A TOTAL FLOP in the making? | Classified Powershift HUB | REAMING
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 06. 2024
- The classified hub was touted as being a replacement for a front derailleur. The reality might not be all it's cracked up to be. This video explains how it works, some of its associated technicalities, and where it could all go wrong.
More on the technicalities here www.hambini.com/classified-po...
GET MERCH HERE!!! www.hambini.com/product-categ...
Some of the equipment I use and recommend
*THE HAMBINI PENCIL OF CHOICE*
UK Kuru Toga Silver Edition amzn.to/3Y9azT1
US Kuru Toga Silver Edition amzn.to/3jryfmT
*THE HAMBINI HAIRDRESSER PENCIL - iT's PINK*
UK Kuru Toga PINK Pencil amzn.to/3VD5wsj
US Kuru Toga PINK Pencil amzn.to/3Hwthx8
*TOOLS*
Wera Allen/Hex Keys
UK amzn.to/3CdPazi
US amzn.to/3wRG1cD
Wera Screwdrivers
UK amzn.to/3WGqOFS
US amzn.to/3HX6KLu
Mitutoyo Digital Calipers
UK amzn.to/3Gq9Nv6
US amzn.to/3E5v4Zh
Mitutoyo Feeler Gauge
UK amzn.to/3Gq9Nv6
US amzn.to/3X4rmp4
Some of these links may be affiliate links for which the channel gets a small commission, the price remains unchanged.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hambini Website www.hambini.com
Facebook / hambinieng
Instagram / hambinieng
If you would like to support the channel for more unbiased reviews, you can do so on Patreon. / hambini - Sport
Since filming this video, a few people have been in touch and said that I was quite charitable with the power loss on the classified hub. The general consensus was based on the likely geometry, 90-92% would be more appropriate. A couple of papers for you to read
Someone with their right hand as their best friend: www.researchgate.net/publication/226757576_Theoretical_and_Experimental_Efficiency_Analysis_of_Multi-Degrees-of-Freedom_Epicyclic_Gear_Trains
Roymech for the practical calculation roymech.org/Useful_Tables/Drive/Gear_Efficiency.html
It is worth noting that there are no hard figures on Classified's website and their mitigation of the apparent loss is to take credit for the aerodynamic loss from the front mech.
Having been in the gear industry for my entire life, I will concur with your "consensus" -- low 90% range is realistic. IMO, that hub would cost thousands of dollars to manufacture in order to approach 95% efficiency, and I'm skeptical that it would even be possible with that many gear meshes.
I think the main claims of efficiency is weighted by the fact that you're spending 90% or more of your time in the direct drive condition. Unlike a 2x where you shift to the low gear in the middle of your shift pattern, with the classified system you'd only use the low gear for the steepest climbs
@@galenkehler And this is where you will be heavily penalized. Hambini described it as a compound ratio. if you are losing another 10%, that's 30W at 300W! for even an amateur that is a hell of a lot.
Not sure how credible it is at the end, but I read an article there the German cycling magazine "Tour" compared the Storck Aerfast against the (at that time) new Simplon Pride II in a wind tunnel. the guys from Storck tried to cheat a bit and used a different setup than commercially available (with just one gear in the front). Without further testing Tour says the advantage of the missing derailleur and sprocket is "a few watts". They tested at the usual 45 km/h, so based on Tours' statement for every normal speed this little advantage is probably neglectable.
When I researched my own patent application I came up with 2-6% as the general range for an epicyclic geartrain. The classified system isn't going to be at the lower end of that range because it includes bushing-style bearings (e.g. for planet gears) and the gear size/geometry is too not ideal for mechanical efficiency within the human power/torque envelope. Then again when the gear is locked into 1:1 ratio there will not be this additional power loss, it is possible that some riders would only need the hub to step down for a small fraction of their riding time.
patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/74/e3/c0/b7d282e8f5269b/WO2018156081A1.pdf
I think people underestimate the amount of design, engineering, testing and innovation that Shimano has put into just chain and cassette technology, and making them work as good as they do.
Campagnolo did this way back before Shimano came into play. Super Record from the late 80ies still shifts like a dream and is way better in durability of the cogs. Shimano was consistently better in marketing.
@@frankieboy5859 due to the fact there are only 6 or 7 cogs at the back. All 5-9 speed stuff was buttery smooth. It only fell off for me with Shimano’s first 10 speed with the cables through the bars.
You’d have to compare modern campag to modern Shimano as a fair test. I have ridden campag myself since 90.
@@machohogan i can tell you that campagnolo chorus 12 speed it's a good bang for your buck. Little bit more noisy but it shif its really good and fast for a mechanic group you can downshift 5 at a time and up shift 3 at time, disc brakes are better than shimano's. Front derailuer needs some adjustment in the beginning and some locktite because the spring of the limit screw it's a little bit loose (let's say campagnolo it's great on great picture but screw up pretty bad on the small details)
I think people underestimate the ability of the old school bike mechanics
I rode Nuovo/Super Record late '70s-mid '80s. It was well made, very durable and performed well considering its decades old tech. I still ride 2 beautiful and smooth sets of Record hubs bought new in 1977. My last Campy parts left from my Raleigh Professional. I wore everything else out racing and using road bikes to explore dirt roads and trails.
I tried out a friends Dura Ace 7400. It was like day and night compared to decades old Campy back then. Never looked back, excepting those glorious hubs. My 7400 is still perfectly functional and running on my old custom Ron Cooper frame. I believe it shifts just as fast and solid as modern DI2, but it's 'only' 7 or 8 speed on friction.
10 speed was always more than enough! The motor is more the issue at hand. Rider.... not the bike and all that jazz.
I have tried more modern Campy recently, really nice, but all this stuff is far beyond my budget anymore. This is a personal problem for the vast majority of cycling enthusiasts. Besides, my 'old junk' still works just fine.
I've got a couple ancient Super Record derailleurs I was given recently and an even cooler and older Huret Jubilee. I dig this cool old junk because of the memories, but all its ever going to be used for again is a single speed tensioner.
I've been using the classified system for about 18mths. It's fully integrated with my left Di2 shifter and works really well. In terms of weight, I know they claim it is roughly the same as a 2x, but I think it's probably marginally heavier with the weight transferred to the back of the bike. Overall I'm a convert to the seamless nature of the shifting. Only lingering doubt is serviceability as I've had issues with play in the bearings. Classified ended up having to send me a replacement Powershift hub as the bearings can't be replaced on their own.
So, it's not even serviceable?
@@tweed0929 Nope. I asked them to just send me some replacement bearings but they said they couldn't. I think the point is that because it's sealed it shouldn't need servicing. I can only assume that their current network of partner suppliers will eventually also have the ability to service them, but at the moment you just get a replacement hub.
