not the market for this. How many comfort bikes retail for over $1500?


I am not in the Bicycle business nor do i understand the design and marketing strategies utilized by the big world companies, but i do ride and enjoy some IGH equipped bikes, which i use for both Cruising and Mountain biking.
I've been reading and following many of the posts about the long awaited Alfine 11. It seems to me that Shimano has Never stated their IGH's are intended for anything but comfort/cruising bikes, so it appear that all the Rohloff/Alfine MTB debates originated here on the forum. 
I would imagine that if Shimano was "AFTER" the Rohloff market, they would have designed the new Alfine 11 quite differently. The 1st and most basic change might have been Chain-line placement to be more compatible with Mountain bike frames. It appears that Alfine is NOT intended to compete in any market against Rohloff, they seem to each have a place in the world, and since there are very few Rohloff Hubs on Cruiser bikes here in the US, which is understandable as the hubs costs more than most fully assembled cruiser bikes, I feel there are different target Markets and buyer Demographics as well.
I installed an Alfine 8 onto a Mountain Bike Frame to use as my own Cruiser, and i quickly learned that it had very severe Chainring Size and Placement issues. I was able to align it well enough for my intended usage, but i quickly discovered the limitations, adopting it to be used with a Double or Triple Chainring systems might not be possible due to the extreme INSIDE location of the REAR COG. Even In a Single Chainring application, i was severely limited in my choices, the Chain Ring has to mount on the INSIDE position of most External BB cranks (which are the dominant style now), and you quickly discover that the inside position Might handle something UP to 32t, but it is all dependent on your Frames' Chain Stay Clearance.
I own 3 IGH bikes, but i do not see Shimano or Rohloff ever overtaking the other in their respective targeted markets. I would imagine dominating the Comfort Bike market is much more important to Shimano as the MTB industry (which they do already own) has not really embraced IGH's for that usage. I use a Rohloff for Mountain Biking and i prefer it, but understandably, it is not the choice most MTB riders would make, we must be a very small niche market, and that is likely why Shimano is not stepping up to MTB use for IGH's, maybe SRAM will, but for now, sadly, for "Intended" Mountain bike usage, it is Roholff or Derailleurs as i see it. I know a few have cleverly adopted Alfine for MTB use, and it can work, the hub seems durable enough based on those few riders testimonies, but as i see it, the issues are more about alignment and fitting. Just my .02


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

Lots of speculation in this thread about what the market "really" is for this hub. Lets not forget shimano's youtube 'sneak peak' of this hub. It's really the only thing shimano has put out about this hub. And they do specifically and repeatedly say how they expect this hub to have a very broad appeal including mountain bikes. And including being OEM on mountain bikes. So I wouldn't write this hub off so soon.


----------



## john_dalhart (Nov 6, 2009)

GTR-33 said:


> I know how Alfine 8 is marketed in the US.


Well, over on Shimano EU, the Alfine 8 & 11 are listed under "City and Comfort".

This certainly doesn't preclude us from using them for any type of cycling we darn well please, it's just Shimano's official marketing position.


----------



## GTR-33 (Sep 25, 2008)

john_dalhart said:


> it's just Shimano's official marketing position.


No it isn't. Shimano on multiple occasions through both industry insider information as well as their own public disclosure have said multiple times that they EXPECT that the A11 will be used for Trekking/Touring and Mountain bikes. I was told once by a Shimano Tech Rep that the A11 will be on an OEM mountain bike.

Now the hub may have been optimized for use on comfort bikes, the price for the system alone puts it well above comfort bike prices. I've seen the commercial cost for it and it isn't cheap. No one is arguing that it might not be the most robust mountain bike hub on the market. There obviously has to be compromises in the product development based on it's use.

Considering chainline. Not really as big a deal as people seem to be making it. The person most likely to want to use this mountain biking is probably already running 1X9 or 1X10. If you use an MRP chain keeper or any other chain keeper you have to space it back to about 48mm. You aren't supposed to run any IGH with more than one chainring. The Alfine 8 chainline is either 42mm or 47mm (46.8mm IIRC). A11 is supposed to be the same. XT cranks are 50mm to the middle chainring.


UN-COG-KNEE-TOE said:


> Even In a Single Chainring application, i was severely limited in my choices, the Chain Ring has to mount on the INSIDE position of most External BB cranks (which are the dominant style now), and you quickly discover that the inside position Might handle something UP to 32t, but it is all dependent on your Frames' Chain Stay Clearance.


What kind of bike? I have had 32-36 spaced in 2mm with an MRP 1.X on several different bikes with room for even bigger on several different MTB cranks from several different companies. All in the middle position on a triple crank.

34t 2010 Fisher Superfly M960 XTR 
33t 2009 Trek 8500 M770 XT
36t 2008 Salsa Mamasita M770 XT
33t 2009 Trek Fuel EX M580 LX
32t 2008 Giant Rincon Truvativ Stylo
33t 2007 GT Peace Truvativ Stylo
35t 2010 Fisher Superfly Truvativ Noir 
34t 2009 Siren Song M970 XTR
33t 2008 Fisher Ferrous Bontrager RXL (Truvativ)
34t 2009 Salsa Dos Niner M770 XT

These aren't all mine obviously, some are friends that wanted to try it.


----------



## BrunoBB (Mar 12, 2009)

Is Alfine 11 already for sale in US ?


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

UN-COG-KNEE-TOE said:


> ....i quickly discovered the limitations, adopting it to be used with a Double or Triple Chainring systems might not be possible due to the extreme INSIDE location of the REAR COG....Just my .02


You get what ya pay for! If you can't deal with a 47mm chainline and adapt your cranks, I suggest you find a good LBS and have them help you. I'm running an Alfine on two bikes and a Nexus 8 on another. Square taper, Shimano LX and FSA single speed cranks. no issues, chainline within 1mm of 47mm.


----------



## kosmo (Oct 27, 2004)

fellsbiker said:


> Lots of speculation in this thread about what the market "really" is for this hub. Lets not forget shimano's youtube 'sneak peak' of this hub. It's really the only thing shimano has put out about this hub. And they do specifically and repeatedly say how they expect this hub to have a very broad appeal including mountain bikes. And including being OEM on mountain bikes. So I wouldn't write this hub off so soon.


THAT is good to hear, because I'm pretty sure that with the previous Alfine, Shimano all but shouted to the world that it was NOT designed for mtb use?

This would just friggin rock on the rigid bike. No sound from anything!

I'll check back after Christmas. Should be some real, hard info trickling in by then.


----------



## valetz (Jul 5, 2010)

QBP stock date has moved up to Nov 19th
(Yes, that's right, next Fri, I'm stoked!)


----------



## john_dalhart (Nov 6, 2009)

valetz said:


> QBP stock date has moved up to Nov 19th


In the meanwhile, Harris Cyclery has begun shipping them out to retail customers.


----------



## valetz (Jul 5, 2010)

Cool! That means I can expect them to hit or exceed the stock date.

My LBS (Shockspital) already has my rim (Large Marge,) and I live in Minneapolis so I'll have it on my bike the day they stock (assuming nothing goes wrong.)


----------



## bikecop (May 20, 2004)

11 speeds yes
thumb shifters no

anybody make a grip shift that'll work with it?


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

bikecop said:


> anybody make a grip shift that'll work with it?


Nope. Not yet anyway.


----------



## irrah (Dec 18, 2008)

My hub arrived on Friday.


----------



## aosty (Jan 7, 2004)

Forget the hub... tell us more about the truing stand. 



irrah said:


> My hub arrived on Friday.


----------



## irrah (Dec 18, 2008)

aosty said:


> Forget the hub... tell us more about the truing stand.


Diy Hi-Tech


----------



## aosty (Jan 7, 2004)

irrah said:


> Diy Hi-Tech


I see that :thumbsup:

- Is it fixed at 135mm axle width?

- Are the doodads held by magnets?

- Nice screwdriver.


----------



## valetz (Jul 5, 2010)

What was in the box for the rotor?
(Do I need to get a 6 bolt to centerlock adapter from problem solvers?)

thx


----------



## merlinm (Feb 12, 2010)

Found a review (of sorts) of a production bike sporting an alfine 11 :-D

http://road.cc/content/news/26886-just-charge-mixer-11


----------



## fokof (Apr 24, 2006)

irrah said:


> My hub arrived on Friday.


Have you weighted the hub before mounting it ?


----------



## irrah (Dec 18, 2008)

valetz said:


> Do I need to get a 6 bolt to centerlock adapter from problem solvers ?


Yes, or Shimano Centerlock Adapter for 6 Bolt Rotor.


----------



## irrah (Dec 18, 2008)

aosty said:


> I see that :thumbsup:
> 
> - Is it fixed at 135mm axle width?
> 
> ...


Yes, it is very fixed 135mm. (50x30x3 RHS-steel tube).
But if I truing front wheel I only use the other side of the stand.

And yes, hard-drive magnets.


----------



## irrah (Dec 18, 2008)

fokof said:


> Have you weighted the hub before mounting it ?


Only in my hand, I do not feel any difference between the old 8-speed and new 11-speed hub.


----------



## ulcerpentacidis (Sep 27, 2006)

Scott H. said:


> What about the Kona Bass?


I've got a large 08 model with an Alfine 8, its fantastic.

A Kona A would work as well.


----------



## jasevr4 (Feb 23, 2005)

This may be a stupid question, but can the trigger shifter be widened enough to slide it up a set of drop bars to the top? Or is it simply not going to happen?


----------



## dru (Sep 4, 2006)

Not a stupid question at all. I did that exact thing on my 8 sp.

My Alfine 8 speed hub does dual duty on my El mariachi. In mountain guise I run flat bars with the shifter and Xtr calipers/levers. In road guise I run drop bars, drop V levers, bb7 calipers, and another alfine shifter that I've enlarged to fit.

The enlarging takes quite a bit of filing/dremelling. You are removing ~1.5 mm from the clamp I.D. You'll get metal filings into the shifter bits if you don't wrap it up really good with tape or plastic. I wrapped mine up half-a$$ed and got filings inside it.

Nevertheless, it works just fine. I have mine shoved 'round to the flats on top.

Drew


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

First review of the Alfine 11 here:

http://road.cc/node/27971


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

Interesting article. I'm not clear on what this means:


> it uses similar non-turn washers as the eight-speed unit and doesn't require any special dropouts.


 ? Also it's odd that they'd take all that time to write that long article, and not bother to take more pics, like some from the OTHER side of the hub.


----------



## aosty (Jan 7, 2004)

To counter axle/hub spin, it uses slightly oblong/elongated tabbed washers that are compatible with regular dropouts. SRAM (and other hubs) use them too... they work but are not as solid as the deep Rohloff dropouts.



fellsbiker said:


> Interesting article. I'm not clear on what this means:
> 
> 
> > it uses similar non-turn washers as the eight-speed unit and doesn't require any special dropouts.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

aosty said:


> To counter axle/hub spin, it uses slightly oblong/elongated tabbed washers that are compatible with regular dropouts. SRAM (and other hubs) use them too... they work but are not as solid as the deep Rohloff dropouts.


Yeah that seems like that would just split your dropouts right off. They don't have an adapter that attaches to your caliper mounts?


----------



## aosty (Jan 7, 2004)

fellsbiker said:


> Yeah that seems like that would just split your dropouts right off. They don't have an adapter that attaches to your caliper mounts?


It's not ideal but sufficient.

Brake caliper adapters for Rohloff hubs have been blamed for contributing to frame failures.

Neither is ideal versus purpose built dropouts.

YMMV


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

The further away from the center of rotation, the more leverage you have. Trying to stop axle rotation right at the axle seems crazy to me. I can't imagine my dropouts can survive that while I'm muscling up steep hills.


----------



## aosty (Jan 7, 2004)

fellsbiker said:


> The further away from the center of rotation, the more leverage you have. Trying to stop axle rotation right at the axle seems crazy to me. I can't imagine my dropouts can survive that while I'm muscling up steep hills.


I don't disagree with you.


----------



## bikeny (Feb 26, 2004)

fellsbiker said:


> The further away from the center of rotation, the more leverage you have. Trying to stop axle rotation right at the axle seems crazy to me. I can't imagine my dropouts can survive that while I'm muscling up steep hills.


The non-turn washers works just fine. Every internal gear hub except the Rohloff uses them. Most of the force is held just by the tightening of the axle nuts. I have never even seen a mark inside the dropouts from my Alfine 8, and I am running a very low 28tx24t gear ratio!

Mark


----------



## itsdoable (Jan 6, 2004)

Non-turn washers have been in use for a century, and seem to work fine, even on a tandem.

Rohloff does not use them because their hub puts a considerably larger torque on the axle, enough to split open most track mounts.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

:-/ Well if my dropouts split off, I hope Shimano will buy me a new rear triangle.


----------



## jasevr4 (Feb 23, 2005)

dru said:


> Not a stupid question at all. I did that exact thing on my 8 sp.
> 
> My Alfine 8 speed hub does dual duty on my El mariachi. In mountain guise I run flat bars with the shifter and Xtr calipers/levers. In road guise I run drop bars, drop V levers, bb7 calipers, and another alfine shifter that I've enlarged to fit.
> 
> ...


Thanks for taking the time to let me know Drew. I do like to do a little bit of custom work from time to time! :thumbsup:


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

So what is the bottom line - with the huge price jump, are these really worth the extra dough from the 8 speed? I'm thinking of putting one on my commuter bike and don't want to spend the extra cashola unless it's really worth it.


----------



## bsdc (May 1, 2006)

gticlay said:


> So what is the bottom line - with the huge price jump, are these really worth the extra dough from the 8 speed? I'm thinking of putting one on my commuter bike and don't want to spend the extra cashola unless it's really worth it.


I think the bottom line is it's not probably worth it for a commuter bike.


----------



## dru (Sep 4, 2006)

I agree to a point, the extra coin isn't worth it if you are updating. A new build would swing me towards the 11. 

Having used the 8 on the road with club rides in a medium fast group the Alfine held up reasonably OK aside from the big gaps between gears. Of course the weight and inefficiency is the biggest handicap compared to a derailleur system.

For offroad, the Alfine 8 is somewhat limited in range. The 11 would be a much better choice (as long as it holds up using the primary ratios mountain bikers need)

Drew


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

I just decided to email shimano and try to get a solid answer about the 1.9 input ratio. The docs don't say "minimum", they say "recommended". Yeah so you can't email shimano. I guess I'll write them a letter?


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

I emailed the uk distributor about it some time ago and got no reply...


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

bsdc said:


> I think the bottom line is it's not probably worth it for a commuter bike.


The Alfine/Nexus 8's weak point on the road is the huge step (25%) on the 5-6 shift. A couple cheap options that are better suited for the road are the Shimano Nexus 7, the SRAM Spectro S7 and the SRAM i-Motion 9 (i-M9 is on sale if you look). These three hubs give a decent range and evenly spaced steps less than 20% each.

I don't mind the range and steps on my Alfine when I'm off-road, just on the street. I don't feel any urge to upgrade to the Alfine 11 right now, I'm sitting back and letting someone else be the innovator.


----------



## BrunoBB (Mar 12, 2009)

*Alfine 11 arriving*

I am awaiting the arrival of my Alfine 11. I bought it at Harris and a friend is bringing it to Brazil. I'll meet her on December 21 so I'll probably use the Alfine-11 only after Christmas. I'll post my impressions as soon as possible.


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

Road.cc just updated their review to give the actual weight of the hub itself... turns out it weighs 1744g straight out of the box.

That's quite a bit more than the claimed 1590g. I'm sure that weight is supposedly the dry weight, but I doubt there is 154g of oil in there.

http://road.cc/content/review/27971-shimano-alfine-11-hub-and-shifter


----------



## bikerjay (Sep 16, 2007)

I just got a stock alert from QBP. They had alfine 11s.From the time i saw the stock alert to when i logged into QBP they were all sold. This thing is taking off already. I am not ready to buy one yet but I am really excited about the existence of this hub.


