removing stubborn five speed (screw on )

[jimlews]

This Regina freewheel cluster is on a wheel whose ratios I wanted to change for a lower set. So two wheels are involved in the procedure. The first is a 700c wheel with a 13-32 six speed Sun tour block requiring a two dog extractor. I took that and the wheel with the offending Regina (27x1 1/4) round to the LBS thinking that would be the 'path of least resistance'. He couldn't get either block off!
Back home, not being blessed with a bench vice, I clamped a 450mm stilson wrench into my 'Work-Mate' and braced the (anticlockwise) leg of same against a wall and used the stilson as stand-in for a bench vice. Hefty twist of the rim and...Success!! and that despite finding that the axle was broken when I offer'd it up. Tried the same trick with the Regina... Result; it carved the freewheel remover up. And two further ones.

Here I go off at a tangent!

At the risk of smuggling in a new topic...

Does anyone have experience of the Helicomatic hub mentioned upthread? I recently acquired one (5sp) from this forum and I have to say, I'm quite impressed. It looks to be a Cycle Tourist's dream. The bearings are widely spaced, being placed right near the drop-outs (further outboard than a Shimano freehub, in fact. The freewheel can be removed using a sort of bottle opener device to remove the serrated lock ring and the freewheel cluster then simply slides off. Replacing a spoke mid tour would be a doddle. I haven't had a chance to try it out yet, I just need a bunch of Maillard sprockets in touring ratios.

So why does everyone seem to despise them? Were they really so bad? Or just a victim of Shimano,s success?

[Brucey]

Helicomatic hubs were OK but...

- the wheel dish was poor for any given number of gears (you could practically park a bike in the gap between the large sprocket and the spokes)
- the freewheel bodies were not very well made and not really sealed
- the sprockets were not so widely available
- the shift quality was not as good as UG shimano
- the RH hub bearing might have been well positioned, but it used 3/16" balls (more like a front hub than a rear) which meant that it simply wasn't strong enough. They broke often.

BTW a simple solution to your regina problem; strip the freewheels and build the outer body of one (with the sprockets that you want) onto the inner body on the other wheel.

cheers

[jimlews]

Thanks Brucey,

I had a feeling that you would be along shortly.

Re: Simple solution. Would the Suntour F/W outer fit the Regina inner?

Re: 3/16 balls. I've got a feeling that some did and some didn't. I'll check mine.

Re: Scarcity of sprockets. Yes that is probably the deal breaker.

[thirdcrank]

... Part two solution is to use Shimano blocks , and buy a splined remover to fit - and I'll never use Regina again. ... .

Regina did move over to the splined remover system which was an improvement except that the Regina splined remover didn't always fit Regina splined freewheels. I had - and probably still have - two visually identical Regina splined removers and various Regina splined freewheels bought as job lots as places like Ribble cleared their stock. One fits some and the other fits the others. Poor quality control as far as I can see.

I have some Shimano 600 freewheels - again clearance from Ribble - in a different quality league.

[JohnW]

... Part two solution is to use Shimano blocks , and buy a splined remover to fit - and I'll never use Regina again. ... .

Regina did move over to the splined remover system which was an improvement................

I never knew that tc............................never occurred to me to find out, but I do have a memory of there being two Shimano splined systems, very similar and not immediately obvious just from looking at.

[Brucey]

....Re: Simple solution. Would the Suntour F/W outer fit the Regina inner?....

I don't think so.

cheers

[thirdcrank]

... I never knew that tc............................never occurred to me to find out, but I do have a memory of there being two Shimano splined systems, very similar and not immediately obvious just from looking at.

The Shimano tools for freewheels and cassette lockrings look similar but are not interchangeable.

[jimlews]

As the original object of this exercise was to get lower gears, I am now thinking that my simplest solution might be to bolt a 32t sprocket onto the hub side of the Regina 5 sp. I have about 11mm clearance between the inner face of the Regina 24t and the spokes, so enough to drive a bus through. Clearance between the jockey arm of the rear mech and the spokes of the rear wheel will probably be marginal, but, I think, worth a 'suck it and see' exercise. Conveniently, the Regina has a series of holes ready drilled in the 24t sprocket.