@@kingearlie So when the components wear out on the inside, throw the whole thing out and get a new one eh?
@@infinati Maybe they just rebuild the cores. So have a bunch of rebuilt cores ready to ship out immediately. Obviously user replaceable bearings would be a less expensive option.
The internal gearing would be uber-sensitive to grime hence the aggressive sealing. Those gears may be sintered metal used in hand tools; easy to build but maybe not so durable. Lack of serviceability would be a non-starter for many bikers for cost and rapid obsolescence.
I had a play around with one at my mate's shop and it was really good fun to play with, really easy to change gear under super heavy load (I was messing around on a 10% slop) BUT it is far too expensive!
I have a bike with the Classified Powershift system from the bike manufacturer. It was the same cost as a SRAM AXS Force or Ultegra Di2. It's a better deal if you buy it as original equipment rather than converting a bike. My frame has no hanger for a front deraileur or chain guide. Mine is SRAM Force AXS rear and shifters and Red cranks and aero chainring with integrated powermeter.
1. There is essentially no weight penalty. The one piece cassette is 12 speed and weighs less than SRAM Red or Shimano Dura-Ace. I don't use a chain catcher (no way to mount one), and I have not dropped a chain since I got the bike 6 months ago.
2. For SRAM, the 12 speed cassettes start with an 11 tooth cog, not the 10 tooth, so less friction loss from small cog, and you can go bigger with 1x chainring.
3. The SRAM 1x Aero chainring has less deflection of chain line than a SRAM 2x system. I will have to measure, since I have bikes with both. SRAM AXS monitors how much time/miles you spend in the 12 rear rings, and spend most time in the middle 7, so chain line with 1x is really good. Even in 1 or 12 the difference is probably marginal between 1x and 2x at the inner and outer gears.
4. There are no pawls in the hub, so there is less friction when coasting whether in 1.0 or 0.697 internal gear. No significant sound from the wheel/hub when coasting.
5. Gerrard Vroomen has tested 1x vs 2x and has the data for the 1-2% aero gains.
6. Wheel switching is a piece of cake. The smart Thru axle only pairs with the bar end BT unit, not with the hub. You just unscrew the Thru axle without any tools, pop out the wheel, put in a new wheel with a Powershift hub, screw in the thru axle (without any tools) and away you go for the racers.
7. If you have a problem with the Powershift hub, call/email Classified and they will send you a new one while yours is being serviced.
8. The torque arm on the hub just swings around the axle and then touches the brake mount screw. When you tighten the thru axle, you have to move the torque arm to touch the brake screw. Easy. Mine was making some squeaky noise, and now Powershift has a plastic insert for the torque arm that touches the mount screw and eliminate the sound. They sent the plastic insert from Belgium in 3 days. All good.
9. I am not a pro racer, just an enthusiast. I cannot feel any loss of efficiency with the 0.697 internal gear vs my 2x Force bike. In fact, it's hard to tell the difference when riding in the virtual big vs small rings. Folks are complaining that with Garmin you have to choose a screen for either the rear gears or the front gears. You can't monitor both at the same time.
10. The thumb switch is very natural to use after a week of riding. Not a big deal. It just works perfectly.
11. Once you shift under power or going up a steep hill without dropping a chain (particularly in a paceline or local race) you will get the benefit of the system. I generate the same maximum watts when sprinting on the Powershift in the 11 tooth cog as I do sprinting with my 2x system in the big ring, both bikes with Quarq power meters. For early adopters there is a cost unless you get a special edition bike like I did. Once cost comes down and reliability is proven, more folks will choose this. I still love my mechanical 2x bikes, but this is better.
Gerrard Vroomen told me that the initial Powershift 8 years ago was not good. Now, it is good.
12. Hambini may be right about efficiency, but I can't feel any power loss. As he said, needs more data.
Concerning point #4, there almost has to have pawls in the hub, otherwise how would it freewheel? It's not a sprag clutch in there--see 2:50 in the video, one can easily see the pawls.
@@stephenkramer6099I see what you mean about the pawls. 1 month later Peak Torque identified a Sprag clutch, but didn't have the unit dissected as Hambini, instead, technical drawings. If Sprags were up to the task, we'd be seeing them on freehubs with infinite points of engagement.
Bicycles are such efficient machines it is pretty hard to do something that doesn't make them worse.
Bicycle Industry for the last 10 years: "Hold my beer.."
*Press-Fit bottom brackets enter the room while squeaking loudly*
Worse is a relative statement. Worse than what? Worse in what way? There's more to bikes than efficiency. There are only 200 people on this planet who actually need to think about aerodynamics and efficiency. Literally everyone else is LARPing.
@@cjohnson3836 Press fit BB's, tubeless tires that require new sealant added about every 2 months and even then do not seal in all puncture situations, integrated internal headset cabling that is almost impossible to work on as an owner, hydraulic disc brakes that require regular bleeding and constant disc pad adjustments on road bikes, etc... None of this clown stuff made modern road bikes or even most gravel bikes better in 99% of such riding situations. All they did was add significant additional maintenance cost, additional maintenance time, additional component replacement costs (namely disc brake rotors and pads) and additional weight to those bikes.
And the addition of 1X drivetrains to road bikes is a farce. All that did is increase manufacturer margins by reducing manufacturer costs by providing one less derailleur, one less front chainring and one less gear shifter while providing no meaningful benefit and usually raising the sales price of that joker 1X set up over a similar 2X set up. In addition the 1X added wider gear jumps and significantly larger chain angles when the chain is near the lower or upper gears on the cassette compared to a 2x or even a 3X set up. And the laughable marketing drivel explanation for 1X in road and gravel bikes was that it was less complex than a 2X set up. LOL, if your goal was to truly reduce shifting complexity in a road or gravel bike you would lose the rear derailleur long before you lost the front derailleur. But even that would have been a bridge too far for the 1X marketing BS artists to sell.
Truth is, very little has been added to most modern bikes in the past 10 years that has actually improved them in any meaningful manner pretty much across all categories of riders. All we have seen for the most part are nonsensical changes to cheaper cost 1X drivetrains marketed as "improvements", silly integrated headtube cable designs, loads of disc brakes and their constant pad adjustment issues added to bikes that were perfectly fine with rim brakes, and tubeless tires put on bikes that in no logical way needed tubeless for virtually all the riding those bikes are used on. The end result has mostly been - significant increased cost to consumer, decreased costs for the manufacturer, significantly more maintenance time and cost to maintain your bike, lots of added bike weight, and set ups that often are near impossible to work on at home or out on a trip by the bike owner. I suppose a delusional person could deem those things "improvements". 🙂
@@rcg9573 I'm not reading that wall stupidity. Tubeless tires are quite possibly the best innovation of the last 20 years. You're just an idiot. I do exactly 5 min of maintenance/year. And I ride in places where the plants evolved swords. So, sounds like a you problem. Same with hydraulic brakes. I haven't bled my mtb in going on 3 years. You don't know wtf you're talking about.
