Results 1 to 38 of 38
  1. #1
    ceteris paribus
    Reputation: xctico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    593

    hidraulic deraulier?

    has anyone actually tried making something like that? is it posible?
    Who is this doin' this synthetic type of alpha-beta psychadelic funkin'

  2. #2
    singlespeed smash brother
    Reputation: shwinboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    290
    Quote Originally Posted by xctico
    has anyone actually tried making something like that? is it posible?
    I asked the same question years ago. Apparantly it has been done and paitened. I seem to remember that the paitent runs out soon and there was a prediction that we'd see some movement on the hydro derailer then. I read it in some mtb mag, the name of which I cannot recall.

  3. #3
    ceteris paribus
    Reputation: xctico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    593
    They could go around the patent. If some silicon valley geeks where able to go around a patent held by IBM (read: army of lawyers), then everything is posible.
    Who is this doin' this synthetic type of alpha-beta psychadelic funkin'

  4. #4
    Gone riding
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,369
    I'll dig up a link for you

  5. #5
    Gone riding
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,369
    Anders has this on his site:

    http://userportal.iha.dk/~20033774/THE-MACHINIST

    http://userportal.iha.dk/~20033774/T...ing_device.htm

    I actually drew up plans to make a copy, but my dad talked me out of it, just too much hassle when for the same price of builiding one you can buy a lifetime supply of high quality sealed cable.... It would of been really fiddly to get things right too I imagine.

    Cheers, Dave

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: laotsu42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    374
    so far as i can tell from conversations about hydro brakes the only reason they are used over mech is stopping power ...and i don't see that you would ever need more shifting power ...unless you are riding an absolute beast ...
    ______
    "thirty spokes converge upon a wheel but it is the hole in the center that enables it to be used"

  7. #7
    Gone riding
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,369
    nah, both pistons would be the same diameter and travel, it would just be to remove friction and make a fully sealed system.

    Cheers, Dave

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: laotsu42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    374
    Quote Originally Posted by Low_Rider
    nah, both pistons would be the same diameter and travel, it would just be to remove friction and make a fully sealed system.

    Cheers, Dave

    would suck less than blowing a cable w/brakes but still ...the reason i'll be avoiding hydros is i've heard too many horror stories of busting a cable ...

    if i ever race down hill or start riding REALLY hard i might change my mind though ...

    there are soo many things about this sport i said that i wouldn't do that i have done now ...
    ______
    "thirty spokes converge upon a wheel but it is the hole in the center that enables it to be used"

  9. #9
    mtbr remember
    Reputation: BikeSATORI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,356
    I always felt that hydros (brakes) gave a larger increase in modulation, rather than just power- less of an off/on feel for riding wheelies/stoppies/descending, etc. You could just run mineral oil since fading and burnt oil wouldn't be an issue, unless your shifting nonstop? I don't think many are bothering w/ this innovation with the arrival of the G-boxx standard, internal centrally mounted gearing essentially working to phase out the derailleur altogether.
    A couple of years ago $himano had a pneumatic shifting system available for DH. It used compressed air in a tank mounted where a water bottle would go- heavy and expensive.
    Schralp it Heavy.

  10. #10
    Gone riding
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,369
    The shimano airlines system was not all that heavy if I remember, you can still get hold of them if you really want. But yeah, it was pretty expensive.

    Cheers, Dave.

  11. #11
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,251

    Wonderful ideas, but....

    there is a couple of things missing from the discussion here, that I would like to introduce.
    1. Weight. The hydraulic shifting system has a heady challenge in this area. The necessary lines and fluid are seemingly doomed to weigh more than todays lightweight aluminum segmented housings and cables. Same with the internal hub/gear-boxx systems. Derailluer systems weigh less- alot less!
    2. Mechanical efficiency. Hydro shifting may even have an advantage here. However; if we are talking internal hub/gear boxx style transmissions, then the current derailluer/chain system has quite an advantage. Until someone can overcome the mechanical efficiancy problems, we half horsepower or less "engines" will be running what we have now, for a long time to come.
    I have an aquaintence who is seriously trying to develope the hydro shifting system for extreme MTB's. I'll have to check in to see if he is having any success.
    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  12. #12
    Gone riding
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,369
    I doubt the instigators of this project would of bothered about wheight, the main issue was making a system that was unafected by mud, dirt, grit, water etc, and hopefully have less friction than a cable while still being adjustable. There is no doubt that it is possible, and in fact it has been done.

