Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 12:04:34 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

On 12/29/2024 9:39 AM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:

Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com> wrote:

https://www.bikeradar.com/news/buffalo-utility-s2

Made for developing countries to allow for easier transportation on
cargo bikes, without the exposure and complexity of an external
derailleur or hand-operated shifting (for an internally geared hub). It >>>> was developed and patented with the help of SRAM.

Are derailleurs really that bad? A whole new bike for the sake of a granny >>> gear seems slightly extreme. Internal pawls at small radius are going to >>> be more stressed and harder to build than a rear sprocket of larger radius.

I'll admit that the narrower flange of a multispeed rear hub impairs the >>> lateral strength of the rear wheel, but a hub with flanges spaced to leave >>> room for a two-cog stack would be vastly stronger. What is the "exposure" >>> alluded to above?

Thanks for reading,

bob prohaska

" Are derailleurs really that bad?"

Yes.

They last a long while for many competitive events (except
criteriums where concrete abrades right through them).
Derailleurs are the overwhelming choice for tourists, even
of great distances, on roads whether paved or not.
Derailleurs are also usually suitable to commuters although
in salted areas that vulnerability is a factor. Offroad is
sorta sketchy in that failures are regular but alternates
have some serious tradeoffs so the derailleurs just get bent
back or replaced.

[note most offroad is recreation, by riders who can well
afford replacement gear. Among the MTB riders, "I broke that
too!" is not always a complaint, it's often a boast.]

Extreme use, where unsupported durability is critical, would
lead one to a not-derailleur design of some type.

I've long marvelled at the rear deraileur mechanisms and how well they function when properly set up. I've never had one fail, but I did
replace one a few years back because the idler sprokets were worn
down. Now, granted, I don't go offroad, and I can see potenial
problems there.

I’ve had 4 failures over 40ish years one from rock strike, as a teen with a new MTB early 90’s managed to to wrap the rear mech around the cassette
with both the gravel and MTB in filthy conditions ie muddy with lots of vegetation matter, both a few years ago COVID ish times.

And this year the old ish and probably quite cheap rear mech on the commute bike spring snapped separating from ie so the cage and parallelogram were separated made for an interesting commute home!

That rear mech was an upgrade? In that the original had become sluggish
even with new cables etc. so a cheap rear mech ie £20 ish solved that, the gravel bike had a upgrade last winter with a GRX rear mech as that has what shimano call a clutch ie keeps the chain off the chainstay etc.

I believe that SRAM UDH

<https://www.sram.com/en/sram/mountain/products/udh> is supposed to be more robust and some of the more modern rear mech’s are chunky boys and
apparently are more durable.

I only have Cues though I have no UDH compatible frame, nor likely to any
time soon, nor do I tend to bash rear mech’s on rocks!

--
C'est bon
Soloman

Roger Merriman

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 12/29/2024 10:39 AM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:

Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com> wrote:

https://www.bikeradar.com/news/buffalo-utility-s2

Made for developing countries to allow for easier transportation on
cargo bikes, without the exposure and complexity of an external
derailleur or hand-operated shifting (for an internally geared hub). It
was developed and patented with the help of SRAM.

Are derailleurs really that bad? A whole new bike for the sake of a granny gear seems slightly extreme. Internal pawls at small radius are going to
be more stressed and harder to build than a rear sprocket of larger radius.

I'll admit that the narrower flange of a multispeed rear hub impairs the lateral strength of the rear wheel, but a hub with flanges spaced to leave room for a two-cog stack would be vastly stronger. What is the "exposure" alluded to above?

Thanks for reading,

bob prohaska

Third-world use by people with little to no technical ability. Their
bikes are heavily misused and abused, and generally speaking the
riders/owners have very few resources that could be applied to fixing
something that failed.. An external gear-changing system doesn't last
long in those environments.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 30 Dec 2024 11:49:01 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 12:04:34 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

On 12/29/2024 9:39 AM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:

Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com> wrote:

https://www.bikeradar.com/news/buffalo-utility-s2

Made for developing countries to allow for easier transportation on
cargo bikes, without the exposure and complexity of an external
derailleur or hand-operated shifting (for an internally geared hub). It >>>>> was developed and patented with the help of SRAM.