[thirdcrank]

As the original object of this exercise was to get lower gears, I am now thinking that my simplest solution might be to bolt a 32t sprocket onto the hub side of the Regina 5 sp. I have about 11mm clearance between the inner face of the Regina 24t and the spokes, so enough to drive a bus through. Clearance between the jockey arm of the rear mech and the spokes of the rear wheel will probably be marginal, but, I think, worth a 'suck it and see' exercise. Conveniently, the Regina has a series of holes ready drilled in the 24t sprocket.

Let us know how you get on. My initial reaction is to wonder how you will get the 32T in there.

FWIW, I have all sorts of 6 speed freewheels dating from the days when I changed my gearing to suit the direction of my ride: 13-18 heading east, with all sorts in between to 13-28 for riding the other way. I started with freehubs at nine speed + triple, when it was my legs which were going west, not just my hilly rides.

From time to time people offer freewheels for sale, but there seem to be few takers. I'd offer any of mine free if it kept somebody's bike going, but I'd not want to sabotage a sale. Also, most riders old enough to be persisting with freewheels seem to need 28T as the smallest sprocket.

[Brucey]

.....the original object of this exercise was to get lower gears...

using very low gears with a freewheel stresses the axle mightily. If you plan to go far like this, it might be best to use a shimano cassette hub.

Another option is to install an outrigger bearing to support the freewheel better.

cheers

[JohnW]

.....the original object of this exercise was to get lower gears...

using very low gears with a freewheel stresses the axle mightily....................

Yeah Brucey, but the point is that they stress the legs much less - and as your legs get older.................

[hamster]

Firstly, work done is force x distance - very low gears give the huge forces at the hub as Brucey says. Pressing down on a 22T chainring puts 2x the forces of a 44T. Beware.

I don't quite understand why you are so against Shimano hubs, the freehub design is a work of genius, requiring no large tools and has proven reliability and durability. The basic design is now 30 years old!

Swapping to Helicomatic (for example) is immediately putting you at the mercy of buying spares for something discontinued over 25 years ago.

[pwa]

Firstly, work done is force x distance - very low gears give the huge forces at the hub as Brucey says. Pressing down on a 22T chainring puts 2x the forces of a 44T. Beware.

I don't quite understand why you are so against Shimano hubs, the freehub design is a work of genius, requiring no large tools and has proven reliability and durability. The basic design is now 30 years old!

Swapping to Helicomatic (for example) is immediately putting you at the mercy of buying spares for something discontinued over 25 years ago.

For that reason I would not move on to helicomatic, an obsolete system now. But the basic idea of a freewheel that slides on and comes off almost as easily, rather like a modern cassette, was to my mind an advance, even if the manner of the execution wasn't. It seems strange that freewheels continued for so long to be attached by an ever-tightening screw on that caused so much grief.

[JohnW]

Firstly, work done is force x distance - very low gears give the huge forces at the hub as Brucey says. Pressing down on a 22T chainring puts 2x the forces of a 44T. Beware.

I don't quite understand why you are so against Shimano hubs, the freehub design is a work of genius, requiring no large tools and has proven reliability and durability. The basic design is now 30 years old!

Swapping to Helicomatic (for example) is immediately putting you at the mercy of buying spares for something discontinued over 25 years ago.

I hope that's not aimed at me Hamster - I've never thought anything against Shimano hubs. Shimano were making Hubs before the Freehub was developed - and some of the best actually - my personal experience rates the Dura-Ace second only to Campag Record, and as the Dura-Ace developed, not very much second at that. There are Pros and cons for freehubs-and-cassettes and screw-on-hubs-and-screw-on -freewheels but whilst I'm riding examples of both at the moment, the Freehubs win for me.

As to low hears - the low gears allow easier pedalling over a given distance - achieving lower gears by us of granny (chain)rings puts less stress on the rear hub than achieving them by use of big sprockets.

As to Maillard's 'Helicomatic', it's as you say - it was a good idea and very serviceable and had several advantages, but limited to one manufacturer's one hub and not widely distributed among the LBSs. Pity that

[thirdcrank]

Is there anybody here who, if they were starting from scratch, would go for freewheels?