    As for internal hubs, although it would appear that friction is a problem, it seems that it is under control. Rohloff owners seem to feel that there is about the same, or possibly less friction in their hubs in comparison to a conventional groupset.

    Where I'd like to see the drivetrain heading is actually away from the huble chain (or atleast shortening runs). To be honset I can't see much wrong with normal derailures, apart from their unfortunate position. The chain though, cops mud, grit and water, and once aged, becomes a major weak point of MTB's. How to get around the chain is a fairly big problem though. A few shaft drive systems have been used on 2WD bikes in the past, although it has only been used to rive the front wheel off the rear. As soon as it is used from the cranks/gearbox to the rear hub/internaly geared hub, I think we will see real progression.

    Having said that though the gear mechanisim between the hub and shaft would need a lot of planning, and would most definiately need to be sealed, although some 2WD bikes on the market seem to have successfully run an open system without trouble.

    Cheers,Dave.

  13. #13
    mtbr remember
    Reputation: BikeSATORI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,356
    I really don't think the shaft drive would work in place of the chain, esp w/ longer travel susp designs. If it were all that much better, why aren't they used in the motocross or even superbike designs? They are both very similar, yet very different from biking, where most of the tech has trickled down from. I know that doesn't necessarily prove anything, but I was just bringing up the point.
    Although, if it were to work and be efficient, that would mean a lot more ground clearance- no need for a huge chainring, another benefit of g-boxx also!
    As for the hydraulic derailleurs, it seems easily done (keyword "seems"), but the pistons would need to travel relatively far ~8cm.
    Schralp it Heavy.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    14
    How about a full hydraulic drivetrain? anyone done that?
    Last edited by beansworks; 06-21-2004 at 01:43 AM.

  15. #15
    Gravity Rides Everything
    Reputation: endurowanker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,127
    I might be giving away a patentable idea here.. but...

    what if the indexing was done at the derailleur? Then you'd only need a small piston at the shifter, and at the derailleur... a shimano triggershifter and a normal derailleur could probably be hacked up to work on this system.. using a very short length of cable..

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    583
    Correct me if I'm wrong but the rear derailleur does not use 8 cm of cable, at least w/Shimano, I'm not sure about the 1:1 ratio SRAM uses.
    I recall reading a review in Mountain Bike Action of the hydraulic shifting system when it came out a few years ago & they really praised it's shifting (flawless, smooth and crisp were some of the adjectives I recall).
    I think it's major drawback was cost. It was like $400 or something ridiculous like that.

  17. #17
    Gone riding
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,369
    I'm not really sure how much cable travel there is with shimano or sram systems?? I do know that the system on the machinists website aparently worked fine after a little tuning, other then that I'm not sure.

    Surestick, I was unaware that shimano had a hydraulic system? If your refering to the airlines system it is actually run on air provided by a tank strapped to the bike, and doesn't use any oil as such.

    http://www.mtbreview.com/reviews/Shi...ct_88480.shtml

    http://www.cambriabike.com/SALE/shif...d_shifting.htm

    Info is a bit limited, I can't even seem to find much on Shimano's own website.......

    Cheers, Dave.

  18. #18
    6x7=Dont Panic!
    Reputation: TheRedMantra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,012
    Anders was not the first to make a hydraulic shifting system. Safe products had their own hydraulic shifting device that attached to any shifter. Safe Products, was owned by former National Downhill Champ, Scott Fyfe. Safe Products went out of business because Fyfe could only make small, cnc-machined production runs of the shift lines (called Hydro Shifts). That, and they sold for $175 a line.

    Pic courtesy of mtnwing

  19. #19
    Gone riding
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,369
    Thanks for the info and the pic!! I've got no doubt in my mind that it would be a really good setup, although I think really it's more of a setup for tinkerer's then anything. It would be a great system for endurance racers through, gritty cables are no fun for 12 or 24hrs........

