Powershift rear hub gear - tempted?

[Cugel]

It seems that some big capitalist has decided to have faith in this new way of establishing a double clanger gear system - in the rear hub rather than on the chainset. Being ultra modern it's electronic and wireless. Given the level of investment and various rave reviews in the cycling media, it might become "a thing".

https://www.classified-cycling.cc/powershift-technology

At present it's very expensive and in its early versions. If it becomes far less expensive (let's say, half the price of a Shimano Di2 system) and proves resilient, would you be tempted to acquire one, sooner or later, when your chainset double clanger breaks or you buy a whole new bike? (Put aside all other modes of upgrading to examine only the pure would-I-wouldn't-I buy such a thing on its own merits alone).

It seems no more complicated (less, perhaps) than the traditional front mech technology; and it's electronics seem no more vulnerable to phut than stuff like Di2 or the SRAM equivalent ....... On the other hand, some of its effects on other parts, such as the need for a special cassette, wireless controller button and through axle, seem unnecessarily complex and may be part of the marketing to sell more stuff. If it worked with standard cassettes and one of the Di2 lever-top buttons or the front-mech controller, that would make it more attractive perhaps?

Wot U fink?

Cugel

[simonineaston]

Wot U fink?

My first thought is wouldn't it be better to put it as low down and central as possible ie like Schlumpf do... yes, I know the schlumpf drive is heavy (was when I last looked) , but there's nothing to stop them developing one that isn't.

[Cavemud]

I wouldn't for just two gears.

But maybe it'll be expanded to three, then four........then the big players will be on to IGH's.

The reality is the decision will be made by the manufacturers who put these on the new bikes that people buy.

[jimlews]

Nothing new.

Sachs were doing 2x7 hubs about 30 years ago.
Sturmey Archer currently have 3x9 as used by Mick F of our parish.

Of course, the above are not attended by all the new-fangled balls & whestles stuff so lack street cred except to the cognoscenti.

[Cugel]

Nothing new.

Sachs were doing 2x7 hubs about 30 years ago.
Sturmey Archer currently have 3x9 as used by Mick F of our parish.

Of course, the above are not attended by all the new-fangled balls & whestles stuff so lack street cred except to the cognoscenti.

That was my thought - the electronic new fangle seems well-made and functional but over-complicated and far too expensive compared to the much simpler but very similar solution of using a traditional hub gear of 2 or 3 "speeds" with a rear derailleur & cassette.

Perhaps those who currently manufacture such hub gears could produce one that has improved innards that allow the sort of immediate shift under pedalling pressure that reviewers of the Powershift thingy wax lyrical about? And some of the traditional hub gear manufactures, including Shimano, already have electronic shifting of their hub gears .......... A Shimano hub gear costs far less than a Powershift hub and fits with already extant wheel standards.

For me, the Powershift system also looks like too much of a lock-in to their stuff, with the inability to use standard components such as the cassette and the Q/R or bolt-through wheel retainer. They also seem to have some sort of unusual requirement of the wheel rims because of the location of their hub flanges.

Cugel

[rareposter]

For me, the Powershift system also looks like too much of a lock-in to their stuff, with the inability to use standard components such as the cassette and the Q/R or bolt-through wheel retainer. They also seem to have some sort of unusual requirement of the wheel rims because of the location of their hub flanges.

There are quite a few wheel manufacturers on board with it now and it's easy enough to wire the shift button into a standard Di2 shifter so with those compatibility issues sorted I can see it taking off for certain users.

It's a lot lighter than anything made previously, the shifting is wireless so no issues with cable routing (which was always a total pain on hub geared bikes) and it obviously overcomes the main issues with 2x7 and 3x9 which is lack of gear range.

A Shimano hub gear costs far less than a Powershift hub and fits with already extant wheel standards.

Completely different uses - Shimano hub gears are great but they're for utility and city bikes with a nod towards touring as well. This is for a totally different market.

[Cugel]

For me, the Powershift system also looks like too much of a lock-in to their stuff, with the inability to use standard components such as the cassette and the Q/R or bolt-through wheel retainer. They also seem to have some sort of unusual requirement of the wheel rims because of the location of their hub flanges.

There are quite a few wheel manufacturers on board with it now and it's easy enough to wire the shift button into a standard Di2 shifter so with those compatibility issues sorted I can see it taking off for certain users.

It's a lot lighter than anything made previously, the shifting is wireless so no issues with cable routing (which was always a total pain on hub geared bikes) and it obviously overcomes the main issues with 2x7 and 3x9 which is lack of gear range.

A Shimano hub gear costs far less than a Powershift hub and fits with already extant wheel standards.

Completely different uses - Shimano hub gears are great but they're for utility and city bikes with a nod towards touring as well. This is for a totally different market.

