Digging through patent documents can sometimes offer hints at what we might be riding in a few years' time. Often the wacky designs don't see the light of day, but even then, it's interesting to see what ideas the bike industry's brains are working on. Here are a few that we've spotted lately.
Shimano's three jockey wheel derailleurWe first spotted this one on
Cycling News. It's a patent from Shimano for a derailleur with three jockey wheels, apparently designed to offer more ground clearance with a wide-range cassette. There is an upper jockey wheel in about the normal place that guides the chain onto the cassette, but instead of one lower wheel to tension the chain, it has two. These wheels are positioned horizontally in front of the first one, keeping them higher off the ground. The chain wraps around the two tensioning wheels, which are mounted on opposite ends of a spring-loaded arm that pivots between the two. When the chain shifts into a larger sprocket, the arm rotates such that there's a shorter path for the chain to go from the chain ring to the upper jockey wheel.
The front two jockey wheels are mounted on an arm that pivots to provide chain tension in all gears.
The key advantage is that it stays higher above the ground than a conventional derailleur cage. The patent also states that it can be used with a cassette with a wide gear range. Perhaps that means a wider range than Shimano's current 10-51 tooth cassettes is on the cards.
SRAM's three-piston floating brakeA patent from SRAM shows a single-sided, three-piston disc brake. While most mountain bike brakes use an opposed-piston design, with either two or four positions arranged in pairs, sIngle-sided brake calipers are typically only seen on budget bikes. Usually, they have a single piston that pushes a moveable brake pad against the rotor, which bends it towards a fixed brake pad on the other side.
In this patent, the rotor is separated into two parts - the carrier and the brake track. The carrier is thick and is fixed to the hub; the brake track (the part which the brake pads rub against) is connected to the track in such a way that it can slide, or float, axially (side-to-side) on the carrier. The patent depicts many ways in which this could be achieved.
The drawings show a caliper with three pistons on the inboard side, pushing a moveable brake pad towards a fixed outboard brake pad. When the brake is applied, the brake track will slide toward the fixed pad.
The caliper mounts to the bike in a different way from the post-mount standard we've been using for years. The caliper connects to the frame with a loop that's concentric to the axle, and there's a lateral stub on the frame with a bolt fixing the caliper body to the frame or fork. Although a drawing shows it being connected to a post-mount fork, it looks like this design would require a new frame mounting standard.
What's the advantage? The patent mentions that conventional brake calipers require careful alignment to avoid brake rub and poor braking performance. Plus, as the pads wear and the pistons advance to compensate, they rarely advance evenly, leading to uneven pad wear, brake rub and poor brake performance. The patent claims that the "self-centering or floating rotors address at least the drawbacks noted above."
Shimano electronic shifter?Finally, Shimano has a patent for an electronic controller that's shown connecting to a brake lever. The patent doesn't say what it's for (patents are always as open-ended as possible) but its position under the right-hand brake lever in the main image and the fact it has two buttons make it a pretty good guess that it could be used as a shifter. Having said that, one advantage of electronic components is that they can be configured to do multiple jobs, so perhaps the same device (or a left-hand version) could be used to control an e-bike motor, dropper post, suspension settings, or more.
The patent says that it could include a "wireless communicator." This would be a new direction from Shimano as their Di2 electronic shifting has always communicated with wires. Will we see a wireless electronic derailleur from Shimano? I wouldn't hold my breath, but a wireless controller/shifter with a derailleur powered by a battery in the frame could be a good compromise, especially for e-bikes.
The big downsides to a gearbox bike is upfront cost and difficulty to shift under load, but the riders I’ve talked to that have gearbox bikes really like them. I’d be really keen to try / buy one
Fixed it
2nd article. OMG, I want gear boxes (that will 100% not work on my current bike) in everything.
That said, I'm still waiting to see if Shimano's chain-driven gear box patent ever surfaces as a viable product. Having a chain-driven enclosed drivetrain, rather than a planetary gearbox, would address every issue other than weight and cost. Not holding my breath, but still keeping fingers crossed.