    Do you have any idea how the system felt to use??

    Cheers, Dave.

  20. #20
    6x7=Dont Panic!
    Reputation: TheRedMantra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,012
    Quote Originally Posted by Low_Rider
    Thanks for the info and the pic!! I've got no doubt in my mind that it would be a really good setup, although I think really it's more of a setup for tinkerer's then anything. It would be a great system for endurance racers through, gritty cables are no fun for 12 or 24hrs........

    Do you have any idea how the system felt to use??

    Cheers, Dave.
    When that thing came out I was less than 10 years old. Ive never tried it. I hear it was amazing. I cant find any more info on it that what Ive posted. I couldnt even find a second pic.

  21. #21
    Gone riding
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,369
    LOL - I thought that shifter looked a little old!!
    Thanks agian.

    Cheers, Dave

  22. #22
    willtsmith_nwi
    Reputation: willtsmith_nwi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    2,997

    Getting the shaft ...

    Quote Originally Posted by BikeSATORI
    I really don't think the shaft drive would work in place of the chain, esp w/ longer travel susp designs. If it were all that much better, why aren't they used in the motocross or even superbike designs? They are both very similar, yet very different from biking, where most of the tech has trickled down from. I know that doesn't necessarily prove anything, but I was just bringing up the point.
    Although, if it were to work and be efficient, that would mean a lot more ground clearance- no need for a huge chainring, another benefit of g-boxx also!
    As for the hydraulic derailleurs, it seems easily done (keyword "seems"), but the pistons would need to travel relatively far ~8cm.
    Well, Christini has shaft drive systems working on it's AWD bicycles. They don't power the main drivetrain, but shaft telescoping shaft systems transmit power from the rear to front wheel.

  23. #23
    "El Whatever"
    Reputation: Warp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    18,841

    Deja Vu....

    I was thinking about hydro shifting this morning.... and I said to myself "nah!, who's to be interested!"... and started revolving about the pro/cons.

    A con is the same as with hydro brakes... if your line get caught with a branch (for example) you gotta do the single speed trick.

    Not very complicated IN CONCEPT though.... the system should be very similar to Airlines. A paddle shifter on the HB which drives a piston and on the derrailleur just another piston driving one of the arms of the paralellogram of the RD. This arm could pivot around one point and thus converting the longitudinal movement of the hydro piston into a rotational movement (what already happens in a normal RD). To upshift the piston at the lever gets pushed and then to downshift the piston gets retracted a bit so the RD could move back one shift (or more).

    One of the drawbacks I was thinking is that weight should be around the actual weight. But advantages like weather-proof performance is tempting at least.

    Another drawback is that the rest of the system is the same mechanical crap we already use and that is severly affected anyway by weather.

    A good combo should be a internal (a la Rolhoff) hub behind with a G-boxx for crank shifts and completely hydro controls.... but as of now, the whole system should weigh like tons...

    Whoever get the patent... send me a proto for testing....
    Check my Site

  24. #24
    Gone riding
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,369
    Yeah Christini's system is pretty amazing, they have to use a custom Whyte Bros fork that has no real steerer, just an external plate, so that they can fit all their gearing in the headtube. They've got expansion links, bevel gears, a freehub on the front wheel... pretty crazy machine.

    And back to the motorbike point that was mentioned a while back, some exotic bike manufacturers actually do use a shaft drive setup to drive the rear wheel. I've forgotten the name of the major company that does this, I'll post back later when I find out.

    Cheers, Dave.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    125

    hydraulic shifter

    i actually designed and built one for my senior design project in 96. i used x-ray shifters and xtr derailer. on the shifter and derailer i fabed some aluminum mounts for tiny hydraulic cylinders. it is hard to explain but it was adjustable. i could only get it to shift between three gears because of air in the fluid. to make it work you would have to design it like a brake system with a reservoir so the air could bleed out. my thought was that it would shift good no matter how dirty it got. 90% of shifting problems are because of dirty cables.