Lets be real, you're just operating on 3 brain cells fighting for 4th place.
I can't wait for the cycling press who have pushed 1x so hard to start espousing the benefits of the closer ratios and wider range this gives...
That's a pretty good teardown based on the photos. About the only thing I'd doubt is bronze or brass gears, far more likely to be sintered steel, induction hardened. Same sort of thing as you find in impact drivers and demolition drills, and easily sturdy enough to take the loads involved.
As far as efficiency goes, you're being pretty optimistic, I'd say. You could probably change the way it drives to put the lower efficiency at high speed with a bit of fiddling / more complexity, but I think your analysis of the setup is probably correct. You have a static axle as art of the initial design constraints, so why not use that to lock the sun gear, after all?
It's not really unproven technology, though - epicyclic gears have been around forever, and, like you say, Sturmey Archer did it for years. and although they were limited to 3 gears, they were pretty much unbreakable.
Fully enclosed gearbox drives do exist in the MTB world, that's probably where they make the most sense. Rode a friend's setup about 8 years ago, it was pretty damn good.
czcams.com/video/K3QJTTcDXJo/video.html
sure pinion ,effigear are nice for ultra endurance steff , rholoff too but hub based, only need some electronic options and propers dropbars shifting solutions, the stuff available now is meh
SA 3 speeds are indeed very reliable, but unbreakable they're not... to service one you really need to know a lot of specialized info... and special tools...
amongst their quirks, they are very suspect to water invasion, one of the 3 bearing races in fact is exposed to the elements, you can see the bearings under their metal shield... was less of an issue way back when you added oil through a nipple on the hub, but now they are grease packed from the factory... second quirk is that the hub is supported on 3 bearing races, not 2, and a couple mm of play at the rim is standard for a well adjusted hub...
So much negativity here;
- fully integrated with di2
- cassettes are not even that expensive
- wheel change is super easy. The unit in the HB is connected to the thru axle - not the hub
- the use on gravel and/or MTB is great.
- the large brands will go onboard but it takes a few years in OEM markets.
- the shifting is better then any front mech can do, even Shimano - SRAM still isn’t capable of doing it.
- the bearings inside the hub can be changed; albeit at Classified and they have a swap service for it.
Hi and thanks for the video. I use the Classified system for more than 8'000km now. Many of your arguments are correct. In terms of efficiency I think your approach is too "academic" or numbers based. I never felt any difference between derailleur systems and this one. I also use power meters and the numbers from power consumption for comparable climbs give me same or even better climbing performance - to me the your argument "efficiency" is not confirmed - or not measurable.
In fact the Classified system changes your driving habits - to the positive. On flatter sections during a climb, you just "slam" the front, instead of changing 2 or 3 gears in the rear. Don't care about chain line and having real 2 x 11 (22!) gears. Finally converted all my bikes to Classified and just love it. (By the way: chain life increased to 4'000km, instead of max. 2'500km)
As long as you're happy you do you!
However, you are losing watts to friction whether you notice it or not. And you're not gaining this lost power back. It's not academics, that's just how the world works.
If you don't care about it and care more about the convenience this brings you than the performance you are losing, then more power to you!
Put on a a customer's bike for last years master's world championship road race. Worked very well, friction isn't something I ever thought about. It did't seem bad at all. I'm a big skeptic when it comes to stuff like this by nature but I was pleasantly surprised.
If he only knew how many watts he sacrificed for chasing a fashion trend. 😀😀
I'm waiting for the return of the triple chainset. might be wireless or electronic but the triple will be espoused as the best new thing EVER
Still have three bikes with triple chainsets, best setup ever.
I’m getting old and need a granny gear.
If I could afford it, I'd try it on my gravel bike. This solves a lot of the trade-offs currently. Front derailleurs are problems when it comes to tire clearance, the more important mud clearance where the real gravel races are at (midwest USA), and dropper post control. The clay here is thick enough to actually drive your chain off the chain ring when it gets caked up. Roadies might not care, but roadies aren't actually important anyways.
That's cruel :) .... Fair, but cruel
That's a good point. I never thought about tire/mud clearance. For touring MTB it would make sense too, as most modern 11/12 spd bikes have no means of attaching a FD. I suppose it would be a good way of getting more gears from an expensive bike with no FD mount.
@@williamwallace5201 They just announced a few days ago a mtb version. With mtbs FD are mostly problems when it comes to modern rear linkages and interference. Hardtails like a karate monkey should be fine with a traditional system. But yeah, there's now going to be mtb options. Especially if you don't like the shifting mechanism for something like a rohloff.
I also sat on a bike equiped with a classified hub and it was an amazing try-out. Shifts were super snappy and quick and it felt a bit like a DSG gearbox compared to a manual gearbox. Really love the idea and the execution. Only the bluetooth dongle is a bit shait and it should talk to a di2 or axs lever. That would be the icing.
They're integrable with di2
I can’t believe SRAM didn’t buy this company and integrate it into their axs stuff since they are all wireless anyways.
I guess they still believe in a 1-by future!?
@@SnappyWasHere because it's bad tech and they already have their inefficient gimmick gearing option covered by the 10 tooth cog.
One thing you missed on the "pros" list is the ability to shift gears under full load and instantly. That being said I agree with your analysis on all fronts.
Awesome video - I learned something! I've been fantasizing about getting a road bike with a Rohloff or Kindernay gear hub to reduce my time spent on bike maintenance. Could you talk about these systems and if they make sense for a road bike in terms of efficiency and power losses or gains?
Great video!
Never liked internal gear hubs. Have a Brompton with Sturmey Archer hub and on the step up or down gears, it was harder to pedal. The frictional losses are real!
Another problem with Classified hub is the battery. It's in the thru axle - propriety part, expensive to replace.
I don't see a market for this product unfortunately.
Aren't all through axles proprietary designs? I don't think I have seen any standardisation in that area
@@AnttiBrax I think there are standards for through-axles in any case (it's just length and diameter), but it's not that, it's the battery, and you are more likely to need to change that than the axle.
Shimano alfine is super good, for a daily work bike that you don't want to mess with but this is just an old idea marketed for aero puppets
You are not supposed to pedal when switching gears with the hub. although you could when shifting up but definitely not down.
In terms of efficiency, the (3spd hub bwr )the middle gear is actually direct. So if you wanted to be efficient, you ride in that gear and use outer sprocket (6spd) to change.
