Classified's Wireless Internally-Geared Hub Increases 1x Drivetrain Range by 45%, Doubles the Number of Gears
With narrow tires, no suspension, and road-inspired geo, gravel bikes aren't the first place we'd look for off-road innovation. That could be changing, though, as Cycling Tips spotted this Classified hub that expands the range of a 1x groupset. Some gravel bikes are now offered with 1x groupsets as it simplifies the frame design and increases tire clearance, but it often comes at the compromise of a smaller overall range.
This Classified hub hopes to remedy that by giving riders more range with the same cassette, effectively acting like a two-chainring setup but with the same minimalism as a 1x set up. Internally geared hubs are nothing new, of course, but most of them are bulky, heavy and normally work with a single cog on the rear. But the Classified hub is much sleeker, and it works with their own proprietary cassette but doubles the selection using by two internal planetary gears. It's a bit like having a 2x set up, but with the front derailleur and the extra chainring in your hub, not at your bottom bracket.
The flange houses the gears.
Inside, the two planetary gears offer 1:1 and 1:0.7 ratios, giving you a lower (easier) range than what your traditional setup might suggest. For example, if you have an 11-34T cassette on your gravel bike, you would expect to have a 309% gearing range, but the Classified hub will increase this to 451%. The shifting is wirelessly controlled and the hub can apparently get it done in 150 milliseconds. It's also claimed to work under loads of up to 1,000 watts. Hhmm, maybe no big sprints then...
At this point in time, Classified hubs require a proprietary cassette and there are currently four on offer, from 11-27T to 11-34T, which, when combined with the hub, offer 358% to 451% ranges.
At this point in time, Classified hubs require a proprietary cassette and there are currently four on offer, from 11-27T to 11-34T, which, when combined with the hub, offer 358% to 451% ranges.
Classified's chart showing the available gear ranges
The electronics are all housed in the thru-axle, including the removable battery. The system works with induction coils so there are no wires to contend with at the hub, and Classified claims the battery will last 10,000 shifts, or roughly three months of riding, between charges. Weights haven't been published yet but are said to be comparable to a 2x set up; of course, this weight is unsprung being in the wheels and not in the frame where the added 2x gubbins would normally be. We're also always suspicious of drag in any gearbox system, but Classified claim that there's no extra drag in the 1:1 ratio while the 1:0.7 ratio is said to be '99% efficient'.
All the electronics (apart from the shifter) are housed in the 142x12 thru-axle.
If all of this sounds like something that interests you, you'll have to wait a little while yet, unfortunately. The system is currently only offered on the top-spec Ridley Kanzo Fast, with seemingly no aftermarket options available at the moment or coming any time soon.
It also only seems to be compatible with Shimano Di2 road levers at the moment, which won't be much use to mountain bikers unless they're brave enough to try to modify their Di2 off-road shifters.
The system is modular and designed to be transferrable between bikes.
The system uses Classified's own cassettes that are compatible with existing Shimano 11-speed road drivetrains, so there's no chance of upgrading your current set up yet.
That's not to say we can't see it being developed for mountain biking applications in the future, though. The advantages are obvious; instead of increasing range beyond the 520% we already enjoy, we could see this being used to get that same range without dinner plate cogs. Instead of a 50+ rear cog, you could get the same range with a 40T rear cog and have twice as many ratios to choose from as well.
There are, of course, plenty of questions over strength, weight, reliability, efficiency, and cost still remaining but Classified's hub could be a way to get all the range of 2x without sacrificing the benefits of 1x.
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
Or just run our 1X, which really seems quite fine.
That said, every "advance" isn't necessarily a good one, and I'd put this in that category. Plus, there's now way that a planetary hub is 99% efficient, that's more efficient than a roller chain, which is one of the most efficient ways to transfer mechanical force.
Also, when I attack a steep technical climb, I put out more than 1000 Watts. I'd shred that hub.
Like a hammerschmidt ?
the roller chain/cassette/derailleur system is the most efficient way to transfer power on a bike. gearboxes are heavy, mechanically inefficient, can't shift under load and more complicated to maintain. While they are cool in theory, they just don't make sense on bikes now.
We’re really talking about mtb drivetrains here, but this being internet, it’s fun to argue.
That said, do you run a 1x setup? If so, what issues do you have with it that a Bluetooth planetary hub would solve?
learn to read
However, I do attempt to understand them and limit their influence, it is a constant battle. I fall into the collusion trap far more often than I like. But through constant reflection and metacognition I will slowly get better. You can only connect the dots looking backwards.