  26. #26
    "El Whatever"
    Reputation: Warp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    18,841
    Quote Originally Posted by wiruth
    i actually designed and built one for my senior design project in 96. i used x-ray shifters and xtr derailer. on the shifter and derailer i fabed some aluminum mounts for tiny hydraulic cylinders. it is hard to explain but it was adjustable. i could only get it to shift between three gears because of air in the fluid. to make it work you would have to design it like a brake system with a reservoir so the air could bleed out. my thought was that it would shift good no matter how dirty it got. 90% of shifting problems are because of dirty cables.
    Pics, man!! Pics.....
    Check my Site

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    125

    pics

    i might have some pictures. i will look tonight at home.

  28. #28
    Gone riding
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,369
    *Happily waits!!*

  29. #29
    Axe
    Axe is offline
    Custom User Title
    Reputation: Axe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,141
    Quote Originally Posted by xctico
    has anyone actually tried making something like that? is it posible?
    I do not believe that it will offer any tangible advantages over the current system. Current one works.

    My take on this:
    1) Contamination is non-issue, as with a decent set of cable housings almost nothing is exposed.
    2) Hydraulics has the possibility to produce more accurate shifts, but at the same time they will be more prone to break chain by forcing it in place, where normal cable has some elasticity. Also - it is not that hard at all to has accurate shift in a cable actuated derailler.

  30. #30
    "El Whatever"
    Reputation: Warp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    18,841
    Quote Originally Posted by Axe
    I do not believe that it will offer any tangible advantages over the current system. Current one works.
    .
    Clippers worked good before the arrival of the Steam vessels.... they needed no fuel, were easier to mantain, and were just as good as any steam vessel.... so why do we have nuclear warships now??????

    Let's go back the caves.... they are easier and simpler. Hell!!! Those might resist earthquakes and hurricanes better than our houses.

    I think the death of the derrailleur (mechanical or hydro) is coming. A matter of time.

    Hydro shifting would be an advantage.
    Check my Site

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    125

    hydro shifting

    i agree with both axe and warp. i did mine as an experiment, this was before Gore cables. it really is hard to beat the current norm. i have an XO with XTR cables and housing with over 100 hours on them and they still shift perfectly. i just like to explore thought.

  32. #32
    HIYAH
    Reputation: heeler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    738
    I heard Wiruth is phat fraud...thats write, you heard it here first!

    JK! Joking - I went to school with wiruth and he really did make the stupid thang...

  33. #33
    willtsmith_nwi
    Reputation: willtsmith_nwi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    2,997

    Why not hydros????

    Quote Originally Posted by Warp2003
    Clippers worked good before the arrival of the Steam vessels.... they needed no fuel, were easier to mantain, and were just as good as any steam vessel.... so why do we have nuclear warships now??????

    Let's go back the caves.... they are easier and simpler. Hell!!! Those might resist earthquakes and hurricanes better than our houses.

    I think the death of the derrailleur (mechanical or hydro) is coming. A matter of time.

    Hydro shifting would be an advantage.
    Well, we have nuclear warships because a nuclear powerplant can generate far more power and require far less fuel. In the case of submarines, they are tactically indespensible since they allow the vessel to remain submerged for as long as the food lasts.

    The idea of a hydro derrailleur sounds intriguing. But I wonder if it would produce results so superior to the traditional cable based system to justify the costs associated with creating a new infrastructure to manufacture these devices.

    I think hydros have worked in brakes because they provide the ability to translate forces in a way that cables cannot. You can distribute the force of a hydro systems to multiple pistons easily. The same system would be far more difficult to implement mechanically.

    I personally don't feel we'll see hydro derailleurs anytime soon. My SRAM stuff shifts just fine. And those cables systems can be sealed to make the more resistant to environmental factors (mud and ice).

  34. #34
    "El Whatever"
    Reputation: Warp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    18,841
    Quote Originally Posted by willtsmith_nwi
    Well, we have nuclear warships because a nuclear powerplant can generate far more power and require far less fuel. In the case of submarines, they are tactically indespensible since they allow the vessel to remain submerged for as long as the food lasts.
    Thanks for the unneeded insight.... I already knew that, I even knew about that electromagnetic impulse system for submarines with superconductive magnets (which generates chlorine bubbles but at least does not makes huge images in the sonar). The point was that seemingly bad upgrades can be the future.

