# Would you use string instead of a chain?



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

Not an internal gear hub, but a fascinating alternative transmission with 19 speeds, none duplicated, and light.

Stringbike | A line


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

dead stop
not going to pick a drive system that wastes watts more than a chain, cogs, and der. 

neat though...

mechanically inefficient to convert reciprocating motion to rotary motion.

chain and cogs, no conversion needed, more efficient

do you really want to deal with this maintenance nightmare ?
it would be fun on the first ride showing it off, then after an hour I'd be longing
for my normal drivetrain and sick of trying to make excuses for the stringdrive


----------



## leaftye (Dec 27, 2007)

It looks like it improves breakover height. I'd like to give it a ride.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

I wonder if they could design it with a second drive on the opposite side that would be engaged while the first slide slips back. But I guess that would be a mess trying to still have it have multiple gears. And of course, that would add weight.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

chazpat said:


> I wonder if they could design it with a second drive on the opposite side that would be engaged while the first slide slips back. But I guess that would be a mess trying to still have it have multiple gears. And of course, that would add weight.


not sure what you mean ? it has the same system on both sides

anyhow I stand by what I said. NEAT, on paper

in practice, you will feel the watts drop of pushing all that extra baloney around...not to mention how fragile that would be in a crash, or strike, or a random stick finding it's way in.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

127.0.0.1 said:


> not sure what you mean ? it has the same system on both sides
> 
> anyhow I stand by what I said. NEAT, on paper
> 
> in practice, you will feel the watts drop of pushing all that extra baloney around...not to mention how fragile that would be in a crash, or strike, or a random stick finding it's way in.


Oops, I was just looking at the animation and not the pic you posted. From their current offerings, they appear to be pretty causal bikes. I would be curious to try one. I'd hate to replace the shifter cables on it, though.


----------



## thesmokingman (Jan 17, 2009)

127.0.0.1 said:


> NEAT, on paper


This.


----------



## Velobike (Jun 23, 2007)

127.0.0.1 said:


> dead stop
> not going to pick a drive system that wastes watts more than a chain, cogs, and der. ...
> mechanically inefficient to convert reciprocating motion to rotary motion.
> 
> chain and cogs, no conversion needed, more [/SIZE]efficient




I don't think there's much difference. That's based on something I read on the IHPVA site some years ago.



127.0.0.1 said:


> do you really want to deal with this maintenance nightmare ?
> it would be fun on the first ride showing it off, then after an hour I'd be longing
> for my normal drivetrain and sick of trying to make excuses for the stringdrive


Actually I thought it looked dead simple considering you have 19 ratios. I watched their maintenance clips, and there's nothing there that a competent home mechanic couldn't do. 

Especially compared to a derailleur system with multiple chainrings and a cassette with 9-12 cogs at the rear. And as for a hubgear...

The negative I see is that the mechanism is exposed, however it would not take much to enclose it in a light polycarbonate or similar casing to keep the muck off.

Another possible negative is the path your feet take when pedalling. If it is not rotary, then there would need to be a period of adjustment which would put many people off.

I have had experience with non rotary pedalling on an Alenax but was never comfortable on it. This has different system, so it's not directly comparable although the method of changing ratio is similar.



It would be good to hear from someone who has had one for long enough to get used to it.


----------