Actually, Sachs (currently under the SRAM banner) already had a rear hub with a 3sp internal gearing and a HG body for a 9sp cassette (or 12sp NX if you prefer to go bonkers). Must have been twenty years old now, well before Hammerschmidt (yet well after MC Hammer). I recall I already considered that must have been an amazing thing to take out in the dirt though I realize that the typical 3sp internal geared hub isn't quite up to proper mountainbike riding. But obviously that is just a matter of sealing and strength. And the "high end" scene might prefer to see some weight savings too.
Either way, I wouldn't quite call this Classified hub an "innovation". It is more an evolution of what was there already. There was already a 3sp hub with a cassette body. Now they made a 2sp one, probably improved sealing and, as this is for gravel, they may not even have made it stronger.
I do realize there must be someone, somewhere in a shed putting together a bike with an 18sp Pinion gearbox, 3sp crank spider, 14sp Rohloff hub and somehow attach that to a cassette body for a 12sp cassette. Ready for Kamikaze downhill, ready for Kamikaze uphill too.
That said, having FS frames:
Wouldn't it be greater if the system would be placed in the BB?
Better to have more sprung weight, then unsprung weight
Whilst they may be lighter and more efficient (mainly when in optimum chain-line only), they are more exposed to potential damage, sensitive to set-up, require more maintenance and have the majority of the weight in a less suitable place than an internal (non-hub) gearbox.
There are situations where an internal gearbox makes a lot of sense.
(I wish Pinion would move away from the rotary shifter idea tho.)
Then of course you still have drawing tablets without a screen. Wacom may be the most common household name there, but I suppose (deriving from your comparison to phones) that you implied a stand alone device with own computing power, screen etc. Either way, back when I got that Microsoft tablet pc button and dial phones were still common. Not sure if there were already phones with a touch screen available back then.
The other thing is that Hammerschmidt had integrated chain retention and chainring protection. With the advent of narrow-wide chainrings fewer people seem to feel the need for chain retention. And I also notice fewer people tend to even run chainring protection. So with fewer people needing/wanting that, Hammerschmidt lost some of its selling points.
I suppose SRAM probably still holds the patent so if they don't feel the urge to revive it, we won't see it. But I expect it to be dated within five years or so so I wouldn't be surprised if there'd be other companies releasing their own version five years from now.
Only other company you may want to look at is Schlumpf. I know them from their geared Kris Holm unicycle hub (which Kris Holm himself successfully used to race the BCBR) but they also offer models for bicycles. Their unicycle hub isn't cheap though so I guess the same could be said about their other offerings.
Just "googlit"
sachs 3x7 Dual Drive hub
No, the value is what the majority perceive as useful. If the early adopters love it, but no one buys it because the general public thinks it is useless, it’s going to die.
You may be right. But I also think you could be very wrong. It depends on how the concept is presented, and whether the companies developing it market with emotion instead of benefits. If you can influence the public to act on a gut feeling - ie our most primitive and powerful thinking, you will bypass the negative and pragmatic side which actually has less effect on actions we choose to make.
But all major frame manufacturers design their antisquat and chaingrowth around 30-32t chainrings and 50t cassettes.
"
11-speed? In an unexpected turn of events, Shimano developed an 11-speed cassette that shares the same gearing as its 10 by 51, but with the 51 removed. The reasoning was that, when asked, Shimano's sponsored racers (both from enduro and cross country), maintained that they didn't need the 51, and were unwilling to carry the burden of the extra cog. Riders who commit to XTR 11-speed can choose a special hub that spaces
the hub flange 4.7 millimeters to the right to help even out the spoke tension, but there's no going back to 12 speed, because the 12th cog will touch the spokes. 11-speed cassettes are backward compatible with 12-speed hubs. Adding up the weight benefits of one less aluminum cog, a couple of missing chain links, and by taking advantage of XTR's mid-length rear derailleur cage option, finicky pros can save 80 grams.
"
www.pinkbike.com/news/first-look-shimanos-new-xtr-m9100-is-more-than-just-12-speed.html
So the 11sp hub would have had the right flange moved 4.7mm to the right. As I mentioned earlier, they eventually scrapped this option because there were production issues. But it would be cool if they'd release it at some point.
Dunno about you guys, but personally I haven't had issues with wheels in a long while that was related to stuff like flange spacing.
Gears. Lots of gears.
396 to be precise.
Pinion, 12speed cassette, 3 speed hub
648 gears enough?
Grabs abicus
1x12 is already at SX and Deore level in the straight bar world, I don't understand why drop bars are stuck on 1x11 and not that wide range 2x11s, when these kind of bikes would really benefit from the extra range. It makes no sense that downhill focused off road bikes have more range than bikes that you're meant to use on all kinds of different terrain both loaded and unloaded.
