I'm not a bike rider but just looking at their web site, they list a maximum operating temperature of just 104F (or 40C)
That's pretty warm to be out riding, but far from impossible.
I'm too old to care about performance bikes. :-)
For an in-town commuter, my ideal would be a Nuvinci hub, with the chain in the sealed oil bath that appeared on another failed innovation in the highlights reel. Well, almost ideal.
There's still the single big sprocket up front. My knees thanked me when I swapped out my ordinary ring for a Q-ring and smoothed out that pedaling dead spot. I'd want some kind of adjustment up front that would give me relief equivalent to a Q-ring.
But without the sealed drive train, I still like the Nuvinci I had installed on my RANS Citi. Maintenance is that I clean the chain occasionally.
Somebody (above) was absolutely correct, too: as soon as you get rid of the derailleur-style shifts, the chain remains constantly in a single plane, and thus the chain and the toothed items at both ends last WAY longer. I've had one chain for five years, including three Ottawa (Canada, eh?) winters, and my bike-shop-guy agrees with me that it STILL doesn't need replacing. Mind you, that's low mileage compared to people who train for competitions, but still.....
Superior in every way.
Its hardly the first, SR Suntour do the 9 speed gearbox in almost exactly the same fashion....
I love the idea, but I guess it will come down to how heavy a bike is using it. As pointed out above, the frame and pedal infrastructure would be quite different (no cassette etc...). It might be possible to replace some of the frame too by using the gear case as part of the structure. Maybe this wouldn't be used by pro racers, but for commuters and weekend warriors the ease of maintenance and convenience might win through.
Would be nice to know how this compares to something like the NuVinci CVT transmission.
"not all of them have axles that are strong enough for multi-terrain use,"
The Nuvinci has a solid axle. Plenty strong.
"they add revolving weight,"
Near the center of the hub, where revolving mass matters least.
"and that weight is added in the back of the bike – not low and in the middle, where you want it."
I don't see how the center of a hub is any higher than the bottom bracket, especially since the Pinion extends above the BB.
"The multiplication of three by six ratios gives 18 real ratios spaced in even, ergonomically ideal, steps of 11.5 percent."
The Nuvinci is ergonomically ideal because it has infinite ratios. Even owners who don't like the weight will attest to that. You can always find the perfect gear, not just something close. Also, consistent gaps aren't optimal. The thinking has always been smaller gaps in higher gears and larger gaps in the lower gear range.
Heavy or not, still sounds good to me. Fiddling with gear changes is a pet hate ... anything that simplifies the process would be welcome. Didn't somebody invent an 'automatic' bike gearbox a while ago though? Just pedal and it changes up (or down) as the needs of the bike change.
I have a Sram iMotion 9 hub and rarely go above gear 6. I think a 9 (3x3) or 12 (3x4) gearbox would have been more relevant, lighter and cheaper. Shimano have an 11 speed Alfine, and Rohloff had the previous record of 14 speed.
omg its not weightless! wharever.
some others are fragile! yes...others.
lets see one in "plastics with silicon bronze bearing surfaces for liwest lowest friction and weight. perhaps a 3d printer expert can program one up.
me. i want one that has edrive incorporated and can hanfle regen. lacking that..one that is fast detatch.
all we need is a 3d printer and the file..
no mention of cost
looks like about $500
Fine for a commuter bike in Holland where there are no hills and the lack of cables might be viewed as advantageous. This is a good example of design engineers starting with a project before they fully understand the problem and what users actually like and do not like with current solutions. The Italians have been producing pre-stretched cables for decades that greatly reduce and needed adjustments and the shift lever mounts often include tension adjustment mechanisms.
This design still makes use of the chain which is the one item that the average commuter would like to have go away.
Walt, type at a slower speed and put at least some effort into observing the preferred rules for spelling and grammar.
Beyond that criticism I would like to see someone do a competent engineering study comparing the various CVTs, belt drives, transmissions, along with costs. BTW, a few more ponds in a transmission is really irrelevant if you just add a bigger battery for the front wheel motor. I have used bikes for around town transportation for over forty years. I do not care if the whole bike weighed three ponds wet, having some extra push from a pedelec is worth it.
Oh, to return to the days of yore when all we had was Sturmey Archer's 3 and 4-speed hubs. Simple, safe, cheap - as opposed to the 'unsafe and any speed' derailier contraptions they force on us today.
Literally a go back to the past!! which means maybe the bicycles are "improving" their gears
I suspect that this transmission has more friction than a good derailleur transmission.
Love it and would opt for the belt drive for sure. If I can stand on it and apply max pedal power without breaking it (200lb of mostly muscle between my ears) I would trade the additional net weight (maybe 2 to3 lb) as compared to derailleur, cassette, etc. Nothing like the sweet action of German gears and bearings.
As with all issues regarding energy use or conversion it is a matter of efficiency, cost and versatility. This solution have been on my wish list for many years but now I think that an electric generator - supercap - battery - hub motor(s) is the optimal driveline when using modern high efficiency power electronics.