Are derailleurs really that bad? A whole new bike for the sake of a granny >>>> gear seems slightly extreme. Internal pawls at small radius are going to >>>> be more stressed and harder to build than a rear sprocket of larger radius.

I'll admit that the narrower flange of a multispeed rear hub impairs the >>>> lateral strength of the rear wheel, but a hub with flanges spaced to leave >>>> room for a two-cog stack would be vastly stronger. What is the "exposure" >>>> alluded to above?

Thanks for reading,

bob prohaska

" Are derailleurs really that bad?"

Yes.

They last a long while for many competitive events (except
criteriums where concrete abrades right through them).
Derailleurs are the overwhelming choice for tourists, even
of great distances, on roads whether paved or not.
Derailleurs are also usually suitable to commuters although
in salted areas that vulnerability is a factor. Offroad is
sorta sketchy in that failures are regular but alternates
have some serious tradeoffs so the derailleurs just get bent
back or replaced.

[note most offroad is recreation, by riders who can well
afford replacement gear. Among the MTB riders, "I broke that
too!" is not always a complaint, it's often a boast.]

Extreme use, where unsupported durability is critical, would
lead one to a not-derailleur design of some type.

I've long marvelled at the rear deraileur mechanisms and how well they
function when properly set up. I've never had one fail, but I did
replace one a few years back because the idler sprokets were worn
down. Now, granted, I don't go offroad, and I can see potenial
problems there.

IÆve had 4 failures over 40ish years one from rock strike, as a teen with a >new MTB early 90Æs managed to to wrap the rear mech around the cassette
with both the gravel and MTB in filthy conditions ie muddy with lots of >vegetation matter, both a few years ago COVID ish times.

And this year the old ish and probably quite cheap rear mech on the commute >bike spring snapped separating from ie so the cage and parallelogram were >separated made for an interesting commute home!

That rear mech was an upgrade? In that the original had become sluggish
even with new cables etc. so a cheap rear mech ie ú20 ish solved that, the >gravel bike had a upgrade last winter with a GRX rear mech as that has what >shimano call a clutch ie keeps the chain off the chainstay etc.

I believe that SRAM UDH

<https://www.sram.com/en/sram/mountain/products/udh> is supposed to be more >robust and some of the more modern rear mechÆs are chunky boys and
apparently are more durable.

I only have Cues though I have no UDH compatible frame, nor likely to any >time soon, nor do I tend to bash rear mechÆs on rocks!

--
C'est bon
Soloman

Roger Merriman

I didn't keep track of my bike components back when I rode two
wheelers, but I put 36000 miles on the Catrike's original derailleur.
One advantage of the trike is that I don't often lay it on it's side
and it's also less likely to contact something from the side.

--
C'est bon
Soloman

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On 30 Dec 2024 11:49:01 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:

Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 12:04:34 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

On 12/29/2024 9:39 AM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:

Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com> wrote:

https://www.bikeradar.com/news/buffalo-utility-s2

Made for developing countries to allow for easier transportation on >>>>>> cargo bikes, without the exposure and complexity of an external
derailleur or hand-operated shifting (for an internally geared hub). It >>>>>> was developed and patented with the help of SRAM.

Are derailleurs really that bad? A whole new bike for the sake of a granny
gear seems slightly extreme. Internal pawls at small radius are going to >>>>> be more stressed and harder to build than a rear sprocket of larger radius.

I'll admit that the narrower flange of a multispeed rear hub impairs the >>>>> lateral strength of the rear wheel, but a hub with flanges spaced to leave
room for a two-cog stack would be vastly stronger. What is the "exposure" >>>>> alluded to above?

Thanks for reading,

bob prohaska

" Are derailleurs really that bad?"

Yes.

They last a long while for many competitive events (except
criteriums where concrete abrades right through them).
Derailleurs are the overwhelming choice for tourists, even
of great distances, on roads whether paved or not.
Derailleurs are also usually suitable to commuters although
in salted areas that vulnerability is a factor. Offroad is
sorta sketchy in that failures are regular but alternates
have some serious tradeoffs so the derailleurs just get bent
back or replaced.

