Benefit Of A Front Freewheel?

[Oli P]

right......i'm confused as F*ck now

Think i better stick it on the crank so i can see how it feels as only ever ridden with rear freewheel mechanism!

hang on, i get it..............apologies, if you stick itn the crank you would need a freewheel multiplied by the ratio as the wheel would rotate the freewheel 1.2 or however many times, yeah, i guess it would mean that to get the same feel at the pedals you need a hub with the freewheel x ratio to get the same feel! The speed of engagement wouldn't change though would it? ie no of degrees in rotation before it picks up????? defo on the front it is then?

The degrees of rotaion will change as Mark said, if you put a 108 freewheel on the front you get 3.333333 degrees of rotation per engagment (360/108=3.333333) but if you put it on the back you get 132 clicks per 360 degrees the cranks move as Mark explained so you get 2.727272 degrees of rotaion per engagment (360/132) due to the ratio of the gears.

Edit: Mark beat me to it

Edited September 21, 2010 by Oli P

[Matt Burrows]

You're obviously having a bit of trouble understanding it (probably not helped by some incorrect posts from others who also don't understand, and mod riders making points that don't really apply to stock), but its a completely irrelevant point anyway! Modern freewheels have so many engagements that it doesn't matter where you fit them, it will be better than an ACS anyway. 50-60 engagements is more than enough, the main issue is strength and thankfully some freewheels are very strong these days (look at the Echo TR or SL)

The reason why they are so common is they do have advantages for top level competition riders. For stock riders, the main ones are having better clearance and lower weight. Both of these points aren't going to have a big effect the ability of 90% of the worlds riders! But like most sports the market is led by the demands of competition, whether it makes much difference to the average user or not. Having said that, its not like there are many disadvantages to FFW.

The biggest issue is getting your trousers caught in them. This may sound silly but if it happens at high speed you will be in trouble, it could even break your ankle. I've got mine caught twice, both at very slow speed. It was still a nightmare though, it took me 10 minutes to break free the second time and I thought i was going to have to cut my trousers out. If i'm wearing trousers now I have to tuck them into my socks

Also FFW will work out cheaper, you have very few options for front cogs if you decide to put the freewheel on the back. You would need a 21 or 22 tooth cog and an Inspired bash which would cost over £50. Whereas a 15 tooth rear cog and an 18tooth front bashring can be had for £25

[murph82]

Hmmmm,double the price or a broken ankle...........or shorts all the time.........

Sorry if i'm being thick but surely the deg of rotation between engagement is the same regardless of position?

Puting on the cranks does seem the best idea for cost effectiveness as you say plus easier to get off cranks as you'll have something to hit......in a controlled way of course.

anyway, 60 clicks is more than enough for a reasonably priced bit of kit,still reassuringly large pawls and teeth to engage. when i started getting back into this the tryall 108 wasjust released and that seemed outrageous something so small could have so much engagement but still hold and be durable, CK 72's were THE hubs 8 years ago and they were pushing it in some people eyes, it seemed that the 36 in hopes were the schiz, all the english pro's used them........how things progress! bikes are radically different now!

Never thought i'd provoke such discussion with a little q like that........vote people!

Edited September 21, 2010 by murph82

[Franksx2005]

I'll try and simplify it...

Freewheel (18t, 108 click) on the rear, fixed sprocket (22t) on the front. Gear ratio = 1.2222. 1.2222 x 108 = 132~. 360° of crank rotation divided by 132 = 2.7° of crank movement between each click.

Fixed sprocket (__t) on the rear, freewheel on the front (18t, 108 click). Gear ratio = doesn't matter as your freewheel's on the front. 360° of crank rotation divided by 108 = 3.3° of crank movement between each click.

Because of that, it feels like you have more clicks if you run your freewheel on the rear with a fixed sprocket (of greater size than the freewheel) up front.

Thats what i was trying to explain.

[Mark W]

Sorry if i'm being thick but surely the deg of rotation between engagement is the same regardless of position?

No (Bear in mind the degrees of rotation I was talking about, as I said, was strictly based around your cranks, not the freewheel). I genuinely can't explain it any more simply than that. All the maths/physics/everything was in that last post, it literally cannot be simplified any more - just read through it and you'll get it.