----------



## inzane (Jun 20, 2006)

Paco Loco said:


> Road.cc just updated their review to give the actual weight of the hub itself... turns out it weighs 1744g straight out of the box.
> 
> That's quite a bit more than the claimed 1590g. I'm sure that weight is supposedly the dry weight, but I doubt there is 154g of oil in there.
> 
> http://road.cc/content/review/27971-shimano-alfine-11-hub-and-shifter


Bike and component manufacturers obviously buy scales with a rather different calibration to people in the normal world


----------



## fokof (Apr 24, 2006)

Paco Loco said:


> Road.cc just updated their review to give the actual weight of the hub itself... turns out it weighs 1744g straight out of the box.
> 
> That's quite a bit more than the claimed 1590g. I'm sure that weight is supposedly the dry weight, but I doubt there is 154g of oil in there.
> 
> http://road.cc/content/review/27971-shimano-alfine-11-hub-and-shifter


I've posted an interesting page from a stores , they weighted the Alfine 11 and the rolhoff

 Reply #17


----------



## Storm Rider (Dec 18, 2010)

*Got my Al-fee-Nay 11 speed hub !*

Greetings y'all. I am new around here, but I am not new to MTB. I have been riding MTB since 1984. My screen name comes from the bike I ride, not the weather. I ride a Storm Cycles bike, which I would classify as an all-mountain bike. It has 6" of rear travel from a Fox Vanilla RC coil shock, and 5.5" 140mm of front travel from a Fox Vanilla coil fork. The suspension is awesome, but the bike is a bit on the heavy side.

Now to the point. My Al-fee-Nay 11 speed hub is in. Woohoo! I rode the A11 at Interbike, and I liked it. I have been researching like mad trying to figure out all of the components I need to upgrade my bike for this hub, and to replace all of the worn out parts. I have always hated derailleurs, and I hope this hub will be the answer to my dreams.

The Shimano guys at Interbike were recommending against using it for MTB, claiming they were blowing them up in testing, but there are a lot of guys on here who are successfully using A8, even with low gears. Since I am only 160 lbs, and not a masher, I think I can get away with a low gear ratio. I have to have my granny to climb the hills around here, so I decided to go with 24/20, which is 1.2:1. With the 1.2:1, I will have all the low gears I need for climbing, and I will only spin out on fast downhills, which is ok with me. That may seem crazy low to some of you, but I am willing to try it.

I also considered 30/22, 1.26:1, but it is difficult to get a 30T middle ring, and the chainline of 50mm is hard to match to the A11 41.8mm chainline. With the 50mm chainline of external bearing cranks, it puts the inner ring at 42.2mm, which is near perfect CL. I am using a Salsa 24T 64 BCD chainring.

I did a lot of calculations to figure out exactly what gears I wanted. The following chart shows three Alfine 11 gear ratios of 24/20, 30/22 and 32/23 in the yellow colors, and the common 22-32-44 chainrings with 11-32 cassette in blue.


----------



## Storm Rider (Dec 18, 2010)

If anyone has any comments or criticism, let me hear it now. I will be ordering the remaining parts any day now. I probably won't be able to finish building it for at least a week or two, while I wait for parts to come in. Hopefully the trails here in SoCal will be dry by then! I will post a ride review asap.


----------



## s-keeper (Oct 12, 2010)

Nice . Tell us how you get on. I've got a Flow rim here all waiting to be laced to an Alfine 11, but since I want a very low ratio too, I'll wait for a couple of months so people can confirm reliability .

Here's a 30t 64bcd chainring I've used for the last 9 months with an Alfine 8. Its 4mm thick and looks CNCed, so its remarkably cheap:

http://www.sjscycles.co.uk/sjsc-64-mm-pcd-4-arm-alloy-inner-chainring-30t-black-with-silver-teeth-prod3941/


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

It sucks that shimano is now saying don't use it for mountain biking, when they kept saying "oem on mountain bikes" when they were hyping it.

That said, your ratio is SO low man! I mean you're going with an even lower first gear than what you get with a 27 speed! I plan on going with 32/20 with an alfine, which will be like losing my two lowest gears. I do plenty of hill climbing, and I should be fine with that, with all but the most crazy insane hills. But 24/20 . . That is just SO low!


----------



## finch2 (Nov 13, 2009)

Storm Rider said:


> If anyone has any comments or criticism, let me hear it now. I will be ordering the remaining parts any day now. I probably won't be able to finish building it for at least a week or two, while I wait for parts to come in. Hopefully the trails here in SoCal will be dry by then! I will post a ride review asap.


if you are looking for a30t middle, check out "widget". Maybe if you talk to them they could sort out a granny option for you. The ring mounts on the granny I think.


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

Storm Rider said:


> ...the A11 41.8mm chainline....


If you flip the sprocket over, the CL is ~47mm.


----------



## Storm Rider (Dec 18, 2010)

This 30T inner 64BCD would be a better option for me, with a 22T cog. It looks like I could easily clear my chainstay with a 30T inner, and I would prefer the larger sprockets and slightly higher 1.26:1 ratio. Does anyone know if I can get this in the US, or do I have to order from England?



s-keeper said:


> Here's a 30t 64bcd chainring I've used for the last 9 months with an Alfine 8. Its 4mm thick and looks CNCed, so its remarkably cheap:
> 
> http://www.sjscycles.co.uk/sjsc-64-mm-pcd-4-arm-alloy-inner-chainring-30t-black-with-silver-teeth-prod3941/


----------



## Storm Rider (Dec 18, 2010)

The Widgit 30T 64BCD is a good looking chainring, but it is dished quite a bit, like half way between inner and middle, and the price is WAY more than I would pay. $110 bare chain ring, and $139 with guides. 
AUD $$$ = USD $$$ right now. Widgit 30T 64BCD



finch2 said:


> if you are looking for a30t middle, check out "widget". Maybe if you talk to them they could sort out a granny option for you. The ring mounts on the granny I think.


----------



## Storm Rider (Dec 18, 2010)

I just found another 30T 64BCD chainring, but it is made by French company Specialties TA. Apparently it would cost around $39 plus shipping. 
Chinook 30T 64BCD


----------



## Storm Rider (Dec 18, 2010)

Here's a titanium 30T 64BCD for only $138. Thanks, I'll pass. Action Tec 30T 64BCD


----------



## MTBOaxaca (Oct 20, 2009)

*Shimano Alfine 8 Speed Hub*

Anyone know if an older 8 speed xt/xtr rear shifter is compatible with the hub?


----------



## Storm Rider (Dec 18, 2010)

Nvm


----------



## evrac (Sep 28, 2005)

MTBOaxaca said:


> Anyone know if an older 8 speed xt/xtr rear shifter is compatible with the hub?


No, it is not.

Your choices are the nexus/alfine trigger or twister.


----------



## s-keeper (Oct 12, 2010)

I haven't seen the Specialities TA 30t 64bdc Chinook in person, but its a very good brand. On the other hand, its very lightweight and designed as a granny ring in a 2 or 3 ring system, so I decided it was probably a bit wimpy for pure hub gear use.

The two SJScycles 30t chainrings are really solidly built and I would recommend them.

For a 28t chainring about half way between the two, see the DMR Shift-R. Whilst I'm not sure about it, I may need to go down to 28t with the Alfine 11 as I want to use the same length chain for singlespeeding with 36t chainring and 13t sprocket (both Surly!).


----------



## Storm Rider (Dec 18, 2010)

Does anyone know the typical thickness of aluminum or stainless steel chainrings? I am thinking about designing a stainless steel 30T 64BCD chainring.


----------



## bikerjay (Sep 16, 2007)

Why make a ring out of stainless? Correct me if i am wrong most stainless alloys are no harder than anodized 7075aluminum, and a good steel is much harder. IMHO the current shimano Xt middle ring with coated steel andplastic shift ramps is amazing. I am not saying dont make a 30T granny, if you made a good one out of steel or 7075 I might even buy one and there are not many out there so its a good niche.


----------



## evrac (Sep 28, 2005)

I guess none of you are worried about the recommended 1.9:1 input ratio?


----------



## evrac (Sep 28, 2005)

Not sure if many on this forum are into downhill bikes, but I thought I'd pass this along.

Creative use of the Alfine. Should be the architecture for all future downhill bikes.
I'm a huge fan of this bike and hope they can make a commercial success of it.

Link to the discussion on Ridemonkey:

https://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showthread.php?t=217825&page=15


----------



## Storm Rider (Dec 18, 2010)

Here is my 30T 64BCD chainring design. I don't really care if they are made from SS, 4130 or 7075. I want to try a prototype, and the material can change later.


----------



## Krakkreel (Jun 4, 2007)

Hi people! Sorry my bad english...

I´ve been reading about this IGH and I just was going to buy it but... in a MTB forum, an user reports his A11 gets broken!

He told that happens when he was climbing, and second and third gear made ´crock´ :S

He uses a 32-22 front and 18 sprocket, but he was using the 32 when gets broken.

He bought the A11 in a spanish dealer. Other user got his A11 in web, until now he haven´t reports any problem.

Here is two links to german webs who offers A11 by 389 and 379 euros:

- bikecomponents

- rosebikes

Anyone had report some problems like this with A8 or Nexus?

Thank You!


----------



## fokof (Apr 24, 2006)

That's where the 1.9 / 1 ratio limit comes in ........


----------



## Krakkreel (Jun 4, 2007)

fokof said:


> That's where the 1.9 / 1 ratio limit comes in ........


Then isn´t possible some plate-sprocket ratios? Which one?

Thank You!

EDIT: ok, I´ve been reading 4 pages back...

Then if I ride with 32 chainring and 22 sprocket... get crash IGH if I take a hard climb?


----------



## ocean breathes salty (Oct 1, 2006)

Krakkreel said:


> Then isn´t possible some plate-sprocket ratios? Which one?
> 
> Thank You!
> 
> ...


I just purchased one. It will be a while before I build a wheel with it but I plan to run it 32:18 (roughly 1.8/1) for a while and see how that goes. Perhaps await a little more information about how they are holding up with lower gear ratios when a few more people are able to give feedback on it.

Its not all that hilly where I live and since I have been riding single speed for a while, anything lower than 51 gear inches will feel positively sporting.


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

Krakkreel said:


> ...He uses a 32-22 front and 18 sprocket, but he was using the 32 when gets broken....





fokof said:


> That's where the 1.9 / 1 ratio limit comes in ........


It will be interesting to see how rugged the Alfine 11 is compared to the proven Alfine 8. In any case, running a 22x18 might even kill an Alfine 8, it's stupid low.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

"proven Alfine 8"? Most of the reviews I've read, and I've been doing a lot of searching on the topic, say that the Alfine 8 is not rugged at all. I read that mountain biking kills them fast, and that they're really only suitable for road biking. It won't take much for it to be more rugged than that, but that still might not nearly be rugged enough. Especially if you are using a more sane gear ratio like 1.6/1 instead of the 1.9/1. That works out to a 1:1 lowest gear. If you can mountain bike with a 1:1 low gear, then I'm going to go out on a limb and say that what you are doing, isn't mountain biking.


----------



## bsdc (May 1, 2006)

fellsbiker said:


> "proven Alfine 8"? Most of the reviews I've read, and I've been doing a lot of searching on the topic, say that the Alfine 8 is not rugged at all. I read that mountain biking kills them fast, and that they're really only suitable for road biking. It won't take much for it to be more rugged than that, but that still might not nearly be rugged enough. Especially if you are using a more sane gear ratio like 1.6/1 instead of the 1.9/1. That works out to a 1:1 lowest gear. If you can mountain bike with a 1:1 low gear, then I'm going to go out on a limb and say that what you are doing, isn't mountain biking.


You've been reading too many e-reviewers speculating what they think an Alfine can handle. Most people who've been hammering Alfines will tell you they're holding up well. I'm sure there are a few failures. Same can be said for Rohloff and traditional drivetrains.

I've been running an Alfine 8 with 32/22 and a Rohloff with 34/16. Both are geared below recommendations. Both have been cranked hard up steep, rugged trails for countless miles. I ride 3-4 days a week year round. Both are holding up well. I expect nothing less from the Alfine 11. I'll be getting one, gearing it too low, and cranking the crap out of it as soon as possible.

Buy it, ride it, THEN review it.


----------



## inzane (Jun 20, 2006)

fellsbiker said:


> "proven Alfine 8"? Most of the reviews I've read, and I've been doing a lot of searching on the topic, say that the Alfine 8 is not rugged at all. I read that mountain biking kills them fast, and that they're really only suitable for road biking. It won't take much for it to be more rugged than that, but that still might not nearly be rugged enough. Especially if you are using a more sane gear ratio like 1.6/1 instead of the 1.9/1. That works out to a 1:1 lowest gear. If you can mountain bike with a 1:1 low gear, then I'm going to go out on a limb and say that what you are doing, isn't mountain biking.


So I guess from that statement that you consider the entire singlespeed thing to not be mountain biking, because if 1:1 aint low enough then the 2:1 that we push sure as heck cant be called mountain biking...

My original mountain bike back in the early 90's had a lowest gear that was 28:28, I guess that was not really mountain biking either :skep:


----------



## aosty (Jan 7, 2004)

Thanks for the helpful and hopeful first hand report.

My favorite uninformed speculation is the anti-rotation washers will instantly tear off your dropouts. 



bsdc said:


> You've been reading too many e-reviewers speculating what they think an Alfine can handle. Most people who've been hammering Alfines will tell you they're holding up well. I'm sure there are a few failures. Same can be said for Rohloff and traditional drivetrains.
> 
> I've been running an Alfine 8 with 32/22 and a Rohloff with 34/16. Both are geared below recommendations. Both have been cranked hard up steep, rugged trails for countless miles. I ride 3-4 days a week year round. Both are holding up well. I expect nothing less from the Alfine 11. I'll be getting one, gearing it too low, and cranking the crap out of it as soon as possible.
> 
> Buy it, ride it, THEN review it.


----------



## aosty (Jan 7, 2004)

A dose or two of HTFU might fix'im up. 



inzane said:


> So I guess from that statement that you consider the entire singlespeed thing to not be mountain biking, because if 1:1 aint low enough then the 2:1 that we push sure as heck cant be called mountain biking...
> 
> My original mountain bike back in the early 90's had a lowest gear that was 28:28, I guess that was not really mountain biking either :skep:


----------



## bsdc (May 1, 2006)

aosty said:


> Thanks for the helpful and hopeful first hand report.
> 
> My favorite uninformed speculation is the anti-rotation washers will instantly tear off your dropouts.


I did have a problem with the no turn washer trying to turn through and rip up the aluminum drop-out on one of my frames. Steel is real. That and big wrenches.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

pursuiter said:


> Hey, doochebag, are you the Rohloff salesman? You're so full of $hit it's coming out of your ears. Go away, trollboy....


I love it when a troll calls me a troll. Read the whole thread, clearly I have no real interest in this hub. If you have a problem with the alfine8's bad rep when it comes to mountainbiking, maybe you should start an internet movement, instead of being an ass. Or maybe start an onlinepetition.com, I hear those are pretty effective . . . :madman:


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

fellsbiker said:


> ...clearly I have no real interest in this hub....


Too funny, half your posts on this website are in this thread. You have researched Alfine extensivly and continue to post here exclusively and claim not to have any interest. Prove your lack of interest by going away....


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

pursuiter said:


> Too funny, half your posts on this website are in this thread. You have researched Alfine extensivly and continue to post here exclusively and claim not to have any interest. Prove your lack of interest by going away....


It's called sarcasm. :madman:


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

A spammer spams, and the "report" page doesn't seem to be working.


----------



## CdaleTony (Jun 21, 2005)

fellsbiker said:


> A spammer spams, and the "report" page doesn't seem to be working.


I got a report


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

So this place is selling them (in the US) for $660 for the hub and shifter and parts kit. Just add brakes (and a cable?)
http://harriscyclery.net/itemdetails.cfm?ID=3225
I'm planning on buying one from them in about two months or so. I'm very excited about it!


----------



## Way (Sep 22, 2010)

fellsbiker said:


> So this place is selling them (in the US) for $660 for the hub and shifter and parts kit. Just add brakes (and a cable?)
> http://harriscyclery.net/itemdetails.cfm?ID=3225
> I'm planning on buying one from them in about two months or so. I'm very excited about it!


I purchase mine from them - good store. Cable for the shifter is included but you do need the centerlock brake rotor or an adapter. Mine is being built up by a lbs right now. Good luck on the build!


----------



## inzane (Jun 20, 2006)

36 hole only, I wonder if they sold out of the 32 hole hubs already?


