Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    183

    There will be no 170mm SPEEDHUB according to ROHLOFF.....

    I've been riding my 2012 Fatback for over a year now and was considering changing frames/driveline to a belt drive/ ROHLOFF IGH because I love my REEB SS gates drive SS so much. So I sent a quick e-mail out to ROHLOFF to inquire about new product development and the possibility of getting a 170mm version of their IGH in the future.

    What I got back was a VERY quick ( next day) and honest reply. Unfortuneately, looks like us 170mm centered rear end fatbike guys are S.O.L. for now...

    Hi Michael,

    if only it were that simple. The SPEEDHUB uses a 20mm thick hollow axle within which the entire shifting and indexing system for the SPEEDHUB is mounted. It is unfortunately not possible with this design to swap out an axle for a longer one, nor is it safe to convert the axle to this extreme length using adapters.

    The axle itself has a long slot in one side allowing various clutch rings to slide along it. This split however will minimally open up or contract with great forces hindering the smooth movement of these clutch rings and leading to shifting malfunctions - possibly accidents and injuries. I must at this point make it clear that adapting the SPEEDHUB in such a way is entirely at your own risk furthermore, the Rohloff AG will not be able to warranty the SPEEDHUB in question for any shifting issues that may occur as a direct result of this customizing.

    To adapt the SPEEDHUB to a 170mm O.L.D. we would not only have to redesign the entire shifting mechanism unfortunately and additionally manufacture such a large number of new components that the purchase price of this already exclusive product would render it uninteresting for the market. The Rohloff AG is currently producing approximately 20,000 units per Annum and although I see potential for the use of a SPEEDHUB in Fatbikes, the market size does not yet warrant investing further resources into that particular market segment.

    I apologize for the no doubt disappointing news.

    Best Wishes from Fuldatal, Germany.


    Stewart Stabik
    Sales Manager (English Liaison)
    OE Technical Support
    Rohloff AG, Germany
    __o
    _`\<,_
    (*)/ (*)
    -+-+-+-+-+-+-

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    5,781
    Are you going to try a 135mm offset frame or not bother?

    BTW - has anyone successfully but some hard miles on a 170mm frame using a 135mm IGH with the adapters that Salsa and some other companies offer?
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    53
    I've been riding this season on a Muk ti w/ rohloff. Not a whole lot of miles (guessing approx 30-40 per week w/ 500-1200 feet of climbing on snow) but I do stomp on it pretty hard and no troubles at all so far.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: buckfiddious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    842
    If the figures are accurate, and there are only 10,000 fatbikes in the wild right now, and of that 10,000, if even 5% have the money or desire to run a rohloff hub, that's a pretty tiny market for the kind of work they need to do. And I'd guess that 5% of 10,000 is pretty high- probably half the fatbikes on the trail today are spaced for 135 hubs.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3
    looks like rohloff changed their minds:

    http://fcdn.mtbr.com/attachments/int...e-unnamed2.jpg

  6. #6
    Dirt Huffer
    Reputation: AC/BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,405
    Nice

  7. #7
    ouch....
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    4,635
    Where did they find the endo? great to see more products though, so many awesome options in the past few months....
    Riding.....

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by leonardo4u View Post
    looks like rohloff changed their minds:
    search is your friend...
    1 Week Ago - /fat-bikes/fat-rohloff-prototype

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    Are you going to try a 135mm offset frame or
    BTW - has anyone successfully but some hard miles on a 170mm frame using a 135mm IGH with the adapters that Salsa and some other companies offer?
    I have two. 2012 Mukluk 2 Rohloff with Salsa adapter and 2013 9Zero7 135mm sliding rear dropout paired with Rohloff. BOTH work flawlessly. I have more miles on the Mukluk as it was my first build. The 9Zero7 was set up with a gates carbon drive. I reverted back to a chain as I broke the belt after just 8 months of riding. The belts can't hold up to the harsh winter and sand riding. Too expensive and not going to carry an extra belt. I prefer the geometry of the Mukluk. I am that small % of the Fatbike community that would buy this, but unfortunately, many bikes are now built 190mm. SO, if they ramped up 170mm Rohloff you may still be looking for the older frames to pair. Nice thing is the Fat community is growing (pun intended), meaning we can expect more product!