Broken belts, broken housings, broken tensioners, and shifter failures are pretty consistent. Pretty rare to tear a mech off. Pretty common to drag your chainring/BB over a rock/root. Double shift cables that still stretch and need pretty precise fine tuning. Less than when I setup a derailleur. Un breakable gates belts, break. First day into their Whistler riding trip.
They’ve all gone back to derailleur bikes with a mixture of Sram and Shimano and after 18 months have changed a chain, a chainring and some shift cable/housing because I’m picky. Haven’t seen a new Zerode in absolute ages, Taniwha nor Katipo.
The shift quality is an issue that maybe the big boys could crack. But just have yet to see a proper example of it being superior.
Gearboxes have to have thousands of dollars worth of surface treatment to the interfacing gears to come even remotely close to the efficiency of a chain/cassette.
If you are able to use the internet and still find yourself annoyed by the fact that gearboxes aren't mainstream in the bicycle world today, then you honestly deserve all of the frustration life can throw at you.
Considering that both examples ceased to be relevant during the Bush administration, one has to wonder if if the juice just isn't worth the squeeze.
I had high hopes for the Effigear- a single stage (as opposed to Pinon's triple stage) gearbox seems to be much simpler and easier to execute. But Paul Aston had so many problems with his that he couldn't ride the Starling his came on.
Imagine a bearing set with a circumference that can enclose an Eagle cassette
Yes, a 4-5 speed Hammy would be amazing on a DH bike.
Pretty sure some developing from Sram/Shimano would end up with a product that's also very good for mtb
Want a functioning gearbox? Speak to G Cross Honda, those quarter mil each prototype bikes supposedly had dream suspension and shifting... also a team of engineers that aren't funded by solely bicycles (or China, not getting political although the source/availability/expected costs all flow into tech and engineering). Usually the best tech is DHS/DOD or nonprofit funded, a quick online search of 2A parts from cheap vs DOD contracted companies shows similar differences in costs/reliability/tech.
If you have basically buckets of 100 dollar bills you can make a pretty friggin gangster gearbox bike. But there is simply no reason to.
It would be pretty cool to get a DoD contract to develop an efficient gearbox and then sell them in a QA process that requires to reject the majority of what you produce. As long as you could charge accordingly.
I had a Nicolai Argon Pinion and had no issues, I'm now riding a Zerode Taniwha Trail and again no issues.
Pinion drives are such a good platform that I'm thinking about rebuilding the Taniwha into my enduro sled; it's currently set up in a 140 mm trail mode, then building a shorter travel 29er (maybe a Katipo or Saturn 14).
What gets me is how well the gearbox shifts once you learn how to use it, easily it shifts better than a derailleur, shifts are quicker and cleaner, not affected by conditions, and you can dump gears faster than anything else.
Current setups only work optimally in 1 or 2 gears.
They are inherently draggy, inefficient, heavy, and complex, and even with the advent of additive manufacturing], are a huge pain in the ass.
The chain, cassette, and derailleur are none of those things, and, incredibly reliable in recent years.
I ride more than ever before, on rocky, janky, tech terrain, and haven’t needed to replace a derailleur in years. I run GX stuff mostly, some XT, and it stays shifting great, and working near flawlessly. 20 years ago, sure, a gearbox would have been great, I think I was futzing with a Rohloff hub, and it was more of a pain in the ass than the shitty derailleurs of the time.
They ones bought are still around and popular in the used market. But they haven’t been this silver bullet in the maintenance train for most, and they be heavy. Which if it matters or not, who knows.
I want it to work, like new shit. But Williams Racing Products seems to be on the trail with a derailleur in a can system.
I’m running XTR on a GX eagle cassette and I check the hanger like once a year usually when I strip down and do frame bearings. Lube the chain when it squeaks. Rarely change my cable/housing. I’ve never had a problem with a derailleur on a personal
Bike, ever. But obviously being in a shop, I fix lots of them. So my anecdote about derailleurs is equal to your anecdote about your gearbox. Been great for us.