To be honest I don’t think they care about efficiency but that 3 speed plus 2 sprockets gives the bike a fairly wide range. Also the hub is low maintenance as well. But damn is it heavy. Was it 800g? You can really see the rear tire wear more than the front.
While on the 11t rear sprocket, middle gear hub , you can get a nice cruising speed of 25km/h with a 53t front ring and 70 cadence. Add some Schwalbe one tires for low rolling resistance and an s bar for a more aero position and I think you can ride in a more efficient manner.
Internal gears have their place... fully sealed, minimal maintenance, no parts that easily get damaged. Depending on use case that may outweigh cost, weight, efficiency.
But who's the target audience for this? A cross continent bike trekker will get a Rohloff, a racer will always pick lighter and more efficient. This is just the worst of both worlds.
As I have just bought a 1x set up I was semi tempted, even though the weight and cost were frightening. The watt loss was the final nail. Excellent review thanks so much saved me a fortune! Thanks :)
[watt loss] That's strange as I don't see a "David Pryce" with a UCI rider profile. There's a number of reasons not to buy this. Price being the most important for most people. But wattage? Unless you're one of 200 people penciled for TdF, you don't need to be thinking about wattage.
@@cjohnson3836 every cyclist needs to think about wattage. 336 Watts up a hill or 349 Watts up a hill over say 20 minutes does make a difference. Especially at altitude.
@@cjohnson3836 Yes that's why we all ride light carbon bikes with electronic drivetrains and carbon wheels. Who the hell is paying 900 quid for a hub if they don't care about losing a few 10s of watts? They''ve picked the exact wrong market.
@@o0o0o0o0o01 Most of you aren't sustaining anything close to 300W for more than 30 seconds on flats, let alone up a grade, especially at altitude. You aren't part of the group that should be concerned about this.
@@TheWoogeroo People aren't fit enough for carbon bikes with carbon wheels to matter either.
Looks like a well engineered and made component for the well heeled non racer
The price is not for a non-racer though, and i bet the internals are non serviceable too.
@@sepg5084 perhaps not, but the internals look fairly straightforward and it should be quite low maintenance if properly sealed.
A good dentist bike option for someone who’s not competitive…good cookies and coffee show boating gear 😀
@@chrisvig123 sounds good
@@sepg5084 you're making his argument for the non-racer. All style, no go. It's the perfect custom cafe build spec drivetrain. Clean look to go with the custom paint and high end parts. Only ones that keep the custom bike industry afloat are non-racers.
Racers are too poor.
I'm really glad I found your channel. Keep up the great work, I love your content.
Another few factors with traditional derailleur drivetrains is the ability to use a variety of different sized cassettes, your local bike shop has cassettes in stock and in 5 years you're still going to be able to buy cassettes. I can also convert a wheel with a standard freehub body to different standards such as 10 to 11 or even 12. Will that be an option with the internal hub. I don't know about you but it seriously reminds me of the the sram 3×8 hubs from 25+ years ago with a few updates. It's worth noting that stopped hearing about the sram 3x semi IGH hubs because they simply weren't nearly as good in terms of weight, durability, efficiency, cost, user serviceability...
In 5 years: a)SRAM will own this company or b) it'll be just a bad memory for the fools who bought 'em and no longer can get a cassette for 'em since they went belly-up.
@@larryt.atcycleitalia5786 we will see. Anyone who bought one should have a solid supply of replacement parts. Not just the cassettes but the internals too.
Hambini tells it as it is... that's what's best about these videos...top man 👍
Thanks 👍
Thanks Hambini for a professional speculative "review" of this product.
I see in a comment earlier there is a player of the hub system and it is well received...
I would say that looks like an Edco/Recon manufactured cassette. The teeth shape and profile looks surprisingly similar to that of their Monoblock cassettes.
Shifting on those is pretty sub par though compared to a Shimano 105 or Ultegra cassette. It's not desperately bad, but you can clearly feel a difference.
it is indeed
As usual a well explained expose on what might, or probably might not, be the 'next big thing' in cycling. I'm with you Hambini - Don't think it will be adopted in large numbers UNLESS Shimano get behind it (which is doubtful).
better chanc of sram trying to buy them, but should fail if they ever tried, classifield has quite deep pockets investors behind them, unless sram is willing to pay the high price
I know for sure Light Bicycle can build a custom pair of wheels with the classified hub. With the hub itself (shell), costs are more or less the same of other hubs + you have to purchase the rest somewhere else.
Was the first one asking them :D
TraceVelo made a video about the chain shifting problem, he forgot to put a spacer behind the cassette. After this fix it worked ok. I ordered some bearing from you, excellent service
Having a couple of Shimano.internal geared hubs, the drag is noticeable.
Bought one for winter commuting.
From a heated garage to work, didn't coast well. Was only 3 miles.
Pushing it into the building, the pedals rotated with the hub.
Maybe the Rolloff wouldn't be as bad, but even oil thickens in the cold.
I used to use an Alfine 11 speed for work...a total of ten miles there and back five days a week with no problems whatsoever, even in winter. I use it for light trekking / gravel these days.
I'm still interested in this technology for a gravel rig, which was it's original target anyway. 4% efficiency isn't at all an issue if you can run a really wide range of gears without massive jumps and a clutched rear mech.
I think that gravel or MTB is the “killer app” for this system. All the advantages of 1x on the dirt with a closer ratio freewheel.
@Kevin Metcalfe how many MTB riders care about cadence but not a 4% power loss?
@@johnm91326 bike packers
@@williamwallace5201 bike packers don't need 1x up front.
I got to try the classified hub a couple days ago, they had it intigrated into the front Shimano Di2 shifter, pretty neat. Overall it was nice, but I was not blown away. I am curious if this product is gonna get pupulart or not, so far I have never seen or met anyone riding it or even talking about it.
Where did you get 96% from? In their review GCN quoted ~99% for the 0.7 ratio.
Awesome video! Certainly appreciate the valuable knowledge
As you mentioned the Sturmey Archer three speed hub with cassette, how would this be an improvement over that much cheaper and simpler setup?
When you show efficiency for regular gears at 10:30, what is the difference between big ring/big cog vs small ring, small cog for the same ratio? Using big/big with equally bad chain line seems to feel a lot smoother to me.
I agree with most the things. But I will say when the Rolhoff hub came out like 2 decades ago I thought it would never make it. Heavier, expensive, gear range was not as wide as a 3x9 at the time, AND to need a special frame made with the specific drop out to accommodate it. But fast forward…it’s a durable beast chosen by many hardcore tourist/commuters. I still have the old Schwinn two speed kick back! I wonder how efficient that is:) great video as always Hambini.