As far as it not making sense that DH focused MTBs have more range than gravel bikes that are "meant to" be used on all terrain loaded and unloaded, when I look at the design of most gravel bikes it seems obvious that they aren't really "meant to" be used for any real loaded touring other than in the purchaser's imagination. Almost all mountain bikers will regularly encounter hills steep enough they need their 50t bailout gear, and downhill straights where they can use their 10t, but how many fancy carbon gravel bikes are ever going to be loaded up for a week-long adventure?
I live in an area with over 1200m of vertical right on my doorstep and value having close ratios as well as decent range, and run 2x groupsets on all my bikes as a matter of choice (yes, I've used XO 1x12 on a 2020 Spesh Enduro for a few days). I could well be climbing solidly for an hour so I don't have a problem with shifting the front and back at the same time to get the ratio I'm looking for. For my next MTB I'll grudgingly accept the move to 1x12, but there's no way I'm moving to a 1x groupset on my road or commuting/touring bikes.
Sure, you can push derailleurs outside of the manufacturer specs. I'm well aware of that. But I want bikes with more range out of the box so people don't have to do that. I see "how to get lower gearing on my gravel bike" posts all the time.
BTW nowadays you can't even get a brifter for a triple above Tiagra level, and I don't think you can get a brifter for a triple and hydro brakes at all.
There are plenty of people that use their fancy, or basic gravel bikes for bikepacking and/or touring. We are seeing bikes with mounts all over more than ever before. But you don't even need to load up the bike or go for a week long adventure to find the limit of a lot of factory drivetrain setups. I see drop bar bikes with 2.0-2.1 tyres, sometimes even front suspension, and most of the time they come with a 1:1 or just below 1:1 low gear. That's not right IMO.
Sure, people on MTBs use their 50T bailout gear, and the 10T on downhills. Plenty of people climb the same stuff on gravel bikes as some people do on XC bikes, but then also use the bike for longer pavement sections, where they will easily spin out something like 32-10. I'm not a strong rider and/or pretend racer by any means, but with knobby 43mm tyres and a 38T chainring I use the 12T and 10T regularly on paved sections on my gravel bike.
Gravel bikes are great all around, do everything bikes IMO. The gear range should reflect that. That's all I was trying to say, and I wasn't trying to start an argument, even though it seems like that's mandatory here.
Shimano dropped the ball with their GRX drivetrains. Many professional reviews criticize GRX for having too little range. It is truly baffling why they designed GRX that way. Or perhaps they plan on selling us this version so that they can increase the range in two years and sell us the version we wanted in the first place.
And I agree that plenty of people use gravel bikes for bikepacking or touring. I did a tour earlier this year on forest roads. I had to push my loaded bike up grades higher than 12% because GRX doesn't have a big enough gear range.
2) puts on dropper post lever instead so we still feel normal
3) slap that b**** back on
4) not sure what to do with dropper lever now...
Not really relevant questions as they are not built for off road use, once off road specific options are available than they would be more relevant.
Regular 1x12 Shimano XT is simple, servicable, pretty cheap, minimum friction and has a huge range.
I imagine how much more headache you will have to serivce basically two(!) drivetrains, recharging that wireless thingy, grease, oil etc etc. Also lots and lots of people are using gravels for bikepacking, an on the road you would like simplicity, and super aesy service which you can do with the tools you have.
Enter Dangerholm...
I mean the size of the cogs itself is not an issue really. If one would argue you get a more reliable shifting performance as tolerances are not as tight on a 2x10 as on a 1x12 that might be a benefit. But only if shifting performance and reliability on 1x12 is really an issue.
The company claims that the efficiency overall is higher that with 1x12 as you have to use the derailleur less frequently and you have a straigter chainline.
Still I'm a bit septic if the benefits really offset the drawbacks of an internal hub combined with the drawbacks of rear derailleurs. There might be some applications where its worth it and I guess gravel is not a bad choice for that.
The 2spd automatic was out in the 60s. Sachs Sram did this, f*ck shimano does DI2 Alfine in 8 and 11 speed. This shit is nothing useful or new.
I think we don't need more range and the big cassettes, altough heavy, work very well. Maybe a front chainring on a sort of angular bearing that adjusts itself in an straight line with the chain; giving a much better chainline and thus decreased wear and more efficiency.
archive.is/UnUH5
what is this a hub gearbox for ants?
You must not have mountains in your area.
Deraillers are amazingly cheap, leight-weight, robust, reilable and simply servicable.
I like theoerall idea of gearboxes, but they: cost a fortune, weight a lot, and create huge additional friction that derailleurs don't have. Plus we don't know how long they would really last. As though single derailleur can run for thousands and thousands of kms.
So the deraillers are here to stay.