The five speed freewheel had a pretty good run, didn't it? Goodness knows when the first ones were made but (due to derailleur development holding things back perhaps) it was still considered new tech (for the mass market) in the early 1950s, gained widespread acceptance, then resisted being displaced by 6s (for decades) before falling into a slow decline as cassette hubs with ever increasing quantities of sprockets became the norm.
It is worth noting that the freewheel more or less 'evolved' in an organic fashion; before freewheels fixed gear sprockets were screwed onto hubs; the same threaded hubs -with minor modifications- accepted 1s freewheels, then 2s, 3s, 4s etc. versions. Often the freewheel was simply extended by screwing further sprockets to the rightmost one, only being redesigned with a wider body after the number of speeds had become widely accepted, and sometimes not even then. Arguably 5s is a 'sweet spot', in that there can be enough gears (by number or range) for most uses, provided multiple chainrings are used; the wheel is not too dished, not too heavy, and the loading on the rear axle is not so bad that typical axles break too often. You can build screw-on freewheels with any number of gears you can think of, but they arguably make decreasingly good sense as the number of sprockets increases.
When I got my first bike with derailleur gears in the 1970s, five speed freewheels were the norm and although things have changed since then, even now some new bikes are still fitted with 5s freewheels; however these are mostly inexpensive bikes, with inexpensive freewheels to boot.
So one question is what to do now, if you want to run older hubs/wheels, or just want a simple transmission? What are the options?
From the start although they were always designed to accept various different sprockets, 5s freewheels were mainly sold with 'standard ratios' of various kinds which varied a little with the manufacturer. I guess the most common types fitted to mass-produced bikes were 14-24 or 14-28, but even then the intermediate ratios could vary. If you were fussy you could always build a freewheel with specific ratios for touring or racing, but most local bike shops didn't stock the sprockets and/or perhaps even have the correct tools to rebuild freewheels to the customer's specification.
In the early 1960s the big freewheel brands included Maillard, Regina, and Cyclo. By the late 1960s Japanese manufacturers had become a presence and included Shimano and SunTour. In fact shimano's first bicycle product was a singlespeed freewheel, I think. I guess the heyday of the 5s freewheel was the late 1970s/early 1980s; however by this time the writing was on the wall: New freewheel systems were being designed to accept 5,6, or even 7 sprockets, such that a 13T or even 12T sprocket could be accommodated. Around this time well-established quality freewheel models (such as SunTour ProCompe) had the choice of ratios in 5s first diminished before such models were discontinued altogether. In their place came posher freewheels (with more sprockets) and cheaper versions of 5s freewheels; this pattern of 'more but posher' or 'same but cheaper' (with cassettes rather than freewheels latterly) has since been repeated many times with every n + 1 increment.
I have to hold my hand up and admit that I like cassette hubs. I liked them a lot BITD and in principle I still like them now because they allow flexible gearing and almost complete immunity (in shimano-esque bearing format) from axle breakage, bearing collapse etc. But they require proactive maintenance and/or good availability of spare freehub bodies in order to be a practical choice in the long term. And on these points shimano seem hell-bent on shooting themselves in the foot since they are making cassette hubs a less practical choice with every passing year; many pointless freehub body spline variations where they mount on the hubshell was the thin end of the wedge: Recently they appear to have stopped making/supplying 7s freehub bodies. This means that if you want a low-dish wheel and/or not too many sprockets in a cassette hub, you are stuck using modified, off-brand or used parts. None of these will appeal to many users, so perhaps it is time to reappraise the humble screw-on freewheel.
Axle breakage when using a screw-on freewheel can be more or less completely prevented by using an outrigger bearing. The freewheel mechanism itself is usually changed with the sprockets, so if this fails, or the body design goes obsolete, it is no big deal; you just buy a new freewheel and off you go again. I think that you will always be able to buy basic freewheels in every shop that sells bikes, because they can be made just a little bit cheaper than cassette hubs. Thus they are arguably a better choice than cassette hubs in the long term, provided hub problems can be avoided and the basic freewheels don't end up so cheap and so poor that they start to be sources of chronic unreliability.