[trialsmax04]

right, a rear free hub with a 10t sprocket and a 50t sprocket on the cranks would give a ratio of 10:50. Simplified this would give a 1:5 ratio. So for every 1 turn of the cranks the rear hub would turn 5 times. So lets say we had a 50 engagement hub. This would mean for every time you rotated the cranks once, you would get 250 engagement points (bit extream!). The 250 divided by 360 (one crank rotation) would give you the engagement points per degree. In front free wheel terms the engagements never change, nor do the engagements per degree because you are turning the freewheel directly.

[Matt Burrows]

anyway, 60 clicks is more than enough for a reasonably priced bit of kit,still reassuringly large pawls and teeth to engage. when i started getting back into this the tryall 108 wasjust released and that seemed outrageous something so small could have so much engagement but still hold and be durable, CK 72's were THE hubs 8 years ago and they were pushing it in some people eyes, it seemed that the 36 in hopes were the schiz, all the english pro's used them........how things progress! bikes are radically different now!

Things have moved on quite a bit even in the last 2 years. Tensiles are good freewheels, certainly stronger than old Hope hubs to give you an idea. But they can break, and the Echo freewheels with 72 or 108 engagements are actually a lot stronger. I would definitely choose an Echo TR freewheel over the Tensile, especially considering they cost the same.

[Mark W]

Matt meant freewheel then, btw. What he was saying's right though - if it doesn't say 'Echo' on it, you're doing it wrong The TR and SLs are the best out there at the moment. Trialtech 108s are close behind, then everything else. TRs are amazingly good value for money.

[Matt Burrows]

Yes I did, thanks Mark

[murph82]

right, a rear free hub with a 10t sprocket and a 50t sprocket on the cranks would give a ratio of 10:50. Simplified this would give a 1:5 ratio. So for every 1 turn of the cranks the rear hub would turn 5 times. So lets say we had a 50 engagement hub. This would mean for every time you rotated the cranks once, you would get 250 engagement points (bit extream!). The 250 divided by 360 (one crank rotation) would give you the engagement points per degree. In front free wheel terms the engagements never change, nor do the engagements per degree because you are turning the freewheel directly.

Yeah, i get it mate, just couldn't see it would change the pick up but got it now.

cheers

[Krisboats]

Well i did say i only skim-read the topic. I knew it was one of the two setups gave more 'effective' engagements.

[Matt Vandart]

All that shiz ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ only really applies when u are rolling though doesn't it?

Does anyone do rolling anymore, I thought TGS was all anyone does

I'm at a loss to understand WTF this is all about and tend to think its what ur used to.

Been thinking of going back to freehub for all the opposite reasons to those stated above which may or may not have made any sense at all.

In what situations does having the weight centered help?

Someone please explain this to me, the only thing I can think of is punching forwards on two wheels and I'm not convinced of that either.

Funny thing is with engagements is that when many engagement freewheels started arriving I went through them all 60/72/108 and to be honest the only reason I use a Echo SL is because they are pretty much bomb proof.

I found 72 teeth better because you didn't 'wind your cranks up' so much when correction hopping, but it might just be because I suck ass.

Chris King hubs have 72 engagements but work differently dont they, so there is no 'pedal lag' as such.

Am I talking Guff?

If you get a bashring, you'd have to be Rusevelt to hit your freewheel hard enough to damage it, so it's not really much of an issue in that sense, and certainly not a reason to not run FFW compared to the advantages of it.

[Oli P]

The talk of the amount the cranks move by having it on the back than the front with the same ratio is consistant to if your rolling or if you are starting from stationary.

Also the way that Chris kings work is different to 'normal' but it does still have engament points so it will feel extremely similar to a normal rear free hub but obviously with more engagments well thats how I have found trying one compared to my Hope.

[Matt Vandart]

How does engagements come into it if you are static eg. side hop?

[Ali C]

you serious? I don't know about you but when I sidehop I don't just boon up.

[Oli P]

Yer with side hops and gaps if you keep the cranks from moving back and the freewheel or hub engaged then it will not affect it a large amount. But if you do move them back with more engagment you will get better pick than if you have a freewheel/hub with less egagment that often put people off and why they go for more engagments.

Edited September 22, 2010 by Oli P

[Matt Vandart]

lol, ur a bit better than me dude.

I'm serious though, how much difference does it make? (not being sarky)

[Odd Socks]

Hi

My concern with the ffw is the trend to go for smaller cogs as this will place more tension on the chain, leading to more stretch and failure.