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

Universal has all colors/hole count, use "VIP15" coupon code for 15% off:
http://www.universalcycles.com/shopping/product_details.php?id=38447&category=2713


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

Yeah turns out the centerlock adapters are really tiny and only $15, so I'll just get one of those so I can stick with my 6 bolt rotor now, and in the future you can generally find better deals on 6 bolt rotors when it's time to replace them. Now I just wait till about the beginning of April and hope that there are no reports of catastrophic hub failure from mountain bikers.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

pursuiter said:


> Universal has all colors/hole count, use "VIP15" coupon code for 15% off:
> http://www.universalcycles.com/shopping/product_details.php?id=38447&category=2713


Does their $578 price include the 'parts kid' and the shifter, or do you have to buy them separately? They don't look like their included looking at the site, but it's not clear.


----------



## Raider1 (Aug 24, 2009)

Bikes Online has a good price on the hub only:

http://www.bikesonline.com/alfine-sgs700-32h-disc-brake-11spd-hub-black.htm

I want to see some real world reviews before I spring for it.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

Can anyone confirm that the Alfine-11 uses the same cogs as the Alfine-8 hubs?


----------



## Eddiecycle (Jun 25, 2009)

The nexus cogs will work on the alfine hub.


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

fellsbiker said:


> Does their $578 price include the 'parts kid' and the shifter...it's not clear.





universal said:


> Does not include shifter, cog, cog snap-ring, axle nuts, non-turn washers & cassette joint (Small Parts Kit)


Look again 

Nexus, Alfine, Shimano, Sturmey Archer (except 8 speed) and SRAM/SACHS (except 9 speed) all use the same cogs.


----------



## gilesjuk (Dec 13, 2007)

Shimano recommends using the Alfine type (with the plastic chainguard) if you are using the single cog Alfine tensioner (S510).

If using the double cog (sprung) Alfine tensioner then Nexus cogs are fine.

Presumably this is because the chain can come off easier without a chainguard and as the single cog tensioner isn't spring loaded it is more likely to happen.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

I'll be using mine with a singleator, but the cog i ordered has a plastic shield anyway.


----------



## wheezee (Jun 23, 2008)

I just spoke to a dealer in the UK who told me there won't be any Charge (UK brand) 11 speeds until the end of this year, or early next, due to Shimano being unable to keep up with the demand. He said the entire company only got eleven, which I grant, is difficult to believe.


----------



## ZackR (Mar 10, 2011)

Seems like this thread is ripe for some new first hand info.

I should be receiving my alfine 11 tomorrow that will go on my MTB/touring bike. So, I have no first hand info about that hub but............

I have some good first hand info on the durability on the alfine 8. This is the 3rd winter on an 8 speed disc hub with 7 inch rotor that I put on our coffee delivery trike. It is an old mexican made street vendors trike that was brought back from mexico. 


It is geared 22 up front 18 in the rear, someone can do the math on that. It has held up amazingly well. I don't know of the mileage on it, but it is low, probably 2,000miles max. It is used for short deliveries around Madison, but it carries a lot of weight. The trike/rider/coffee load max is around 450 pounds and it regularly goes with that load up some fairly steep hills, which means high torque on the hub(right?). It is used year round and has never iced up or been clogged with snow and we get a fair amount around here. It is NEVER slipped, skipped, grinded(ground?), or anything of that sort while in any gear or carrying any load.

I am very excited to get my 11 speed version. I am most excited about being able to use my MTB to ride all year round with out having to worry about salt and rust eating away my ders. and chain and not have to be always on top of maintenance.

I will put up some info when I get the hub and get it on a bike a ride it.

Zack


----------



## BrunoBB (Mar 12, 2009)

*Alfine 11 in Brazil*

I bought my Alfine 11 from Harry´s, it came with a 36t chainring and 18t cog, my actual weight is 83kg (183 pounds), impossible to ride uphill. I ordered a 32t chainring from Chain Reaction, but Brazilian Customs made me wait 60 days before it could be delivered, so only today i had the chance to try it. The actual weight of my MTB is 33 pounds. Alfine is sounding wierd while i´m riding, similar when you change the bike gear that´s not properly ajusted. Two or three times i felt like having a neutral gear after gearing, between 9th and 10th gear. I´ll take some photos and post them here.

Sorry for the poor english.


----------



## decipher (Aug 17, 2007)

BrunoBB said:


> I bought my Alfine 11 from Harry´s, it came with a 36t chainring and 18t cog, my actual weight is 83kg (183 pounds), impossible to ride uphill. I ordered a 32t chainring from Chain Reaction, but Brazilian Customs made me wait 60 days before it could be delivered, so only today i had the chance to try it. The actual weight of my MTB is 33 pounds. Alfine is sounding wierd while i´m riding, similar when you change the bike gear that´s not properly ajusted. Two or three times i felt like having a neutral gear after gearing, between 9th and 10th gear. I´ll take some photos and post them here.
> 
> Sorry for the poor english.


I think the Alfine manual makes a recommendation for a 1.9 chainring to sprocket ratio e.g. 34/18, although I don't think that undercutting it by ~7% would result into the kind of shifting you are experiecing.

What size wheels and tyres do you use?


----------



## BrunoBB (Mar 12, 2009)

26" wheels with 2.2 tires.


----------



## decipher (Aug 17, 2007)

BrunoBB said:


> 26" wheels with 2.2 tires.


Given it's gearing and c/s ratio limitations, I don't think the Alfine would be very well suited for climbing steep stuff. For MTB I would opt for the Rohloff because of its lower and overall wider gearing and MTB-crank compatible chainline.


----------



## BrunoBB (Mar 12, 2009)

The Rohloff is too expensive and I just got my Alfine 11. I think the 32x18 (1,777) ratio will be enough for the nearby hills and i still can use 20t cog. What realy bothers me is the noise and the neutral between the ninth and tenth gears.


----------



## Pinchphlat (Feb 27, 2009)

BrunoBB, your problem sounds like a shifter cable tension issue. I had a similar problem between 10th and 11th gears on my Alfine 11 until I backed the cable tension off a bit. This meant that the yellow lines were out by half a millimetre, but it resulted in perfect gear shifting. I have had no problems with the hub since.

The hub should not make too much noise when riding. I hear a faint but consistent whirring noise, but I can only notice this noise when riding in perfectly quiet conditions. he hub makes a definite 'click!' sound when shifting down into lower gears, but is silent whe shifiting into higher gears. The strange noise from your hub reinforces my theory that your gears are not indexed correctly. 

I haven't built an Alfine 11 into a MTB yet (I am currently using mine for commuting), although I plan on doing so in the near future. 32/18 seems too high for me though - I would want to run 32/22 on this hub if I was taking one off-road. I would be interested to see your build and how it performs when you get the 32T chainring - looking forward to your photos!


----------



## BrunoBB (Mar 12, 2009)

The Alfine 11 cable is too long, can i cut it?


----------



## BrunoBB (Mar 12, 2009)

Here some photos of my bike and Alfine 11.

Yesterday, during my night ride (when i almost ran over a rattlesnake) i noticed that is when i change from 10th to 11th the neutral appear. I tried to adjust while i was riding but without success.

The noise is gone, one problem less.


----------



## BrunoBB (Mar 12, 2009)

More photos.


----------



## Pinchphlat (Feb 27, 2009)

Nice set up  

Good to hear that the noise has disappeared, although I am not sure what could be causing the neutral feeling going from 10th to 11th. May be you are in 11th and just don't realise it (I have noticed that upshifts are so smooth they are almost undetectible)?

Also, how did you get you bike to run with the rear sprocket dished inwards while using a set of mtb cranks? I thought that the only way to get a straight chainline with an Alfine and mtb cranks is to run the sprocket outboard and put the front chainring on the middle position of the cranks. That's what I did on my commuting bike, which has mtb cranks on it.


----------



## BrunoBB (Mar 12, 2009)

I only did what people at Harris Cyclery told me to do. First of all, I sent some photos of my frame to them, and they sent all parts i needed. The only change was a new chainring, 4t smaller. Now i´m worried if i did something wrong.

The neutral cannot be the 11th, the feeling is to be riding at a much lighter gear, as if Alfine jumped from 11th to 5th or even lighter gear. Sunday is rest day but tomorrow i´ll ride again and try to tune Alfine once more.


----------



## Pinchphlat (Feb 27, 2009)

My comments were not intended to mean that you had set-up your bike incorrectly BrunoBB! I just found the arrangement to be different from what I was expecting. I hope you sort out your shifting issues - it took me a few weeks to figure out my inability to shift into 11th gear (it was incorrect cable tension).


----------



## BrunoBB (Mar 12, 2009)

Pinchphlat:

I´ll take more photos and post here, it can be wrong or my frame may have a different geometry (is possible?).

As i already posted, the Alfine cable is too long, it made two rounds in front of my handlebar. Can i cut it? I think this can be the problem, being so long does not control properly the gears.


----------



## huntting (Mar 27, 2011)

BrunoBB said:


> As i already posted, the Alfine cable is too long, *it made two rounds in front of my handlebar*. Can i cut it? I think this can be the problem, being so long does not control properly the gears.


Bingo! That's the problem, right there!

It's not the length, it's the bends/loops/rounds. Ideally, the cable housing should be one straight, short line from the shifter to the cassette joint. Of course, that's not possible on any real-world bike. But, if you start with that goal and sweat blood every time you add another slight bend you will end up with good shifting.

So, YES, you can cut the cable and housing! But, cutting housing is not as easy as it sounds. If you do not have the proper tool for cutting brake/derailleur housing and a lot of experience cutting and routing shift cables, take it to a good bike shop and pay them to do the job right.

One great feature of the Alfine-11 is the bellows seal at the cassette joint end of the shift cable/housing. But, it means that you have to re-thread the cable through a very tiny hole down at the dark end of those bellows after you cut the housing. For me, that turned out to be the toughest part of the entire conversion!

Bruno. when you get that shift cable and housing right and you will have one sweet-shifting hub. Give that job to your LBS.


----------



## BrunoBB (Mar 12, 2009)

I was planning to cut the cable housing using a dremel with a cut disk, do you think is better to go to a bike shop?


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

That works, you just have to be careful to twist it back together after you cut it, so it won't be frayed. And make sure you clamp and end cap on it. I planned on running my alfine 11 shifter cable through my bike's regular rear-derailer mountings, including a few sections of exposed area.


----------



## huntting (Mar 27, 2011)

fellsbiker said:


> And make sure you clamp an end cap on it. I planned on running my alfine 11 shifter cable through my bike's regular rear-derailer mountings, including a few sections of exposed area.


The Alfine-11 cable/housing is designed as a single, sealed-housing, cable run. The housing is triple-wall with a no-lube, teflon inner, similar to the Gore housings. Shimano asks you to cut the housing only at the hub end - not the shifter end - because they have that clever bellows seal. No end cap is needed.

Breaking the housing across exposed sections will defeat the sealed system. My guess is they included the sealed system for something more than bling factor - perhaps because the shift adjustment is so touchy?


----------



## BrunoBB (Mar 12, 2009)

Done. I used the dremel disc to cut the housing and a scissors (for metal sheet) to cut the cable. Two clean cuts. Now just wait until the end of the day to try Alfine 11 again.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

That "bellows seal" isn't going to do much good when there's several cm of cable and pulley exposed to mud, snow, etc, afterwards. At least one person has mentioned problems with ice buildup in the cable groove in another thread. IMHO, Shimano need to make a cover that prevents gunge falling on the exposed section of the cable and pulley, otherwise there will always be a problem, same as there is with all bare cable sections running along the seatstay where muck can fall onto them from the tyre.


----------



## Tripower (Jan 4, 2011)

*Jones Spaceframe with Alfine 11*

Just finished the build. Will be used mostly for trail riding. I'll let everyone know how the IGH holds up.


----------



## dru (Sep 4, 2006)

That is a cool bike! My freinds ride pugs, they are fun in the snow.

Drew


----------



## paulk_5 (Mar 1, 2006)

*My Alfine 11 Build*

I have three good rides on this so far. I'm really liking it, but still a little worried about how hard I can push it. Shifts better than a derailleur - rides quiet as a single speed (awesome!). I figure it's about a 2lb weight penalty, so I'll have to work a little harder to enjoy my quiet.

Oh, and that Jones post... Nice!


----------



## clewttu (May 16, 2007)

*Salsa Fargo Alfine 11*

Finished building this up about a month ago, havent gotten around to taking/posting any photos till now. Fits in great as a quasi rigid mountain bike/quasi roadish tourer. As soon as the Alfine 11 drop bar shifters hit the stores back in January, I started accumulating parts.
Absolutely loving this bike for cruising to the bars, getting groceries, all day exploring on/off road, and soon to be some on/off road touring...its been an amazingly fun ride. The hub shifts well and is super quiet (first IGH so I can give much of a comparison or critique)

Build:
Salsa Fargo Large
Alfine 11 Rear Hub 36h 18t with Alfine Tensioner
Alfine Generator Front Hub 32h
Velocity Dyad Halo Reflective Rims
WTB Vulpine Rear
WTB Nanoraptor Front
Versa VRS-11 Brifters
Salsa Woodchipper Bars
Salsa Cross Top Levers
Brooks Antique Brown Tape
Brooks B17 Antique Brown
Chris King Brown Sotto Voce Heasdset
e.13 XC SS Crankset with 38t Raceface Chainring
Cane Creek Thudbuster LT
Easton EA50 70mm Stem 20deg
Avid BB7 160mm Brakes
Topeak Super Tourist DX Tubular Rack 
Topeak MTX TrunkBag DXP
Planet Bike Cascadia 29er Fenders


----------



## Paco Loco (Oct 25, 2007)

@paulk_5 - what's with the white zip tie?


----------



## paulk_5 (Mar 1, 2006)

I'm running the cable up the chainstay (unconventional). The clearance between the chain and the gear cable needs a little help. The zip tie pulls the the cable/arm over a quarter inch. I've heard others just bend the arm a little, but I liked this better. You do have to carry an extra zip with you, because you will have to cut it to get the rear tire off. I ride tubless with sealant, so don't expect to flat often.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

clewttu: Why did you go with the derailer-style tensioner? Especially on a hardtail? Why not a simpler single wheeled tensioner. Or use a half-link, get close enough, and ride with no tensioner at all.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

I got my hub installed on my Maverick. I took a bunch of pics and posted them in my own thread. It's working well, but my bike was clearly not designed to be a singlespeed. 
http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?p=8028877


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

^^ Sometimes it's impossible to get the chain to stay on if you attempt to use half-links and such to get a "good enough" chain length, even with 1T different chainrings and rear cogs.. Then there's the problem that the chain will get looser as soon as there's any wear. IME, single wheel tensioners don't always solve the problem either; sometimes they just don't work and sometimes they move - or break. I'm fairly sure Shimano decided to use the tensioner design they did for a reason. (Plus it'll work with rear suspension too.)


----------



## bikerjay (Sep 16, 2007)

Pretty sure the shimano tensioner is made to accommodate a wide capacity for a 1 or 2 chain ring crank set up. For a dedicated single chain ring set up a Phil wood eccentric would be perfect.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

^ The Shimano tensioner is meant to be able to cope with double rings and up to 16T difference.I'm not so convinced that eccentric BBs are the best answer; sliding or horizontal dropouts are a lot simpler to make and adjust and don't affect rider position, plus they're lighter too. Everything has its pros and cons...


----------



## huntting (Mar 27, 2011)

satanas said:


> ^ The Shimano tensioner is meant to be able to cope with double rings and up to 16T difference


That's the Shimano spec, but I'm using that tensioner, the CT-S500, with rear-suspension and a 44-32-20 triple up front - that's a 24T difference. It accommodates it just fine and the FD shifts great.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

^ People have said before that Shimano specs are conservative, but this has to be a record! Out of curiosity, could you tell us what hub and rear sprocket size you are using, and what size wheel???


----------



## huntting (Mar 27, 2011)

satanas said:


> ^ People have said before that Shimano specs are conservative, but this has to be a record! Out of curiosity, could you tell us what hub and rear sprocket size you are using, and what size wheel???


This is with the Alfine-11. I have both the 23T and 18T rear cog (not simultaneously!) and everything works fine with both. The 23T cog is also outside the Shimano spec.

