Gearing on Torqs

[flecc]

but they wanted a fortune for the only one with a choice of size - a Thorn Shimano Compatible: I am fairly sure. Asking £19-49; then there's the shipping making the total a king's ransom.

Peter

I couldn't help but smile, the one I'm looking at currently for a particular purpose is £79.75, but not ideal, so I might have to pay more.
.

 

[coops]

Thank you very much for all that information Pete .

I hope this is helpful and apologies if I have insulted your intelligence

It was very useful indeed - just the sort of facts & tips I need - I have little experience of this (it probably shows!) and I'm very grateful to benefit from yours.

I'll look into those suppliers you suggest & see what I can turn up -thanks.

I think I'm more of a spinner on a standard bike ~72 rpm (per leg), but can spin slower on an electric, I've found, when the effort required is less.

Gear range I'd like is ~45" or lower to ~112" top, but with high gears spaced appropriately for the delimited torq.

My BCD seems to be 130mm too (5-arm).

Interesting that you say your 76T setup required the same no. of links as the 77T original: I've not found much online to help work out how well a particular front/rear setup will fit a given chain length, so I'll just have to trust to luck I guess, but like yours, so long as I'm under 76/77T total I hope I can just shorten the existing chain if required

Thanks again,

Stuart.

 

[ITSPETEINIT]

Tooth Difference

Thank you very much for all that information Pete .

I think I'm more of a spinner on a standard bike ~72 rpm (per leg), but can spin slower on an electric, I've found, when the effort required is less.
That's good. I like to spin when the terrain is against one, like hills

Gear range I'd like is ~45" or lower to ~112" top, but with high gears spaced appropriately for the delimited torq.
That's a good low gear. If you are happy with the range and the intervals I'd go for that combination.

Interesting that you say your 76T setup required the same no. of links as the 77T original: I've not found much online to help work out how well a particular front/rear setup will fit a given chain length, so I'll just have to trust to luck I guess, but like yours, so long as I'm under 76/77T total I hope I can just shorten the existing chain if required

The front/rear gear mechs don't need a relationship to chain length as measured on the bike - I hope I have not got your meaning wrong. The relationship is the sum of the difference between the largest and smallest chain ring plus the difference between the largest and smallest rear sprocket. Thus the Rear mechanism is required to 'wrap up' in the case of a 12-32 cassette 20 teeth and a single chainwheel of any number of teeth = 0 : that's just 20 teeth of chain to wrap up.
The size of the largest rear sprocket and the largest (or only) chain ring just influences the length of the chain not the capacity of the rear mech.

I must have been wrong about the length of the chain on the Torq. It is for your set up 52 x 12/32 136 links (a link being one pitch of 1/2 inch).
The standard chain is between 114 or 116 links)

Stuart.

I actually had my chain on the bench and measured it and counted the links - the note I made was partly obscured by a fold in the paper.
Peter

 

[coops]

The size of the largest rear sprocket and the largest (or only) chain ring just influences the length of the chain not the capacity of the rear mech.

That's what I meant and to clarify (I hope) I found a chain length calculator which does the job: I counted 67 links on the Torq's chain, with 52T-25T & when you put that in the calculator (I make it roughly 58.5cm chainstay length on the Torq), it does give 67 links

I found a Stronglight Dural 130mm 46T £12.90 incl. delivery & if put with an 11-28T cassette, would give an ok range for me (46"-117") & no need to change the Sora: although the bottom gear is higher than with a 30T largest cog, I think the ratios & spacing in the high gears seems better with the 11-28T (11-12-14-16-18-21-24-28 vs 11-13-15-17-20-23-26-30) & of course no need to change the rear mech too.

Except I may have to remove a link (or two) since 46+28=74T total, vs the 77T now.

So I hope to get the parts for ~£30 or less, though chain tool & freewheel remover may be extra, but I hope it'll be worth it for a seemingly minor change which makes a big difference to use in the long run

Stuart.