Powershift is for a different market, troo, but it surely wouldn't be difficult for Shimano et all to adapt their current hub gears to a similar set of requirements and functional aspects.

Cugel

[rjb]

early adopters will miss out on the 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 speed versions in the pipeline.

[pliptrot]

The bicycle is a low tech machine and a simple way of getting about. When I raced (at the lowest level) I do not remember being hobbled by down tube friction shifters, possibly because I could not afford anything else back then, and I use STI and Ergopower now. indexed shifting and clipless (weird nomenclature) pedals were worth it; everything else is an attempt to extract money from gullible cyclists. I rather hope that Shimano's decision to abandon mechanical shifting will see a backlash - I won't be buying anything electrical. I grew up with the dreadful Ever Ready bike lights and modern LED lights were a huge step forward. They are still completely <i>[inappropriate word removed]</i> if your bike lives outside. God knows what Di2 will be like for users when the bike is 5 years old. I don't think this Powershift thing will stand the test of time. The point about development is that it should make things simpler and more reliable, and cheaper. Everything we are asked to buy for our cycling is the opposite. Who holds the tide back? I read a review of bicycle wheels this week and there was not one comment on anything about hubs. Think about that. Obviously the morons who get paid to write about bicycle equipment are not going to offer anything at all.

[PH]

I think it'll take off, the way bikes are going riders ate looking for more gears without the complexity of front mechs. The days of mocking anyone with a larger sprocket than 26 have given way to bragging it can go up to 50. I don't know if this is the finished product or a stepping stone along the way, the electronic shifting hasn't been seen as a drawback for current groupsets, so I doubt it'll be for this. It isn't going to lead to increased popularity of IGH's, they offer something different but not without their own compromises. There's predictably the trope about it being nothing new, doesn't matter if it is or not, it's application is significantly different even if the principal has some similarities.

[cyclop]

Bit puzzled by the supposition that the front changer is remotely complicated.It,s so basic,especially with a friction shifter like what I,ve retro fitted on my nice carbon flat bar conversion

[boblo]

From the spec sheet ratios are 1 and 0.7. So with a 50t front ring that's a range almost the same as my current 50/34 compact road chainsets.

I also note the hub weighs ~500g whereas a front der is what, 100g and a decent mid range rear hub ~250g?

So it weighs more, costs much more, needs charging and nicely replicates what I already have whilst centralising more weight round the rear axle which is one of the major downsides of current IHG's.

Where do I sign up?

[esasjl]

More load on the lithium mines!

[rareposter]

Bit puzzled by the supposition that the front changer is remotely complicated.It,s so basic,especially with a friction shifter like what I,ve retro fitted on my nice carbon flat bar conversion

A front mech in and of itself is not that complicated, the problem is that using one massively restricts frame design, especially on full suspension MTBs (where pivot point placement, leverage ratios etc are affected) and on gravel bikes which have tended to wider tyres, more clearance etc.

And on top level road bikes, where everything else has been aero-optimised to the limit, losing a front mech and double chainset is an obvious place to get some decent aero gains. I get that for the vast vast majority of people pottering around the lanes, touring or whatever that isn't a consideration but at World Tour level, it absolutely is.

So it weighs more, costs much more, needs charging and nicely replicates what I already have whilst centralising more weight round the rear axle which is one of the major downsides of current IHG's.

No it doesn't (it's about the same, maybe fractionally less than a Di2 double set-up), Does it need charging? Can't see anything about that, only that there's a wireless shifter button so presumably a tiny coin cell battery somewhere. Either way, irrelevant - you already charge the Di2, you charge your phone, laptop, lights, Garmin (other brands are available...)....

The bicycle is a low tech machine and a simple way of getting about. When I raced (at the lowest level) I do not remember being hobbled by down tube friction shifters, possibly because I could not afford anything else back then, and I use STI and Ergopower now. indexed shifting and clipless (weird nomenclature) pedals were worth it; everything else is an attempt to extract money from gullible cyclists.

You could argue the same about pretty much anything.
You can buy a basic car for a few hundred pounds secondhand. But a F1 car is something else entirely.
You can buy a basic bike for a few hundred pounds brand new. But a World Tour racing bike is something else entirely.

I very much remember the early days of STI and racing tight hilly crit circuits (the old Eastway, Crystal Palace etc) - the difference was night and day very quickly and all the sneering old guard ("ooh, it's too heavy, it'll break, it's too complicated, what do you need all that rubbish for...") were very quickly out the back as they fumbled around for gear changes. STI was a radical change, being able to shift under load, seated or standing, precision gear changing...

I get that for most people, it's not going to be a remotely necessary innovation. But that's not a reason not to do it.

[boblo]

I don't use Di2 and show your workings if you think a 500g hub weighs less than a front der/conventional rear hub mechanical set up. It'll also need some form of power unless they've solved electrical alchemy at the same time...

Just saying it, doesn't make it so...