Timeline for Why offset the rear rim to the hub and not the hub in the frame?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 11, 2021 at 16:41 | answer | added | juhist | timeline score: 4 | |
| Mar 9, 2017 at 18:04 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://4.bp.blogspot.com/ with https://4.bp.blogspot.com/
|
|
| Sep 7, 2014 at 15:30 | answer | added | user13680 | timeline score: 3 | |
| Oct 27, 2012 at 21:43 | answer | added | curmudgeon2B | timeline score: 4 | |
| Apr 15, 2012 at 18:51 | comment | added | Daniel R Hicks | Ah, but go back through the past 35 years or so of cycling and it's not so neat. | |
| Apr 15, 2012 at 1:52 | comment | added | Ehryk | It looks like most fronts are 'standardized' to be ~100mm, rear 6/7 speeds are ~126mm, 8/9/10 speed road is ~130mm, and 8/9/10 MTB is ~135mm. I noticed that Surly bikes do offset their wheels like this. | |
| Apr 15, 2012 at 1:50 | comment | added | Ehryk | I'm not sure where I'm 'defining a standard.' It seems there is a rather large one - the 8/9/some 10 speed cassette size that can accept a 6/7 speed with a 4.5mm spacer, or be converted to single speed. That's a well defined standard, so shift the dropouts to the right that amount. Not my standard (Hyperglide perhaps?). | |
| Apr 15, 2012 at 1:35 | vote | accept | Ehryk | ||
| Apr 14, 2012 at 22:15 | comment | added | Daniel R Hicks | The width between dropouts is not really all that standardized. Yes, for a particular number of cogs and derailer brand the width is "standard", but that changes every time Shimano wants to obsolete old parts. Forks can tolerate 5mm or so of variation. But the width of the cluster, in your scheme, would determine the offset, and that varies widely. | |
| Apr 14, 2012 at 20:08 | comment | added | zenbike | And I told you why below. | |
| Apr 14, 2012 at 19:54 | comment | added | Ehryk | When? Front hubs seem to be somewhat standardized (100mm?) since they all fit in the same forks, are rear hubs not standardized in width for the most part? All I'm asking is, why not offset the frame and not the rim by whatever amount that is? | |
| Apr 14, 2012 at 18:20 | comment | added | Daniel R Hicks | That's simply because you've defined an arbitrary offset as "the standard". | |
| Apr 14, 2012 at 18:15 | comment | added | Ehryk | Not exactly true. Change rear axle width, and you're right, but if you take a mountain bike hub, for example, you can put 6, 7, 8, 9 speed (6 and 7 with spacers) or single speed conversion cassettes on the same hub and everything would still be centered. 10/11 may require a different frame. | |
| Apr 14, 2012 at 18:07 | comment | added | Daniel R Hicks | For (2) the rim would not be centered between the axle ends, so the bike would have to be set up with the same offset as the wheel. Change number of cogs, eg, and you change centering. | |
| Apr 14, 2012 at 16:10 | comment | added | Ehryk | 1) if it's just tradition, then it's time someone shakes it up, 2) How do you figure? It would go in centered just like any other wheel, and 3) what causes the uneven stress? That one bearing is farther from center than the other? Both should be under their limit, so is there something wrong with uneven stress? | |
| Apr 14, 2012 at 12:27 | answer | added | zenbike | timeline score: 13 | |
| Apr 14, 2012 at 9:47 | comment | added | Daniel R Hicks | 1) Tradition, 2) It would make mating wheel to bike (and getting brakes centered, etc) harder, 3) It places uneven stress on the axle and bearings. | |
| Apr 14, 2012 at 8:39 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackBicycles/status/191083348943319040 | ||
| Apr 14, 2012 at 8:16 | comment | added | Ehryk | I know they make offset rear rims to accomodate this, but this is another compromise as the rims are weaker on one side. It seems we try everywhere else, Why not the frame? | |
| Apr 14, 2012 at 8:14 | history | asked | Ehryk | CC BY-SA 3.0 |