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    183
    good news! I thought it would happen sooner or later but wow, that was fast.

    I just finished my new Titanium 170mm frame with 12mm X 177 TA w/ paragons & taper carbon fork with 15mm TA. All rolling on clownshoes w/ Bud/Lou and a 1X10 driveline ( 40 T hope rear) I'm happy...

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    5,781
    At this point have they said anything firm about actually selling a 170mm IGH?

    I've just seen talk about testing the prototype. It could be a while or never before they sell one.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    At this point have they said anything firm about actually selling a 170mm IGH?

    I've just seen talk about testing the prototype. It could be a while or never before they sell one.
    Just checked with Cyclymonkey (the USA Rep for Rohloff) and here is the latest.

    Here's the latest info: 170mm SPEEDHUB for Fatbikes: www.rohloff.de. If testing pans out on this setup, the plan is to make a retrofit kit available. No info on release date or pricing is available yet. The hub in the photo has a hand made shell and is the first prototype, so testing is just getting started.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    5,781
    Quote Originally Posted by fatmtb View Post
    Just checked with Cyclymonkey (the USA Rep for Rohloff) and here is the latest.

    Here's the latest info: 170mm SPEEDHUB for Fatbikes: www.rohloff.de. If testing pans out on this setup, the plan is to make a retrofit kit available. No info on release date or pricing is available yet. The hub in the photo has a hand made shell and is the first prototype, so testing is just getting started.
    That link on the Rohloff site specifically says there will be no retrofit kit. You will have to buy a new 170mm IGH if you want one.

    So essentially there is no firm idea when this might come to market.

    I'd rather see them testing the idea than not, but I wouldn't start planning any 170mm Rohloff builds quite yet.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    That link on the Rohloff site specifically says there will be no retrofit kit. You will have to buy a new 170mm IGH if you want one.

    So essentially there is no firm idea when this might come to market.

    I'd rather see them testing the idea than not, but I wouldn't start planning any 170mm Rohloff builds quite yet.
    Not sure why Neil (owner of Cyclemonkey) wrote about the plan of creating a retrofit kit when the site clearly states they won't. I do think there will be something which is a good thing.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    155
    A perfect frame for this new hub is the Singular Puffin. 170mm rear spacing with an EBB. I actually wanted to go with the Kickstarter but was determined that my next fat bike would be suitable for a Rohloff and was unsure the spacer was a proper solution.

    Now very tempted to go with a Puffin, run it single speed for now, and fit this new hub when it's available. I really like single speed on my Fargo, but reckon a fat bike needs an extra low gear for riding the places a fat bike is designed to go. Perhaps dingle speed for now?

    https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...puffin-fatbike

    Brian

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    40
    Timing is everything, Neil wrote his piece regarding the retrofit before Rohloff wrote their page on the matter.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    5,781
    Quote Originally Posted by genefruit View Post
    Timing is everything, Neil wrote his piece regarding the retrofit before Rohloff wrote their page on the matter.
    +1 - there was a rumour of a retrofit floating around [which Rohloff mentions and then dismisses]

    If you want one of these babies plan to wait a long time and plan to buy a new and even more expensive hub.

    Rohloff's are a lifetime investment so the cost doesn't bother me too much. My primary concern for a fatbike IGH is that stuff is changing so fast I may have no use for a 170mm IGH in 3 years let alone in another 10-15yrs when the Rohloff is just breaking in. If nobody else does either it will be a huge $$ loss.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  18. #18
    is buachail foighneach me
    Reputation: sean salach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,840
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    +1 - there was a rumour of a retrofit floating around [which Rohloff mentions and then dismisses]

    If you want one of these babies plan to wait a long time and plan to buy a new and even more expensive hub.

    Rohloff's are a lifetime investment so the cost doesn't bother me too much. My primary concern for a fatbike IGH is that stuff is changing so fast I may have no use for a 170mm IGH in 3 years let alone in another 10-15yrs when the Rohloff is just breaking in. If nobody else does either it will be a huge $$ loss.