More to follow.
Five speed freewheels; then and now.
Five speed freewheels; then and now.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: Five speed freewheels; then and now.
seven or eight years ago I built my first bike for decades -of any quality- that incorporated a screw-on freewheel. I built it as a commuter for a friend of mine. The main reasons why I was pushed in the freewheel direction were that
a) I thought drum brakes were the most appropriate solution for the intended use and
b) it was clear that a wide range/large number of gears was not required and
c) I wanted low consumable cost on the bike and
d) the end user insisted that they wanted gear ratios close together.
Were it not for d) I would have pushed the idea of an IGH instead. If the SA X-RDC cassette hub were better designed and/or accepted a narrower freehub body/cassette more easily, that could have been an option too.
In the end it was decided to try SunRace 6s freewheels, simply because they were cheap and readily available, and in 14-28T form they had enough gear range and gears with small intervals too (14-16-18-21-24-28). I was put off them at first by the slack in the bearings of the freewheel bodies I bought, and that I managed to crack a lockring when adjusting one. However since then I have not yet cracked another lockring (and indeed the cracked one didn't break in service either) and furthermore subsequent SunRace freewheels have arrived with the bearings much better adjusted too. I also made shields which protected the exposed freewheel bearings from the usual plume of corrosive winter crud.
So far that bike has used a freewheel and chain about once every 3000 miles. and is on freewheel #6 I think. I suspect that if the chain were better maintained, or changed at ~1500miles instead, the freewheel sprockets could last at least twice as long. So the approach of using cheap freewheels can work, in that use anyway. Not the same thing as a loaded tandem or touring bike, in the hills though, so what about those applications?
Well that can be influenced by the sprockets but is mainly down to the quality of the freewheel body. In particular whether or not both pawls reliably engage simultaneously or not. In this respect pretty much any used freewheel body is usually better than any brand new freewheel body; machining tolerances ensure that most often the pawls don't engage simultaneously and share the load in a new freewheel body. I don't know just how strong a SunRace freewheel body is, but I do know that they usually have unsynchronised pawls when they are new.
BITD some freewheels allowed a wide range to be specified; for example SunTour sprockets went to 38T. Shimano sprockets went to at least 36T. Maillard and Regina also made similar offerings. 'So what?' I hear you say; "not one of those manufacturers make freewheels these days, with the exception of shimano, and none of their current models support either very large sprockets or swapping the low gear sprockets around, and they use a different spline now anyway." Which is all true and you might think leaves you with only the option of used freewheel bodies/sprockets and new stuff that isn't ideal. However this ignores several things;
1) there are such things as IRD freewheels
2) the largest 'large' freewheel sprockets don't usually wear out and can be swapped from one freewheel to another
3) most of the currently available freewheels (ones you have heard of and 'off-brand' ones) use splines for the sprockets that are almost identical to shimano freewheel sprocket splines, so swapping around is possible in many cases provided you can do some minor modifications.
The last of these means that you can often use new sprockets from a no-name freewheel and fit them to a 'trusted' freewheel body. However I don't know if IRD sprockets use the common shimano-esque spline types or not.
cheers
a) I thought drum brakes were the most appropriate solution for the intended use and
b) it was clear that a wide range/large number of gears was not required and
c) I wanted low consumable cost on the bike and
d) the end user insisted that they wanted gear ratios close together.
Were it not for d) I would have pushed the idea of an IGH instead. If the SA X-RDC cassette hub were better designed and/or accepted a narrower freehub body/cassette more easily, that could have been an option too.