 

[ITSPETEINIT]

Length of chain is proportionate to the time of night

That's what I meant and to clarify (I hope) I found a chain length calculator which does the job: I counted 67 links on the Torq's chain, with 52T-25T & when you put that in the calculator (I make it roughly 58.5cm chainstay length on the Torq), it does give 67 links

It was the lateness of the hour that really threw me.
trouble is a chain has two different links a narrow one and wide one. 66 is the number of both (1 inch long) - 132 is the number of each (1/2 inch long). Unless you have 1/2 link you have to remove (or add) an even number of short links to maintain the pitch. Thus the Std chain (118) links is shorter than the Torq chain by 14 of those shorter links.
Yes that's right. I measured the chain stay and it was 23 1/2 inches. I chose inches because the chain is 'imperial' not metric.

IfoundStronglight Dural 130mm 46T £12.90 incl. delivery & if put with an 11-28T cassette, would give an ok range for me (46"-117") & no need to change the Sora: although the bottom gear is higher than with a 30T largest cog, I think the ratios & spacing in the high gears seems better with the 11-28T (11-12-14-16-18-21-24-28 vs 11-13-15-17-20-23-26-30) & of course no need to change the rear mech too.

In view of what Flecc said about his proposed purchase of a chain ring (or was it chainset?) stronglight is a bargain.
Hope you are right about the 28 rear sprocket the Shimano website says all Sora have maximum largest cog of 27.


Except I may have to remove a link (or two) since 46+28=74T total, vs the 77T now.
Yes! that's 1 or 2 inches.

So I hope to get the parts for ~£30 or less, though chain tool & freewheel remover may be extra, but I hope it'll be worth it for a seemingly minor change which makes a big difference to use in the long run

I take it you have the crank extractor tool.
46 x 28 will make a big difference - 44 inch lowest gear compared with 60 inch

Stuart.

A pity you don't live closer to me, you could borrow all my tools: but then there is nothing like having one's own on hand to fiddle about in the future.
When I bought my Torq I went the whole hog and bought a £70 workstand.

Best of Luck

 

[ITSPETEINIT]

Chains - Epicidiot links versus SJS Cycles links

That's what I meant and to clarify (I hope) I found a chain length calculator which does the job: I counted 67 links on the Torq's chain, with 52T-25T & when you put that in the calculator (I make it roughly 58.5cm chainstay length on the Torq), it does give 67 links

Stuart.

I looked at the Chain Length Calculator and was amazed that they are as confused as I am. " 1 link" to them is a wide one plus a narrow one - ie 1 inch of chain.
The chains advrtised on SJS Cycles web site must be mighty long at 116 or 118 link. So my Torq chain is 66 'epicidiot' links, one less than the chain length on the standard delivered bike.

Peter

 

[flecc]

" 1 link" to them is a wide one plus a narrow one - ie 1 inch of chain.

Peter

Technically they are right, one link is the whole caboodle. Cyclone's fitting instructions are the best for confusion, on their site where this picture and caption appear:

Add some chain on the all chain ( about 3 notes)
.

 

[coops]

Ok, I think I've got the hang of chain-length adjustment, in theory - so hopefully clearer for me than the "cyclone" instructions!

Thanks for all that info & feedback again Pete, its most helpful & supportive.

One curiosity I've noticed related to gearing, and an illustration of why its good to have experience of a bike before making changes, is that contrary to both my expectations and my impressions while riding, my cadence has markedly increased on the Torq compared to an unpowered bike!

Another realisation is that my top speed under motor power only is lower than that quoted by others, and I think its simply down to my weight... but that means if I lose weight while cycling (hopefully), my top motor speed will go up & so shift all my gear ratios backwards in relation to the motor speed!!! (albeit slowly...)

