Sonix and Rohloff- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: itsdoable's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,902

    Sonix and Rohloff

    I'm a big fan of tensionerless SS and geared hubs, so when I saw the potential with the Haro Sonix frame, I think it was inevitable that I would try it.

    I got the frame in the spring, but it took a while to build, and I've only recently had some saddle time on it. It is currently set up tensionerless with a 44:17 and a new chain, I'll probably have to file the dropout a touch to accommodate the chain as it wears. The Sonix chainstay yoke-to-chainring clearance is tight, but you can still get a good Rohloff chainline. The DUC fork is overkill on it, but I had it, and couldn't resist using it.

    The ride is nice, this is the first time I've ever had the Rohloff on a frame with serious travel, and I now realize how little finesse you need to navigate technical sections with a bike like this (I ride alot of rigid SS). The suspension tuning is tricky (or touchy) on this frame, and it rides on the firm side, which is my preference anyways. Once set-up, its good, it just took me a while. In any case, I'd say this is a good candidate for a geared hub, and the only thing better would be if I could convince Haro to put the Rohloff specific dropouts on it.

    PS: X-posted to Drivetrain forum

  2. #2
    ridin' Mary
    Reputation: OhNooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    359

    Haro and Rohloff do play well together

    That is indeed a sweet looking ride. I can see how the unique BB of the Sonix lends itself well to a Rohloff without a tensioner. I am surprised to see the chainstay arm in use. Did you not want to use a Speedbone?

    I wanted to try out a Rohloff, as I've never used one before. The Haro Mary seemed like the perfect vehicle for this hub with it's EBB and vertical dropouts. With the big hoops, I had to drop the gearing down to 34:16 to get the low gears I need for the steep climbs. The bigger hoops on the Mary essentially drop off the lowest gear, so I needed an even lower gear to compensate. I'm having a blast with this new bike too!

    I used a speedbone which downhillhjill has told me would void my warranty. I had no choice as when I tried to use the chainstay arm like you did, I couldn't get the cables to route around the disk brake. I'm not sure how you did that as I couldn't find a way to get it to work. I've since rerouted the shifter cables down along the chainstay and downtube instead of up over the seat stay and toptube as show in the picture. I didn't like grabbing a handfull of cables on the top-tube whenever I hiked the bike over a stream. The speedbone allowed this alternate routing, which would probably work great for your full-suspension bike. Routing the cables along the chainstay would cause the cables to bend at your BB when the suspension is active, but would not change in length like routing them along your shock does. Something to consider...

    Kudos on your awesome ride!

    mary_LHS2.jpg

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: itsdoable's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,902
    Nice Mary!

    The Speedbone & OEM-2 torque arm require good tolerances in the dropout, since I was planning to file the dropout to maintain chain tension, it's not that easy to get that torque arm to mesh properly. Besides, it's alway good form not to void the warranty until your sure about the setup... Besides, I don't mind the after-market torque arm, it works well, and looks.... well, "German".

    My rear caliper is ISO, most post mount calipers sit higher due to the adapter, and interfere with the shifter box. I also like to keep the shifter above the chainstay, things hanging below have a tendency to get mangled when you slip off a log or skinny.

    I usually ride 38:16, but you gotta use whatever fits when you don't have an eBB. Cable routing is per Haro, which seems to work fine (I'm sure they thought about it). Besides, the Rohloff is not affected by slight changes in the housing length since the indexing is at the hub.

  4. #4
    Derailleurless
    Reputation: Speedub.Nate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    9,122
    The cable routing was possible because the seat stay (shock stay) angle to the frame isn't as steep on itsdoable's Sonix as on the Mary.

    On my RIP9, I run the cables under the bottom bracket, and the flex doesn't jack with the shifting at all. I'll probably have to replace the housing more frequently due to all the bending and rub, but that's once a year, at worst.

    I've been eyeing the Sonix and have questions.

    First off, how is this bike **not** a URT? (Don't take that the wrong way -- I loved my Joshuas (2)).

    You say it's a firm ride. Does it rely heavily on platform valving?

    What were the challenges you had dialing it in?

    I'd love to see a 29" version with sliding Rohloff dropouts. Well, that is, if it rides well.
    speedub.nate
    MTBR Hiatus UFN

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: downhilljill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,820
    Quote Originally Posted by Speedub.Nate

    I've been eyeing the Sonix and have questions.

    First off, how is this bike **not** a URT? (Don't take that the wrong way -- I loved my Joshuas (2)).

    You say it's a firm ride. Does it rely heavily on platform valving?

    What were the challenges you had dialing it in?