Rolhoff and pinion sure you lose efficiency ... but I prefer the low maintenance and again no derailleur.... I have a pinon... and I am perfectly happy with it ... but as for my road bike and the like ... yeah this seems like re-inventing the mousetrap ... lose the derailleur... so what you still have a chain and now a custom cassette ... i'll pass
Reliability trumps efficiency for long distance bikepacking. Busting a derailleur is a major problem if you're a 2 days ride from a bike shop. Commuters just need the bike to get them from A to B without hassle. If the only thing they cared about was speed they'd jump in the car instead. The rest of the bicycling world follows the technology trends of race competitors, and in a race where the time difference between 1st and 10th may be less than 1%, that 5% efficiency loss is a killer.
I always look forward to a Hambini reaming.
Will this be compatible with an absolute black hollow cage rear derailleur thingy?
The planetary gearbox inside the classified hub reminds me very much onto the Schlumpf speed drive.
It's the Mountain Drive moved to the rear axle.
Reminded me the Rohloff hub gears.
It is a really interesting concept, do you think it would work better at the cranks instead of the hub ie Truvative Hammerschmidt cranksets from the 2000s? Mechanical planetary gear in the crankset to have a 2x set up with only one Chainring. It was relatively popular on Mountain Bikes around then. Sram probably has the patents on it locked down
Maths doesn't change about efficiency, more gears, more losses
That's the gearbox designs we are starting to see. They're still heavy and not as efficient as traditional systems
Actually this is an old idea. I used to have a Schlumpf MountainDrive in my daily driver a couple of years ago. Compared to grinding in a much higher gear the efficiency hit was about 5-7%. That's not nothing, but getting a bike with lots of (travel)cargo up a hill, it was well worth it. The reduction was 2.5x, so I could ride a 52 chainring and reduce it to a 21. This meant comfortably spinning 300W at 85 rpm up any hill. For my occasional climbing, it was more than perfect.
The Schlumpf bottom brackets are certainly neat, but there's an even older product that's does this exact thing: Sachs/SRAM 3x7/8/9/10 internally geared hubs. Sachs started making them in the 80's while Schlumpf has only been around since 2010. The Sachs/SRAM units use shimano cassettes because they weren't Silicon Valley inspired assholes trying to lock people into a proprietary system like they're selling replacement razor blades.
@@DonOblivious I have one of those in a recumbent too. What makes that less usefull is the fact that it's 0.67/1.00/1.33x only.
@CameraMule Could be very true. My only experience with the Schlumpf is inside a velomobile, so the biggest problem for my drivetrain is sweat. There is simply nothing to clean for me, if I wasn't a torquey sprinter my chain would live at least 25.000 km.
Finally a video that really explains how it works! Thank u!
Classified stated that the "Direct Drive" is 1:1, so this is a really attractive option for people like myself who are already running 1x. This system would simply add a low end "bailout" for the occasional hill.
I wouldn't care about the reduced efficiency in the "Under Drive" condition, it would just be nice to get up the climbs in a bit higher cadence.
This defeats the object of having a 1x drive train. You would have your lowest gear for the time when you really need it and the full range on the back cassette to use with your chainring. If you need more ratios then your cassette is not low enough and you have a similar setup to a 2x drivetrain.
@@theillegalimmigrant9314 I disagree, this system allows you all the normal benefits (aero, simplicity) of the 1x, but just adds more range in the extreme case of hills. For some areas like where I ride, this is ideal as the hills are rare, so the extra weight doesn't really matter most of the time, and I could narrow the cassette range so I have tighter gear spacing for the 95% of my riding that I'm not using it.
I'm not going to buy one of these, don't worry, but it's a system that would work well for me.
@@galenkehler Yes that is exactly what i thought but they would have to cost a fraction for me to consider one. The issue with 1x for me is, i ride on (with 11 gears, 1 is the smallest) 7-10 on flat/slightly up hill, 11 down hills and for steep i am on 1 or 2. But i would never give up a narrow/wide chainring and a clutch for my offroad riding.
@@arisu1252 agreed, cost would have to come down a lot before I'd actually buy one. The current alternative, of just putting a slightly larger cassette is too simple and cheap. For the money I'll just accept a bit larger gaps between gears.
@@galenkehler Simplicity?? really?
Great presentation. I like the idea of a planetary gear that is not a Sturmey Archer, or the like, in the wheel hub with a derailleur. To make it worthwhile I think they need to make the rations such that this will substitute for the front derailleur entirely WITH a wider overall range then you would usually get. That would make it great for me, the commuter. However, the cost numbers I remember were higher or equal to the Rohloff. AND, the Rohloff is made to be used without any kind of derailleur at all. Much higher than a Shimano Nexus.
I agree with your bottom line - too expensive for the casual rider, too complicated and risky for the racer. No customers will want it.
This is just a rehashing of a 3x7/8-9-10 product that's been available since the 80's. EDIT: Correction, Sturmey-Archer introduced it in the 1930's.
Sachs and SRAM made them up until 2022. The only reason you're hearing about this "amazing new product" (that has existed for 40 years) is marketing budget.
some years ago I owned a bike with a Truvativ Hammerschmid Drivetrain - which was kind of similar, but the planetary drive was installed instead of the 2 front chainrings. The feeling of losing power was insane, so I knew from the beginning, that the Classified system won't work at all..... :)
Truvativ Hammerschmid Drivetrain was similar with other difference being also that lower efficiency was in the higher gears rather than lower gears so was better efficiency for climbing hills, but was tried in DH racing & was see to be slower
My hunch is this system will not turn out to be successful but, like L shaped cranks or Biopace chainrings, but it's good to see people experimenting with this type of thing. Thanks for sharing.
This is something you've been able to buy for the last 40 years that was discontinued. This "improved" version uses proprietary cassettes instead of Hyperglide...
Very good video and clear explanations ! I kind of feel that for years "gear box" system have been on the market. Al lot of good system able to replace the standard derailleur system (Pinion, Effigear even Shimano Nexus/Alfine ...) but all with the same issu of efficiency. I'm not sure they all use the same planetary system (?) but they all are less efficient than the derailleur as Classified .So maybe that could be an option for non-competitive cycling ? But then it's too expensive ...
I have a classified hub and tested it on rollers. It's no more than 2-3% at 300w
Anecdotal, but would love to see some test videos!
Calibrated rollers in laboratory conditions?
Indoors....no Wind....and just simulated by a computer. IRL it´s most likley closer to 6-8%. Ridin 400W no one is gonna want too loose that much power.
@@66mikkim - *lose*
rollers and consumer power meters are going to be too innaccurate to determine the losses. Someone needs to test this in a lab. Where's friction facts?
I own this system and installed it on my gravel bike with Shimano GRX 815. I have horrible shifting. I'm still trying to dial it in. I have a number of complaints about the system, but I have complaints about Shimano and SRAM's offerings as well. If I get it shifting smoothly, I'll enjoy having it.