All THREE wheels are 406 (20"). Oh! Did I mention that this is a recumbent tadpole trike?


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

Curse you! I just spent hours looking at the Trice web site and elsewhere. They look rather interesting.  

I am a bit surprised that you really need all three rings (or a 23T cog) with an Alfine hub and 20" wheels - what sort of hills can you ride up that require such a low gear? (I tried 11.5" on a MTB once (15x34T) and found that small lumps stopped the bike in that gear; ~16" seems low enough for anything rideable, and if it's rough I find I cannot stay seated and so ~20" is enough.) I guess if you're riding uphill with a touring load on bitumen on a recumbent trike then really low gears could be handy if it's super steep, as in the UK...


----------



## huntting (Mar 27, 2011)

satanas said:


> I guess if you're riding uphill with a touring load on bitumen on a recumbent trike then really low gears could be handy if it's super steep, as in the UK...


Or, as in the Alps, where we like to tour. The physics of slow, uphill riding completely change when you add a third wheel into the equation. An MTB loses stability rapidly as forward speed decreases - a trike is infinitely stable at zero forward speed. And, my Trice is so comfortable that there is no rush to get there and extract the seatpost from my posterior.

Also, my 9.0 gear-inch low gear is very welcome on every ride from my home near Rocky Mountain National Park.


----------



## finch2 (Nov 13, 2009)

I'd like to see a photo


----------



## ohmoxide (Aug 22, 2010)

*Alfine in Portland or Hood River*

I would like to ride an Alifne equipped bike, I live in Hood River, anyone wanna trade me 5 mins on their bike for a beer?
-Rob


----------



## huntting (Mar 27, 2011)

finch2 said:


> I'd like to see a photo


I'd be happy to oblige, but what would you like to have featured in the photo?


----------



## LukeSPOOK (Aug 27, 2007)

I'll give you a go of my alfine equipped bike, but you'll have to travel to Sydney, Australia.
Cheers


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

^ LukeSPOOK, I'm in Sydney Australia - if you have an Alfine 11 hub I'd really like to go for a quick ride if that's possible... :thumbsup: 

@huntting: I figured it had to be something like that! Last time I was in tha Alps I saw a group of 3 or 4 guys on LWD recumbents with panniers climbing one of the passes while I was stopped having lunch, so you're not alone.


----------



## LukeSPOOK (Aug 27, 2007)

Sorry, I've only got an 8speed -- goes great.
Cheers


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

^ <sigh> Figures!


----------



## finch2 (Nov 13, 2009)

huntting said:


> I'd be happy to oblige, but what would you like to have featured in the photo?


don't be shy, show us your trike!


----------



## huntting (Mar 27, 2011)

*It's not exactly riding weather just now...*



finch2 said:


> don't be shy, show us your trike!


It's not exactly riding weather just now, but I guess a guy's got to keep his public satisfied, right?

So, here's a few pic's of my pride and joy.










In this next shot you can see the Alfine-11 instalation with the 23T cog and CT-S500 tensioner. For reference, the 20T chainring is currently selected and, as you can see, I still have a little more tensioner wrap available.









Here's the other end of the drive train with the 44-32-20 triple. This also shows the Terracycle dual idlers which replaced the standard single idler plus chain-tube system used by ICE and most bent builders.









Finally, here's a view of the cockpit showing the tortured installation of the rapid-fire shifter. Clearly, Shimano was not thinking under-seat-steering when they designed the shifter.









OK, I hope I don't get flamed for posting pic's of a bike that is so far from being an MTB, but I would argue that is really is a "bike for the mountains" - as long as the surface is paved.


----------



## ohmoxide (Aug 22, 2010)

LukeSPOOK said:


> I'll give you a go of my alfine equipped bike, but you'll have to travel to Sydney, Australia.
> Cheers


Would love to come down under and drive/drink with you, but I don't see that happening.


----------



## finch2 (Nov 13, 2009)

huntting said:


> OK, I hope I don't get flamed for posting pic's of a bike that is so far from being an MTB, but I would argue that is really is a "bike for the mountains" - as long as the surface is paved.


It's all about fun isn't it  nice to see it. I haven't seen many.


----------



## Wombat (Jan 25, 2004)

huntting

Neat bike, but shouldn't the chain run either side of the idler wheel that sits in the middle of your frame, or have you just pulled the bike for photo purposes, and that's not how you ride it?

Tim


----------



## huntting (Mar 27, 2011)

Wombat said:


> Neat bike, but shouldn't the chain run either side of the idler wheel that sits in the middle of your frame...


There are TWO idlers: a toothed power idler and a smooth return-side idler. The chain runs under both due to the low seat.


----------



## dru (Sep 4, 2006)

*love the trike.*

I want one, have for awhile now! Do they torque steer if you are pedaling hard? I've heard that one of the designs does. What does it weigh? Cost? Very cool.

Drew


----------



## huntting (Mar 27, 2011)

dru said:


> Do they torque steer if you are pedaling hard? I've heard that one of the designs does.


Do full-suspension MTBs pogo? The answer is similar. Many (most?) low-end trikes pedal-steer - some wildly. Better designs, e.g. ICE, Greenspeed, HP Velotechnik, Logo, have solved the problem. Something very similar can still happen if your upper body is not quiet and you have a death-grip on the steering. Low-end trikes also use "direct steering" which is very twitchy and really exacerbates pedal steer. My wife's trike is identical to mine except that she opted for short crankarms. She can spin at 120 rpm with no visible pedal steer, but she rides with a very quiet upper body.



dru said:


> What does it weigh?


As delivered it was 36 lbs. In full touring trim mine now tops 40. Trikes aren't for weight-weenies!



dru said:


> Cost?


I'll refer you to the website of my favorite dealer, The Recumbent Trike Store. My 2008 Q20 has been replaced by the current Sprint RS.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

Very interesting! Seems to me an IGH is just about perfect for a recumbent application, and I'm surprised they aren't a factory option from ICE.


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2011)

satanas said:


> Very interesting! Seems to me an IGH is just about perfect for a recumbent application, and I'm surprised they aren't a factory option from ICE.


The benefits and drawbacks of IGHs are the same for recumbents. The owners may be more receptive depending on the bike. Go-fast recumbents reject IGHs for the same kinds of (perhaps faulty) reasons. Recumbents have challenges with chain management and drivetrain efficiency. IGH is perceived as a disadvantage there, perhaps unfairly.

My impression of recumbent cycling is the same as other forms of cycling. The trend is conservative except when it comes to individual issues (I'm liberal on my issues, conservative on yours!). Since they are older as a group, they are more receptive to short cranks, as an example. They like two speed cranks because they need wider and lower gears. Otherwise there is reluctance to change.

It's nice to see a recumbent received warmly in an MTB forum though. I especially like the effort made on this one to keep the chain path as clean as possible.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

^ I haven't done much recumbent riding as it's hilly with nasty drivers and heavy traffic where I live (Sydney, Oz), plus sight lines are poor in many places. Still, I would think that being able to shift when stopped would be a massive help when one cannot use body weight to get started - especially uphill. 

Plus, I'm not so keen on the idea of complicated drive trains with weird cassettes - ICE now use 9-32T on many of their trikes. My experience is that custom wear components and tyres are disasters waiting to happen. The gaps between the gears with an Alfine 11 or Rohloff are within reason, no worse than most 10-speed MTB cassettes, and a little extra weight isn't going to matter all that much in many cases, plus a lot of chainline and wheel dish issues go away when there's only 1 rear cog.

I can see how an IGH wouldn't be so compelling on a competition low racer, but then there's no way I'd consider riding one of those where I live as my life expectancy would probably be <10 minutes!


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2011)

satanas said:


> ^ I haven't done much recumbent riding as it's hilly with nasty drivers and heavy traffic where I live (Sydney, Oz), plus sight lines are poor in many places. Still, I would think that being able to shift when stopped would be a massive help when one cannot use body weight to get started - especially uphill.
> 
> Plus, I'm not so keen on the idea of complicated drive trains with weird cassettes - ICE now use 9-32T on many of their trikes. My experience is that custom wear components and tyres are disasters waiting to happen. The gaps between the gears with an Alfine 11 or Rohloff are within reason, no worse than most 10-speed MTB cassettes, and a little extra weight isn't going to matter all that much in many cases, plus a lot of chainline and wheel dish issues go away when there's only 1 rear cog.
> 
> I can see how an IGH wouldn't be so compelling on a competition low racer, but then there's no way I'd consider riding one of those where I live as my life expectancy would probably be <10 minutes!


I agree. I think those are good arguments for uprights as well.

One thing recumbents frequently have to deal with is getting adequate gearing on small drive wheels. The Capreo cassettes you mention are a mixed bag. IGH still has problems with that but the chainrings are smaller and at least you don't have to shift them.  Here's and interesting example. Rob English is an interesting builder with some unusual race history. Check out his single speed 29er belt drive, too.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

craigsj said:


> I think those are good arguments for uprights as well.


Now that the Alfine 11 is here and Rohloff prices are not as horrific as they were my next bike is likely to have an IGH, and I am hoping never again to buy a MTB with derailleurs. For road/randonnee bikes derailleurs make sense due to lighter weight and closer ratios, but off-road and utility no way. It's to be hoped that IGH volume will increase and price will decrease as time goes by.

FWIW, I've had experience with 9T cogs on an AM with 17" wheels and would absolutely never again use such a thing unless there was a very good reason indeed(!). For starters, it's possible to feel the "corners" on cogs with less than 12T. 11T isn't too bad, 10T definitely feels rather off and IME 9T feels rough, even when new. There's a good reason why engineering pactice suggests using at least 16T for power transmission. Plus wear is increased with very small cogs and spare parts costs are frightening with anything custom. Then there's the problem of only being able to get spares from a single source, with dubious long-term backup. I'd much rather use an IGH or larger chainrings to get the desired top gear.

The Rob English bikes linked look interesting!


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2011)

satanas said:


> FWIW, I've had experience with 9T cogs on an AM with 17" wheels and would absolutely never again use such a thing unless there was a very good reason indeed(!). For starters, it's possible to feel the "corners" on cogs with less than 12T. 11T isn't too bad, 10T definitely feels rather off and IME 9T feels rough, even when new. There's a good reason why engineering pactice suggests using at least 16T for power transmission.


I've heard that about 9T cogs but have no experience. Good to hear.

One of the problems with recumbents is the need for power-side idlers. They need return-side ones, too, but they have less effect on power. Curiously, power-side idlers, when they are toothed at all, are typically 14T or 15T. Some people have realized that bigger is better there. On the English bike you'll see quite a large power-side idler, because the builder is smart. 

I would think an IGH would be a win on a recumbent if it could result in the removal of a power-side idler. Not an option on many bikes, but a stick-style high racer like a Bacchetta may work.

Check out Rob English's personal racing recumbents. The Hachi is awesome. He's also a competitive TT racer and has a degree in engineering from Cambridge. No project intimidates him, and he's a weight weenie that works in brazed steel. Hard not to like! I love his winter bike which is also IGH.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

I like the winter bike, but am surprised he chose to use Salmon guards. I've had these since 198x but most don't seem to like them much. On the positive side they are very rigid, fairly aero since they're narrow, will fit into gaps other guards won't and give very good coverage. OTOH, they're quite heavy and are buggers to fit.

The Hachi is cool but definitely not suited to Sydney traffic! BTW, I notice people seem to be using shorter cranks on recumbents than for road/MTB - what's the theory here, and how much shorter is average???


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2011)

satanas said:


> I like the winter bike, but am surprised he chose to use Salmon guards. I've had these since 198x but most don't seem to like them much. On the positive side they are very rigid, fairly aero since they're narrow, will fit into gaps other guards won't and give very good coverage. OTOH, they're quite heavy and are buggers to fit.
> 
> The Hachi is cool but definitely not suited to Sydney traffic! BTW, I notice people seem to be using shorter cranks on recumbents than for road/MTB - what's the theory here, and how much shorter is average???


Haha no, I doubt the Hachi would work well in traffic.

Regarding crank length, recumbent riders seem to go shorter when they have a preference. The unfaired racers are usually around 170mm like roadies. Some riders are older and feel it's better for their knees. Some are convinced that shorter is more powerful but that seems to grow out out of the fully faired racers' preference for small fairings. Some believe that the recumbent pedal stroke has unique requirements but research hasn't supported that so far. There's a lot of bias and conjecture like everywhere else, just a different leaning. I've heard of crank lengths as short as 110mm but typically the short crank lovers are using lengths around 150mm. With some recumbents, foot and pedal strikes are an issue with the front wheel. Shorter cranks can help with that, but it's not really where the preference comes from.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

^ So it's all personal preference/bias just like with road and MTB for the most part.  Can certainly see how a smaller fairing is good, and how shorter cranks would help with foot clearance with many designs like P38, many front drive bikes, etc. Still, I think I'd be inclined to start off with what I'm used to for non-'bent use first, then experiment from there. Bedtime for me now.zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..........


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2011)

satanas said:


> Still, I think I'd be inclined to start off with what I'm used to for non-'bent use first, then experiment from there.


I think that is wise.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

Soooooo I'm noticing my first issue with my Alfine 11. I used my old 6 bolt 203mm rotor, and an official shimano 6 bolt to centerlock adapter. Everything seemed to go on fine. But there is a lot of play. When I lock the rear brake, I can move the wheel back and forth a good...20 degrees or so. (I haven't done geometry in a long time, that guess could be way off). There's a surprising amount of play, and it's not loose play, it's tight play. (minds out of the gutter people!) You kind of have to force it, and then it slides. The rotor appears to be totally solid in the adapter, so it must be the adapter itself, or the hub itself acting very strange. 

Thoughts?


----------



## dru (Sep 4, 2006)

*weird*

Something else is going on. Has to be you'd think.

I've had play in my 8 and it was maybe ~2-5 mm of total play side to side. You could grab the wheel in dropouts and the rim would wiggle L & R about that much. That was last fall. I tightned the non drive cone until all the play was taken out. I checked several times with the wheel bolted in the drops before I was satisfied. I just relubed the beast and had to retension the bearings just a few weeks back during reassembly. I could feel when the cones weren't quite tight enough without being able to see any sloppiness in the wheel relative to the frame

How exactly are you checking, I don't exactly follow? Sounds like some weird brake thing.

Drew


----------



## sealcove (Apr 26, 2004)

fellsbiker said:


> Soooooo I'm noticing my first issue with my Alfine 11. I used my old 6 bolt 203mm rotor, and an official shimano 6 bolt to centerlock adapter. Everything seemed to go on fine. But there is a lot of play. When I lock the rear brake, I can move the wheel back and forth a good...20 degrees or so. (I haven't done geometry in a long time, that guess could be way off). There's a surprising amount of play, and it's not loose play, it's tight play. (minds out of the gutter people!) You kind of have to force it, and then it slides. The rotor appears to be totally solid in the adapter, so it must be the adapter itself, or the hub itself acting very strange.
> 
> Thoughts?


When you say "back and forth" do you mean rotationally or axially? If rotational, then that seems strange. Could it be frame flex?


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

I mean rotationally as in the way the wheel rotates. The wheel rotates with the rotor not moving. But only a small amount.


----------



## rekrutacja (Jan 16, 2011)

At least [EDIT] two companies now offer Alfine 11 mountain bikes. Interesting bit: 32/20. Here is Charge Duster 11:









And here is 32/18 Genesis iO iD Alfine 11:


----------



## Wombat (Jan 25, 2004)

fellsbiker said:


> Soooooo I'm noticing my first issue with my Alfine 11. I used my old 6 bolt 203mm rotor, and an official shimano 6 bolt to centerlock adapter. Everything seemed to go on fine. But there is a lot of play. When I lock the rear brake, I can move the wheel back and forth a good...20 degrees or so. (I haven't done geometry in a long time, that guess could be way off). There's a surprising amount of play, and it's not loose play, it's tight play. (minds out of the gutter people!) You kind of have to force it, and then it slides. The rotor appears to be totally solid in the adapter, so it must be the adapter itself, or the hub itself acting very strange. Thoughts?


I just looked at my 8 speed with a 203mm centrelock rotor and it has no movement. I think you'll need to look carefully to see what's moving. The adapter shouldn't be able to move on the hub as it sits on the spline, so perhaps it's the pegs.