In the end it was decided to try SunRace 6s freewheels, simply because they were cheap and readily available, and in 14-28T form they had enough gear range and gears with small intervals too (14-16-18-21-24-28). I was put off them at first by the slack in the bearings of the freewheel bodies I bought, and that I managed to crack a lockring when adjusting one. However since then I have not yet cracked another lockring (and indeed the cracked one didn't break in service either) and furthermore subsequent SunRace freewheels have arrived with the bearings much better adjusted too. I also made shields which protected the exposed freewheel bearings from the usual plume of corrosive winter crud.
So far that bike has used a freewheel and chain about once every 3000 miles. and is on freewheel #6 I think. I suspect that if the chain were better maintained, or changed at ~1500miles instead, the freewheel sprockets could last at least twice as long. So the approach of using cheap freewheels can work, in that use anyway. Not the same thing as a loaded tandem or touring bike, in the hills though, so what about those applications?
Well that can be influenced by the sprockets but is mainly down to the quality of the freewheel body. In particular whether or not both pawls reliably engage simultaneously or not. In this respect pretty much any used freewheel body is usually better than any brand new freewheel body; machining tolerances ensure that most often the pawls don't engage simultaneously and share the load in a new freewheel body. I don't know just how strong a SunRace freewheel body is, but I do know that they usually have unsynchronised pawls when they are new.
BITD some freewheels allowed a wide range to be specified; for example SunTour sprockets went to 38T. Shimano sprockets went to at least 36T. Maillard and Regina also made similar offerings. 'So what?' I hear you say; "not one of those manufacturers make freewheels these days, with the exception of shimano, and none of their current models support either very large sprockets or swapping the low gear sprockets around, and they use a different spline now anyway." Which is all true and you might think leaves you with only the option of used freewheel bodies/sprockets and new stuff that isn't ideal. However this ignores several things;
1) there are such things as IRD freewheels
2) the largest 'large' freewheel sprockets don't usually wear out and can be swapped from one freewheel to another
3) most of the currently available freewheels (ones you have heard of and 'off-brand' ones) use splines for the sprockets that are almost identical to shimano freewheel sprocket splines, so swapping around is possible in many cases provided you can do some minor modifications.
The last of these means that you can often use new sprockets from a no-name freewheel and fit them to a 'trusted' freewheel body. However I don't know if IRD sprockets use the common shimano-esque spline types or not.
cheers
Last edited by Brucey on 5 Aug 2020, 2:45pm, edited 2 times in total.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: Five speed freewheels; then and now.
the long-awaited pt 3:
So who is going to use freewheels now? Well I guess there are a few main categories;
a) vintage bike owners
b) 'retro' cyclists
c) utility bike riders
d) riders of obscure and/or expensive machines that cannot easily be converted.
The last category includes a lot of tandems, trikes and other unusual machines; these cannot use cassette hubs without being almost completely re-engineered. For categories a) and b) the 'only 100% correct thing' is a vintage freewheel. But 'retro cyclists' -who might actually ride their machines a significant mileage- can use modern freewheels when available, instead of wearing out irreplaceable period correct equipment. Utility type users -more than the others perhaps- just need to use whatever can be bought and will work reasonably well.
To my surprise there are still three and four-speed freewheels being made, eg in some former French overseas territories. I have even seen a 'Simplex' branded freewheel which was (I think) made in Thailand this century. Who knows how long that will carry on? The other thing is that many 5s freewheels were based on 4s designs, so if you really must have a 4s freewheel, in many cases you can convert a 5s to a 4s one so that at least you have 'the right thing' for your vintage machine.
The unstoppable march of the mainstream equipment market means that the 'no brainer' option for converting older bikes to everyday use (which was to fit a 7s freehub at 126 to 128mm OLN) is no longer quite such a straightforward option. 7s freehubs are still made, but not by shimano. So if you convert an older bike to a 7s freehub system now, you are arguably trading one kind of obsolete equipment for another. HG freehub sprockets will be available for a very long time but new freehub bodies, rather less so. Fortunately freehub bodies last well if they are looked after.