Anyway, I've had a re-rethink, and if my higher cadence seems to apply in all situations (not sure yet) then I could just change the front chainwheel fairly radically to 38-42 ish which would suffice for top & bottom gears with the existing rear setup, though the current 50T x 12-25T setup, as I think was intended, gives better, more closely spaced gears at the top end of the range... I think I'll carry on for a while as it is, before I decide to change.

I'd be interested to hear if others have noticed any change in their cadence when using electric in general or the Torq in particular, especially derestricted, and also if any have noticed better range through modifying their gears for starts as I intend to...

Thanks

Stuart.

 

[flecc]

My cadence has changed for the derestricted Torq Stuart. It was likely to increase anyway from the slow rate necessary for the Twist I'd been using for years, but the rate I've settles on is faster than when I rode unpowered. In fact I often drop from top gear to seventh just to get the higher rate I'm more comfortable with on that bike. It could be something to do with the character of the Torq, since I'm not too happy with a very high cadence on the Quando.

My gearing on the Torq remains standard, 58" to 122".
.

 

[coops]

Well, I took the plunge & swapped the front chainring for a 40T, and I'm happy with the result . It seems drastic I know, but works since the large 28" wheel makes 40T equivalent to 43T on my 26" wide tyre MTB, and my higher cadence on the Torq works to my advantage by enabling a relatively smaller front chainring & so lower bottom gear .

(I also removed that clear plastic "guard" between the largest rear cassette cog & wheel that you mention on your site Flecc - it seemed unnecessary to me too - and now rear freewheels much better.)

The gear range is now 44.8-93.3", so bottom gear is much improved - very comfortable for starts, then up through the gears and with my higher Torq cadence the top 3 gears are well placed for full throttle with headwind/mild gradient, on the flat/calm and then the top gear close spaced for "overdrive" or gentle downhills at around 24mph+, which will only be used occasionally!

Still seems too many gears for an electric assist, I agree Flecc, but it does gain in flexibility if you want to just pedal at times to economise on power use & extend the range a bit, since the gear spacing allows that .

Thanks again for all your info & support

 

[Ian]

Well, I took the plunge & swapped the front chainring for a 40T, and I'm happy with the result . It seems drastic I know, but works since the large 28" wheel makes 40T equivalent to 43T on my 26" wide tyre MTB, and my higher cadence on the Torq works to my advantage by enabling a relatively smaller front chainring & so lower bottom gear .

(I also removed that clear plastic "guard" between the largest rear cassette cog & wheel that you mention on your site Flecc - it seemed unnecessary to me too - and now rear freewheels much better.)

The gear range is now 44.8-93.3", so bottom gear is much improved - very comfortable for starts, then up through the gears and with my higher Torq cadence the top 3 gears are well placed for full throttle with headwind/mild gradient, on the flat/calm and then the top gear close spaced for "overdrive" or gentle downhills at around 24mph+, which will only be used occasionally!

Still seems too many gears for an electric assist, I agree Flecc, but it does gain in flexibility if you want to just pedal at times to economise on power use & extend the range a bit, since the gear spacing allows that .

Thanks again for all your info & support

Thoroughly agree, my torq has 38 and 42T chainrings, I fitted the 42 in the outer position in case 38 was too low, but in fact the 38 suits me fine, my short legs are suited to a fast cadence and I can spin downhill at 30 mph easily enough as well as being able to climb steep hills. Did have to shorten the chain though.

Ian.

 

[coops]

Hi Ian

I'm glad your re-geared Torq is working for you too! I saw your post in the "best electric bike" thread which prompted me to update this thread with my progress.

I also had to remove 3 or 4 chain links. I should add for others that from what I've read re-gearing in this way may not suit everyone and is by no means applicable to all Torqs and riders, which is why I've taken some care to explain at length what I've tried to achieve in my own usage of the bike .

Your style of riding seems similar to mine & so it works for us both: now I just need to work on the throttle economy to eke out more range if necessary - 30 miles is some going!

Stuart.