Tim


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

20 degrees of play cannot be right! There are only 360 degrees in a complete circle, and IIRC there are more than 18 splines on the Centrelock mount. Hard to imagine there can be something like a full spline's worth of play. You should check the attachment of the rotor to the adaptor and, if the adaptor has a pinch-bolt, check that too. There should be no play! The calliper isn't moving is it?

Re gearing: I was thinking of using 31x20 at the worst, and maybe 31x21-23T (I already have a Surly SS 31T ring), so its good to see Charge are confident about unleashing 32x20 on consumers. Since I weigh 65kg, like to spin and very rarely break things lacking design flaws this makes me confident I'd never break an Alfine 11 hub. :thumbsup:


----------



## rekrutacja (Jan 16, 2011)

Fellsbiker, today i finally got wheels from builder and... i have exactly the same issue. Alfine 11, official Shimano centerlock to 6 bolt adapter, and rotational play. If you managed to solve the problem please let me know.


----------



## itsdoable (Jan 6, 2004)

The Center lock interface is not tapered or an interference fit, so you get some play. Most of my center lock wheels have a bit of fore and aft play when you rock the bike with the brakes locked, some of it is in the pads, the rest is in the center lock interface.

The shimano 6-bolt to center lock adapter is not and interference fit either, so there will be a bit of play there. I've seen the rotor mount holes elongate in these adapters.

They still work fine for slowing you down.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

itsdoable said:


> The shimano 6-bolt to center lock adapter is not and interference fit either, so there will be a bit of play there. I've seen the rotor mount holes elongate in these adapters.


That doesn't sound good - maybe it'd be better to use a Shimano rotor, or a different adaptor?!? (I'm likely to have this problem shortly myself.)


----------



## GTR-33 (Sep 25, 2008)

It's normal. You can try the DT Swiss adaptors, they seem to have a tighter fit.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

^ You mean it's normal to have a little play or to have the holes elongate? (I presume you mean the threaded holes in the adaptors elongate, not the holes in the rotors.)


----------



## itsdoable (Jan 6, 2004)

satanas said:


> ^ You mean it's normal to have a little play or to have the holes elongate? (I presume you mean the threaded holes in the adaptors elongate, not the holes in the rotors.)


The holes in the rotors elongate. Shimano and DT adapters do not have threaded holes, they have steel pins that the rotors slide onto.

Problem Solver adapters use regular torx screws to hold the rotor to the adapter, and the adapter uses a pinch bolt on the hub instead of the lock ring, so they do not have any play. But they are heavier.

There is really no reason to use an adapter since the shimano center lock rotors work fine with most callipers, and they are not expensive. The adapters are useful if you have a chi-chi rotor that you really want to use.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

itsdoable said:


> The holes in the rotors elongate. Shimano and DT adapters do not have threaded holes, they have steel pins that the rotors slide onto.


WTF? I haven't actually seen either of these in the metal and had assumed they worked the same as the PS one you mentioned. So the rotor holes sit over pins embedded in the adaptor and then the lockring holds all the bits sandwiched together?



itsdoable said:


> There is really no reason to use an adapter since the shimano center lock rotors work fine with most callipers, and they are not expensive. The adapters are useful if you have a chi-chi rotor that you really want to use.


The reasons I can see are if one has an Avid front brake with a 185mm rotor, or else a supply of 6-bolt rotors which need to be used up. Otherwise I agree 100%.


----------



## GTR-33 (Sep 25, 2008)

satanas said:


> So the rotor holes sit over pins embedded in the adaptor and then the lockring holds all the bits sandwiched together?.


Exactly correct.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

Yikes! Handy to know; I'll avoid them.


----------



## MacB (May 13, 2011)

satanas said:


> Yikes! Handy to know; I'll avoid them.


I picked up a secondhand Shimano adaptor to work with an Avid 6 bolt rotor, wasn't impressed at all. It's now in the spares box and I just bought a centrelock rotor instead. The front wheel uses 6 bolt anyway so I just have a spare rotor as and when.

I'm not even sure Shimano do the adaptors anymore, the other makes all seem to be £20-30($30-45) over here. I can get a reasonable centrelock rotor for less, or at least it's as good as the bog standard, came with BB7s, rotor that it's replacing.


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

MacB said:


> ...I can get a reasonable centrelock rotor for less, or at least it's as good as the bog standard, came with BB7s, rotor that it's replacing.


I have found that the bosses on the centrelock rotors occasionally interfere with the BB7 calliper.


----------



## MacB (May 13, 2011)

Velobike said:


> I have found that the bosses on the centrelock rotors occasionally interfere with the BB7 calliper.


Hmmm, interesting, I've just been checking what I have, these are for new wheels not arrived yet, so currently still using 6bolt rotors and hubs. I bought a couple of centrelock rotors, a Deore and an XT and I can see what you mean, having been to the garage to do some measuring.

The Deore should be fine as it has about 40mm from rotor edge to where the rotor arm attaches to the centrelock bit.

The XT however only has about 25mm at this point and, a quick measure up against the bike would indicate that the rotor bosses could make contact with the pad tabs that stick out of the caliper, or worse.

Looks like I'll need to send at least one back...if need be is there any reason I couldn't use an Avid G3 Cleansweep Centrelock instead? The Avid site list it as suitable for Avid XO and Elixir only, but getting info out of SRAM isn't easy.


----------



## dru (Sep 4, 2006)

> I have found that the bosses on the centrelock rotors occasionally interfere with the BB7 calliper.


You'll find that what is actually hitting the rotor is the removal tab on the BB7 brake pad, on the inside pad. I cut mine off with a pair of side cutters. Makes removing the pad a bit of a pain because you need to yank it out with needlenose pliers instead of your fingers.

My winter brakes are BB7 calipers on XTR 97 rotors. Stupid Xtr calipers suck a$$ in the winter; leaking fluid, etc....but they (with levers obviously) are tons lighter than cables, levers, and BB7s

Drew


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

dru said:


> You'll find that what is actually hitting the rotor is the removal tab on the BB7 brake pad, on the inside pad. I cut mine off with a pair of side cutters...


I joggled mine which was ok for a while, but when the pads wore then the interference started again.

Cutting off the tabs like you did is the best idea - unless you are needing to replace them quickly in a race 

Otherwise it just adds a few minutes to a workshop job, so no problem.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

^ Terrific! So what you're saying is that there's no good way to use a BB-7 calliper with a centrelock hub...


----------



## MacB (May 13, 2011)

satanas said:


> ^ Terrific! So what you're saying is that there's no good way to use a BB-7 calliper with a centrelock hub...


this is rotor arm/caliper interference or, more specifically the bosses on the rotor arm, that attach rotor to centre lock spider, catching the little metal tabs on the brake pads, the ones you grab to remove the pad. This will only be an issue for rotors where the gap from rotor edge to rotor arm boss is below a certain distance.

As I mention above I compared an XT(SMRT79) rotor to an SLX(DMRT64) and this distance was about 25mm for the former and 40mm for the latter. So with the SLX there is no chance of this interference occuring. to use the other rotor you may need to cut off the tabs on the pads meaning you need to use needle nose pliers to remove pads rather than fingers.

I've also put a question on the brake thread re the actual brake track area, my measurements indicate the difference between the SLX and the Avid rotor is no more than 1mm. My understanding is that if the pads protrude above the rotor edge then, as they wear, the upper(unworn) bits will eventually meet resulting in the brake being unable to actuate. How close this point would be to needing new pads anyway I don't know. But the spacers on the caliper mount could also be altered to ensure that the top of the pad doesn't go past the top of the rotor. They are only spacing washers a quick trip to a hardware store could give you a good selection for pennies.

The other aspect I've gleaned is regarding the pad contacting below the brake track area, or on the rotor arms. From reading the brake thread some seem to claim this causes issues and others that it doesn't. Considering the brake track itself has cut outs I'm not sure I'll find an issue but we'll see. If need be I can always take a dremel to the bottom of the brake pads to remove a little material.

The other option is if you could use Avids G3 cleansweep centrelock rotor, the SRAM info doesn't say and I don't have one yet to measure up, but I will. For me the G3 costs almost double the SLX rotor and doesn't come with a lockring like the SLX. So the overall cost is a factor, I would much prefer it if I find success with the SLX/BB7 combo.

I hope that helps as a sort of summary and perhaps other, more knowledgeable folks, could pitch in with any corrections or clarifications.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

Thanks! Sounds like one should measure rotors and preferably try them on the bike to see which will work before buying anything. Like you say, one can always dremel bits off here or there if necessary. I notice the G3 rotor is $40-50 at jensonusa versus $47-51 for a complete brake, so best avoided.


----------



## itsdoable (Jan 6, 2004)

satanas said:


> Terrific! So what you're saying is that there's no good way to use a BB-7 calliper with a centrelock hub...


Shimano SM-RT53 & SM-RT62 work fine with Avid bb7 callipers. I think you only have problems with the xt-xtr versions.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

^ :thumbsup:


----------



## MacB (May 13, 2011)

Just to report that it all works fine, setup is Alfine 8 with 19t Nexus cog, old style Alfine tensioner and 28/40 double up front. SLX disc rotors and BB7 calipers.

Now I have a general info request on the Alfine 11, and specifically setting it up with the Forward Components EBB, I have the universal version:-

I currently have the bike setup with the SRAM I-9 which has a chainline of 49mm and a Deore triple chainset with a 38t ring in the middle position and bash outer giving a front chainline of 50mm.

I plan to upgrade to the Alfine 11 using a 23t Nexus cog and still the 38t chainring, giving a primary input ratio of 1.65:1. My local Shimano service centre told me that was the lowest they would warrant. Basically the tech specs show you can use up to a 23t cog and the Alfine chainset has a BCD of 130 so smallest ring is 38t. They accepted that there's no published limit but indicated that 1.65 was what was implied by the scope of the Alfine parts available. Anyway this is for road use so 1.65 is fine as a ratio, gives me a range of about 24 to 99 gear inches.

However chainline isn't so easy, as it's the FC EBB I'm using for chain tension, I have to use OBB cranks and can't place a spacer between cup and frame. The EBB came supplied with a 5mm spacer for the drive side. I'm concerned that the 50mm chainline won't play nicely with the 46.8mm that the flipped Nexus cog on the A11 will give me. I know I could use a different crankset but it's new and I'd like to stick with it if possible.

I don't mind machining off the inner mounting points to create more room if need be. So is it possible to use a smaller spacer on the drive side and put a spacer on the non drive? Changing the drive side from 5mm to 2mm and adding 3mm to the non drive would give me a perfect chainline. I'll also e-mail this to FC but if anyone has done similar I'd appreciate hearing how you did it.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

IMO, it'd be easier to use Sturmey-Archer spacers rather than machining anything. These are 1/16" (~1.6mm) thick, so three would be 4.8mm = probably close enough to 5mm not to matter. You could use two on the RHS and one on the LHS.

NB: I know nothing about Forward Components anything, so am only commenting on the spacer(s).


----------



## MacB (May 13, 2011)

satanas said:


> IMO, it'd be easier to use Sturmey-Archer spacers rather than machining anything. These are 1/16" (~1.6mm) thick, so three would be 4.8mm = probably close enough to 5mm not to matter. You could use two on the RHS and one on the LHS.
> 
> NB: I know nothing about Forward Components anything, so am only commenting on the spacer(s).


Ah, no, it's not spacing at the hub end, that's set at 41.8 or 46.8mm depending on which way round you mount the cog, I think you can also get about 44mm with a flat/undished cog. It's the crankset chainline and spacing and, for the FC EBB to work it has to be two piece cranks, ie Hollowtech II or similar.

Along with the crankset I received 3 spacers totalling 7mm, I don't have a precision measuring tool but they look like 2 x 2.5mm and 1 x 2mm to me. In theory I could just run one of the 2.5s each side and leave out the FC supplied spacer.

I'm just not sure as I have/had zero experience of external bearing cranksets until I bought the FC EBB. As long as the inner ring mounts don't clash with the EBB cup then I can't imagine I'll do any damage. It's just always nice to hear from someone more experienced that's done something similar with no ill effects.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

^ I meant the BB spacer you were talking about machining, not re-spacing the rear cog; there's nor much you can do about the latter. Assuming the crankset has normal BSC threaded cups, then the S-A spacers could be used to adjust the chainline since BB cup threads and S-A/fixed/freewheel cogs are the same diameter.

If you can re-arrange the supplied spacers then everything should work. Otherwise, why not just use spacers between the spider and the chainwheel to move it in a bit??? If the crankset's chainline is 50mm and the cog's is 46.8mm then that's 3.2mm (~1/8") so no big deal. You might need slightly longer chainwheel bolts (or not) but some triple inner bolts should work if so.


----------



## FIBRE+ (Nov 6, 2009)

My Alfine 11 speed hub and shifter finally turned up today! . It's only been on back order since January!. Just need to order a Stans Flow rim and DT spokes.

The hub looks good but the shifter is the biggest ugliest thing i've ever seen, I'm pretty sure it's even bigger than my Alfine 8.

Does anyone know of any aftermarket shifter blanking plates?, I never use shift indicator windows and want to try and get rid of some of the bulk factor. 


First post, hello all :thumbsup:


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

FIBRE+ said:


> My Alfine 11 speed hub and shifter finally turned up today! . It's only been on back order since January!. Just need to order a Stans Flow rim and DT spokes.
> 
> The hub looks good but the shifter is the biggest ugliest thing i've ever seen, I'm pretty sure it's even bigger than my Alfine 8.
> 
> ...


The indicators are pretty useful. You need to put it in 6th gear to calibrate the cable. Its much easier looking at the indicator vs counting in your head as you shift. Plus since the gears are so different than a 27 speed, I find I actually use the indicators from time to time to see where I am. I used to look at my casette sometimes to see what gear I'm in, but you can't do that anymore unless you have those fancy X-Ray eyes.


----------



## FIBRE+ (Nov 6, 2009)

I've not been using it on my Alfine 8 setup for a good 6 months, but then again it could be a different story on the 11. I'll leave it on until it's set up.

I've still not decided on my gearing yet, I noticed prebuilt Alfine 11 MTBs seem to come with 32T 18T as standard, I know gearing is specific to riding preferance\style\terrain but what are people running with 32T chainrings?


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

I run 32/20 and it's great. It's basically the same as my 27 speed, with two gears shaved off the bottom and one gear shaved off the top. You still miss those gears sometimes but overall, it's a really good, wide range. 32/18 would make the low gear too high for me. I do lots of technical climbs.


----------



## rekrutacja (Jan 16, 2011)

I just installed Alfine 11 hub, but i'm not sure about what i did. Here is video explaining the problem: 



 - there is a serious play on locking ring and mechanism allowing gear change. Please let me know how your Alfine 11 behaves in this regard. Should i look more to correct this (but i do not know where i could make a mistake), or it's just expected to be there?


----------



## huntting (Mar 27, 2011)

That's normal. No problem. Ride more - worry less!


----------



## rekrutacja (Jan 16, 2011)

Hunnting, thank you for answer, i was just not sure. I decided to put my bike together all by myself, and this was in fact the first time in my life i was using tools more complicated than hammer so i had lots of doubts ("Zinn and the Art of Mountain Bike Maintenance" was a great help). In fact i'm not sure about most things i did, but... surprisingly bike just works. There is sometimes loud sound when i change gears under load, very similar to sound regular transmission makes when you change gears under load. I assume that this is also sth i should expect.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

Best to anticipate the need for downshifts shifts and *NOT* shift under load!!! You really don't want to destroy anything inside the hub, like for instance the pawls...


----------



## rekrutacja (Jan 16, 2011)

Remeber that jokes about tearing out dropouts? I managed to do sth like that today. Going uphill i pushed cranks really hard and suddenly bang! - my rear wheel jumped out of dropouts. There is a lot of really deep marks in aluminium on them now. I do not know why this happened. I believe that I secured wheel really good, but this shows that really good was not good enough. Now i'm applying paranoid level of force while mounting rear wheel. It seems that Alfine 11 and cable survived all that just fine.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

So you didn't break the dropouts, you just popped out of them?