[note most offroad is recreation, by riders who can well
afford replacement gear. Among the MTB riders, "I broke that
too!" is not always a complaint, it's often a boast.]

Extreme use, where unsupported durability is critical, would
lead one to a not-derailleur design of some type.

I've long marvelled at the rear deraileur mechanisms and how well they
function when properly set up. I've never had one fail, but I did
replace one a few years back because the idler sprokets were worn
down. Now, granted, I don't go offroad, and I can see potenial
problems there.

I’ve had 4 failures over 40ish years one from rock strike, as a teen with a >> new MTB early 90’s managed to to wrap the rear mech around the cassette
with both the gravel and MTB in filthy conditions ie muddy with lots of
vegetation matter, both a few years ago COVID ish times.

And this year the old ish and probably quite cheap rear mech on the commute >> bike spring snapped separating from ie so the cage and parallelogram were
separated made for an interesting commute home!

That rear mech was an upgrade? In that the original had become sluggish
even with new cables etc. so a cheap rear mech ie £20 ish solved that, the >> gravel bike had a upgrade last winter with a GRX rear mech as that has what >> shimano call a clutch ie keeps the chain off the chainstay etc.

I believe that SRAM UDH

<https://www.sram.com/en/sram/mountain/products/udh> is supposed to be more >> robust and some of the more modern rear mech’s are chunky boys and
apparently are more durable.

I only have Cues though I have no UDH compatible frame, nor likely to any
time soon, nor do I tend to bash rear mech’s on rocks!

--
C'est bon
Soloman

Roger Merriman

I didn't keep track of my bike components back when I rode two
wheelers, but I put 36000 miles on the Catrike's original derailleur.
One advantage of the trike is that I don't often lay it on it's side
and it's also less likely to contact something from the side.

I’d assume that a road or commute type bike the rear mech would last
decades and many miles, indeed the MTB commute bike the cheap rear mech
lasted 9 years and 19,000 miles before separation!

Previous rear mech a Deore so mid ish end lasted 8 years before I replaced
it, though it had a much harder life being used for the majority of its existence as a MTB only last two years on the commute.

The full suspension rear mech had been fine until it wrapped its self
around the cassette and was 8 years old though low miles as well MTB rides
tend to be 20ish miles so you don’t clock up the miles.

--
C'est bon
Soloman

Roger Merriman

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

On 12/30/2024 6:11 AM, zen cycle wrote:

On 12/29/2024 10:39 AM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:

Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com> wrote:

https://www.bikeradar.com/news/buffalo-utility-s2

Made for developing countries to allow for easier
transportation on
cargo bikes, without the exposure and complexity of an
external
derailleur or hand-operated shifting (for an internally
geared hub). It
was developed and patented with the help of SRAM.

Are derailleurs really that bad? A whole new bike for the
sake of a granny
gear seems slightly extreme. Internal pawls at small
radius are going to
be more stressed  and harder to build than a rear sprocket
of larger radius.

I'll admit that the narrower flange of a multispeed rear
hub impairs the
lateral strength of the rear wheel, but a hub with flanges
spaced to leave
room for a two-cog stack would be vastly stronger. What is
the "exposure"
alluded to above?

Thanks for reading,

bob prohaska

 Third-world use by people with little to no technical
ability. Their bikes are heavily misused and abused, and
generally speaking the riders/owners have very few resources
that could be applied to fixing something that failed.. An
external gear-changing system doesn't last long in those
environments.

+1

Yup seems a poor choice for derailleur!

Roger Merriman

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 12/30/2024 6:11 AM, zen cycle wrote:

On 12/29/2024 10:39 AM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:

Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com> wrote:

https://www.bikeradar.com/news/buffalo-utility-s2

Made for developing countries to allow for easier
transportation on
cargo bikes, without the exposure and complexity of an
external
derailleur or hand-operated shifting (for an internally
geared hub). It
was developed and patented with the help of SRAM.

Are derailleurs really that bad? A whole new bike for the
sake of a granny
gear seems slightly extreme. Internal pawls at small
radius are going to
be more stressed  and harder to build than a rear sprocket
of larger radius.

