Re: [CR] Why I don't like Regina Freewheels.

(Example: Framebuilders:Chris Pauley)

From: "paccoastcycles" <paccoastcycles@sbcglobal.net>
To: "M-gineering" <info@m-gineering.nl>
References: <4C13F6E7.6030700@verizon.net> <4C13FA50.3040309@m-gineering.nl>
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 22:56:08 -0700
Cc: Classic Rendezvous <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
Subject: Re: [CR] Why I don't like Regina Freewheels.


Here is one more reason I don't like Regina freewheels: The innermost cog always, that is always, cups inward and that creates a larger gap for the chain to span. Yes, even the 17 tooth inside cog cups. Check any one of them that has been ridden and you will see.

However, I found the cogs to be a workable system for building custom ratios. I had the big box of cogs with diagrams, special tools, big vise, a few Italian swear words and plenty bandaids. All that is forgotten now.

Chuck Hoefer
Pacific Coast Cycles
Oceanside, Calif.


----- Original Message -----
From: M-gineering
Cc: Classic Rendezvous
Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 2:21 PM
Subject: Re: [CR] Why I don't like Regina Freewheels.



> Harvey Sachs wrote:
>>..a recent post reminded me
>> of all the reasons I don't like Regina (and Atom) freewheels.
>>
>> 1) Threaded cogs for all positions, instead of splined for most or all.
>> Designed to never be changed, and a more expensive production process.
>> Early feedback from my earlier post today on a related topic shows I'm
>> not the only one who has found the FW cogs to be less interchangeable
>> than theory suggests.
>>
>> 2) An almost infinite set of different thread diameters for different
>> positions, depending on how many speeds and the phase of the moon. And
>> cog thickness matters. A stockists nightmare.
>>
>> 3) That wonderful slot in the top of each tooth, designed to elegantly
>> cradle the side plates of the chain, so mis-shifting can give you a
>> wonderful freewheeling effect. I haven't seen anything quite so perverse
>> since the big gap between 2 and 3 on the Sturmey-Archer trigger and hub,
>> elegantly designed to give the same forward freewheeling effect. What
>> were they thinking, to spend the extra effort on that slot?
>>
>> 4) And then there is the two-notch remover itself, a design that could
>> not be improved by Satan himself as a way to provoke "interesting"
>> outbursts from the naive who didn't know that you had to hold the FW in
>> place with a QR skewer or a nut on the axle.
>
> Didn't matter, not if you climbed a mountain with a 30T, then the tool
> would chip the slots regardless
> And I think you failed to mention the FW pawls falling out their
> position when you tried to reassemble the body. But that could be solved
> by replacing the lot with an Atom body
>
> --
> mvg
>
> Marten Gerritsen
> Kiel Windeweer
> Netherlands
> _______________________________________________

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 9.0.829 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2933 - Release Date: 06/12/10 11:35:00