Quantcast

Hayes To Market Chain-driven Gearbox System--oct 5

Acadian

Born Again Newbie
Sep 5, 2001
714
2
Blah Blah and Blah
from www.mbaction.com

Hayes Disc Brakes announced that it has the exclusive rights to manufacture and sell the PeteSpeed gearbox that has been raced by the BeOne downhill team this past season. The PeteSpeed patented “gearbox” is actually a small derailleur that is packed into machined-aluminum housing, mounted in the frame near the bottom bracket area. Inside the box, a freewheeling sprocket, driven by the crank arms, powers a close-ratio road bike-type cogset. A compact set of jockey pulleys is fixed to the crank-side sprocket which slides back and forth on the bottom bracket shaft to shift the chain across the cogset. A standard cable actuates the shifting.

Honda has patented a similar system for its RN01 downhill bike that reportedly has been in service with the team for much of this past season. There is no big secret to be revealed inside the Honda or the PeteSpeed transmissions—they are really just a derailleurs in a box. The PeteSpeed/Hayes system, however, does offer downhillers a couple of big advantages over the conventional external rear derailleur:

1)Anytime shifting: because the freewheel is at the crank, not the cogs, as long as the bike is moving, so is the transmission—which means that you can shift whether you are pedaling or coasting.

2)Precise drive-sprocket placement: the final drive sprocket can be placed close to, or concentric with the swingarm pivot, which helps to remove pedaling torque from the suspension action.

3)No more flailing chains: a derailleur in a box has a short chain that cannot derail easily. Conventional external derailleurs are weak chain tensioners that let the chain flap all over the place.

4)Say goodbye to muddy cogs: Only the final chin drive and a couple of sprockets are exposed to the goo and dust—and a heavier chain can be used, because it does not have to shift.

SO, WHAT’S BAD ABOUT IT?
Weight—it has to be contained inside a strengthened housing that is bolted to a frame, so it will be heavier. And, it will not cover a wide enough range of gearing to make a true mountain bike transmission in its present layout. Another disadvantage is that the small-diameter sprockets inside the PeteSpeed transmission are subject to much greater torque loads than the larger-diameter sprockets of a standard system. This will undoubtedly lead to accelerated wear of the sprockets and chain inside the PeteBox.

CAN WE SEE A PICTURE?
We can’t show you the pictures we have because that would mean stealing them without permission. We are working on permission, but we are going to see the Hayes version this week at the Las Vegas Bike show, so in any case, we will have them up as soon as Wednesday afternoon this week.

We’ll keep you posted
 

ÆX

Turbo Monkey
Sep 8, 2001
4,920
18
NM
i think it is a great system, if i was to purchace a bike right now this would be it.
 

Pip3r

Turbo Monkey
Nov 20, 2001
1,112
0
Foxboro MA
OH MAN!!! thats so sick. Hopefully this is the start to something very good. I saw a picture of the system floating around somewhere awhile ago, it looks so sweet.
 

buildyourown

Turbo Monkey
Feb 9, 2004
4,832
0
South Seattle
I'd put up with 50% slower shifts if it meant that I wouldn't have to worry about snapping another der.
That sounds like a good trade-off to me.
 

Kornphlake

Turbo Monkey
Oct 8, 2002
2,632
1
Portland, OR
buildyourown said:
I'd put up with 50% slower shifts if it meant that I wouldn't have to worry about snapping another der.
That sounds like a good trade-off to me.
you should have quoted BCD before he edited his post, that made absolutely no sense unless you already understood what he was talking about. I too would put up with slower shifting for the added durablity and I like the idea of shifting while coasting although I admit I'm not a talented enough rider to actually take advantage of that feature. As I understand it the cog that mimicks the chainring on a standard setup slides along a splined shaft to keep the cog inline with the appropriate cog on the cassette. It seems like there could be some trouble with keeping the cog sliding well, but if Yeti can make a bike that rides on rails, maybe one that pedals on a sliding shaft will work out too.
 

zedro

Turbo Monkey
Sep 14, 2001
4,144
1
at the end of the longest line
Kornphlake said:
you should have quoted BCD before he edited his post, that made absolutely no sense unless you already understood what he was talking about. I too would put up with slower shifting for the added durablity and I like the idea of shifting while coasting although I admit I'm not a talented enough rider to actually take advantage of that feature.
couldnt you just design casette sprokets with more ramps to regain the revolution angle per shift of a standard setup?

and i wonder what exactly is patented in the system, since the actual gear arrangment is the same.
 

OGRipper

back alley ripper
Feb 3, 2004
10,757
1,279
NORCAL is the hizzle
Is this really what's going on inside the Honda gearbox? I never saw that MBA article but I thought it was supposed to be something completely different from a traditional derailleur and cog setup, more like the variable (CV/T?) transmissions.

This is cool but it's still derailleurs and cogs only now we've added more complexity to stuff it all inside a box, plus we've got limitations on the gears we can use. Sure it's out of the way and protected from the elements, which are huge advances, but I dunno, I guess I'm underwhelmed...would rather replace a rear der or chain every now and then. Hahaha, to borrow from another thread, what happened to K.I.S.S.?

Man I'm ornery today...
 

zedro

Turbo Monkey
Sep 14, 2001
4,144
1
at the end of the longest line
OGRipper said:
Hahaha, to borrow from another thread, what happened to K.I.S.S.?

Man I'm ornery today...
well, lets pretend the Petespeed was invented before the derailler system. Then the invention of the derailler would seem like that type of violation to me.
 

ÆX

Turbo Monkey
Sep 8, 2001
4,920
18
NM
Kornphlake said:
you should have quoted BCD before he edited his post, that made absolutely no sense unless you already understood what he was talking about. I too would put up with slower shifting for the added durablity and I like the idea of shifting while coasting although I admit I'm not a talented enough rider to actually take advantage of that feature. As I understand it the cog that mimicks the chainring on a standard setup slides along a splined shaft to keep the cog inline with the appropriate cog on the cassette. It seems like there could be some trouble with keeping the cog sliding well, but if Yeti can make a bike that rides on rails, maybe one that pedals on a sliding shaft will work out too.
it would shift fine if everything was driven by the rear wheel turning.
I.E. freewheel at the bb.

i edited my post b/c i spoke too soon. if it can shift while coasting
it will shift fast.
my freewheel was at the casette. by der pullys, bb drive and cogs were still.
so you hade to shift while pedaling
 

buildyourown

Turbo Monkey
Feb 9, 2004
4,832
0
South Seattle
Kornphlake said:
you should have quoted BCD before he edited his post, that made absolutely no sense unless you already understood what he was talking about.
I also new from a previous thread about the slow shifting issues. Hopefully, this design doesn't have those issues.

OGripper, one thing that is good about this system is that it does use proven, efficient, available parts. The biggest problem with any internal drive or CVT is friction. None of them can approach the effeciency of a conventional der system. Also, if something does break, you could find a part at any bike shop in the country.

I'll be the first to chop out the BB on my steel bike and weld a box in for this badboy.
 
Mar 9, 2003
5
0
Åre/Sweden
Espen said:
What makes the final rotate faster????
Thats the main problem whith that design it dosent.. it can only make it slower if you look at the honda patent you se that they use 6! gears infront of the zeromax at 16x as the smalest amonut of downshift a 4-unit zeromax can do is 1/4 and then down to zero. one ather problem that tey have solved si that a zeromax dosent have continious output but a oscilating output therefor one ov the rears infront of it is hmm.. squareich.. -not round.. cant be efficient :/