    As said the steam boat seemed a bad idea when the clipper was the top of the techonogly available.

    Shitmano already made some air assited shifters but the need for a compressed air bottle sunk the ship (to continue with analogies). The hydros can be a good idea. Operative word CAN. It maybe it may not but we should at least give it a go. I still think the system is viable ....

    The problem is not hydro/cable but the derrailleur system itself. G-boxx and PeteSpeed gearboxes seem like the next step as they already solve some problems but they address a new one too (weight).
    Check my Site

  35. #35
    willtsmith_nwi
    Reputation: willtsmith_nwi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    2,997

    Thanks for the friendly response ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Warp2003
    Thanks for the unneeded insight.... I already knew that, I even knew about that electromagnetic impulse system for submarines with superconductive magnets (which generates chlorine bubbles but at least does not makes huge images in the sonar). The point was that seemingly bad upgrades can be the future.

    As said the steam boat seemed a bad idea when the clipper was the top of the techonogly available.

    Shitmano already made some air assited shifters but the need for a compressed air bottle sunk the ship (to continue with analogies). The hydros can be a good idea. Operative word CAN. It maybe it may not but we should at least give it a go. I still think the system is viable ....

    The problem is not hydro/cable but the derrailleur system itself. G-boxx and PeteSpeed gearboxes seem like the next step as they already solve some problems but they address a new one too (weight).

    Well, I suppose my point is that nuclear power solved a problem on submarines and surface ships that couldn't readily be solved by other means.

    The question here is exactly what problem hydraulic derailleurs solve. I really don't think they solve any problem that can't be solved with a sealed cable system like the $20 jagwire kits. The ONLY real problem I see hydros solving is the issue with cables freezing in winter conditions However, it won't stop the derailleur itself freezing in place ;-)

    You are right that the g-boxx standard seems to be the future. It has a nice market entry point in competitive downhill bikes where the position of an external derailleur is a major liability. And additional benefit is that you don't need so many gears when your cruising downhill. So it's probably acceptable to substitute the exotic and expensive Rohloff hub with a 7 speed model from SRAM or Shimano.

    Beyond this the g-boxx standard provides additional benefits. It effectively turns the external drivetrain into a singlespeed. Gone are issues with chain slap, chain binding, chain jumping, chain suck, and it all but banishes chain breakage.

    Finally, even if g-boxx does become prevelant among downhill bikes, I doubt that they'll be shifted with hydraulics OR pneumatics. Cables work beautifully for shifting (especially if your using SRAM ESP 1:1). Why replace simple cheap pieces of plastic enclosure with mondo expensive new equipment ????

  36. #36
    "El Whatever"
    Reputation: Warp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    18,841
    I don't want to highjackthis thread but I was thinking about adding another unit to a petespeed gearbox... say the problem is that you get only 7 sp and a limited gear ratio.

    If you add another unit (axle + gears + shifter) to a petespeed type of gearbox you can get wider ratios (for climbing for example) and still keep the chainline.

    Wether they're going to be hydros or cable... that's another ticket.

    I wondered myself (see above on the thread) why should someone want a hydro derr. I still think (even when I accept the marginaly little advantages) hydros could work. Implementation has not been explored so I would not dismiss it yet. It just takes a bunch of guys raving about the advantages of something to get it widely spread. If there are guys buying XTR components which IMHO offer marginal advantages for a stratospheric price, then a CORRECT implementation of the hydro derr COULD be possible.

    But even though I put more money on the petespeed than any other alternative available.
    Check my Site

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    545

    Bio gearing

    The best derailleur is no derailleur, no shifter, and no cables. So much lighter, quieter, and much more reliable. Less techno, more bio.

    Learn to use your legs and join the Single Speed movement

  38. #38
    "El Whatever"
    Reputation: Warp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    18,841
    Quote Originally Posted by datako
    The best derailleur is no derailleur, no shifter, and no cables. So much lighter, quieter, and much more reliable. Less techno, more bio.

    Learn to use your legs and join the Single Speed movement
    Yup... I will remove the gearbox off the first car I get my hold on and install it a bi-turbo engine!
    Check my Site

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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