Companies were making lots of commuter frames to accept a belt. Everyone loved them until Canadian winter came. Especially cycle couriers, they had a hell of a time with the belts, in winter, putting actual miles on them. I still think they’re the dream, especially in commuter world. Just have flaws that should be talked about.
My $550 Globe Daily 1, singlespeed did 6 years of daily commuting year round in Canada and other than tires and brake pads I never changed a thing in that singlespeed chain drivetrain. Until I cracked the frame. Just a singular anecdote, to go along with yours.
Again, like I keep saying. Not against the belt or the gearbox. Just that I actually work on a lot of bikes in these two markets and this is what I’ve learned. They’re real cool to tell your mates about until they aren’t. Can always find a chain and a derailleur, best of luck trying to find a shift joint for a pinion or a belt in a stock. Or you punch a hole in the case on an awkward rock.
I’m not entirely sure what you’re using, or how many miles you’re putting on, but compared to drivetrains of even 10years ago, they are great.
I ride a tonne, and regularly maintain 3 bikes, that get ridden daily. I haven’t replaced a derailleur that wasn’t damaged by my own stupidity, in years.
The one that I did replace, would have destroyed any tension device used on a gearbox anyway, and did destroy my wheel so my day was done anyhow.
They simply work well, are easy to maintain, and if you can’t be bothered to do some quick maintenance on cables and tension, then the rest of your bike is going to let you down as well
I will say,that man do I go through alu wheels, 3 rear wheels this season, until I sucked it up and bought some WAO carbon hoops.
I’m hard on parts, not for lack of skill, but a complete lack of mechanical sympathy. I tend to ride my bike like it owes me money, cause that’s how I enjoy it. Usually a wheel set, and a set of pedals annually, along with all the regular maintenance, and suspension service. But derailleurs and cranks, hardly ever nowadays, and I’m only riding jankier stuff, at higher speeds.
I get that others are harder, and easier on stuff, but I’m just not seeing damaged derailleurs, and janky shifting like I used to.
I do understand your sentiment
Even a heavy - hard riding individual shouldn't be obliterating stuff that much.
Again, no mechanical sympathy at all.
DTSwiss Ex 471’s I could get a season out of, but we’re always more difficult to find.
This season was a
Mercury rear rim, and freehub (this was a hold over from the previous season, and lasted for a full season, hand built).
Stan’s rear hubx2 (free hub, and somehow cracked the body and bearings)
Stan’s Flow EX rear rim (hand built)
Stan’s Arch front rim (presumably machine built)
I had enough, now the big bike has Unions, and the little bike will prolly get Factions
I’m stout, and live in a very rocky area, and seek out janky riding. In all that time, no derailleurs….
When I rode Rhyno lites, I was out East, they didn’t last long, but I was lighter, and maybe more skilled?
But D321’s 36 hole, hand built, were my go-to
bikerumor.com/kickstarter-nuseti-inner-drive-mountain-bike-from-national-champ-downhiller
Their claims of 23lbs are pretty dubious, when a current Scott Scale is 20lbs.
They’re not the answer,
The Williams idea looks great, and prolly the best possible solution.
Here ya go, derailleur in a can, prolly real similar to what Honda did in WC DH racing
www.instagram.com/reel/CkrhSeSBSm0/?igshid=MDJmNzVkMjY
Also before I asked for your help, I searched the Williams website. So far as I can tell, it does not even mention that device.
Our world is one in which ill-mannered people can immediately express their irrational contempt for another to most of the population of the planet with a few keystrokes.
I don’t think there’s anything irrational about my contempt.
Mostly just a little sarcasm, but I understand i can sometimes come off as a little aggressive.
For that, I do apologize, and that’s not meant to be sarcasm either.
