Hub points of engagement?? Salsa & Fatback (aka Hadley)- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 28 of 28
  1. #1
    mnt bike laws of physics
    Reputation: yogiprophet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,641

    Hub points of engagement?? Salsa & Fatback (aka Hadley)

    I'm just trying to piece together some components for my first fat bike, and would like to know the number of engagement points per revolution of the hub that Salsa makes for the Mukluk and also for the one that Hadley makes for Fatback - I'm assuming that one is 36 per revolution (since it has 3 sets of pawls instead of the 4 mine has - two offset) but would like clarfication.

    I am also looking at the one Fatback has made in Taiwan and saw that it has 24 per rev.

    I'm sure weights would be too much to try and find and...well this is a fat bike

  2. #2
    How much does it weigh?
    Reputation: Borgschulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,169
    I believe both models of Fatback hubs are 36 engagements.

    I'd gladly swap you for that Hadley freehub though I miss having 72 engagements with my King hub.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dvo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    753
    There is a 72 point engagement Hadley from Fatback.

  4. #4
    How much does it weigh?
    Reputation: Borgschulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,169
    Not when I asked there wasn't.

  5. #5
    Fat!Drunk!Slow!
    Reputation: JordyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,453
    Hasn't the Fatback Hadley hub always been 72 PoE?

  6. #6
    How much does it weigh?
    Reputation: Borgschulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,169
    Mines 36... I think my swapping offer kind of clues that in?

  7. #7
    mnt bike laws of physics
    Reputation: yogiprophet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,641
    I wonder where dvo1 is getting his info. If you talked to them personally and they said no then?????

    BTW, Hadley is awesome to deal with. If you were really interested in upgrading to the freehub body with the 2 by 2 offset pawls, they would hook you up for sure.

  8. #8
    mnt bike laws of physics
    Reputation: yogiprophet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,641
    Quote Originally Posted by Borgschulze View Post
    I believe both models of Fatback hubs are 36 engagements.
    According to tscheezy's post, the Taiwan Fatback has 24 POE. Look at the 6th picture down with description.
    http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.ph...hub+engagement

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dvo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    753
    Quote Originally Posted by yogiprophet View Post
    I wonder where dvo1 is getting his info. If you talked to them personally and they said no then?????

    BTW, Hadley is awesome to deal with. If you were really interested in upgrading to the freehub body with the 2 by 2 offset pawls, they would hook you up for sure.
    By walking over and checking the hub on my bike.

  10. #10
    mnt bike laws of physics
    Reputation: yogiprophet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,641
    Quote Originally Posted by dvo1 View Post
    By walking over and checking the hub on my bike.
    Really? Do you have a degree in mathematics? or did you just look at it and decide it had 72 POE?

  11. #11
    How much does it weigh?
    Reputation: Borgschulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,169
    I think that was a really bad joke right? Haha.

    Maybe he opened his up.

    I cleaned mine out and put my favourite grease in it... Super Lube, and used Tri-Flow on the pawls.

  12. #12
    mnt bike laws of physics
    Reputation: yogiprophet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,641
    I am a serious guy who thinks everything is funny, so i will wait for dvo1 to tell me it was bad before I concede.

  13. #13
    Dr Gadget is IN
    Reputation: wadester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,358
    Quote Originally Posted by yogiprophet View Post
    According to tscheezy's post, the Taiwan Fatback has 24 POE. Look at the 6th picture down with description.
    http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.ph...hub+engagement
    OK, the link shows 24 teeth on the ratchet - but 3 pawls. Do you count 24 individual positions, or 24x3 =72 total "engagements"?

    I note that the "walk to bike, spin wheel, count clicks" method would say 24.
    This isn't a "you're doing it wrong" topic.

    WSS/OSS: Open Source Sealant

  14. #14
    mnt bike laws of physics
    Reputation: yogiprophet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,641
    Quote Originally Posted by wadester View Post
    I note that the "walk to bike, spin wheel, count clicks" method would say 24.
    Now that is funny to me!

    Quote Originally Posted by wadester View Post
    OK, the link shows 24 teeth on the ratchet - but 3 pawls. Do you count 24 individual positions, or 24x3 =72 total "engagements"?
    I doubt the paws are offset, but I have been wrong before....this time I seriously doubt it as that would leave one pawl engaged at a time..

    Wade, I have an extra Lefty laying around I wish I could use, but at this point am not considering it. BTW, I have finally this year taken to fully disassembling and even assembling Leftys with great success....mostly due to the thread you started.

  15. #15
    How much does it weigh?
    Reputation: Borgschulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,169
    Hadley had a 108 engagement freehub for a while.

    It used 3 pawls, offset... 1 engaged at a time.

    The bearings in them exploded quite often from what I have read, but there was also people who claim theirs is still running flawlessly.

  16. #16
    Dr Gadget is IN
    Reputation: wadester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,358
    Quote Originally Posted by yogiprophet View Post
    Now that is funny to me!