Another solution to a non-problem. A 2 chainring system will typically provide a better chain line than single chainring. Front derailleur shifting on DI2 is lightning fast and auto trims. Maybe this makes some sense for an off-road system where mud can clog the front derailleur in extreme conditions?
It would solve a problem if there wasn’t a cassette and derailleur. I run single speed now, and I appreciated the low maintenance of my Rohloff. But it definitely wasn’t as efficient as a derailleur system.
Another typically fascinating review, even though I'll never be in the market for this anyway.
cheers from cloudy Vienna, Scott
There exists a sachs orbit hub like this haha. Quite old, but became a bit of a classic within its small fanbase i think
Still using SRAM DualDrive today on my city/Trekking bike. Sadly SRAM killed the product line. sturmey Archer still makes a hybrid hub until today. Both Dualdrive and the clone are popular within velomobile riders.
"ring gear with planetary gears", "centrally pivoted sun gear" ... this was almost too much for my heart and soul. Totally fantastic; a video about cycling Utopia.
But wait - you weren't FINALLY doing a video about the epitomy of transport endevour, the zenith of technological progress, the superlative achievement of human evolution, what we have been heading towards since we first decended from the trees?.
Forget quantum physics, CERN or the James Webb Space Telescope: the Rohloff hub is humankinds greatest achievement
.
.
Maybe next week
I think it looks interesting for a gravel or a road bike. Is the 4% that big a deal for a 'bailout' gear? I ride almost exclusively in the big ring ( it is a 50 though but I do live in the lake District) and if it gets steep enough for me to be in the 34 then I'm probably out of the saddle. It does have full integration with last gen Di2 and GRX, I'm seriously considering it, maybe try it on my gravel bike and see how it works out. I did try a hammersmidt thing years ago on an MTB which is similar tech on the crank. You could definitely feel it in the low range taking a bit of power but it was no big deal.
I was thinking the same thing, it would be nice to run a slightly bigger front ring on my 1x (maybe a 44 or 46) and still keep some lower gears for the super steep long climbs, without having to run a 2x that I'm only going to use the small ring occasionally
I have a Classified hub and it’s very nicely integrated with my Di2. Classified did the integration for me. Separately- Hambini, I’m a fan of yours, but I think I’m this instance you should do more due diligence before slamming a product. How about actually buying a hub and testing it / tear down??
I agree with you 100%! A lot of assumptions were made in this video seemingly with the intention to just slam the product.
I just purchased a Classified hub and had it laced onto a ZIPP 353 rim. So far, I'm impressed with the Hub, but the jury is still out at the moment.
Not one for the roadies but I’d be interested to see what you make of the schlumpf mountain drive. Similar concept but half the price and the planetary gears are in the bb shell instead of at the back. I worked on one recently and I was impressed (although I hated it at the time)
Thanks Hambini...very enlightening. Would love to see a video on Pinion gearbox effciency.
One thing that appears to be a pro that is not listed is that they rate the "downshift" to the 0.7 ratio is rated up to 1000W so, unless you have monster thighs and quads, you can down shift even while standing up, and that happens very quickly. Is that worth the efficiency lost? Maybe under certain scenarios, but probably not.
Regarding the inertia and acceleration:
I think you have to consider that the low distance to the center of rotation compared with the rim of a wheel means it will be significantly less noticeable than if you had a heavy set of wheels.
Certainly for the average rider they will likely not notice any difference, ditto with the efficiency loss.
For a road bike this seems to make less sense than for a gravel bike.
A lot of gravel riders are already running a 1x setup, this would effectively just give them closer gear spacing or an even wider gear range depending on setup.
It's also less problematic than a front mech, especially for quickly changing gears or with regards to reliability and durability in off road situations.
I think your conclusion is correct for road bikes, but for gravel or even perhaps MTBs, there's a place for this system.
Thanks for this - what you say makes a lot of sense. However, the custom cassette bothers me (chain compatibility).
It’s a beautiful design, can’t argue with that. I could see a use case with more performance focused e-bikes which have electric crank drive motors, gravel, mountain e-bikes etc. The efficiency of the chain is quite amazing and the engineering / precision in modern derailleur gears is quite staggering, hard to beat with anything.
Such a major improvement over the 1950's 3 speed hubs (Shimano, BSA, Sturmey-Archer ...) 🤣 maybe they keep their 3rd speed... classified ?
Sturmey did this style of hub, 3 speed epicyclic, triple sprocket, 3x3, 9 speed. I have one in my garage on a vintage tandem. It is interesting to see these reboots. .
How much better would this be compared to the holy grail of hub gears (rolhoff)? Would you be better off adding a few more gears while you're at it?
I recall seeing an internal gear hub with a five speed cassette like 15 years ago or something. It ends up combining the worst of both. Hassle with derailleur and weight of internal. So if you're willing to use a derailleur you're better off with a proper 12 speed. And if you want internal, Rohloff is heaps better.
Another con is the added cross chaining in the lowest gears, since you're always in the "big ring", They should make the front ring "axially floating"
Winteresting
You omitted the biggest plus, which is ability to shift under load. I agree with you that their only chance of success is to be integrated (I.e. acquired or licensed) with SRAM (since they seem more interested in 1x than Shimano. This tech is better for gravel and MTB - since Road racers will never be able to do quick wheel change with neutral Shimano service vehicle.
Classic case of a solution looking for a problem where there is none. This will never work as adoption hurdle far too high. Another great video.
Actually I want to put a single speed kit on it. Two speeds!
@@AnttiBrax If it wasn't so expensive I'd try it on my gravel bike. Mine doesn't have provisions for a front derailleur.
In the real world, the benefit of lower chain tension essentially gets balanced out by the disbenefit of faster chain speed. Running larger sprockets does result in one benefit of lowering polygonal losses (oscillations in chain speed due to chordal action), although really these losses only become significant when running sprockets smaller than 14T.
It's an interesting concept, but I wouldn't be inclined to try it based on the loss in efficiency. I noted one of your points related to wheel changes. If the transmitter is attached to the through-axle, it may not be a big deal as long as the through-axle remains with the bike and there has been some prior syncing with the new wheel components.
It is a clever idea and would work really well with crank based E-bikes motor such as the Specialized Creo, where 2x is not an option. The cost is bonkers and the serviceability do put ne right off.
There are better used options for ebikes, if you want to go down a long road to track them down. Sachs/SRAM manufactured this same thing from the 80's until 2022 in a 3 speed internal hub with a 7 speed, or 8-9-10 speed Hyperglide hub. Ebikes tend to like the 7 speed stuff for durability and a vintage Sachs might work well. OTOH, the motor might make mince meat out of the IGH. Who knows?