I'll admit that the narrower flange of a multispeed rear
hub impairs the
lateral strength of the rear wheel, but a hub with flanges
spaced to leave
room for a two-cog stack would be vastly stronger. What is
the "exposure"
alluded to above?

Thanks for reading,

bob prohaska

 Third-world use by people with little to no technical
ability. Their bikes are heavily misused and abused, and
generally speaking the riders/owners have very few resources
that could be applied to fixing something that failed.. An
external gear-changing system doesn't last long in those
environments.

+1

--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

zen cycle <funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> writes:

On 12/29/2024 10:39 AM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:

Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com> wrote:

https://www.bikeradar.com/news/buffalo-utility-s2

Made for developing countries to allow for easier transportation on
cargo bikes, without the exposure and complexity of an external
derailleur or hand-operated shifting (for an internally geared hub). It
was developed and patented with the help of SRAM.

Are derailleurs really that bad? A whole new bike for the sake of a
granny
gear seems slightly extreme. Internal pawls at small radius are going to
be more stressed and harder to build than a rear sprocket of larger radius. >> I'll admit that the narrower flange of a multispeed rear hub impairs
the
lateral strength of the rear wheel, but a hub with flanges spaced to leave >> room for a two-cog stack would be vastly stronger. What is the "exposure"
alluded to above?
Thanks for reading,
bob prohaska

Third-world use by people with little to no technical ability. Their
bikes are heavily misused and abused, and generally speaking the
riders/owners have very few resources that could be applied to fixing
something that failed.. An external gear-changing system doesn't last
long in those environments.

Derailleur chains require frequent replacement due to wear. Expense and logistics would likely be a problem in the Buffalo application.
Non-derailleur chains can wear in with the cog and sprocket and last for
years without requiring replacement.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

https://www.bikeradar.com/news/buffalo-utility-s2

Made for developing countries to allow for easier transportation on
cargo bikes, without the exposure and complexity of an external
derailleur or hand-operated shifting (for an internally geared hub). It
was developed and patented with the help of SRAM.

It appears to engage one drive train or the other through a
back-pedaling action, forcing the pawls in the freewheel to toggle from
one side to the other.

It's been tested for over two years in the field with great feedback
(according to the article) and is now being marketed in 3rd world countries.

The design won the Eurobike Gold award in 2024 for "excellence in design
and innovation within the cycling industry"

More information at https://worldbicyclerelief.org/s2/


--
Add xx to reply

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 12/27/2024 12:32 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 12/27/2024 10:35 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:

https://www.bikeradar.com/news/buffalo-utility-s2

Made for developing countries to allow for easier
transportation on cargo bikes, without the exposure and
complexity of an external derailleur or hand-operated
shifting (for an internally geared hub). It was developed
and patented with the help of SRAM.

It appears to engage one drive train or the other through
a back- pedaling action, forcing the pawls in the
freewheel to toggle from one side to the other.

It's been tested for over two years in the field with
great feedback (according to the article) and is now being
marketed in 3rd world countries.

The design won the Eurobike Gold award in 2024 for
"excellence in design and innovation within the cycling
industry"

More information at https://worldbicyclerelief.org/s2/

Thanks, that's more info than I was previously able to find.

ISTR a 1960s hub gear with coaster brake that also shifted
gears when backpedaled slightly. I never had a chance to
ride one.

Many similar. Cheap and effective, famously robust too. I
made that comment the first time we discussed double ($$)
drive chains on that vehicle.

The original 1950s Bendix two speed had a cable to change
gears. In 1960 it was replaced with the three 'automatic'
versions whose mechanism is directly analogous to a Parker
ball point in-out mechanism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhVw-MHGv4s

[nice clear graphics]

Fichtel & Sachs (later SRAM) made a very nice automatic unit
as well and there are smaller volume eastern European
variants too.

Two of the Bendix 2-speed CB designs are currently produced
under the Eagle [SOMA] brand.

https://www.bicycleretailer.com/product-tech/2021/03/17/merry-sales-helps-bring-back-eagle-2-speed-coaster-brake-hub

--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)