----------



## rekrutacja (Jan 16, 2011)

Fellsbiker, yes. Anti-turn washers do not sit really deep in droputs, they are protruding inside for just 2mm. Under load they just popped-out (removing some of drop-outs aluminium with them in the process). I do not know why this happened - my bet is the wheel was not tightened strong enough. I hope it is not more fundamental design flaw or incompatibility with my dropouts, and this will not happen again.


----------



## SteveA63 (May 10, 2011)

I'm considering upgrading my Cannondale Bad Boy to one of these, is there a general consensus yet about them? are they worth the $$ when compared to the 8?


----------



## 2gears=1speed (Jun 5, 2004)

*alfine 11*



rekrutacja said:


> I just installed Alfine 11 hub, but i'm not sure about what i did. Here is video explaining the problem:
> 
> 
> 
> - there is a serious play on locking ring and mechanism allowing gear change. Please let me know how your Alfine 11 behaves in this regard. Should i look more to correct this (but i do not know where i could make a mistake), or it's just expected to be there?


...I just watched your video. I checked my alfine 11 and the Cassette joint and lockring are TIGHT on mine, there is about 1 -2 mm of lateral movement on the cassette joint, but to me, yours looks like it moves quite a bit more. You might want to check to see that all the parts are installed in the proper Orientation as flipping 1 of them over during installation could cause this looseness.


----------



## rekrutacja (Jan 16, 2011)

2gears=1speed said:


> ...I just watched your video. I checked my alfine 11 and the Cassette joint and lockring are TIGHT on mine, there is about 1 -2 mm of lateral movement on the cassette joint, but to me, yours looks like it moves quite a bit more. You might want to check to see that all the parts are installed in the proper Orientation as flipping 1 of them over during installation could cause this looseness.


Thanks, i will check that again...


----------



## Arkitektsundberg (Aug 1, 2011)

I have a On-One Pompetamine bike that I've just started using. I've ridden about 200 km and I've had some trouble with the gears. This thread has helped me figure out whats wrong and hopefully I can tweak the cable setup to make it work perfectly. My problem is 8th gear, it just won't work properly.

Recently however, I've run across a much more irritating problem: The "chain guard" ring that is attached to the hub side of the back cog is loose, and no matter how I try to put it in place it kind of sits a little loose. This causes the chain to touch the chain guard resulting in some mild scraping noises. I've tried to look at the manual and to really figure out whats wrong, but from what I can make of the design there really isn't a way of fastening the chain guard. It's just supposed to snap on. It's driving me crazy! Does anyone know what I'm talking about at all?

The bike was built by Rob at Planet X/On-One.

cheers, JS


----------



## arjag (Mar 11, 2011)

Hi everyone, very interesting forum.

@Arkitektsundberg 
I do not have an alfine yet, but I strongly suspect that if the rear cog guard can just be removed and left off.

I have been recently looking at getting a On-One Pompetamine myself. Well, I have been debating a pompetamine complete from on-one or ordering the parts and building myself, or building up a similar bike using the inbred gen2 slot frame (for fast strong commuter with ~28mm tyres)

How do you find the pomp? 

Thanks.

p.s. sorry for this little hi-jack but none of my friends know or care much about cycling.


----------



## Arkitektsundberg (Aug 1, 2011)

@arjag
The pomp is excellent and I love riding it. The bike is beautiful and you get lots of compliments from everyone. I've had big problems adjusting the Alfine 11, and even though Rob at On One bike build is friendly, their support has been.. a bit lacking.

I went for the Alfine 11 because I wanted something that was maintenance-free. Now I've sort of come to realize that just because something can't be adjusted or serviced - doesn't mean it's always hassle-free. 

The 11th gear is sort of flaky and sometimes doesn't catch. Also, some of the others gears don't catch sometimes, or are left in a state where they work but start jumping when the pressure increases. It's really frustrating because you never know exactly if they've caught or not. Also, there is some difference in the feeling in the pedals depending on what gear you are in. Some feel very smooth, some feel a little rough. This might all be an adjustment issue, but how the hell do you adjust the thing except for changing the gear wire length to align the yellow dots? I've found no other way. 

The gear lever indicator is also not properly aligned, this shouldn't matter but it looks stupid. According to the manual, there's no adjusting this. Actually, this might really be a problem because on the 11th it feels like the gear lever doesn't release a full length of wire. (I've NEVER heard of this, and my bike friends just laugh it off, so dare not do anything about it.)

The plastic details such as the chain guard ring are clearly not of very high quality. Sure I could just take the ring off, but that would sort of make it less pure in my mind.

Then again, the bike is in service at a local pro shop now so we'll see. Maybe Rob at on-one put the back wheel together wrong or something. Or maybe the Alfine 11 is just not very sturdy or reliable?

About the pomp:
A good example of the general attitude of On One/Planet X is when you build the bike. There is really no way of knowing what the bike will look like. For example, my tires came with green stripes on them, which clearly doesn't match anything found on the website. If you ask them about this, they sort of just say that they keep changing the setup and some thing may change or differ from whatever was sent out the other week. I might be a bit masochistic, but I like this attitude. Haha. I mean, the bike looks great with the green detail.

Another slight drawback might be that the bike is on the heavier side. I guess a steel frame does that.

Right now I feel like I've should have gone with a proper road bike. Not being able to ride is frustrating! We'll see how this develops.


----------



## arjag (Mar 11, 2011)

Sorry to hear about your probs with the alfine 11.

Hopefully the service guys can sort it. Please keep us all updated.

I am so lost as to what I should do about an all weather commuter;
Alfine 11 vs alfine 8 vs cassette/der AND 700c vs 26"

need to upgrade from this;








I love it, rides great and fast and super compfy, but hard on cassettes and chain (~1500km) and is super noodly vintage frame. Oh, and bakes dont work in wet and no guards. Need disc's and guards and tyres that prevent rim from hitting ground so much.


----------



## Corporal Punishment (May 26, 2011)

Arkitektsundberg said:


> The 11th gear is sort of flaky and sometimes doesn't catch. Also, some of the others gears don't catch sometimes, or are left in a state where they work but start jumping when the pressure increases. It's really frustrating because you never know exactly if they've caught or not. Also, there is some difference in the feeling in the pedals depending on what gear you are in. Some feel very smooth, some feel a little rough. This might all be an adjustment issue, but how the hell do you adjust the thing except for changing the gear wire length to align the yellow dots? I've found no other way.
> 
> The gear lever indicator is also not properly aligned, this shouldn't matter but it looks stupid. According to the manual, there's no adjusting this. Actually, this might really be a problem because on the 11th it feels like the gear lever doesn't release a full length of wire. (I've NEVER heard of this, and my bike friends just laugh it off, so dare not do anything about it.)
> 
> The plastic details such as the chain guard ring are clearly not of very high quality. Sure I could just take the ring off, but that would sort of make it less pure in my mind.


I have an alfine 8. I love it. Best bike investment I ever made. Anyway, I have never used the 11, but they're pretty similar in terms of the adjustment issues you brought up.

Your gearing problems are most likely cable issues. The indexing is done completely by the shifter and if your cable is not free enough, it will not index properly. Q1: are you using the supplied cable or a different one? Q2: is the cable you're using fully sheathed from start to end, or is it cut to meet the frame cable holders (cable runs free along the downtube and chainstay)? When I first installed my alfine 8, I tried to re-use my old cable. The cable sheath stays on the frame allowed for the cable to run outside the sheath for most of the length. I found that I had shift indexing problems caused by the cable. For example - I shifted to 1st gear, then shifted up to 4 (the "normal" gear used for adjustment - the one with the yellow dots) and made my adjustments so the dots lined up. Then when I shifted up and back down to 4, the dots were no longer lined up. If your setup is the same, or if the dots don't line up when shifting down to the "normal" gear (not sure which it is on the 11), then your problem is 100% cable related. Use the supplied cable. If you cut it for length, make sure th end you cut is squeezed back into a perfectly round shape.

The indicator design is horrible and completely unprotected. If you turn the bike upside down, you risk breaking it completely. See my post here for more detail: http://forums.mtbr.com/internal-gear-hubs/alfine-8-shifter-indicator-broken-726822.html

As to the chain guard, are you referring to the plastic guard attached to the cog or the dust cover that comes with the hub? I noticed when I bought a new hub that when I turn the cog around backward (for 50mm MTB chainline) the dust cover and the chain guard attached to the cog rub together. I just removed the chain guard completely. Not sure if that's your problem. If you don't have your cog turned around, then perhaps you could try a narrower chain. Just a thought.

Good luck with your issues.


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

Corporal Punishment said:


> ...The indicator design is horrible and completely unprotected. If you turn the bike upside down, you risk breaking it completely...


100% agree about cable issues. IMO almost all hub gear "problems" are actually cable problems, or caused by continuing to use the bike with cable problems. About time the indexing was made internal like the Rohloff.

I have solved the indicator problem by using a pair of short bar ends to protect it when the bike is upside down. (The red objects on the handlebars)


----------



## Corporal Punishment (May 26, 2011)

Sweet. Good idea. I really like the indicator. I will live without it for now but if I ever replace the shifter I'll look for something like your setup to protect it.


----------



## Pinchphlat (Feb 27, 2009)

Those symptoms are definitely cable issues, because I had the same problem when I first put the Alfine 11 on my commuting bike. My cable had a kink, and that was a serious issue for the hub. Once I replaced the cable with something that was a smooth run to the hub, my problems disappeared.

Also I have noticed that problems with the 11th gear occur if the cassette joint is not properly seated on the hub. When cliping the cable bolt in place, give the cassette joint and the cable a little jiggle when in 11th gear - this seats the cassette joint and removes all shifting issues with 11th.

I love this hub - once I had figured out the minor set-up issues, the hub has performed perfectly. I have also serviced the hub recently (oil change), and found the process to be so simple that it only took 30 minutes :thumbsup:


----------



## Stopbreakindown (Jun 27, 2011)

Velobike said:


> 100% agree about cable issues. IMO almost all hub gear "problems" are actually cable problems, or caused by continuing to use the bike with cable problems. About time the indexing was made internal like the Rohloff.
> 
> I have solved the indicator problem by using a pair of short bar ends to protect it when the bike is upside down. (The red objects on the handlebars)


That may be one of the coolest sleds I have ever seen. :thumbsup:

So is anyone using a spacer for the centerlock rotor or running a centerlock adapter to 6 bolt? Results?

In the process of an 11 build and would like to work out the kinks early as my LBS is 2-3 hours away.


----------



## Arkitektsundberg (Aug 1, 2011)

*Did some service*

Thanks for all your kind help.

I gave up and handed the bike over to the local bike dealer, Bikepro i Malmö. Sweden. The guy changed the wire and lubed it. He however found no way of truly fastening the chain guard ring. They said the fit isn't that good and there's no way to get it to fit perfectly. Some have suggested removing it completely, I will probably try this later.

I took the bike home and tried out the gears, 11 works fine, but on shifting up from 6 everything works good except, 8th. It's a total crunch-bang kind of deal and it really makes you wince. There might be other problems on the lower gears, found no way of testing them under pressure.

Shifting down from 11 sometimes makes 8 work ok though, which I guess makes it likely to be a wire issue.

It's going back to the shop tomorrow. I really don't have the technical skill to make this work. Ordering a bike like this on the internet turned out to be a very bad idea indeed.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

So I'm having my first real problem with my Alfine 11. And it is a REAL problem. 2nd gear started skipping. Before I realized that it was specifically happening in just second gear, I managed to have it skip on me a bunch of times while I was mashing on it climbing up a hill. Now I have no 2nd gear at all. Any force in second gear causes it to skip. I assume shimano will replace it for free (although I'm sure i'll end up paying to have it built into my wheel). But even if shimano does replace it, failure after half a season is pretty much the same failure rate as a derailer. Not the great improvement I was hoping for with this hub.


----------



## Arkitektsundberg (Aug 1, 2011)

Fellsbiker: I'm starting to thing that I might have broken my 8th gear too. I think I'll have to replace the hub. Apparently, On-One might take it back but that is of little consolation to me since I have to ship the whole back wheel to the UK (from Sweden). Lesson learned: Buy a bike from a local dealer if you're a beginner like me


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

8th gear is a high gear though. It seems much less likely that you would break a gear like that, vs a lower gear like 1 or 2. The low gears get hit with so much torque. Although it is strange that 1st gear is rock solid and 2nd is completely junk. I'll have to wait and see what they say.


----------



## Arkitektsundberg (Aug 1, 2011)

Update: Shimano Sweden have agreed to replace the innards of my hub as a warranty service.


----------



## mikael_nr1 (Dec 17, 2005)

About how many POE(points of engagement) does the Alfine 11 hub have? Or put in another way, how many degrees do you have to rotate the hub chainring before the drive mechanism engages and starts to rotatethe wheel.

I'm interested in buying one but I really don't want it to feel like my old 3-speed hub which has like 4 POE.

Would really appreciate a reply from someone who rides an Alfine, because I can't find it on the internet. Thanks


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

The Alfine 11 is a silent hub, that uses a clutch type engagement. So your answer is ∞


----------



## mikael_nr1 (Dec 17, 2005)

Great news! Thanks


----------



## Micrastur (Jul 31, 2007)

Velobike, your fender is awesome. I agree with Stopbreakindown, your sled ranks very, very high!


----------



## Evesie (Feb 26, 2011)

Second gear on my 11 has also started to skip. Hub now stripped out of wheel & being posted back to importer . It has lasted ~400miles & been treated with a lot of mechanical sympathy when shifting. Second is not a gear I used a lot either. Though not sure if 2nd gear pawls are used to drive through other gears - anyone know? - I'll take a look at the diagram & see if I can work it out.
Was good when it was working - did not last long though :-(


----------



## marchone (Aug 16, 2011)

I'm glad I've been watching this thread. It looks like I'll hold off and spring for a Rohloff for an extra thou. Ouch.


----------



## canyoneagle (Sep 27, 2007)

marchone said:


> I'm glad I've been watching this thread. It looks like I'll hold off and spring for a Rohloff for an extra thou. Ouch.


Likewise. Good thing I haven't built my wheel yet.

I'm going the cheap route for now - Nuvinci N360 here I come. By the time that one breaks or wears out (could be a long time, by the sounds of it) I'll see what options exist.
At least with the Nuvinci I can climb hills out of the saddle without having to worry nearly as much about stripping a gear out or blowing up an expensive hub (!!!!!!!!!)

I'm pretty sure I can re-sell my alfine 11 and shifter/parts kit for what I paid - I did get a great deal on Ebay, so at least I'm not totally screwed. Lesson learned - make damn sure of a decision before spending money. I guess I thought I'd done the research, but I'm grateful for the timing of these (sudden) threads with folks busting the hubs.

I was considering proceeding with the build, relegating the 11 speed hub for on-road commuting duty, with a singlespeed for offroad duty, but I don't want to be so restricted.


----------



## Storm Rider (Dec 18, 2010)

I have a lot of trail miles on mine, with probably the lowest gearing around, and still no problems. All of my shifting problems have been cable and shifter related, or operator error. The key is anticipate downshifts while climbing, and to shift under little or no load as much as possible. 

I like this hub a LOT, and I can't wait for Shimano to come out with a MTB specific hub, hopefully with internal indexing. A 12 speed with slightly wider gear spacing would be perfect.


----------



## marchone (Aug 16, 2011)

Storm Rider said:


> All of my shifting problems have been cable and shifter related, or operator error. The key is anticipate downshifts while climbing, and to shift under little or no load as much as possible.


I'm glad it works for you but I'm not that careful with stuff. If I know I'll have to baby it it's a no go for me.

The Rohloff sounds bullet proof.


----------



## Storm Rider (Dec 18, 2010)

I'm not implying that you have to "baby it", you just have to use proper technique, just like any other shifting system. Momentarily reducing torque while shifting is easy and becomes second nature after a while. I am talking mostly about steep climbs, not flat trails.

When I am going fairly fast, and approach a sudden transition to a steep climb, I like to downshift two gears at once. If I am cruising in 6, I will go 6-4-2-1 as I ramp up the steeps. This reduces the number of downshifts under heavy load, which reduces the chance of an impossible or bad shift. I rarely have to bail off due to a bad or late shift. These hubs WILL NOT downshift under real heavy torque. On more gradual climbs, I will downshift one gear at a time as needed.