As recently as ten years ago there were still enough occasional 'finds' of populated freewheel sprocket boards and hoards of spare parts to make running some older freewheel systems viable. But even with the internet easing availability of such spares, folk who do lots of miles and are heavily invested in particular freewheel systems will increasingly struggle to find enough kit to carry on for years unless they have a stash already. If new spares come available, prices may be eye-watering; for example 'Yellow jersey' were selling NOS SunTour New Winner sprockets a while back; thirty dollars (USD) per sprocket and they soon sold out.
In any case if you use an older/irreplaceable freewheel, the key to making the sprockets last is to keep replacing the chain. Chains are cheap and readily available. If you let a chain run past about 0.5% elongation the sprockets will be being worn differently and this may mean that a new chain won't run on the sprockets again.
If you want 'current' with availability of larger sprockets, IRD is pretty much the only game in town; at a price. Arguably the price is no greater than it would have been decades ago, in real terms, but it seems like a lot in the context of other current freewheels perhaps. As mentioned previously I don't know for sure if IRD use splines that are compatible with shimano sprocket splines, but if not identical then they were certainly 'inspired' by them, so I think they will share common dimensions.
Shimano sprocket and extractor splines are probably the key to running freewheels these days; SunRace (definitely), and several other brands ('golden sun', 'falcon' , DNP etc) all use variants of shimano UG and HG freewheel sprocket splines. With a little imagination and some grinding, much swapping of sprockets between bodies of different makes is possible. The biggest (and most insoluble) variation in these freewheels is in the small sprockets; these tend to be specific to each brand to a greater extent. The shimano extractor spline is not only the most common sort now (although there are variations, e.g, 'falcon' brand freewheels use a slight variation so not all removers that fit shimano also fit falcon...) but the spline also lends itself to fitment of an outrigger bearing.
BITD shimano UG freewheel sprockets were very hard-wearing (as were their cassette sprockets) so lasted a long time. However HG types (in both freewheel and cassette form) offer improved shifting at the expense of higher wear rate; HG sprockets are usually softer than the hardest 'older' sprockets. This isn't all bad though; HG teeth are shorter so whilst they wear, they also retain their shape (i.e. without becoming unduly 'hooked') for longer. Swings and roundabouts.
With any freewheel system, a key ingredient to running them in the long run is maintenance of the body bearings. This means lubing them regularly especially whenever they get wet. It also means maintaining the bearing clearances, keeping them without appreciable free play. This is easier with some freewheels than others; SunTour New Winner models have a screw and locknut bearing adjustment system; pretty much all others use a bed of shims to seat the (left hand threaded) RH bearing cone/lockring on, and the shim stack is adjusted in thickness to adjust the bearings. This adjustment can take just a few minutes; if the lockring is accessible and unscrews easily, if the insides of the body are in good shape, and if there is a thin shim that can be removed and if this gets the bearings perfect, you are on easy street.
However if you can't even get access to the lockring without taking sprockets off (common with designs that use 13T or smaller sprockets), you get inside and find the pawls or springs are not in good shape, you only find thick shims (or no shims that can be removed) then it can turn into a much longer job. Many times I have ended up making shims for freewheels by cutting up beer cans. Steel is best; if you have to use aluminium to make a shim, this is usually OK provided it is sandwiched between steel shims when it is installed. If you try and use an aluminium shim at the top of the stack, it is more likely to get torn up when the lockring is installed.
Perhaps controversially, I suspect that the basic quality and life expectancy of even inexpensive Sun Race freewheel bodies probably isn't much worse than any other unsealed freewheel body, provided it is adjusted and lubricated correctly. Seals are a different matter; they are a great idea, but they can of course hold water inside the mechanism as well as they keep it out. I recently got hold of a low mileage SunTour 'Winner Pro' freewheel, (which has labyrinth seals in it, and uses shim adjustment) and was somewhat dismayed to find that in its few miles of use, it had suffered corrosion damage inside. If the freewheel body has seals, unless they can be removed easily, you can't expect to 'purge' the freewheel body using a water-displacing spray. The Sun Tour Winner Pro also had a disappointing collection of shims inside; just two shims in the 0.2 to 0.3mm thickness range; I had to make a thinner shim to get the clearances set right. This all meant that a job which could have taken five minutes actually took about an hour and a half....hey ho....no-one ever said it was gonna be easy....
cheers
So who is going to use freewheels now? Well I guess there are a few main categories;
a) vintage bike owners
b) 'retro' cyclists
c) utility bike riders
d) riders of obscure and/or expensive machines that cannot easily be converted.
