100mm Schlumpf BB- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1. #1
    Cheesiest
    Reputation: intheways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,596

    100mm Schlumpf BB

    While not the most popular popular setup, Schlumpf is releasing a 100mm version of their geared BBs:


    New: version for ultra-wide bottom bracket shells

    We deliver all our gearing systems (mountain-drive, speed-drive and high-speed-drive) in an extra wide version for b.b. 100 (100mm wide bottom bracket shells).

    Typical application: Surly bikes, some E-bikes with wide b.b. shell
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  2. #2
    will rant for food
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,836
    Nice, I'm interested. ...Does it not require ISCG tabs?

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,667
    Hopefully it's BFL compatible.

  4. #4
    Slow But Still Pedaling
    Reputation: JimInSF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    484
    I have one of the original speed-drive models on my tadpole and it required chamfering the BB but no tabs - you can feel the whir/drag when the gear is engaged, but the direct drive is totally smooth, and the newer high-speed-drive and mountain-drive units are supposedly even more efficient when engaged.

    If you deeply and madly hate chain suck like I do, and don't want to go IGH, very much recommended. (Actually, on the trike, I have both a Rohloff and the Schlumpf, but that's another story for a very different kind of bike...)

  5. #5
    will rant for food
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,836
    Yeah, I'm used to the drag with my Hammerschmidt - it's not that bad, I usually suffer worse from inappropriately low tire pressure. I'm interested in the Schlumpf because of possibility of using his ABDS belt design, I appreciate the lower tension requirements.

    This is also attractive because I won't have to modify my Hammerschmidt BB axle to get real fat tire clearance.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Quote Originally Posted by Drew Diller View Post
    ...I'm interested in the Schlumpf because of possibility of using his ABDS belt design, I appreciate the lower tension requirements...
    I had a good look at that too. It's an ingenious way of solving a problem.

    However once I had done a few calculations, I came to the conclusion that it would be impractical on an mtb. I can't put my hand on the notebook I did this in, but I think the larger pitch of the belt made it difficult to get small enough diameter cogs and chainrings. Perfectly ok for a road bike. (Of course the next post here will be from someone who has done it and I'll have to eat my hat )

    Anyhow, draw it up and see what you think. I'd love to see it working on an mtb.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 5736' Highlands, Scotland

  7. #7
    Slow But Still Pedaling
    Reputation: JimInSF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    484
    Couldn't you use the high-speed-drive with its much smaller cog?

  8. #8
    will rant for food
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,836
    Velobike, that was my original conclusion, but since this got brought up again, I had, well, JimInSF's conclusion.

    Basically have a front:rear ratio of 5:4, which would be roughly 2:1 in overdrive, and would (hopefully) give adequate ground clearance. I'll trust you on the notion of difficultly finding small cog sizes.

    I'm basically trying to figure out which design direction I want to take on my next frame.

  9. #9
    Slow But Still Pedaling
    Reputation: JimInSF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    484
    BTW, Florian Schlumpf is very responsive and speaks good english. Wouldn't surprise me a bit if he would machine you something custom if that were necessary - I believe he used to do custom length crank arms, not sure if he still does but in any event this sounds like a worthy project.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Quote Originally Posted by Drew Diller View Post
    ...I'll trust you on the notion of difficultly finding small cog sizes...
    Don't!

    Things may have changed since I did this. Schlumpf are innovators - maybe they'll provide suitable cogs if you ask.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 5736' Highlands, Scotland

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    143
    Subscribed. This is something that has intrigued me on many levels for quite a while, but their new belt system is what makes it truly interesting. Here are my ridiculous reasons:

    1 - No cables - as stealth as you can get, wouldn't be shifting the front that often anyways, can take a second to click my heel to do it

    2 - Belt system that works - big dude mashing on original Gates belt = ratcheting, which totally blows. If this works at lower tension with a deeper pitch belt, I will get it and never look back. The easily adjustable belt-line adjustment with the way they do the plates up front is pretty awesome too.

    3 - Mountain "SS" - what I would want, is roughly 1.8 to 2:1 drive ratio for straight gear since that's the one I'd be mashing in 90% of the time, then be able to kick it down to a super-low (with the 2.5:1 reduction) gear for climbing up steep fire-roads in the mountains. This would allow me to ride SS for the majority of mountain trails, which are totally do-able, then switch to a really tiny gear for climbing up the super-steep stuff when necessary.

    It would be nice to have a different solution than chamfering the BB, but if it work (at 150 lb-ft torque!) then so be it.

    Now the question is, who will be the first to do this? Because it will pretty much end my SS quest right now: 2-speed, stealth, mountain-capable, belt-drive fatbike. Rockin.
    "I applaud your stupid idea because it is genius." - Eric Sovern, Surly

  12. #12
    Cheesiest
    Reputation: intheways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,596
    Quote Originally Posted by aTomOfAllTrades View Post
    Subscribed. This is something that has intrigued me on many levels for quite a while, but their new belt system is what makes it truly interesting. Here are my ridiculous reasons:

    1 - No cables - as stealth as you can get, wouldn't be shifting the front that often anyways, can take a second to click my heel to do it

    2 - Belt system that works - big dude mashing on original Gates belt = ratcheting, which totally blows. If this works at lower tension with a deeper pitch belt, I will get it and never look back. The easily adjustable belt-line adjustment with the way they do the plates up front is pretty awesome too.

    3 - Mountain "SS" - what I would want, is roughly 1.8 to 2:1 drive ratio for straight gear since that's the one I'd be mashing in 90% of the time, then be able to kick it down to a super-low (with the 2.5:1 reduction) gear for climbing up steep fire-roads in the mountains. This would allow me to ride SS for the majority of mountain trails, which are totally do-able, then switch to a really tiny gear for climbing up the super-steep stuff when necessary.

    It would be nice to have a different solution than chamfering the BB, but if it work (at 150 lb-ft torque!) then so be it.

    Now the question is, who will be the first to do this? Because it will pretty much end my SS quest right now: 2-speed, stealth, mountain-capable, belt-drive fatbike. Rockin.
    I would be all over it if I had some $$$ to throw at the project for all the reasons you mentioned. I was originally gawking at one of these for a different project and then the ultrawide version came up...decisions, decisions

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    681
    3 - Mountain "SS" - what I would want, is roughly 1.8 to 2:1 drive ratio for straight gear since that's the one I'd be mashing in 90% of the time, then be able to kick it down to a super-low (with the 2.5:1 reduction) gear for climbing up steep fire-roads in the mountains. This would allow me to ride SS for the majority of mountain trails, which are totally do-able, then switch to a really tiny gear for climbing up the super-steep stuff when necessary
    Glad I'm not the only person who considers this a valid setup for a fatbike!

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,667
    I think it's a bit more valid with the BFL. If you could run your chaining out the outside as well it will be even better. With the mountain drive format you can get an insanely low gear combination. What's the BCD and price for it? Our cranks are already expensive. The Schlumpf shouldn't be too much more unreasonable.

    This is the mountain drive for those that don't know:
    schlumpf innovations

  15. #15
    Dr Gadget is IN
    Reputation: wadester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Schmucker View Post
    I think it's a bit more valid with the BFL. If you could run your chaining out the outside as well it will be even better. With the mountain drive format you can get an insanely low gear combination. What's the BCD and price for it? Our cranks are already expensive. The Schlumpf shouldn't be too much more unreasonable.

    This is the mountain drive for those that don't know:
    schlumpf innovations
    A Schlumpf system (mt-drv/spd-drv/hi-spd-drv) are all about $840 base price (converted from swiss francs).

    Spiders are available for both 110bcd and 130bcd, but the size of the gear housing limits the smallest ring available:
    "- 27 tooth chainring, directly screwed on the mountain-drive housing"
    "speed-drive model 08: 27, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, 40, 42t."

    Pricey, but well made and durable if maintained.
    This isn't a "you're doing it wrong" topic.

    WSS/OSS: Open Source Sealant

  16. #16
    Cheesiest
    Reputation: intheways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,596
    I believe they are moving production to Germany to lower costs and increase numbers

Similar Threads

  1. Schlumpf Cranks?
    By CarlosMeatPewps in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 10-16-2012, 11:34 PM
  2. Schlumpf Planetary Drive in the Sand
    By chessmonster in forum Drivetrain - shifters, derailleurs, cranks
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-03-2011, 12:40 AM
  3. Schlumpf
    By AJT in forum Santa Cruz
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-17-2009, 05:43 PM
  4. Schlumpf Maintainance Question
    By safetybike in forum Drivetrain - shifters, derailleurs, cranks
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-08-2009, 08:01 PM
  5. Schlumpf drive..
    By Rainman in forum Drivetrain - shifters, derailleurs, cranks
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-29-2005, 09:50 PM

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
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.