Like everyone else, I spent decades riding on derailleurs, and the greater the torque, the less willing and able they are to downshift. It's a similar scenario for both IMO.


----------



## marchone (Aug 16, 2011)

Thanks. That makes sense. Your description reminded me of my old 1967 MGB non-syncro gearbox.


----------



## Corporal Punishment (May 26, 2011)

Storm Rider said:


> I'm not implying that you have to "baby it", you just have to use proper technique, just like any other shifting system. Momentarily reducing torque while shifting is easy and becomes second nature after a while. I am talking mostly about steep climbs, not flat trails.
> 
> When I am going fairly fast, and approach a sudden transition to a steep climb, I like to downshift two gears at once. If I am cruising in 6, I will go 6-4-2-1 as I ramp up the steeps. This reduces the number of downshifts under heavy load, which reduces the chance of an impossible or bad shift. I rarely have to bail off due to a bad or late shift. These hubs WILL NOT downshift under real heavy torque. On more gradual climbs, I will downshift one gear at a time as needed.
> 
> Like everyone else, I spent decades riding on derailleurs, and the greater the torque, the less willing and able they are to downshift. It's a similar scenario for both IMO.


I agree 100%. I have the 8 speed - same scenario. I try to completely stop pedaling when shifting down. Shifting up can handle a small amount of torque because the shifting is driven from your thumb pushing the shifter. Downshifting is driven from spring tension on the cassette joint.

It took a few rides to adjust my shifting style but I like it much better. Often, I will down shift while coasting. I can shift while coasting over obstacles - can't do that with a derailleur!  I also noticed that when climbing, shifting down 2 gears at once usually matches the amount of momentum I lose when I stop pedaling. That's still better (faster) than when shifting with a derailleur because derailleurs take longer to engage. With a derailleur, you can lose all your momentum just trying to get into a gear that will work on a steep climb. If you train yourself to click through the gears on the alfine quickly, that will never happen. Once you're confident that you've actually engaged the gear you want, you can hammer it. You'll get that confidence after messing up once or twice and noticing the sound and feel of having the gearing engaged or not.

If you hammer on the pedals while shifting and ignore your senses (including common sense), you'll probably break something internally. If you learn how to shift in a way that removes torque _while shifting_ and suits your riding style, then you'll probably have a long happy life with your alfine hub.


----------



## Storm Rider (Dec 18, 2010)

(_In my best Walter Cronkite voice_) And that's the way it is, Thursday, August 25th, 2011.


----------



## Corporal Punishment (May 26, 2011)

Storm Rider said:


> (_In my best Walter Cronkite voice_) And that's the way it is, Thursday, August 25th, 2011.


:thumbsup:


----------



## canyoneagle (Sep 27, 2007)

Storm Rider said:


> I have a lot of trail miles on mine, with probably the lowest gearing around, and still no problems. All of my shifting problems have been cable and shifter related, or operator error. The key is anticipate downshifts while climbing, and to shift under little or no load as much as possible.
> 
> I like this hub a LOT, and I can't wait for Shimano to come out with a MTB specific hub, hopefully with internal indexing. A 12 speed with slightly wider gear spacing would be perfect.


Are you on an 8 or 11?
I have had quite good luck on my 8's (primarily road miles), and tend to shift the same way you do - never under load.

Nonetheless, I'm still hesitant to build a brand new, in box 11 speed into a wheel if its durability is now being reported to be somewhat less than the 8 speed hub (despite high hopes that it would be more robust).

I'm still on the fence. Thankfully, the Singular frame won't be here until October at the earliest, to I have time to contemplate my decision.
In the mean time, I am riding my son's XT-equipped 29er as my primary transportation, which has reminded me of why I love IGH drive trains. I've gotten spoiled by them since riding them exclusively since '05, after so many years on derailleur setups.


----------



## canyoneagle (Sep 27, 2007)

Storm Rider said:


> (_In my best Walter Cronkite voice_) And that's the way it is, Thursday, August 25th, 2011.


Walter Cronkite sign-off - YouTube


----------



## Storm Rider (Dec 18, 2010)

I have the Alfine 11 speed. See my other posts further up this thread.


----------



## geweber (Jan 12, 2008)

*I have both the Rohloff and Alfine 11.*

I got the Rohloff two months ago and like it real well. However, it is a 2004 vintage and has an oil leak. Since I will send it in to get it serviced I decided to try the Alfine 11. I have only ridden it twice. I like it. These are on a Niner RIP. I have The Alfine geared 22 to 22. I am a spinner and like the low gears for our steep climbs. At the moment I have a 32 and 22 on the front without a derailer. I can switch it manually in a couple of seconds. I like running the Rohloff at 22 x16. It wastes the two lower gears. The higher gears are more efficient and I get more riding in gear 11 which is one to one, the most efficient. Gear 14 gives enough top end for my riding.

The Alfine seems to have some give in it. Standing still with the rear brake on I can move the input cog a few degrees like it is spring loaded. Is this normal?

It shifts from 1 to 2 like an automatic transmission. No sound and no sudden change.

The axle nuts need about 300 inch pounds of torque. Anyone know of a good light weight tool to carry incase of a flat?


----------



## empire_builder (Apr 10, 2008)

Just ran across this today in fact: Portland Design Work 3Wrencho. (Sorry, forum won't let me post a link.


----------



## geweber (Jan 12, 2008)

Sounded good, I just ordered it. Thanks for the info.


----------



## geweber (Jan 12, 2008)

Nice wrench but to heavy to carry in back pack.


----------



## bsdc (May 1, 2006)

Wow! I thought I was geared low. I'm nowhere near your gearing. I'll be interested to hear some long term results. Supposedly, your IGH is going to explode when geared so low. Keep us posted.



geweber said:


> I got the Rohloff two months ago and like it real well. However, it is a 2004 vintage and has an oil leak. Since I will send it in to get it serviced I decided to try the Alfine 11. I have only ridden it twice. I like it. These are on a Niner RIP. I have The Alfine geared 22 to 22. I am a spinner and like the low gears for our steep climbs. At the moment I have a 32 and 22 on the front without a derailer. I can switch it manually in a couple of seconds. I like running the Rohloff at 22 x16. It wastes the two lower gears. The higher gears are more efficient and I get more riding in gear 11 which is one to one, the most efficient. Gear 14 gives enough top end for my riding.
> 
> The Alfine seems to have some give in it. Standing still with the rear brake on I can move the input cog a few degrees like it is spring loaded. Is this normal?
> 
> ...


----------



## rekrutacja (Jan 16, 2011)

Shimano Poland is testing Alfine 11 hub on XC hardtail used for MTB marathons and posting reviews on their website. Results are quite interesting. Hub is geared 44/28t front and 20t rear.

Here is text in polish

Here is Google translation.

PS. Do not judge the rider by the BMX helmet he is wearing. Tomek Wisniewski is known for winning competitions on strange bikes and/or in strange outfit


----------



## geweber (Jan 12, 2008)

I stripped 2nd gear today. I was in a steep technical climb. In first gear I would spin out. I had made this climb before in 2nd gear. However, this time in second gear it gave way. I was running 22/22 which I guess was too much torque for it. I weight 160 pounds and don't have strong legs. I was in the saddle. The cranks are 170 mm. I figured I had about half the force of a healthy 200 pounder standing on the pedals so I should have been okay with the 22/22 ratio. Wrong!!

I sent my Rohloff off to get serviced. It was mailed back 9 days ago. I hope it gets here tomorrow so I can put that back on. Then get the Alfine 11 fixed.


----------



## finch2 (Nov 13, 2009)

geweber said:


> I stripped 2nd gear today. I was in a steep technical climb. In first gear I would spin out. I had made this climb before in 2nd gear. However, this time in second gear it gave way. I was running 22/22 which I guess was too much torque for it. I weight 160 pounds and don't have strong legs. I was in the saddle. The cranks are 170 mm. I figured I had about half the force of a healthy 200 pounder standing on the pedals so I should have been okay with the 22/22 ratio. Wrong!!
> 
> I sent my Rohloff off to get serviced. It was mailed back 9 days ago. I hope it gets here tomorrow so I can put that back on. Then get the Alfine 11 fixed.


I'd be really interested to see what happens to your rohloff with that gearing. Even if you make another thread for it, please keep us posted.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

2nd gear is what went on my hub too. I weight 150, probably more like 175 with gear. I had a 32/20 gear, but I do consider myself to be strong. And I do lots of steep climbs. It is funny to me though, that my 1st gear was always rock solid, but 2nd **** the bed. But shimano sent my shop a new hub and they already swapped the guts. Hopefully I'll be doing my first significant ride tonight, and I expect the hub to be essentially perfect. I think I'm going to change the oil probably around june of next year. It should be broken in by then but just broken in. This way I can keep the oil nice and fresh.


----------



## Corporal Punishment (May 26, 2011)

rekrutacja said:


> PS. Do not judge the rider by the BMX helmet he is wearing. Tomek Wisniewski is known for winning competitions on strange bikes and/or in strange outfit


Cool helmet - iron cross. I want one.


----------



## geweber (Jan 12, 2008)

The 22/22 with the Alfine 11 on a 29ner gives about 48 inches of travel per crank revolution. I am going to put the Rohloff on a 26er next. Because the Rohloff has a lower gear ratio a 34 x 16 will give me the same 48 inches of travel per crank revolution, A 22 x 34 with a derailer is about 53 inches of travel per crank revolution with a 26er.

Rohloff	IGR	Rear	Front	PedTOhub inches/Rev	inches/Rev
1	0.279	16.00	34.00	0.593	2.13	54.01	48.43
2	0.316	16.00	34.00	0.672	1.13	61.18	54.85
3	0.360	16.00	34.00	0.765	1.14	69.70	62.49
4	0.409	16.00	34.00	0.869	1.14	79.18	70.99
5	0.464	16.00	34.00	0.986	1.13	89.83	80.54
6	0.528	16.00	34.00	1.122	1.14	102.22	91.65
7	0.600	16.00	34.00	1.275	1.14	116.16	104.14
8	0.682	16.00	34.00	1.449	1.14	132.04	118.38
9	0.774	16.00	34.00	1.645	1.13	149.85	134.35
10	0.881	16.00	34.00	1.872	1.14	170.56	152.92
11	1.000	16.00	34.00	2.125	1.14	193.60	173.57
12	1.135	16.00	34.00	2.412	1.14	219.74	197.01
13	1.292	16.00	34.00	2.746	1.14	250.13	224.26
14	1.467	16.00	34.00	3.117	1.14	284.01	254.63
5.258 
29.00	26.00
Alfine 11 inches/Rev	inches/Rev
1	0.527	22.00	22.00	0.527	1.00	48.01	43.05
2	0.681	22.00	22.00	0.681	1.29	62.04	55.63
3	0.77	22.00	22.00	0.770	1.13	70.15	62.89
4	0.878	22.00	22.00	0.878	1.14	79.99	71.72
5	0.995	22.00 22.00	0.995	1.13	90.65	81.27
6	1.134	22.00	22.00	1.134	1.14	103.31	92.63
7	1.292	22.00	22.00	1.292	1.14	117.71	105.53
8	1.462	22.00	22.00	1.462	1.13	133.20	119.42
9	1.667	22.00	22.00	1.667	1.14	151.87	136.16
10	1.888	22.00	22.00	1.888	1.13	172.01	154.21
11	2.153	22.00	22.00	2.153	1.14	196.15	175.86

Chain Sprockets 34-11/22 26.00	29.00
PedTOhub	inches/Rev	inches/Rev
1.00	34	22	0.647	52.85	58.95
2.00	30.00	22	0.733	59.90	66.81
3.00	26.00	22	0.846	69.12	77.09
4.00	23.00	22	0.957	78.13	87.15
5.00	20.00	22	1.100	89.85	100.22
6.00	17.00	22	1.294	105.71	117.90
7.00	15.00	22	1.467	119.80	133.62
8.00	13.00	22	1.692	138.23	154.18
9.00	11.00	22	2.000	163.36	182.21
1.00	34	34	1.000	81.68	91.11
2.00	30.00	34	1.133	92.57	103.25
3.00	26.00	34	1.308	106.81	119.14
4.00	23.00	34	1.478	120.75	134.68
5.00	20.00	34	1.700	138.86	154.88
6.00	17.00	34	2.000	163.36	182.21
7.00	15.00	34	2.267	185.14	206.51
8.00	13.00	34	2.615	213.63	238.28
9.00	11.00	34	3.091	252.47	281.60
1.00	34	44	1.294	105.71	117.90
2.00	30.00	44	1.467	119.80	133.62
3.00	26.00	44	1.692	138.23	154.18
4.00	23.00	44	1.913	156.26	174.29
5.00	20.00	44	2.200	179.70	200.43
6.00	17.00	44	2.588	211.41	235.80
7.00	15.00	44	2.933	239.60	267.24
8.00	13.00	44	3.385	276.46	308.36
9.00	11.00	44	4.000	326.73	364.42


----------



## finch2 (Nov 13, 2009)

OK..in your earlier post you mentioned running the rohloff on 22 16, but 34 16 is much closer to recommendations.


----------



## honkonbobo (Nov 18, 2006)

i am just finishing building my alfine 11 into a stans arch 29er wheel to run 32x23. i am about 210lbs geared up. am i looking for trouble? 32 is a far cry from 22 in the front like the other post who crunched his 2nd gear.

i like the ratios that 32x23 offer and dont really want to lose those climbing gears.


----------



## bsdc (May 1, 2006)

honkonbobo said:


> i am just finishing building my alfine 11 into a stans arch 29er wheel to run 32x23. i am about 210lbs geared up. am i looking for trouble? 32 is a far cry from 22 in the front like the other post who crunched his 2nd gear.
> 
> i like the ratios that 32x23 offer and dont really want to lose those climbing gears.


I've run an Alfine 8 on a 29er for a while now at 32x23. I'm about the same weight as you. I can't say I have a ton of miles on it but I do have quite a few standing, hard cranking hours on it. No problems so far. That gear ratio is below what is recommended but not crazy.


----------



## canyoneagle (Sep 27, 2007)

43 inches from a 22/22 with an Alfine 11? Am I reading your basis incorrectly? For a 22 chainring / 22 cog, it will be more like a 15" low gear.
Perhaps I've misunderstood your inputs, but here's what I get for a 22/22 with 700x56

0.53 (Low)	0.68	0.77	0.88	1.0	1.13	1.29	1.46	1.67	1.89	2.15 (High)

1: 15.4
2: 19.8
3: 22.4
4: 25.6
5: 29.0
6: 33.0
7: 37.6
8: 42.6
9: 48.6
10: 55.0
11: 62.7



geweber said:


> The 22/22 with the Alfine 11 on a 29ner gives about 48 inches of travel per crank revolution. I am going to put the Rohloff on a 26er next. Because the Rohloff has a lower gear ratio a 34 x 16 will give me the same 48 inches of travel per crank revolution, A 22 x 34 with a derailer is about 53 inches of travel per crank revolution with a 26er.
> 
> Rohloff	IGR	Rear	Front	PedTOhub inches/Rev	inches/Rev
> 1	0.279	16.00	34.00	0.593	2.13	54.01	48.43
> ...


----------



## empire_builder (Apr 10, 2008)

Canyoneagle, multiply your numbers by Pi to get geweber's numbers.


----------



## canyoneagle (Sep 27, 2007)

empire_builder said:


> Canyoneagle, multiply your numbers by Pi to get geweber's numbers.


Ahh, gotchya. He's doing actual rollout.


----------



## geweber (Jan 12, 2008)

I rode the Maverick ML8 with the Rohloff (32 front 17 rear sprokets) yesterday and everything went well. I did get into granny on the longer steep climbs so I could keep pedeling and not have to stop and rest.

I am using a chain tensioner on the bottom bracket and nothing in the rear. It works fine so far. I put an old large sprocket on the front to provide some protection for the chain tensioner. It is the Yess ETR-B bottom bracket chain tensioner.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

How does that tensioner not hit your chain stays? Can you post some pics? Or even better a short video of you compressing the suspension?