The last category includes a lot of tandems, trikes and other unusual machines; these cannot use cassette hubs without being almost completely re-engineered. For categories a) and b) the 'only 100% correct thing' is a vintage freewheel. But 'retro cyclists' -who might actually ride their machines a significant mileage- can use modern freewheels when available, instead of wearing out irreplaceable period correct equipment. Utility type users -more than the others perhaps- just need to use whatever can be bought and will work reasonably well.
To my surprise there are still three and four-speed freewheels being made, eg in some former French overseas territories. I have even seen a 'Simplex' branded freewheel which was (I think) made in Thailand this century. Who knows how long that will carry on? The other thing is that many 5s freewheels were based on 4s designs, so if you really must have a 4s freewheel, in many cases you can convert a 5s to a 4s one so that at least you have 'the right thing' for your vintage machine.
The unstoppable march of the mainstream equipment market means that the 'no brainer' option for converting older bikes to everyday use (which was to fit a 7s freehub at 126 to 128mm OLN) is no longer quite such a straightforward option. 7s freehubs are still made, but not by shimano. So if you convert an older bike to a 7s freehub system now, you are arguably trading one kind of obsolete equipment for another. HG freehub sprockets will be available for a very long time but new freehub bodies, rather less so. Fortunately freehub bodies last well if they are looked after.
As recently as ten years ago there were still enough occasional 'finds' of populated freewheel sprocket boards and hoards of spare parts to make running some older freewheel systems viable. But even with the internet easing availability of such spares, folk who do lots of miles and are heavily invested in particular freewheel systems will increasingly struggle to find enough kit to carry on for years unless they have a stash already. If new spares come available, prices may be eye-watering; for example 'Yellow jersey' were selling NOS SunTour New Winner sprockets a while back; thirty dollars (USD) per sprocket and they soon sold out.
In any case if you use an older/irreplaceable freewheel, the key to making the sprockets last is to keep replacing the chain. Chains are cheap and readily available. If you let a chain run past about 0.5% elongation the sprockets will be being worn differently and this may mean that a new chain won't run on the sprockets again.
If you want 'current' with availability of larger sprockets, IRD is pretty much the only game in town; at a price. Arguably the price is no greater than it would have been decades ago, in real terms, but it seems like a lot in the context of other current freewheels perhaps. As mentioned previously I don't know for sure if IRD use splines that are compatible with shimano sprocket splines, but if not identical then they were certainly 'inspired' by them, so I think they will share common dimensions.
Shimano sprocket and extractor splines are probably the key to running freewheels these days; SunRace (definitely), and several other brands ('golden sun', 'falcon' , DNP etc) all use variants of shimano UG and HG freewheel sprocket splines. With a little imagination and some grinding, much swapping of sprockets between bodies of different makes is possible. The biggest (and most insoluble) variation in these freewheels is in the small sprockets; these tend to be specific to each brand to a greater extent. The shimano extractor spline is not only the most common sort now (although there are variations, e.g, 'falcon' brand freewheels use a slight variation so not all removers that fit shimano also fit falcon...) but the spline also lends itself to fitment of an outrigger bearing.
BITD shimano UG freewheel sprockets were very hard-wearing (as were their cassette sprockets) so lasted a long time. However HG types (in both freewheel and cassette form) offer improved shifting at the expense of higher wear rate; HG sprockets are usually softer than the hardest 'older' sprockets. This isn't all bad though; HG teeth are shorter so whilst they wear, they also retain their shape (i.e. without becoming unduly 'hooked') for longer. Swings and roundabouts.