We look forward to a "Shaft-Drive" version! ...Why not?
hm, seems quite strange since there is already truvativ hammerschmidt or schlumpf dual speed chain wheel...I cant see strong benefit, as there is still rear chain guide :-(
I bought oldschool Sturmey-archer X-RF8 which is fine, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEPUuR5ZnOM
One of the weaknesses of a chain/derailleur is gear range duplication. A dedicated cyclist will build their own rear gear cluster and choose their front chain wheels to customize their shift points and limit ratio overlap.
The second major weakness of derailleurs is seen when on tries to shift in high torque circumstances such as honking up a hill. Even when the best riders and mechanics tune a riders bicycle it's common to for the chain to slip 5 to 10 gear teeth or throw the chain completely. If the chain gets bound up behind the rear gear cluster and spokes or the front of the gear stack and the frame, the rider is going down and there's not a hell of a lot that the rider can do about it. I broke an ankle from the sudden impact of a chain jamming. That was during my freshman year in high school when I rode an average of 70 miles a day.
The gearbox concept eliminates those problems, but I have to wonder how precisely, quickly, and smoothly they'll complete the high torque shifts. Since I can no longer ride a conventional bicycle. The gear box concept would be ideal for hand powered bikes.
re; Alastair Carnegie
Shaft drive bicycles have two high friction gear sets. I would rather drag a meter wide parachute.
How does it compare to a Schlumph drive?
Why do sealed drive bikes not exist?
Not like pinion just a derailuar in a box
I have a Pinion, Nuvinci, Alfine8 and 11, Sturmy 8 and had a Rohloff.
Nuvinci is great on non fun type bike. The weight out back is way too heavy for good handling performance off road. I run mine on my shop bike, and it's great. Alfine 11 offers nothing over 8 really IMO. I have an Alfine 8 in my Zerode DH sled and it's great for that. Rohloff was great. But expensive and again heavy for fun handling. Sturmy 8 is crap, on my pub bike now. Pinion is awesome. I haven't ridden a bike with massive range for years, as I didn;t see the point, but chugging up long hills on long rides really is nice. Too many gears, maybe, but still great. I have the Pinion on my all day epic ride 27"(650b) Nicolai Helius. And it's rad. Getting a Effigear boxed Cavalerie asap to complete my stable.
Chains last several times longer on all of these bikes, so do gear cables as they're never under load. Being able to shift any time is amazing once used to it. No more compromised shifting. You might not think you have hassles with a mech and shifting, but wait til you're used to a gearbox and go back to a mech and you'll soon see how compromised you were.
They may be a touch more inefficient in a lab compared to derailleurs, but add some dirt, more than often worn components and or a chain guide or narrow wide ring and you'll find they're probably about equal. Then there's the fact you're always in the right gear, not wasting energy thinking about when you can change gears and never being caught in the wrong gear. I'd say on most rides you save more energy using a gearbox.
Better weight comparison: this device + belt + rear pulley VS
front derailleur + rear derailleur + front chain rings + rear cluster + chain, + bottom bracket. BB alone is about a pound. What a worthless comparison this article makes. Also, cables do not stretch. Period. What most people call "cable stretch" is housing compression, and will not happen if the housing ends are ground flat.
Nice idea, but the extra weight is gruesome, and the cost for a new bike with the gearing built-in will be at least $3,000 and more likely $6,000. Too many gears too. With the 636% gear ratio, wouldn't a low gear of 25" get you a top gear of 184"? Or would that be 158"? Using the lowest gear I'd ever ridden (18"), which was impossible to stay up on unless going up a steep hill, that ratio would get you a top gear of either 114" or 132" (multiply by 636 or 536 ... I don't know which).
I biked across USA in '76 with a 25" low and 108" high (10-speed, or was it 15 ... I can't remember), and the gearing was perfect. 114" would be OK, and 18" nice when you needed it, but 132" would be a bitch to pedal, and 158" or 184" would require you to be TOWED up to at least 65mph before you could even pedal it!
Ideally, for a town/comfort/trail bike (ie, non-racing), I think 9 evenly-spaced gears from 25" to 105" would be perfect ... that's a 10" jump between each gear. It would be simpler and lighter too. Now if I could ADD that feature to my current Electra Townie for, say, $200, I'd be sittin' pretty!
Oh, yes, and for those fans of the Sturmey Archer 3 and 4-speed hubs, surely you jest! I got a Schwinn World in 1952 (age 11), the first Schwinn with those gears, and a day didn't go by that those damned gears didn't slip, causing my feet to leave the pedals and for me to drop HARD, smashing my crotch right onto the top bar, with the result being a slo-mo roll onto the grass or pavement as I silently screamed in agony (traffic was usually watching). And later a girl friend slipped the same way and caused some REAL damage.
Those English gears were sent here only to torture us. Before a year had passed, I switched that Schwinn to a 1-speed with a New Departure FOOT BRAKE only (threw those lousy rim brakes out too). I stripped that skinny-tired Schwinn down to almost nothing (no fenders, no hand grips, no horn, no gears, no hand brakes) until it was the lightest and fastest bike in town. And I never stopped without skidding sideways. God, I miss that bike!
Cool... I have always been interested in the internal hubs and other such designs. However, they have never really taken off, sure, a niche market for those here and there. But, this design has the disadvantage of requiring a purpose-built frame, in only four sizes, which is a disaster.