----------



## geweber (Jan 12, 2008)

Log In | Facebook
With the bottom bracket mount I rotated the tensioner forward enough where the pulley goes up just forward where the chain stay spreads out horizontally. I have a photo on face page. Not sure how to link to it.
Jerry Weber | Facebook


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

So you have it pushing down instead of pushing up? Doesn't the tensioner get smashed on logs and rocks all the time? I'd never be able to have a tensioner like that, it wouldn't last a single ride.


----------



## geweber (Jan 12, 2008)

I am hoping the basher (old big ring sprocket) will protect the fixed portion of the tensioner and the pully will get pushed up alongside the chain stay pivot point. If I hit the log or rock straight on will be better than if I slide sideways into a rock.


----------



## geweber (Jan 12, 2008)

I may have my second gear back. Shimano called my LBS back and said to measure the cable from the holder shoulder to the cable fixing nut(184 mm) and to make sure the yellow marks are aligned. Well, the alignment was off about a half of the width of the mark. After adjusting it didn't slip against the break. I will know more when I get it on a climb. This will be great if this is what was wrong.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

My second gear was totally junked. No problem at all with the cable. Shimano sent my LBS a new hub though so I"m already back in business.


----------



## geweber (Jan 12, 2008)

The Alfine 11 is still working pretty good. The alignment of the yellow marks is very critical. If I adjust the cable too much in one direction gear 2 skips, too much in the other direction and gear 10 skips. When the Rohloff came back from getting serviced I put it on my Maverick ML8. I like them both. The Alfine shifts smoother and feels like there is less resistance. I assume the new seals on the Rohloff are causing a little more drag. I would prefer the Rohloff on a deep ride into the trails where I don't want to break down and have a long hike out.

I am getting familiar with the shifting. I like the quick shifting of several gears in an instance with the internal hubs.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

Update: 5th warranty replacement is dead. Only now is Shimano speaking out and saying that 32/20 is too low of a gear ratio, and that every Alfine 11 hub they send me will fail with that ratio. Of course with a higher ratio, you won't be able to climb at all off road. So after a year or so of ambiguity, Shimano is now backing away from this hub being useable on mountain bikes. And those of us who spent a fortune on them and have had multiple replacements? I guess we're just ****ed then?


----------



## Wryknow (Mar 13, 2012)

I'm sorry that you've had so much trouble with it - it must be very frustrating for you. It does sound like they've tried to support you though. If they've provided 4 replacements then they've lost a ton of money on your sale so it sounds like a lose/lose all around. I'm running a 32/20 ratio on my bike though and not having any issues with it. I've only got a 150 miles on it so far of course but it's been flawless for me to date. I still wonder if there's not an issue a full suspension bike, or the cable routing being too tight or something. There has to be another explanation for it than the gear ratio since I (and others) are runing succesfully at that ratio and you've had 5 failures in a row. My condolences, I hope you find something that works for you - it sounds like you've earned some good karma anyway


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

My first hub at 32/20 lasted about 2 months before it started to fail. I would bet you that your hub is going to be failing shortly. In fact, I could challenge you to do some steep climbs in 2nd gear and your hub may die tomorrow. As far as "other" causes, shimano has never once suggested that the problem could be the cable or the shifter. If they'd rather send out whole new hub after whole new hub, they must be pretty confident that the shifter and cable are fine. And I still don't see how being a full suspension, could have anything to do at all with the hub.


----------



## Pinchphlat (Feb 27, 2009)

Sorry to hear about your hub problems. I have put in about 300 km on my alfine 11 that I am running at a ratio of 32/21. There doesn't seem to be any issue with the hub except the occasional mis-shift that occurs during the breaking-in period of an IGH. My alfine 11 seems to be bomb-proof at the moment.

I do not have a full suspension bike though (mine is a soft-tail with 1" travel), so perhaps the other posters are right about it being a cable tension issue? IGH (of all types) are notoriously self-destructing if used with mis-aligned shifting.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

Full suspension does not put any tension on the shifter cable at all. Turning your handle bars moves the cable around significantly more than a few inches of suspension travel. This idea that it has to do with being a FS makes no sense. And also this issue isn't a shifting issue. I've had 2nd gear self destruct when no shift is going on and it is solidly in gear. It just can't take the torque. Pinchphlat I guarantee you that if you to a really steep climb in 2nd gear, the kind of climb where you really have to mash on it, you will annihilate your hub.


----------



## Corporal Punishment (May 26, 2011)

fellsbiker said:


> Full suspension does not put any tension on the shifter cable at all. Turning your handle bars moves the cable around significantly more than a few inches of suspension travel. This idea that it has to do with being a FS makes no sense. And also this issue isn't a shifting issue. I've had 2nd gear self destruct when no shift is going on and it is solidly in gear.


Not true. You must route the cable using sweeping bends - such as what's normally seen at the handle bars as you said. Very tight bends in the cable sheath can kink the sheath, grab the cable or even move it.

The best way to test this is to have a friend help out, put it in 6th gear, run the rear suspension through its entire travel and see if the marks move at all. If so - then change the routing immediately so only very sweeping bends are possible in any position of travel.

Your best bet is to run the cable down the down tube and along the chainstay. Leave lots of slack under the BB shell and do not secure it to the BB shell. Slack is good.


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

fellsbiker said:


> Full suspension does not put any tension ...blah, blal, blah...Pinchphlat I guarantee you that if you to a really steep climb in 2nd gear, the kind of climb where you really have to mash on it, you will annihilate your hub.


Yeah, right, you toasted 5 hubs without every trying to address any issues, now you're an expert, NOT. Shimano keeps replacing your incorrectly installed hub, proof of good customer service? Not according to you and "Don in Austin", no, you two claim it's proof Shimano sucks. This website is interested in fixing issues, you're not. If you're not going to try and fix things, then maybe it's time go back to derailleurs.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

Please enlighten me, how was my hub being incorrectly installed? You line up the dots. That's essentially all there is to it. But you seem to know something else about it so please, let me in on the secret!

Also, I thought this website was interested in reviews.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

Corporal Punishment said:


> Not true. You must route the cable using sweeping bends - such as what's normally seen at the handle bars as you said. Very tight bends in the cable sheath can kink the sheath, grab the cable or even move it.
> 
> The best way to test this is to have a friend help out, put it in 6th gear, run the rear suspension through its entire travel and see if the marks move at all. If so - then change the routing immediately so only very sweeping bends are possible in any position of travel.
> 
> Your best bet is to run the cable down the down tube and along the chainstay. Leave lots of slack under the BB shell and do not secure it to the BB shell. Slack is good.


Well them maybe your frame has some fundamental differences from mine. But on my frame, there's barely a bend at all in the shifter cable. Nothing even remotely close to a kink. Like I said, on my bike anyway, the shifter cable at the suspension point is significantly looser and free than it is even at the handlebar loop.


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

We've been trying to discuss some of the more subtle issues, but you refuse to open your mind. Go get your derailiuers, IGHs are not for you.


----------



## Corporal Punishment (May 26, 2011)

pursuiter said:


> Yeah, right, you toasted 5 hubs without every trying to address any issues, now you're an expert, NOT


Actually, that's not true. Fellsbiker reported - possibly in another thread - that one came with a grinding noise and one came with bad seals leaking oil out of the box. So at least 2 of them had manufacturing issues and he didn't "toast" them in any way. I'm thinking the replacements are rebuilds or returns or something. It would be nice to get to the bottom of this because I think I can only remember one other person reporting the same 2nd gear issue. That's not much in the way of negative feedback. There has definitely been more positive feedback reported.

And by the way, Fellsbiker, I have a hardtail so I don't have any pivot issues. But when I first set up my alfine 8, I did kink the cable a bit and what I found was that the cable would get stuck in the sheath. It upshifted fine, but because a spring inside the hub pulls the cable back through to downshift, it would not fully shift into gear. So if I started from 1 and shifted to 8 there was no problem and the dots would line up at 4 every time. But shifting from 8 back down to 4, the dots would not line up because the cable was getting stuck. Bad news but I caught onto it fast and re-routed the cable and haven't had an issue since.

Can you post a pic of how you run your cable? All roads are pointing in that direction and it would certainly help shut all of us up. ;-)


----------



## -jes (Feb 6, 2011)

Corporal Punishment said:


> Can you post a pic of how you run your cable? All roads are pointing in that direction and it would certainly help shut all of us up. ;-)


There is a picture of fellsbikers setup on one of the Alfine threads, the cable run does look quite good, although I think it could be straightened up a bit from the seat stay to the hub, swopping over the torque washers to the opposing side could help with this.


----------



## geweber (Jan 12, 2008)

I am on my second Alfine 11. I was way over torqued with gear ratio. It gave out on a steep climb. I plan to take it easier with my second one. I am running 32 x 24 now. I think I was running 22 x 22 when about 5 gears gave way.

I do find the cable adjustment very sensitive. A little too much adjustment one way and second gear starts to skip and a little too much the other way then gear 10 starts to skip. I adjust between these two points. I favor second gear a little more since I use this one more on the climbs. I use this method instead of looking at the yellow dots.


----------



## merlinm (Feb 12, 2010)

fellsbiker said:


> Please enlighten me, how was my hub being incorrectly installed? You line up the dots. That's essentially all there is to it. But you seem to know something else about it so please, let me in on the secret!
> 
> Also, I thought this website was interested in reviews.


Hm. Fellsbiker, how would you describe your fitness level, strength in particular? Have you trained on single speed bikes? I know some mountain bikers that have superhuman strength relative your typical rider. What kind of trail riding do you normally do? That might help explain your failures.


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

While I'd love to say that yes, I do have super human strength... these hub failures were happening early early in the season before I had any sort of real strength going. And when it broke, I'd be without my bike for weeks. So I don't think it was that. If I was breaking them NOW, I'd buy that. I just blew up a power link yesterday from pedaling the **** out of my bike. But these hubs were breaking with just moderately heavy pedaling.


----------



## wheeliam (Feb 16, 2011)

hi everyone!

I'm currently using this hub with 32/18t and has no problem. I use my MTB almost on paved roads only, set-up as commuter with 700x28c tires.

Now, I have a roadie friends that I frequently ride with & I'm toying the idea of putting a bigger crank/chainring to somehow keep with them up a little bit. Does anyone try the Shimano Alfine crankset with 45t chainring? How was it? If I'd like to have a lighter and bigger crank, what's the best recommendation? Should I use a road crankset? What's the combination (should I stick with 1.9:1 Shimano's recommendation)?

Thanks to your replies.


----------



## dru (Sep 4, 2006)

I geared my Alfine 8 MTB with 44x16 running 700x32 road tires and drop bars for a season. Worked just fine for road riding but you really feel the inefficiency in certain gears. Sadly my 1985 30 dollar Raleigh Grand Prix is infinitely better as a road bike.

Drew


----------



## fellsbiker (Jun 17, 2006)

hah


----------



## Tunalic (Feb 13, 2012)

wheeliam said:


> hi everyone!
> 
> I'm currently using this hub with 32/18t and has no problem. I use my MTB almost on paved roads only, set-up as commuter with 700x28c tires.
> 
> ...


Hello Weeliam, I bought the Alfine crankset with 39t chainring for my Sawyer and found out that it would not fit. It's for 68mm shells and the Sawyer has 73mm. Also, when I pushed the crank in the bottom bracket I believe the chainring either hit the chainstay or was a hair away from it. I went ahead and kept it...may put it on another bike.

Since you are using the original wheels that came with your bike can you find out what size spokes you used? I'm out of town until next week...trying to set up my bike shop to have all that is needed.


----------



## wheeliam (Feb 16, 2011)

Hi Tunalic, thanks for the heads up! 

I remember in the Trek Sawyer forum, theres one guy there (I think GuitarTed) who was able to put a 46t centertrack carbon belt drive. Well I might have missed something there. Anyways, I'l try to ask my LBS as to which big crank best fits my 29er.

About the spoke size, Im using a gauge 14 with 286mm length spokes to fit the Alifne 11 on the Bontrager Duster.

Goodluck on your build.

Cheers!

Wheeliam


----------



## Tunalic (Feb 13, 2012)

Thanks for the info Wheeliam! Got em ordered now. 

And Cheers to You!


----------



## Tunalic (Feb 13, 2012)

Finally got it on. Finished it last night and had to take it around the block. I didn't know what to think...went through all gears and was smooth as my 8 speed. Only got to do a few miles this afternoon but so for so good!


----------



## Winfried (Nov 22, 2014)

Hello

I'll take advantage of this thread to ask a question about the Alfine 11.

On a brand new Alfine 11 + Gates belt drive-based bike bought last summer, I got my first puncture on the rear wheel last Sunday, so went through the procedure to remove the wheel:

Unhooked the IGH cable
Undid the two bolts and removed the wheel
Changed the inner tube
Put the wheel back
Redid the bolts
Rehooked the IGH cable.

It runs OK, but I noticed that, even when set to the 6th gear, the two yellow marks are no longer aligned:








By default, the tension screw next to the speed shifter was already screwed all the way so couldn't go any further to align the yellow marks.

Any idea why the two marks drifted, and what should I do?

Thank you.


----------



## Pinchphlat (Feb 27, 2009)

Hi Winfried,

Have you checked that the cable outer is properly seated in either the shift lever or in the cable sleeve down near the hub? That is usually what causes the yellow markers to unexpectantly mis-align on my Alfine 11. Another option may be that the cable is not wrapped around the cassette joint mechanism properly.


----------



## Winfried (Nov 22, 2014)

Thanks for the tip.

Indeed, a bike mechanic solved the adjustment problem by tightening the cable really hard on the shifter end:








I guess undoing the cable at the IGH end can unloosen the cable at the other end and cause the issue I had.


----------



## Pinchphlat (Feb 27, 2009)

That is exactly how the yellow markers get misaligned on my A11. The cable drops out of the shifter barrel when I remove the other end from the hub. I now regularly check that I have placed the cable back into the barrel before looking at the yellow markers.


----------



## Winfried (Nov 22, 2014)

Thanks for the feedback.

I wish someone would have mentioned that possibility instead of recommending elsewhere to "simply" chunk the Alfine and get a Rohloff instead 

After four months of riding that belt-drive-powered bike every day in the city and week-end outings, I'm very happy with the Alfine 11. I just wish Shimano would improve the design so that it no longer leaks oil.


----------



## Bullit_cn (Feb 24, 2004)

Im building an Alfine wheels on my Pugsley but would like to seek inputs on the spoke lacing. Do you do 3x or 2x lacing with a Marge Lite?


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

2 cross. I've done it both ways, 3x makes the spoke nipple angle bend the spoke in a manner that I prefer not to have (and right at the spoke threads). 2x makes the nipple angle less extreme and there's less stress on the spoke. I make my 700c/29er wheels 2x these days also although it's not as bad (3x) as it is for 26" wheels.


----------



## PlutonicPlague (Jan 19, 2014)

I have a Pugsley I custom built from a frame. Marge Lites with an Alfine 8. I had my wheels built professionally. Spokes are 2-cross.

I had recently noticed 3rd gear skipping occasionally when climbing steep dunes. Temps during those rides weren't too cold, high 30's to low 40's F, so I didn't think it was the grease thickening up from the cold. Then I had it skip once in 7th when accelerating.

I examined the yellow marks (in 4th) on my hub, and they were very slightly mis-aligned. The edge of one mark hit the center of the other. I readjusted the cable using the adjuster barrel on my shifter, so that the two marks were perfectly aligned, and took my Pugs for a test ride in the local pine forested dunes.
I stood up in 3rd and hammered it several times going up a steep dune. Absolutely no slipping now. 7th was solid, too. So I discovered that this hub might start acting up and slipping if/when it gets only a hair out of perfect adjustment.
I discovered a tidbit on info in the Alfine 8 literature that came with my other bike (Giant TranSend EX). It states that the cable length from the end of the housing to the clamp should be 101mm. I think I originally set mine to 100mm, but it has probably stretched a tad. The adjuster barrel on the shifter takes care of that, anyway.


----------



## Bullit_cn (Feb 24, 2004)

pursuiter said:


> 2 cross. I've done it both ways, 3x makes the spoke nipple angle bend the spoke in a manner that I prefer not to have (and right at the spoke threads). 2x makes the nipple angle less extreme and there's less stress on the spoke. I make my 700c/29er wheels 2x these days also although it's not as bad (3x) as it is for 26" wheels.


Thanks a lot, will build mine with 2X then,


----------