With any freewheel system, a key ingredient to running them in the long run is maintenance of the body bearings. This means lubing them regularly especially whenever they get wet. It also means maintaining the bearing clearances, keeping them without appreciable free play. This is easier with some freewheels than others; SunTour New Winner models have a screw and locknut bearing adjustment system; pretty much all others use a bed of shims to seat the (left hand threaded) RH bearing cone/lockring on, and the shim stack is adjusted in thickness to adjust the bearings. This adjustment can take just a few minutes; if the lockring is accessible and unscrews easily, if the insides of the body are in good shape, and if there is a thin shim that can be removed and if this gets the bearings perfect, you are on easy street.
However if you can't even get access to the lockring without taking sprockets off (common with designs that use 13T or smaller sprockets), you get inside and find the pawls or springs are not in good shape, you only find thick shims (or no shims that can be removed) then it can turn into a much longer job. Many times I have ended up making shims for freewheels by cutting up beer cans. Steel is best; if you have to use aluminium to make a shim, this is usually OK provided it is sandwiched between steel shims when it is installed. If you try and use an aluminium shim at the top of the stack, it is more likely to get torn up when the lockring is installed.
Perhaps controversially, I suspect that the basic quality and life expectancy of even inexpensive Sun Race freewheel bodies probably isn't much worse than any other unsealed freewheel body, provided it is adjusted and lubricated correctly. Seals are a different matter; they are a great idea, but they can of course hold water inside the mechanism as well as they keep it out. I recently got hold of a low mileage SunTour 'Winner Pro' freewheel, (which has labyrinth seals in it, and uses shim adjustment) and was somewhat dismayed to find that in its few miles of use, it had suffered corrosion damage inside. If the freewheel body has seals, unless they can be removed easily, you can't expect to 'purge' the freewheel body using a water-displacing spray. The Sun Tour Winner Pro also had a disappointing collection of shims inside; just two shims in the 0.2 to 0.3mm thickness range; I had to make a thinner shim to get the clearances set right. This all meant that a job which could have taken five minutes actually took about an hour and a half....hey ho....no-one ever said it was gonna be easy....
cheers
Last edited by Brucey on 23 Oct 2020, 10:24pm, edited 2 times in total.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: Five speed freewheels; then and now.
It's a looonnnnggggg time since I used freewheels of any number,the last one being a six speed.
IMHO the Shimano qr 9/10sp freehub is the zenith of hubs,and IME XT M756 chromo axle hub the top of the affordable tree*(with Deore a very close second),cheap to buy,easily serviced,well sealed and very looonnnnggggg lasting in all but submarine conditions.
Together with a double or triple chainset it has unparalleled range and close enough ratios to suit every cyclists needs,I can't for the life of me think why anyone needs more sprockets than 10.
Mr Shimano lost the plot sometime ago with everymore technical variations on what was the best.
My 2d's worth
* and better than the vast majority of the exotic unaffordable ones too IMO
IMHO the Shimano qr 9/10sp freehub is the zenith of hubs,and IME XT M756 chromo axle hub the top of the affordable tree*(with Deore a very close second),cheap to buy,easily serviced,well sealed and very looonnnnggggg lasting in all but submarine conditions.
Together with a double or triple chainset it has unparalleled range and close enough ratios to suit every cyclists needs,I can't for the life of me think why anyone needs more sprockets than 10.
Mr Shimano lost the plot sometime ago with everymore technical variations on what was the best.
My 2d's worth
* and better than the vast majority of the exotic unaffordable ones too IMO
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
-
simonineaston
- Posts: 8078
- Joined: 9 May 2007, 1:06pm
- Location: ...at a cricket ground
Re: Five speed freewheels; then and now.
My first proper bike was the then ubiquitous "five speed racer"...