    I doubt the paws are offset, but I have been wrong before....this time I seriously doubt it as that would leave one pawl engaged at a time..

    Wade, I have an extra Lefty laying around I wish I could use, but at this point am not considering it. BTW, I have finally this year taken to fully disassembling and even assembling Leftys with great success....mostly due to the thread you started.
    Glad to hear my old thread helped you! I'm semi-patiently waiting for Mendon to get his proto-fat-clamps going so I can get back to Leftying myself.

    And I just spun my FatBack Hadley and got 36 clicks, so there's something.
    As a point, tho: the most durable rims we've got are the LM 65mm DH and the USC 100mm - which only comes in 36h, and you can only get 36h 170mm hubs from Fatback/Hadley.
    This isn't a "you're doing it wrong" topic.

    WSS/OSS: Open Source Sealant

  17. #17
    mnt bike laws of physics
    Reputation: yogiprophet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,641
    Quote Originally Posted by wadester View Post
    And I just spun my FatBack Hadley and got 36 clicks, so there's something.
    As a point, tho: the most durable rims we've got are the LM 65mm DH and the USC 100mm - which only comes in 36h, and you can only get 36h 170mm hubs from Fatback/Hadley.
    That is very good to know. I was thinking about the DH LM because of it being double walled. Do you think the USC 100 would be as durable even though it is single? That rim seems too wide, but I am very inexperienced with all of this. My guess would be that it would support the tire under lower pressures better, but not be as suitable for regular trail riding.

    Have you tried to run a fat tire tubeless? Am wondering if that is a viable option. I have no idea how the available tires would hold up. You know, being in New Mexico with all the cactus.....I suppose you could just slime up the tubes.

  18. #18
    Dr Gadget is IN
    Reputation: wadester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,358
    Good questions!

    Firstoff, the USC rim is doublewall, and they have stood up to the Dona Ana trails w/o problems - both north and south..



    Width wise - well, I wanted to ride arroyos. Wider is better for soft conditions, so the 100mm rim is the one for me. I have had no issues riding the regular trails with them - other than things being a bit bouncy if the pressure is too high (12 psi? They're gonna blow!!). So far I've got one scratch on the rim sidewall.

    Since I'm a tubeless kinda guy, I paid a lot of attention when folks experimented (before I got my bike together). It seems that 7-10 psi just isn't enough to hold the tire bead on reliably - but if someone made it work, please prove me wrong!

    My slow moving devious plan to make it happen involves an inflatable bead lock - basically a lightweight "tire" with tube inside the fatty that will let me run enough pressure to hold the beads in place w/o having to have the fatty itself at that pressure. Here's the 4WD version:



    The motorcycle version:



    and my latest attempt:



    A 26x1.25 slick cut in half and expanded with some polypro webbing. A regular tube will shove those beads against the beads of the Larry. I have the parts for the 2nd valve stem and bypass tubing that will allow inflation of the Larry. Problem is, I'd rather be riding......
    This isn't a "you're doing it wrong" topic.

    WSS/OSS: Open Source Sealant

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velobike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    7,171
    Good stuff Wadester.

    This is why I get keen on the idea of a fat tubular. I suspect it will be the only way to have a light fat tyre setup.
    As little bike as possible, as silent as possible.
    Latitude: 5736' Highlands, Scotland

  20. #20
    mnt bike laws of physics
    Reputation: yogiprophet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,641
    Quote Originally Posted by wadester View Post
    Good questions!

    Firstoff, the USC rim is doublewall, and they have stood up to the Dona Ana trails w/o problems - both north and south..



    Width wise - well, I wanted to ride arroyos. Wider is better for soft conditions, so the 100mm rim is the one for me. I have had no issues riding the regular trails with them - other than things being a bit bouncy if the pressure is too high (12 psi? They're gonna blow!!). So far I've got one scratch on the rim sidewall.

    Since I'm a tubeless kinda guy, I paid a lot of attention when folks experimented (before I got my bike together). It seems that 7-10 psi just isn't enough to hold the tire bead on reliably - but if someone made it work, please prove me wrong!

    My slow moving devious plan to make it happen involves an inflatable bead lock - basically a lightweight "tire" with tube inside the fatty that will let me run enough pressure to hold the beads in place w/o having to have the fatty itself at that pressure.

    my latest attempt:



    A 26x1.25 slick cut in half and expanded with some polypro webbing. A regular tube will shove those beads against the beads of the Larry. I have the parts for the 2nd valve stem and bypass tubing that will allow inflation of the Larry. Problem is, I'd rather be riding......
    Cool stuff! Keep us posted on your progess. Seeing as how much a fat tube weighs, and with desert riding I wouldn't think using a regular tube would be a good option, this setup would be lighter....I think you could get away with using less sealant without a tube also.

    So, if I understood you correctly, you can only use so much pressure with these rims or the tire blows and, at the same time, running one of these tires tubeless at that low pressure doesn't provide enough force to hold the bead on and you burp air. Is the necessity for low pressure a function of the wide rim or something else?.... cause I have heard of others running much higher than 12 psi.