@@DonOblivious I’ve seen ebikes with similar setups and it is as you’ve described. One customer had a Bosch driven belt drive set up to a sturmey archer IGH but the torque of the Bosch was too much… not saying it’s impossible but tolerances for ebikes is another factor entirely
Very accurate explain. Nice
Really love this video. Can you do another one with more detail? you mention it very briefly, but can you do a more in-depth analysis and comparison with the drop of efficiency with cross chaining? Also if you only have 1x in front, don't you get worse cross chaining since nobody would mix the small chainring with the smallest sprocket? meaning classified would actually have more cross chaining than a standard front derailleur.
Speaking of drivetrain efficiency, what happened to that Irish company that was claiming a new kind of chain that would boost DT efficiency to nearly 99%? They seem to have disappeared off the face of the earth, despite having notable backers and engineering via some fairly well respected engineering faculties at Irish & British universities. Edit: I see they're now targeting e-bikes / city bikes / cargo bikes / industrial applications, and selling track chainrings and sprockets as a set but without chains (useful :-D ). All mention of road or MTB / gravel has been dropped. New Motion Labs.
Didn't they have a super weird and wide chain? I remember that. Anyway their chainrings look way too thin.
They are there, it seems they shifted that technology to e-bikes.
I have a still working Hammerschmidt crank and when you are on the geared side of things there is noticeable drag. This is on a mountainbike , just the design of these systems means there is going to be internal losses .
It's not comparable, but isn't the small ring also a slight mechanical disadvantage of a % or so? With chain wrap and articulation?
yes it is
There is a option to pair it to the Di2 / ETap levers which means no additional switch needed. You just shift as usual. But from what I heard the reprogramming is a one way street. No going back to using your Di2 as a 2x setup as before.
I'd be surprised if it's properly one way through a software change. Software should allow configuration back the other way.
It requires disassembly and soldering. May be reversible with more soldering. Classified offers zero support for this IMO mandatory integration
Back in 1975 or 1875 or 1775 I was in high school and had my own bike shop. Sturmey Archer was everywhere, and I allowed (assigned) my brother to do all the internal gear hubs which was fine by both of us. The hub had a little plastic flip cap so an end user could squirt in some oil with a trigger driven hand held pump.
Most people think that if a little oil is good then more is better, and others deicded to leave such things to "the pros" whom they never made it to see and they used leaded air (unleaded gasoline was a new thing) as a lubricant, so nothing could go wrong. Some were so maladjusted that the shift lever had ne effect.
When gears are out of sight they are out of mind and we can guess how many people are either out of their mind or their mind is out of them. I think the sun and planet gear system is so old that it was developed by Copernicus (the dog in Back to the Future) because it takes a son of a female dog to build and sell such a thing. If they are well funded then maybe this is a front for something nefarious. Nice review, and I also believe the gear to be pinned.
Good analysis, thanks.
That actually looks like an Edco mono-block cassette. They are about 200.00 US. I use one on my training bike, they work well.
I hoped it could be used in my velomobile to reduce the gearing further instead of having a third ring or a gearbox like the Moutain Drive, or a Pinion in the front but the losses are a no go compared to a chain only since with velomobile riding effiency is everything.
I still use a SRAM DualDrive II which is kind of a 3 speed internal hub + 8/9 speed cassette.
I would guess you could check out the efficiency by running the following test. Have 2 models of the same bike, 1 normal 2x and one 1x with the Classified hub. Run each of them on a cycling treadmill with the same rider riding both bikes, same tyres and tyre pressure, at a standard wattage of say 250 watts measured at the cranks or pedals. You would then be able to see the different speeds and wattages on the treadmill compared to crank watts measurements. This could also be checked in different chainring combinations on the 2x bike to see if that makes a difference.
One aspect I was considering was that... if you used it for an aero setup... then using the 'lower ring' ie.. with the lossy planetary gears engaged.... might not actually be used.... or used so little, that the 'losses' don't overcome it's virtues. An expensive 'solution' is given... perhaps it IS, potentially, the expensive 'solution' for a very specific problem.
Well 4% of nothing (my output) is still nothing. So will work for me. 🤣
Agree with your main point about this, it just doesn’t make sense for “serious” road bike use which is what it’s pitched at.
A question though - mountain bikes went to single chainwheel a long time ago and manage with a bigger difference in rear cogs. Wouldn’t that be possible on a racer? Sure there will be chain tension issues but overall surely still better than a gearbox.
It would be the perfect buy for SRAM as their Front Derailleurs' are pants and need very careful setting up. Or if they can come up with a solution to integrate into Sram eTAP, Shimano DI and Campag EPS control systems. But given the power loss it may suffer the same fate as other hub gear systems and be for town/commuter use, in which case it will be prohibitively expensive I guess.
Totally agree, nobody at the front is going to accept 4 or 5 percent loss. That's much more than the difference between winning and losing
They already fixed fd in the new Force groupset.
Yup. Sram from mechs have been SHIET since the mid naughties. That's why back in the day MTBs specced with sram had Shimano front mechs. Sram still can't shift a chainring to save their life. Mollema's "fucking sram" moment Comes to mind. And this is why they forcing this 1X crap on us so hard on road gravel and MtB
SRAM already have a 3x hub with cassette system. Mine only has a 7 sprocket cassette, but I’m sure they could up that if they wanted. Hub gearing is good for touring because on tour maintenance is greatly reduced, but no one in their right mind would argue that a hub is as efficient as a cassette setup.
@@alastairstedman7840 which is surprising, given that SRAM has bought Sachs - the company that produced front deraillers that worked amazingly. I had Sachs front mech on my bike. Never experienced front shifting better than that. SMH...
I'd think that the power loss, and the wheel change restrictions will mean it'll never be suitable for professional racing and thus will fade away or simply fail. I'd be interested to know how efficient the "in bottom bracket" mtb style gear boxes are as an alternative to standard 2X and cassette setups? I know they are much heavier, but these days there are bikes that are too light to be used professionally so with the extra weight you'd equal out to a weight suitable bike, plue the weight is in a low position and centrally located so could also result in minor handling improvements. Not sure what kind of state the gearbox market is in these days, but with frames getting ever lighter at the high end it seems their time could come
To me, the cassette is a custom cassette made by Harryrecon, the Shimano/campa/SRAM version is sold in Europe by E.dubied.
I mean, I have one of them for my wheels, it is made of steel and it is superlight
I see this being pushed onto, or more readily adopted by, gravel bikes. Manufacturers are seemingly competing to see who can fit the widest tires on gravel bikes. A lot of gravel bikes are 1x only as a result. But, a lot of people want smaller jumps in gears but lots of range. This seemingly "fixes" that problem. I could see it being successful on gravel bikes and with recreational riders.