As a side note, if I remember correctly, at one point in the distant past someone came out with a free wheel that used rollers, not ratchets. This meant that there were no clicks and instant engagement. I think I remember one of the Martins testing them for MBUK and stating that it was quite weird having an instant drive. Are these still made by anyone.

Tim

[Matt Vandart]

you serious? I don't know about you but when I sidehop I don't just boon up.

Thats my usual plan.............

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^That was a reply to that^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Edited September 23, 2010 by Matt Vandart

[Oli P]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^That was a reply to that^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Lol, yer obviously it will make a small difference as when I preload I move my cranks back a small amount but the differnce my Hope Pro 2 trials and a Echo SL freewhel is minimal from what I have found.

If you are thinking of getting a rear hub over a freewheel then the reason I went for a rear hub is how easy it is to take it apart and service it and also the reliability of the hub but obviously some of the freewheels out are becoming extremely reliable.

Edit: If you do get a hub with less engagments you will soon get use to it and after a while you will not notice the difference.

Edited September 22, 2010 by Oli P

[murph82]

All that shiz ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ only really applies when u are rolling though doesn't it?

Does anyone do rolling anymore, I thought TGS was all anyone does

I'm at a loss to understand WTF this is all about and tend to think its what ur used to.

Been thinking of going back to freehub for all the opposite reasons to those stated above which may or may not have made any sense at all.

In what situations does having the weight centered help?

Someone please explain this to me, the only thing I can think of is punching forwards on two wheels and I'm not convinced of that either.

Funny thing is with engagements is that when many engagement freewheels started arriving I went through them all 60/72/108 and to be honest the only reason I use a Echo SL is because they are pretty much bomb proof.

I found 72 teeth better because you didn't 'wind your cranks up' so much when correction hopping, but it might just be because I suck ass.

Chris King hubs have 72 engagements but work differently dont they, so there is no 'pedal lag' as such.

Am I talking Guff?

I used to ride a pashley so roll a bit, but my point was more regarding from standstill, losing drive, taking up slack before it engages. Is there no benefit to having weight at the rear? lowest point possible meaning lower centre of gravity??

BTW, what does TGS stand for?

As i understood it, CK's when i use to ride worked on pressure, the more pressure the harder it engaged, I think it was a similar principle to a clutch, a spring held the drive plates apart, pressure on the drive pushed them together engaging the freewheel, wasn't impossible for grit to get in either so they, for all the cost ,£300 + then,weren't infallable, just great when they did!.

[Oli P]

I used to ride a pashley so roll a bit, but my point was more regarding from standstill, losing drive, taking up slack before it engages. Is there no benefit to having weight at the rear? lowest point possible meaning lower centre of gravity??

BTW, what does TGS stand for?

As i understood it, CK's when i use to ride worked on pressure, the more pressure the harder it engaged, I think it was a similar principle to a clutch, a spring held the drive plates apart, pressure on the drive pushed them together engaging the freewheel, wasn't impossible for grit to get in either so they, for all the cost ,£300 + then,weren't infallable, just great when they did!.

Over all if think the best bet is to put it at the front due to if you put it at the back then you will have to run a larger front cog and bashring which will add more weight, also puting it on the back will give less slack between engagments but the difference between it being on the back than the front will be almost unnoticeable.

Having the weight in the middle will help espesialy when doing sidehops.

If you have a threaded hub and cranks then the best option is to put it on the cranks.

TGS stands for Taps Gaps and Sidehops.

[murph82]

Over all if think the best bet is to put it at the front due to if you put it at the back then you will have to run a larger front cog and bashring which will add more weight, also puting it on the back will give less slack between engagments but the difference between it being on the back than the front will be almost unnoticeable.

Having the weight in the middle will help espesialy when doing sidehops.

If you have a threaded hub and cranks then the best option is to put it on the cranks.

TGS stands for Taps Gaps and Sidehops.

i see, thanks for opinion, front is def winning on the vote!

[Matt Vandart]

Over all if think the best bet is to put it at the front due to if you put it at the back then you will have to run a larger front cog and bashring which will add more weight, also puting it on the back will give less slack between engagments but the difference between it being on the back than the front will be almost unnoticeable.

Having the weight in the middle will help espesialy when doing sidehops.

If you have a threaded hub and cranks then the best option is to put it on the cranks.

TGS stands for Taps Gaps and Sidehops.

Could you elaborate please?

[forteh]

Could you elaborate please?

Its less weight to move over a fixed difference, its easier to pick up a heavy weight from waist to shoulder height than ankle to shoulder height