italian gearbox
- Thread starter dhkid
- Start date
Are they going to try to patent aluminum, titanium, magnesium, steel, stainless-steel, and wood as well?? There has to be someone somewhere who has used some sort of fiber reinforcement for a gear enclosure (prior art)?
What about BCDs original gear box?
What some people try to call "IP" gets pretty ridiculous, IMO.
Am I out in left field on this?
What about BCDs original gear box?
What some people try to call "IP" gets pretty ridiculous, IMO.
Am I out in left field on this?
simple solution that i like but id tend to think from the gear range this setup has, that it isnt meant much as a dh system, too many gears and too big difference (probably close to 4:1). besides, the size of it means you have to use some pretty wild main pivot location.
Carbon fiber has been used for gear enclosures before- in Formula 1 cars and even motorcycles. Don't think it's ever been used in bikes.....
Sweet.
Question- How come these all use twist shifters? Why can't a trigger style shifter be used? Or can it and I missed that thread?
Question- How come these all use twist shifters? Why can't a trigger style shifter be used? Or can it and I missed that thread?
Annoying isn't it? I suspect it's partly because it's easier to design a twist shifter to operate the push-pull twin cable system many of these things run, but also maybe because just about every permutation of trigger shifter has been patented by either Sram or Shimano, leaving everyone else struggling to figure out something different. Just a thought.
course!! the gray matter wasn't working too well yesterday...
Can't seem to view that.
Is it a double inverted cluster like Ritchie from NZ's been running.
Edit:
Guess it is
Is it a double inverted cluster like Ritchie from NZ's been running.
Edit:
Guess it is
looks awsome, does any one know how much it weighs in at...?
It's a tough call. Sometimes it gets out of hand, but sometimes people put huge amounts of time and effort into projects hoping to merely recoup their investments and advance the technology, only to have someone come along and rip it off. And rip it off poorly to boot, which hurts the reputation of the product. Sure, some people want to make boatloads of money - it's still not clear what Honda wants to do - but that's not always what it's about.
i dont think honda is trying to make a bunch of money off it. they just dont want other people making money off it.
Hmmm. Well, to use a trigger you'd need the mechanism to be spring-loaded like a rear der., and things are already pretty complicated in there. I imagine it could be done - BCD always seems ahead of the curve so maybe he's on it. If you could do that, I wonder if you could just sell the box and make it compatible across SRAM and Shimano cassettes and shifters, just like selling rear hubs or whatever. It's not clear to me if they are using standard freehub bodies in there or what, but I don't think selling a box compatible with existing drivetrain stuff would create any patent issues - in fact that would seem like an ideal way to go.
that's the longest shifter I've ever seen. I don't like steering, braking or lifting the front end of my bike up much anyways, so I guess that's cool.
Longer than even the halfpipe, me thinks. At least you could make braaaap sounds when you twist it.
I still wish people would get away from the "massive amount of junk near the BB" idea. It limits suspension design, and that's a big deal IMO.
Longer than even the halfpipe, me thinks. At least you could make braaaap sounds when you twist it.
I still wish people would get away from the "massive amount of junk near the BB" idea. It limits suspension design, and that's a big deal IMO.
I'm guessing you're joking there,reducing the rear wheels unsprung weight and having the gearbox weight low and a high pivot location are all the best bennefits you could gain from a gearbox,followed by shifting bennefits.I think it's a great step forward with what appears to be a sound logical design that's hopefully reliable. In the video the chain and therefore cassettes seem to be under alot of load and therefore shortly lived but I gues that's not that big a deal and they may have been changing lots of gears for effect and I guess you normally would only be changing one or two gears at a time.No kidding. Maybe they could put it on the rear wheel.
I hope they can produce it to the mainstream market.
that was sarcasm.
I just mean why build a gear "box" that is enormous and requires you to change your entire frame design to use it? That's my problem with the gboxx standard...creative frame design is severly limited.
Low mass centralization and a compact CoG is ideal, and these designs do that well, but I'd love to see something that's not so large...like the rohloff/lahar setup.
I just mean why build a gear "box" that is enormous and requires you to change your entire frame design to use it? That's my problem with the gboxx standard...creative frame design is severly limited.