    I'd love to see a 29" version with sliding Rohloff dropouts. Well, that is, if it rides well.
    A true URT lacks the pivot around the BB. Without this pivot, you get all sort of unsavory characteristics like your pedal to saddle height changing. That's the main reason why true URT's really aren't being produced anylonger. The Virtual Link bikes (Sonix and Xeon) can be thought of as a hybrid between a URT and a BB pivot bike.

    Given the nature of the design, a rear shock with a pedaling platform really isn't neccessary. It's the design that yields such a unique ride, not the rear shock. Shocks with a platform (like Fox RP23, RockShox MC3.3, etc) will not only have a platform built in, but they have a variety of other adjustments as well. The two I just mentioned have different degrees of platform you can dial in which are sort of fun to play with.

    These bikes aren't hard to dial in, but you just have to make sure that you go through the motions to get it done. Unlike other suspension platforms where you might run a little a little less sag for a plusher ride, you can't with the Sonix. You gotta run 10mm and no more. Make sure you take your sag reading with your platform in the "off" or "open" position.

    29er version is in the works! We should have prototypes here any day.

  6. #6
    Derailleurless
    Reputation: Speedub.Nate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    9,122
    Quote Originally Posted by downhilljill
    29er version is in the works! We should have prototypes here any day.
    That's nice to hear!

    I know from other posts that you've had some interest from the singlespeed crowd due to the nature of this design.

    I'm curious if you've entertained the notion of commissioning a singlespeed rear triangle to include sliding dropouts, perhaps eliminating the extra cable guides & derailleur hanger? Likely not a sales chart burner, but it would definitely be a unique selling point.

    With that out of the way, tensionerless internal hub compatability would be a given, and a Rohloff specific design would be just a slight extension to the right hand dropout.
    speedub.nate
    MTBR Hiatus UFN

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: itsdoable's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,902
    Quote Originally Posted by Speedub.Nate
    The cable routing was possible because the seat stay (shock stay) angle to the frame isn't as steep on itsdoable's Sonix as on the Mary.
    Actually, With the After-market Torque-arm, the shifter box has to be above the horizontal to clear, and the cables exit such that they run right into the avid caliper's actuation arm. With a lower profile direct to ISO caliper, the cable goes over the caliper - I've noticed this issue with many hardtails.


    Quote Originally Posted by Speedub.Nate
    I've been eyeing the Sonix and have questions.

    First off, how is this bike **not** a URT? (Don't take that the wrong way -- I loved my Joshuas (2)).

    You say it's a firm ride. Does it rely heavily on platform valving?

    What were the challenges you had dialing it in?

    I'd love to see a 29" version with sliding Rohloff dropouts. Well, that is, if it rides well.
    It is basically a URT with a virtual pivot, where the pivot moves from in front of the BB early in the travel to concentric with the BB deep in the travel. I've always preferred the sweet-spot URTs (over the Trek's) for FS-SS and Rohloff conversions.

    Firm ride - I think by design, the Sonic is more of a XC/Racer than a AM type bike. But part of it is me, I've been riding alot on a rigid SS/Fixie and if didn't like it when I set the Sonic up too soft. I'm sure if I left it there, I'd get use to it. My shock is a Manitou S-type, but I have the platform set low.

    Dial-in - not hard, but because there are alot of options, it took some time to try out different pressures, (a little more sag, a little less sag), and varying the platform - you can spend a long time trying out all the options. It took me longer than other bikes I've riden, and when it's set-up poorly, you notice it. I ended up with less sag than recomended, and a mild platform. Part of the difference was probably the DUC fork, which is a bit longer travel than recomended, and very plush.

    It does settle deep into it's travel on G-outs, but that's a combination of a very plush fork, and a platform shock (which uses a softer spring, so when your G-out exceeds the platform, it tends to sink in it's travel).

    As set-up, it feels a little harsh at low speed (not in a bad way), like you are not geting 5" of travel when picking your way slowly through rock gardens - which to me feels right. If you wind it up to speed and take a strait line through the rocks, they seem to disapear with a mild thud-thud-thud in the back.

    I asked Jill about a Rohloff/SS version last year, but they were busy with other projects (we're pretty small potatoes) - but now that the 2-9er is pretty much done, maybe we can ask again?

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: downhilljill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,820
    SS/Rohloff drop-outs....yes, you are right. It would be a real low-volume item, but unique for sure. The problem for us is tooling costs. It's pretty expensive to open up tooling for a project. I don't know that we'd sell enough to justify the expense. I will certainly keep it in the suggestion box!

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.