I’ll also add that I have IGH bikes, I have single speeds, I have multiple-geared bikes using derailleur shifting (both index and friction), but I really don’t see any as “elegant” or some more elegant than others. Maybe compared to automobiles, they are, but that’s not the definition implied here.
Neal Lerner Brookline MA On Friday, September 13, 2024 at 4:03:46 PM UTC-6 nlerner wrote: > That seems an accurate summary to me, Bill, but this medium always puzzles > me by its sharing of opinions without agreeing on terminology. You might > guess I’m a pointy headed academic, which would be correct. > > Neal Lerner > Brookline MA > On Friday, September 13, 2024 at 3:51:05 PM UTC-6 Bill Lindsay wrote: > >> Neal >> >> Nobody gave a shared definition for elegant. It's just opinions being >> shared. Patrick Moore just shared the opinion that IGH bikes are far more >> elegant than derailleur bikes. I responded that in my opinion, IGH bikes >> and derailleur bikes are equivalently elegant but an IGH bike is "max >> elegant" with a belt. >> >> It sounds like you agree that there are -OR- can be elegant IGH bikes and >> elegant derailleur bikes, because for you it's an aesthetic quality. >> >> BL in EC >> On Friday, September 13, 2024 at 2:41:50 PM UTC-7 nlerner wrote: >> >>> Well, I must have missed the shared definition of what “elegant” means. >>> Seems the implication is that elegant is equivalent to simple or paired >>> down, e.g., devoid of the complications of derailleurs and gear clusters or >>> simple to maintain and service in Bill’s examples of cartridge BBs and belt >>> drive. Elegant, to me, is more an aesthetic quality than a mechanical one, >>> but that’s just me. >>> >>> Neal Lerner >>> Brookline MA >>> >>> On Friday, September 13, 2024 at 3:34:21 PM UTC-6 Eric White wrote: >>> >>>> The silence is very nice, most of the time, but when I ride my commuter >>>> with IGH and belt in the rain, I get a bit of wet belt squeak. It's not >>>> intolerable, but it's not silent either. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 2:50 PM ian m <darkg...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Belt drive is extremely practical for people who don't *care *for >>>>> drivetrain maintenance. I maintain all my (and wife's) bikes and am >>>>> overjoyed with the IGH and belt drive on my Omnium cargo. >>>>> Not to mention the beautiful silence that accompanies riding with it. >>>>> >>>>> On Friday, September 13, 2024 at 3:26:39 PM UTC-4 Ray Varella wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Belts would likely be well received if more bikes were built to >>>>>> accommodate them. >>>>>> A belt with an IGH be extremely practical for people who don’t >>>>>> maintain their bikes. >>>>>> Children’s bikes, commuter bikes and occasional use bikes that get >>>>>> stored outside would benefit. >>>>>> >>>>>> MHO >>>>>> Ray >>>>>> >>>>>> On Friday, September 13, 2024 at 11:19:47 AM UTC-7 Bill Lindsay wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> "elegant IMO" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Elegance certainly is in the eye of the beholder. Even if you think >>>>>>> your derailleur-equipped bike(s) are inelegant, I think they are >>>>>>> equivalently elegant to your IGH bike(s). I think they are all valid >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> equivalently elegant ways to realize a build. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Pushing it to the limit of *Opinion*, in the IMO department, I'm >>>>>>> becoming convinced that chains are primarily good for being derailed. >>>>>>> Shiftability is the core attribute of contemporary chains. For me, if >>>>>>> you've got a drive train with no derailleurs, the preferable setup, in >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> IMO elegance department is a BELT. A belt is a purpose built optimized >>>>>>> object for a no-derailleur setup. So, for optimal elegance (IMO), an >>>>>>> IGH >>>>>>> build should be a belt build. IMO. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Bill Lindsay >>>>>>> El Cerrito, CA >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thursday, September 12, 2024 at 4:52:56 PM UTC-7 Patrick Moore >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes to the IGH; far more elegant IMO than a FD and a chain >>>>>>>> tensioner not to mention the multiple chainrings. But the defect of >>>>>>>> IGHs is >>>>>>>> the choice of ratios, drag -- if you choose a wider-range, more-ratios >>>>>>>> hub >>>>>>>> the internal friction increases, and if you choose the lowest drag >>>>>>>> options >>>>>>>> (several tests have shown that the basic SA 3 speed hubs have no more >>>>>>>> drag, >>>>>>>> or even a wee bit less drag, overall, than derailleur systems), you >>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>> limited to the more basic 2 and 3 speed hubs which have very limited >>>>>>>> range. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But if you can get by with limited ratios, they're worth >>>>>>>> considering. I've built very usable all-rounder beaters with the >>>>>>>> venerable, >>>>>>>> durable, and in fact ineradicable AW, and the nice thing is that the >>>>>>>> these >>>>>>>> are very available, very cheap -- old units are about $50 on eBay and >>>>>>>> older >>>>>>>> ones, even the 114 mm OL ones, will work fine with 120 mm frames. I've >>>>>>>> set >>>>>>>> mine up with 3d/high/overdrive for pavement cruising with about a 72" >>>>>>>> gear, >>>>>>>> 2nd/direct at about 54", and 1st/low/underdrive at about 41". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Couple the AW with a double ring and you can split the gaps in the >>>>>>>> AW for a very usable 6-speed -- my second complete bike build circa >>>>>>>> 1971 >>>>>>>> had a "half stepped" AW, tho' I used 2 cogs instead of 2 rings. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But even more exotic SA IGH are available on eBay; the wonderful AM >>>>>>>> medium ratio hub comes up from time to time at reasonable prices (I >>>>>>>> got >>>>>>>> mine for well under $200 each -- $150? -- IIRC in runnable condition) >>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>> again the 114 mm OL will fit 120 mm frames with only strategic >>>>>>>> anti-rotation washer selection and placement. And, it uses the >>>>>>>> ubiquitous >>>>>>>> AW trigger shifter. Direct, 15.5% overdrive, 0.8654% underdrive; mine >>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>> geared75/65/56". And the AM is reputed to be, like the AW, one of SA's >>>>>>>> most >>>>>>>> durable hubs. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And even the pure gold ASC close ratio fixed 3 speed. I got my 2 >>>>>>>> very cheaply, $200 NOS and $150 used but VG. But these are much rarer; >>>>>>>> I >>>>>>>> was lucky. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 1:19 PM Mackenzy Albright < >>>>>>>> mackenzy...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ... I think an internal real hub like a sturmey-archer 3 speed >>>>>>>>> with a compact double crank and paul tensioner would be an incredible >>>>>>>>> build.... Price aside the roaduno is the perfect candidate for some >>>>>>>>> fun >>>>>>>>> builds. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/709d070f-15fb-453a-a56b-4a03dc69115bn%40googlegroups.com >>>>> >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/709d070f-15fb-453a-a56b-4a03dc69115bn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/06f4d81d-e4ac-4785-94be-8ea3a84131cdn%40googlegroups.com.