Low mass centralization and a compact CoG is ideal, and these designs do that well, but I'd love to see something that's not so large...like the rohloff/lahar setup.
Looks like 11-28 clusters or thereabouts.
That means a 650% range.
In steps of 20% increase.
Rohloff runs 500% in 13% steps. Sounds pretty able-bodied to me.
That means a 650% range.
In steps of 20% increase.
Rohloff runs 500% in 13% steps. Sounds pretty able-bodied to me.
Looks like a neat system. Petespeed was still a superior system for downhill IMO. Not as large gear jumps (although that could be varied with cassette size in the italian model) and probably les weight (only one, smaller cassette in petespeed). Nice to see new companies puching the envelope though.
This sh1t is sooo cool, I can not wait for few years down the road when all of this is trick and refined.
that is sweet, but imagine after 3months hard riding when you go to change your two XTR clusters you have in their so the weight isnt 1 billion kilograms... makes for expensive. wont wear at as fast as its in a sealed unit, but still gonna wear, and be expensive when it does.
pretty sweet vid. cool idea.
pretty sweet vid. cool idea.
I saw Ritchie's bike the other day, while out riding.
Its...........ah..........interesting?
It does seem to work ok though.
Cool idea, hope it works out, could give us riders/ buyers another option if it does, which cant be all bad.
For downhill, many racers are running a road cassette 11-23 = 209% range.
You could build one of these with an 11-17 7 speed on both sides which would have 239% range in approximately 15% steps and would be much smaller and lighter than the one shown.
actually that'd give you a 13 speed with 6- 9% changes. Not very appropriate for DH where the ideal gap would be about 20%.
I'd be looking at a 6 speed with 3 at the bottom and 4 at the top and a 250% range.
These systems have some potential due to no need to move either cluster and minimal chain length changes making a compact single jockey derailier possible. the best settup would be to have the clusters offset so ones cogs are between the others. This should allow shifting to alternate between top and bottom as long as the right stiffness and jockey sideplay are built into the shifter carriage. Shifting top and bottom simultaneously is clumsy. Provided smooth shifting of the "front der" part is achievable these could prove the best derinbox design.
What are you running BCD?
well i was doing 12-19 - tooth profiles cut down for quick shifts.
but i never got it to shift as fast as i wanted.
now with his patents its in the trash.
i think 29 wheels will progress DH far FAR FAR more!
can't see patents holding water. Other than a few details perhaps. All been done lots of times dating back up to a century so priors and obviousness. If they hassle you say " fine, I'll pay you a licence fee for any details of your design I've copied. Or we go to court and you lose your patent due to priors and obviousness. "
I am talking about a 7 sprocket cluster on both ends, each 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, & 17. The system mates one sprocket on one cluster with the inline sprocket on the other cluster only. This will result in 239% range in 7 gears with approximately 15% steps. An 11 tooth at the crank may not take the torque so one might have to start at 13 teeth.
One option here would be to just make a gearbox that is compatible with a shimano/sram shifter, and not try to re-make the shifter.
What I'm surprised by though is Rohloff, and that they've not further developed the speedhub yet. I mean that thing is the shiznit, with a couple of glitches, but has been around 10 years or so - you'd think by now they'd have solved the glitches, and made it into a frame-centric solution?
I'm just not sure why you'd want to use twice as many sprockets and require both ends to shift simultaneously for the same range and steps as a one at a time rig.
I guess the front shifting may be a little better if the ratios are tight, but generally shifting both at once would seem likely to eliminate this advantage.
I'm sure you could use a standard shifter with a leverage multiplier at the business end. That Italian one seems to have alternating cogs. Is it a 21 speed or an 11?
BCD you were a gearbox pioneer in the late 90's but gave it away for the area suspension diversion . With things like over 80% of poll respondants saying they would prefer to buy a gearbox bike on Farkin.net recently you should not be chucking gearboxes in favour of big wheels. Big wheels are good but if you lose some swingarm angle the tradeoffs on big bump performance, pedalling and braking may lose their advantage. By all means do both, but don't walk away from the real performance and reliability gains of gearbox layout.