 

[Ian]

Hi Stuart,

you are quite right to say that modified gearing might not suit everyone, in fact Flecc has stated that standard gearing suits him best. At least if anyone tries it and doesn't like it it's easily reversable.

I've been giving some thought as to why I'm getting better range than many people and have come to the conclusion that much of my milage is done on pedal power alone, my longer journeys are purely for fun, I'm normaly in no hurry and only tend to use power on hills, even then I'm probably matching the motor with my legs, I also have the bike in pedelec mode most of the time. The times when I am in hurry are short journeys close to home where range isn't an issue, I've wired a waterproofed switch under the bottom bracket to the red sleeved link for those occasions!

I've had the Torq for 8 months now, in that time I've lost a stone and got fitter, its a case of the more I pedal the fitter I get which means I can pedal even more and so it goes on. I wouldn't like to be without the motor though as its the only way I can beat really fit guys half my age!

Ian.

 

[coops]

Yes that's true, it is reversible, and I suppose anyone trying this would be doing so on an informed basis i.e. aware of their motor speeds, cadence, gear inches etc. requirements & so hopefully (if one gets one's sums right!)would be most likely happy with the results .

Interesting what you say about range too: I've noticed myself more inclined to use the Torq as a "pedal bike with motor support" rather than "motor bike which I also pedal"! since reducing the front chainwheel, i.e. I'm less reliant on the motor to get going & even while moving, since the lowest gears allow me to pedal easily from a standing start . Hopefully this will lead to more relaxed use & extended range for me - when required!

I'd considered a "turbo/economy" switch as you've done, but have found that by being economical with throttle in pedelec mode (I loosened the spring in mine so easier to hold in position but Flecc has a more comprehensive mod on his site) and limiting top speed to around 16mph average I can get near to restricted range for my terrain - around 23 miles.

By either limiting the top speed further to 15mph or less, or only using the throttle periodically & for hills/headwinds etc. I think you would get longer ranges as you do . In contrast, full throttle flat out derestricted I get about 15-16 miles in good conditions, but it is fun & fast!

I'm also hoping to get fitter & lose some weight as you have, so you've given me some hope but I think I'll have to pedal some more first! Still, if I can get reliable longer ranges, I'll possibly be able to pedal far enough to escape the city, which would be nice .

By the way, with the 38T chainwheel does your chainline clear the unused V-brake fixing on the right chainstay, or did you have to remove/modify them?

Also, what's your current tyre choice/thoughts? Did you go for marathon plus? I'll probably post in that thread anyhow, so I'd best keep this thread on topic

Stuart.

 

[Ian]

Stuart,

my experience of the Manchester area is of rather more hills than we have in Leicestershire so I probably have an advantage there in terms of range.
The 30+ miles I regularly get is exactly in line with A to B magazines test results of a deristricted torq so it is achievable elswhere.

I removed the unused brake pivot as it was very close to the chain, it was was very stiff to remove having been scewed in with thread locking compound. I fitted a small aluminium plate in its place to protect the chainstay which was now being hit by the chain everytime I hit a bump in high gear. The mods can be seen here.

I am looking at Continental tyres as they're a lot lighter that the marathons but as you suggest we'll discuss that in a more appropriate thread.

Ian.

 

[coops]

Nice shot of the bike Ian all looks very neat & streamlined!

Peter also mentioned the brake pivots were hard to remove: luckily for me I don't think they cause an obstruction to the chain with the 40T front chainwheel, though it is quite close - I'll have to watch that one!

I'm in a fairly level part of south Manchester which merges into the very flat Cheshire plain, so nothing more than a number of bridges over mostly disused railways unless I venture north, which is hillier as you say but overall yes, more undulating than what I know of Leicestershire! I certainly hope your road surfaces are better than many of my local ones!

I've posted on the tyres in the "marathon plus tyres for Torq" thread - seemed the best place to add to the marathon plus debate .

I wish you continued happy & safe cycling

Stuart.