    Assuming steel doesn't become obsolete, you can get a new back end welded onto any steel frame for $300 - $400 US*. That would be cheaper than custom on a frame like a Pugsley. You will likely never not be able to have a frame to accommodate any width hub. You'll never have to put your $2000 hub on a shelf because there's no frame to use it in. In fact, I bet within 15 years, we'll be able to design our own frames and have them 3d printed at a remote location out of a more than strong enough material.


    *Bilenky Cycle Works

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    5,781
    Quote Originally Posted by sean salach View Post
    Assuming steel doesn't become obsolete, you can get a new back end welded onto any steel frame for $300 - $400 US*. That would be cheaper than custom on a frame like a Pugsley. You will likely never not be able to have a frame to accommodate any width hub. You'll never have to put your $2000 hub on a shelf because there's no frame to use it in. In fact, I bet within 15 years, we'll be able to design our own frames and have them 3d printed at a remote location out of a more than strong enough material.


    *Bilenky Cycle Works
    No doubt you can always go custom. You can always hack something in some way. I have tried various options and for myself found that buying production bikes/parts is the way to go most of the time.

    I have not had a custom experience which worked out as intended. Now with the willingness to repeat the process 2 or 3 times I have no doubt I could, but that gets expensive and you'd have to be okay with doing it again and again as standards kept changing.

    Just look at the number of "Ultimate Custom" bikes proudly pimped on MTBR that lasted longterm with the original owner...I don't see many. Some people realized the bike wasn't so ultimate, others just want to keeping buying new stuff and others want to install some new parts that are not compatible due to changing standards.

    If you can be satisfied with what you have you can just keep rolling on the existing bike. Barring an accident or really abusing it I could probably keep a Pugs going until I can no longer ride a bike. I'd have to be okay with skipping the Bluto and really wide rims/tires. I haven't sold my Pugs yet and if I don't I'll likely move a Rohloff to it and plan on keeping it. A steel IGH bike like that will always have a place in the touring/adventure world.

    Despite being an IGH fanboi [I have 2 Rohloffs and 4 Alfines] I am not so zealous that I can't acknowledge derailleurs do work and at come point in the cost/hassle curve it just makes more sense to roll with what the other 98% of the bike world is riding.

    Back when 135mm QR hubs looked to be a long term option buying a Rohloff made more sense than it does now. At least to me.

    BTW - to your point about rapid prototyping becoming easier/faster/cheaper...I agree that may well happen, but there are a number of other factors that could derail that so it's not something I would expect to happen - although I will be stoked if it does come to pass.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    88
    ^^^ That is very well written. I agree chasing technology can be never ending and when should someone stop if ever ? I've been gone from the fat forum for quite a while. So long that I don't know what many words like Bluto for example mean.

    I still ride my 1st gen Pugs with a Rohloff. I would love a custom Ti fat bike but then what. It can become a never ending upgrade. I feel people are focusing more on the technology and less on the joy of riding. That's great for companies who make products. More choice means more happiness right ? More fun right ? Wrong. I highly doubt anyone here is having more fun on their uber fat bike than the guys way back on their Pugs and Endo's.

    Fatter tires are better ? Ok maybe to some, but it's like the lumen race. It's sort of madness really and it doesn't always lead to happiness or more fun. It just leads to less money that you should be saving or investing for your future. Believe it or not you need to plan for your future.

    I'm happy with my old Pugs. It's not stock mind you. I have a lot of $ in upgrades, but it's finished. No further upgrades are needed. Would a new Ti fat bike make me happier ? Sure for a while until the high wore off. Would it make riding more enjoyable and fun ? I really doubt that it would. It would be different and novel, but quantitatively better ? I'm not so sure. You may not see it this way. You might want the latest and greatest. Nothing wrong with that. It's your money and time.

    Just remember that chasing technology is a never ending cycle ( no pun intended : ) It's up to you when to get off the bus.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    343
    I got curious as to what a Rohloff Speedhub 500/14 would bring to a fat bike...
    So assuming/guessing that a Speedhub 500/14-FAT would have the same ratios.
    There will be no 170mm SPEEDHUB according to ROHLOFF.....-rohloff-speedhub-500-14-fat-prototype-gear-inches-example.jpg

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •