160 or nothing?- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: 160 or nothing?

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    280

    160 or nothing?

    Is there anyway you can build a true rear fat tire (LM/Larry) around a 135 rear hub without offest? Is the Alfine system an option? Or running 3-4 cogs and a spacer in the back?

    I know other have moved on to winter specigic bikes but I am looking to use parts I have already.

  2. #2
    is buachail foighneach me
    Reputation: sean salach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,589
    Single speed and internal setups work, from what I've seen. your gear choice is limited though, and you'll need a custom frame.

  3. #3
    no dabs
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by green mt. boy
    Is there anyway you can build a true rear fat tire (LM/Larry) around a 135 rear hub without offest? Is the Alfine system an option? Or running 3-4 cogs and a spacer in the back?

    I know other have moved on to winter specigic bikes but I am looking to use parts I have already.

    your question doesn't make sense to me..... you have to get a new frame. you have to get new spokes. you have to get a new rim. offset 135 is the easiest way to stick to parts you already have. do you already have the alfine? with only 3-4 sprockets in the rear spaced over, the rear derailleur is not going to work right.

  4. #4
    is buachail foighneach me
    Reputation: sean salach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,589
    The rear der. should work fine if the range isn't that extreme. I ran a 5 spd setup on a SS cassette hub all summer and had no problems with the derailluer not functioning correctly.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    280

    clarification

    Thanks Sean. I recognize a new frame is in order and hope to build one some day. The 135 is readily available and cheap. In addition, I already have some wheels sets sitting in the shop.

    If I could pair the proposed Salsa fork (135, non-offset) with a 135 non-offset rear I would get lots of good things including interchangeable wheels with zero dish. I have seen the 4-5 gears on a SS hub and I like that set up. The Alfine is good but moves away from the interchangeable thing.

    Lots of smart folks are years ahead of me on this but I ask the question is 160 or offset the only way to go? Thanks for the comments.

  6. #6
    no dabs
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by green mt. boy
    Lots of smart folks are years ahead of me on this but I ask the question is 160 or offset the only way to go? Thanks for the comments.
    160 mm non offset works. 150mm or 165mm non offset will also work. 150 non offset will mean gearing compromises. Having looked at it extensively, clearly the 2 obvious choices are 135 offset and 160 symmetric.


    If you use 135 non offset in the rear, you will have a 92-109+ mm wide tire. that means the chain hits the tire inboard of about 55mm off centerline.

    The attached picture is a quick mod of a sketch I did to check chain clearances. I never checked 135 non offset but I spent 10 minutes modifying a sketch to make it accurate to scale to show the problem you are dealing with. The "tire" is mounted to a 100mm rim, so it is ~107mm wide. The stays are 17 inches eff, which is the shortest you can get to work with a front derailleur, and near enough the shortest you can do without curved seat tubes and plate wishbones and other complicated crap. I did some paint drawing on top of the measured, to scale drawing to make it easy to see what I mean (hopefully). the chain (red) diverges from the front sprocket at the center of the BB. The widest part of the tire has to be a minimum of about 6 inches behind the BB center, which means it doesn't take much angle inward on the chain before the chain starts to touch the tire. Note that the red chain in the sketch is not to scale, and a real chain is wider, closer to the tire, and further from the drive side dropout in the higher position rear, small ring front. The second, angled red line shows the chain (again, narrower than reality to save time) coming from the middle ring position of a 100 mm shell standard chainline (ie wide as heck).

    The bottom line:

    treat the rear of a snow bike like a 29er fork or road pedals for an MTB or something. There are bodge fixes of various degrees, but you aren't going to just swap parts around from other bikes and be completely happy with it.

    Nothing 135 and non offset makes much sense to me. 50mm rims seem much narrower than ideal for snow use and 3.7 tires. The compromises get worse or the possibilities go away with wider rims. I think I remember that the difference between a large marge and a 100 mm rim was about 2 gears in the rear on a 17.25 inch chainstay, and less with longer stays.

    with 135mm non offset and 50mm rims:

    1.) you can not get an IGH to work with enough chain clearance to the tire and a reasonable chainline. IGH's generally do not let you run the sprocket as close to the dropout as a cassette.

    2.) you could get an IGH to work if you ran a badly skewed chainline and chain guides (basically derailleurs) both front and rear. there is a 1/2" dished 22t available for 3 tab/spline compatible IGH's, so that might just about get you there too if the hub you choose can clear the shift cable with that sprocket (S-A is I think the only one).

    3.) you can get a 3 speed by having a triple up front and one sprocket in the rear

    4.) you can get a 4 speed or a couple other bastards by having two, or maybe three rear sprockets, and only using the low ones with the bigger rings up front, in other words your lowest gear would be small-small, and other ratios could come from middle and big rings cross chained onto the larger sprockets in the rear.

    5.) you could rig up a wear surface or side load capable idler or something to protect the tire front the chain, and let it rub like hell in low gears if you don't plan to use them often.

    notice how stupid these possibilities are sounding? I am sure there are other stupid possibilities, but I haven't found any that make sense. I bet you could make a workable S-A 8 speed using the chopper offset sprocket and 135mm spacing, but then it is so custom that why not do offset in the frame and a better, more ideal solution?
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 160 or nothing?-135-non-offset.jpg  

    Last edited by rocwandrer; 01-06-2010 at 09:23 AM.

  7. #7
    is buachail foighneach me
    Reputation: sean salach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,589
    Quote Originally Posted by rocwandrer
    ...........

    with 135mm non offset and 50mm rims:

    1.) you can not get an IGH to work with enough chain clearance to the tire and a reasonable chainline. IGH's generally do not let you run the sprocket as close to the dropout as a cassette.

    2.) you could get an IGH to work if you ran a badly skewed chainline and chain guides (basically derailleurs) both front and rear. there is a 1/2" dished 22t available for 3 tab/spline compatible IGH's, so that might just about get you there too if the hub you choose can clear the shift cable with that sprocket (S-A is I think the only one).

    .........

    I'll go look for em, but I've seen photos of 2 or 3 custom bikes posted here on MTBR using 135 non offset IGH with Marges, with no chain guides and no apparent clearance or chainline issues.

  8. #8
    is buachail foighneach me
    Reputation: sean salach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,589
    Here are two of them.

    http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=571865

    http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=559037

    There's definitely another out there, I just couldn't dig it up. It's painted, I think, blue and orange and hase some crazy double or triple yoke setup on the chainstays.

  9. #9
    is buachail foighneach me
    Reputation: sean salach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,589
    Retrotec are doing 135/no offset snow bikes as well: http://www.flickr.com/photos/retrote...tags/snowbike/

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: miles e's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,034
    Quote Originally Posted by rocwandrer
    treat the rear of a snow bike like a 29er fork or road pedals for an MTB or something. There are bodge fixes of various degrees, but you aren't going to just swap parts around from other bikes and be completely happy with it.
    Guess again.





    https://forums.mtbr.com/29er-bikes/just-another-black-sheep-single-speed-570112.html
    ''It seems like a bit of a trend, everyone trying to make things longer over the last couple of years" Sam Hill

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockraptor5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    129

    slightly aroused

    This bike makes the front of my pants tight

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.