S
(on the look out for Armageddon, on board a Brompton nano & ever-changing Moultons)
(on the look out for Armageddon, on board a Brompton nano & ever-changing Moultons)
Re: Five speed freewheels; then and now.
I had various BSOs with 5 speed freewheels back in the 80s and I clearly remember going into a really oily and greasy bike shop and they rolled me a custom freewheel.
I also remember breaking an axle but the bike shop fixed it while I waited. I guess that was because everything was pretty standard.
I also like freehubs but getting the spares can be a hassle and I find that weather rather kills them (on one tour a few years back my rear hub was so noisy I wondered if a cab would have been required - breathed a sigh of relief when we made it to the station). I also strongly doubt that they will last as long as the old freewheels did.
Another issue for low number gearing is availability of shifters
I also remember breaking an axle but the bike shop fixed it while I waited. I guess that was because everything was pretty standard.
I also like freehubs but getting the spares can be a hassle and I find that weather rather kills them (on one tour a few years back my rear hub was so noisy I wondered if a cab would have been required - breathed a sigh of relief when we made it to the station). I also strongly doubt that they will last as long as the old freewheels did.
Another issue for low number gearing is availability of shifters
"Marriage is a wonderful invention; but then again so is the bicycle puncture repair kit." - Billy Connolly
Re: Five speed freewheels; then and now.
A question.
I was actually discussing sprockets and gears this morning in a local bike shop. We were going back over the past and I mentioned my first bike I had in 1959. A viking touring bike with a triple front chain set and I said 7 gears at the back. The owner was pretty certain the maximum number at that time was 5.
I cannot remember but think he is probably right. Can you confirm
Happy days
Anthony
I was actually discussing sprockets and gears this morning in a local bike shop. We were going back over the past and I mentioned my first bike I had in 1959. A viking touring bike with a triple front chain set and I said 7 gears at the back. The owner was pretty certain the maximum number at that time was 5.
I cannot remember but think he is probably right. Can you confirm
Happy days
Anthony
Re: Five speed freewheels; then and now.
I've always favoured having an odd number of sprockets, so there's always a middle sprocket.
11-speed doesn't shift as well as 9-speed did (XTR shifter and XT rear mech in both cases).
It shifts acceptably well, but there's definitely a slight delay there that wasn't there on 9-speed.
It seems the further back you go the faster they shifted and the 8-Speed XTR setup I had was the best shifting I have ever had. I just can't tolerate being on 8-speed with either big gaps or a low sprocket not low enough. 11-speed at least solves that but it's not got that snappiness anymore. I should imagine now 12-speed is out it's slightly worse again for the shifting speed.
11-speed doesn't shift as well as 9-speed did (XTR shifter and XT rear mech in both cases).
It shifts acceptably well, but there's definitely a slight delay there that wasn't there on 9-speed.
It seems the further back you go the faster they shifted and the 8-Speed XTR setup I had was the best shifting I have ever had. I just can't tolerate being on 8-speed with either big gaps or a low sprocket not low enough. 11-speed at least solves that but it's not got that snappiness anymore. I should imagine now 12-speed is out it's slightly worse again for the shifting speed.
We'll always be together, together on electric bikes.
/elephant.jpg)
Re: Five speed freewheels; then and now.
AS regards that Viking. no way was it 7 and perhaps not even five,it may have been 3 or 4 with the most likely set up of that period on any British machine Cyclo...but hold on.. if it was a triple it may have been a custom job.. there weren't many using 3 front chainrings back then even 2 was rare except maybe on a real '' race use '' bike.....there are those on here who will know perhaps better than myself.. will
Re: Five speed freewheels; then and now.
My biggest gripe with freewheels was their non existent sealing. - I am talking here of Regina and Maillard/Sachs models up until the late '80s / early '90s. After the first few wet autumn rides the bodies were wrecked, despite regular lubrication. I usually managed to extract a bit more service life by re-shimming them after the corrosion had made them too wobbly.