    Do you happen to know how much that rim weighs?

    Thanks for all the info and insight Wade.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,242
    Yogi, The low pressure is a function of flotation and ride. Snow or sand often times won't support a tire pumped up to even 10 psi. In addition for summer riding or riding on packed trails in the winter the tire volume and footprint is so big that they ride very hard and bouncy at pressures that would allow one to ride tubless. If all you wanted was to ride on pavement you could probably make tubeless work easily but what would be the fun of that?
    Last edited by sryanak; 07-23-2011 at 06:47 PM.

  22. #22
    Dr Gadget is IN
    Reputation: wadester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,358
    PS: I was kidding about 12 psi being dangerous. It's just that 12 is up in the "way too much pressure to ride" zone - at least on dirt. As stated, pavement is another ballgame (and one I'm not that interested in).

    While experimenting, I've had tires up to 40-50 psi - not 3.7's but other 26's. Getting a 2.5" tire to seat the beads takes a bit. No problem with strength.

    On that note, out riding today I got a pinch flat. Now I have another scratch on the rim. Sealant didn't hold on the snakebite <sigh>. I was about to patch when my buddy whipped out a spare Toob. In comparing the weight, my M/C tube and his Surly were similar in weight - but I've got schraeder valves. Beadlock Tubeless may or may not be lighter, but it will certainly be better for things like pinches.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Hub points of engagement?? Salsa &amp; Fatback (aka Hadley)-img_1619s.jpg  

    This isn't a "you're doing it wrong" topic.

    WSS/OSS: Open Source Sealant

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: damnitman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,288
    has anyone tried going tubeless using tubular-cement as a chemical (vs mechanical) bead-lock?
    If Huffy made an airplane, would you fly in it?

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: icecreamjay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,188
    I just spun my hadley hub and got 96 points of engagement. I also backed it off each click to make sure and sure enough it grabbed 96 times. Actually I got different numbers each time but always 96 or just shy, sometimes 2 clicks would sneak by. I haven't looked inside yet, I imagine all the pawls are offset to achieve that many engagement points.

    I bought blue ones in June of 2010, just to make things clear. Maybe hadley and fatback were doing a little experimenting?

  25. #25
    mnt bike laws of physics
    Reputation: yogiprophet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,641
    Quote Originally Posted by damnitman View Post
    has anyone tried going tubeless using tubular-cement as a chemical (vs mechanical) bead-lock?
    Not sure if that would hold. Why don't rim makers just make a beadlock in their rims? I know I saw one on this forum about a week or so ago. Does anyone know what kind of rim that was? I looked for about an hour and gave up.

  26. #26
    How much does it weigh?
    Reputation: Borgschulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,169
    Quote Originally Posted by icecreamjay View Post
    I just spun my hadley hub and got 96 points of engagement. I also backed it off each click to make sure and sure enough it grabbed 96 times. Actually I got different numbers each time but always 96 or just shy, sometimes 2 clicks would sneak by. I haven't looked inside yet, I imagine all the pawls are offset to achieve that many engagement points.

    I bought blue ones in June of 2010, just to make things clear. Maybe hadley and fatback were doing a little experimenting?
    I only know of the 36 - 3 pawl, 72 - 4 pawl 2 offset, and 108 - 3 pawl 3 offset.

  27. #27
    Dr Gadget is IN
    Reputation: wadester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,358
    Quote Originally Posted by damnitman View Post
    has anyone tried going tubeless using tubular-cement as a chemical (vs mechanical) bead-lock?
    Quote Originally Posted by yogiprophet View Post
    Not sure if that would hold. Why don't rim makers just make a beadlock in their rims? I know I saw one on this forum about a week or so ago. Does anyone know what kind of rim that was? I looked for about an hour and gave up.
    People have used tubular cement to prevent bead rotation, but just on one bead so they could still change a tube. Doing both beads could work - but might be hell to throw in a tube after a sidewall rip. Anybody try this?
    This isn't a "you're doing it wrong" topic.

    WSS/OSS: Open Source Sealant

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: icecreamjay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,188
    Quote Originally Posted by Borgschulze View Post
    I only know of the 36 - 3 pawl, 72 - 4 pawl 2 offset, and 108 - 3 pawl 3 offset.
    I know even less. It seems odd that I would be off by 12 in my counting though. Someday I'll open it up and I'll let you know what I find.

Similar Threads

  1. Cassette engagement points
    By rogerraa in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 08-26-2010, 10:40 AM
  2. points of engagement
    By Jason B in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-02-2010, 02:48 AM
  3. Mavic points of engagement
    By Aaron65 in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-04-2007, 11:06 AM
  4. Points of engagement
    By JAKEtheDOG in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-03-2006, 02:52 PM
  5. Industrynine vs Hadley engagement points
    By ExtraStout in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-28-2005, 06:41 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.