The der in a can looks great though doesn’t it, and way better than any current draggy, heavy gearbox
It is possible to get gear action with a standard bike cogwheel, or sprocket. Drive it with a reverse sprocket. That is, a wheel that uses the pins and rollers of a roller chain in place of gear teeth. If this is not clear, I can look up a patent that shows it.
This design avoids the problems with gears. The wheels don't cost as much. They are lighter. They don't require lubrication or precise mounting and alignment. And I suppose they would run as efficiently as a chain-driven sprocket, better than a pair of gears would. Especially since they would always be in the best alignment, no cross-chaining there.
You angling for an invite?
That’s a solid idea.
I’m all for this though
bikerumor.com/next-gen-sram-eagle-direct-mount-derailleur-is-modular-to-save-the-planet-your-wallet
www.disraeligears.co.uk/site/suntour_xc_derailleur_3_pulley_system.html
I wrenched all of the 90s and only ever saw one of them.
bikepacking.com/news/rene-herse-nivex-derailleur
"So what in heaven’s name is this? SunTour were wrestling with the demands of the new mountain bikes, with their triple chainsets and huge gear capacities. They hated the very long pulley cages, which had limited ground clearance and irritating chain slap - so they invented the ‘3 Pulley System’. With one brilliant stroke it gave huge capacity with a relatively short cage. Ground clearance was restored, chain slap minimised."
www.disraeligears.co.uk/site/egs_up_cage_derailleur.html
Shimano bought the intellectual property from EGS's creator
www.disraeligears.co.uk/site/us_patent_6793598_-_shimano.html
Edit: More chainslap potentially. Chain will be closer to the stay on the underside. Not a big deal, rubber will fix that.
Shimano acquired small French company EGS along with all of their patents, one of them was this design of a derailleur.
The truth is out there!
26", sure.
Maybe the "lower" gear is direct drive so no loss in efficiency for climbing, then "overdrive" high gear might be a slight loss (not a gearbox expert so I don't know how that actually works).
Or shit...put it in the rear hub. Seems like we're just over-complicating with these massive cassettes and huge derailleurs, right?
3 speed internal rear hub with a cassette freehub? That was a Sachs (later SRAM) DualDrive.
Yet the same company has been praising their poorly performing brakes for the past 25 years.
Why not? What's the deal with Shimano not moving towards wireless? I was looking forward to their take on it and am obviously out of the loop.
Wireless shifting is just generic use of an already existing technology.
Things like that should not be allowed to get patented imo.
In fact, I have to wonder of the mid-cage is actually fixed position. That certainly would remove a ton of complexity that would come from having 2 independent cages sharing the P-knuckle (PA1). And the "cable or wire-based system that would create a cam system to pull the second cage into position", that Cycling News noted, is more likely to connect the second cage to the clutch, which seems to remain at the P-knuckle (PA1).
Anyway, there was a time when Gustavs came with the same lever as the Louise. The combo was that bad that Magura would change it for you for the lever lever (the black one) free of charge. So... what are we talking about?
What I was talking about is that she was successfully running a floating caliper in WC DH racing.
You could progress and progress the bike forever until it isnt a bike anymore... but we already have those options.
SunTour’s got ya beat with the XC that was offered in the 3 pulley configuration back in the days of yore…
Gearing is very personal so I expect someone in the himalayas to need a 100T. I'm just saying I really think we are on the edge of usable range for most people with 50T
We don't ride in the same places.
www.gear-calculator.com/?GR=DERS&KB=32&RZ=10,12,14,16,18,21,24,28,32,36,42,50&UF=2309&TF=90&SL=2.6&UN=KMH&DV=gearInches&GR2=DERS&KB2=30,43&RZ2=10,11,13,15,17,19,21,24,28,32,38,44&UF2=2100
www.disraeligears.co.uk/site/us_patent_6793598_-_shimano.html
#there'sareasonIstillhaveatriple.
@islandtrader:
That's the start.
You'll be in for 50 miles and 8000' by the time you are done. I do that on a 35 pound E29. You might appreciate that gearing out here.