This was why I became a "fixed" rider in the winter months.
For a few years in the 2000s I went back to gears and freehubs (Campag) and found them much more durable than the earlier freewheels. Still not prefect though, and now it was uneconomical to replace individual worn sprockets - a complete cassette required instead.
This was why I became a "fixed" rider in the winter months.
For a few years in the 2000s I went back to gears and freehubs (Campag) and found them much more durable than the earlier freewheels. Still not prefect though, and now it was uneconomical to replace individual worn sprockets - a complete cassette required instead.
Re: Five speed freewheels; then and now.
I do like a five speed.
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
Re: Five speed freewheels; then and now.
willcee wrote:AS regards that Viking. no way was it 7 and perhaps not even five,it may have been 3 or 4 with the most likely set up of that period on any British machine Cyclo...but hold on.. if it was a triple it may have been a custom job.. there weren't many using 3 front chainrings back then even 2 was rare except maybe on a real '' race use '' bike.....there are those on here who will know perhaps better than myself.. will
IIRC the first sight of a six speed freewheel for sale (for racing) may have been Regina in the early 1960s. This used more or less the same body as was used for 4s and 5s, only on the RHS where there were two small sprockets screwed into one another for a five speed freewheel, there were three instead. It is quite possible that this became a production offering as a result of someone modifying parts and making their own six speed. This might have been as easy as taking a 15T top sprocket and machining a female screw thread inside it such that it would accept a 14T top sprocket (the thread sizes varied with top sprocket sizes in such a way as to allow this).
So in custom work anything would be possible (e.g. triple chainsets were being used by some for touring even in the 1930s) but in an off-the peg bike 2x5 would have been the most that was commonly available. There are plenty of manufacturer's catalogues which show what was offered then.
cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: Five speed freewheels; then and now.
robc02 wrote:My biggest gripe with freewheels was their non existent sealing. - I am talking here of Regina and Maillard/Sachs models up until the late '80s / early '90s. After the first few wet autumn rides the bodies were wrecked, despite regular lubrication....
yep, even summer rain is enough to overwhelm many oils and greases, and winter road salt will see off the vast majority of lubricants.
So if a freewheel is re-oiled after every wet ride and immediately 'exercised' to drive out water , the bearings can usually be kept sweet in summer use.
In winter use you need to use a lube that resists road salt and water. I've had some good results using aerosol lube that is meant for motorcycle chains, but it is not all created equal by any means. The best stuff I ever used was some Castrol motorbike chain lube which penetrated well, and dried quickly to leave a sticky black-coloured gel. This seemed to resist anything the weather /road conditions could throw at it.
However not every freewheel is as easy to get lube into; any kind of shoulder on the RHS makes it easy to introduce lube, but it also encourages water and dirt to get into the bearings too. Most currently available freewheels have such shoulders. In recent years I've made and fitted plastic shields that keep most of the crud out, but can be pulled back far enough to add lube/purge as necessary.
cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: Five speed freewheels; then and now.
Hi Willcee
quote
AS regards that Viking. no way was it 7 and perhaps not even five,it may have been 3 or 4.. Unquote
I know for a fact my Viking was a 5 though perhaps not a seven. It was put together by a ex cyclist called Stan Miles in his shop in St Albans near where we lived. I recall being the envy of all our friends at the age of 11 with a touring bike of such calibre.
quote
AS regards that Viking. no way was it 7 and perhaps not even five,it may have been 3 or 4.. Unquote
I know for a fact my Viking was a 5 though perhaps not a seven. It was put together by a ex cyclist called Stan Miles in his shop in St Albans near where we lived. I recall being the envy of all our friends at the age of 11 with a touring bike of such calibre.
-
francovendee
- Posts: 3153
- Joined: 5 May 2009, 6:32am
Re: Five speed freewheels; then and now.
Brucey, I've seen you mention 'outrigger' bearings before. Is there a chance you can post up some pics as I've never seen this set up. Thanks