Is there any potential of the hub interior becoming contaminated due to mud, water, corrosion from the type of terrain and debris damage being ridden from gravel?
Its not just tires clearance, but yes. I'd try one on my Stormchaser if I could afford it.
@@kellrockets101 I haven't thought of that. That is a very valid concern.
Constantly innovating and moving away from tried and tested pleasures may prove excessive but worth a try … such gearing on a Brompton around tow makes for quick acceleration from standing start …
Excellent video today thank you. Question can you run tubes On hookless rims.
Yes, with a hookless rim compatible tyre.
From what I've seen and read you should avoid hookless rims if possible. Yes they are less expensive to make but is it worth risking your safety for a few beans? Stay with hooked...IMO
@@rickmorse3351 True, for now. But Giant bikes, for example, come with hookless rims by default.
@@Rajesh-cg5pz Didn't know that! Thanks Rajesh.
I think a similar combination of hub gear and cassette was tried before. I think it was Sachs, but it was also the late 80's so any detail escapes me now.
I’m skeptic but interested to see how this all plays out. However, when I read about people dismissing 2x setups as if they’re the worst thing to have on their bike, I feel like an alien. People really willing to pay the cost of DT efficiency, increased complexity and $900 to remove their front mech and chainring? absurd
People are drama queens. The entire 1X fad for road and gravel bikes has been drama quern type claims of, “ohhh that front derailleur is sooooo complex I can’t have handle it.” Utterly laughable how easily some people can be marketed snake oil BS and actually pay more for less. LOL
Switching to a 1x chainring will also add more friction to the drivetrain. I wonder how it would work when added to a 2x drivetrain? You don't necessarily have to get rid of the front derailleur and use a big cassette. MTBing may have an use for it because there is no other options to increase gear range.
I haven't got one but a riding buddy has, he said the shifting wasn't "bad" with a Shimano chain but it wasn't great either. He swapped to a SRAM and it improved "a lot, maybe 95% to Shimano quality" Not surprising really SRAM chains have always been the go to when mixing drivetrains/using aftermarket cassettes, and I guess with no front mech' to worry about and a NW chainring you only need a chain that plays nice with the cassette. He's 11 speed though, not sure how well that would workout with HG+ and Flattop chains I suppose SRAM Eagle?
Don't quote me on this. But while Shimano chain has better shifting feature shapes on the chain, Sram chain is laterally stiffer. Shimano lost so much lateral stiffness when it's no longer new. Whether lateral stiffness or shifting geometry is more important to shifting speed and smoothness depend on the cassette and RD design.
Dura Ace is closer to 98-98.5% efficiency. So you actually loosing more.
Everyone is trying to re-invent the wheel with regards to bike drivetrains. 1Xs, classified hub, ceramic speed shaft drive.
Yet Noone realises we actually struck gold 100 years ago and there is really no reason to fix what ain't broke.
2X MTB master race right here!
I mostly agree, but 1x with 520% cassette range is the real deal for me (also MTB). There is NO WAY I would ever want a front derailleur on a mountain bike again.
@@jamisonr Could not agree more. I'm still firmly in team 2x for road/gravel but single chain rings for mtbs work really well.
The CeramicSpeed project was no better than a failed vocational school student reject project. Any person with even a hint of very basic mechanical engineering knowledge (like 1st year undergrad level) could see from day one that set up would never be efficient, would be highly susceptible to road contaminants, and the way the gear interacted with the cassette made absolutely zero sense at all from a mechanical advantage (or should I say disadvantage) standpoint. Then again, it's CeramicSpeed whose entire business model for years has been selling silly priced snake oil products to the gullible using completely BS laden "performance gain" claims. 🙂
@@richardhaselwood9478 Agreed. They have a place in MTB and even in cross. For road or gravel they make little to no sense at all.
Efficiency is not the only metric of a drivetrain, and stopping innovation is a loser's mentality. Not everyone is a racer, and that's why groupsets like Shimano Alfine exists, which are not as efficient as Dura Ace.
I think you should consider getting building an rig to measure efficiency. Also to get data for crosschaining.
I suppose you could attach an electric motor to the chainring
Very cool idea for a gravel bike
Hammerschmidt was somehow simpler and put the extra weight in the chainring instead. It seemed to vanish all the same, though
With no battery required too! Bring back Hammerschmidt
In my opinion the chainring teeth on a 1x are different to a 2x which I think makes for a less efficient system. Has Hambini looked at this? I think it’s got something to do with keeping the chain on the chainring.
I believe the concept you're thinking of is that the chain is less efficient on smaller chainrings / smaller cassettes because the rotation at the chain link is greater, resulting in frictional loss. I can't remember the exact term for that, but I remember the conclusion being that running in a similar gear ratio on the big ring / bigger cassette cog was more efficient than the equivalent small ring / smaller cog combination even after cross-chaining was factored in. That being said, if the additional friction loss in the Classified system is on the "small ring" gearing (not sure if that's the case?), then I wonder how much less efficient the Classified system truly is.
1x chainrings have "narrow-wide" teeth which stops the chain falling off (2x chainrings are obviously shaped to allow the chain jump between the rings). I don't believe there is a significant friction loss from these teeth profiles otherwise there wouldn't be so many top TT riders using 1x. The narrow wide teeth are as it says, narrow, and then a wide tooth after which means the chain can only go on the right way, since chains have a smaller gap between the inner plate links and a bigger gap between the outer plate links. the chain will make much more contact with the chainring teeth but I don't believe the contact between the plates and the teeth make up for much of the chain friction, it's the rollers that do - and these have the same amount of contact as on a 2x setup.
My feeling is that it depends on the aerodynamic benefit. The foot is only I from of the front derailleur about 25% of the time. Most of the energy loss is aerodynamics at decent speeds so it is possible that a much smaller percentage of a much bigger number counteracts. I can imagine a situation where on the flat or gentle uphills it is of benefit and the hub will be locked anyway, but a deficit on steep uphills, rather like aero bikes currently. From a normal person’s perspective it depends how cheap that gear can be made. If it took off Shimano would make compatible cassettes at the higher end anyway. Hopefully the cassette requirements are open and patent free. Big mistake not to. Not aware of any cheap single piece hubs though. Chainrings aren’t cheap though so that is a saving.
"The foot is only I from of the front derailleur about 25% of the time."
That may be, but it's still fucking the hairdresser's airflow 100% of the time you're spinning around that footjob.
I've followed the adverts about this thing since it first became public. Once it became available here in the US I inquired about the price. It will cost you $3400 to have this system put on your bike. Is that that a number you're willing to pay just to drop the front mech and one chainring? IMO this gear system should not have gotten this far and should be gone already. Thanks Hambini for you comments and pointing out more industry BS.