You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I'm still marvelling at the levels of thought, time and money that went into the design of the Halfords GTi Drive bikes. How many engineers & CAD ‘aces’ did it take to produce this flawed and functionally inept system?
A friend asked if could sort his front mech out as he was struggling to engage granny-ring whilst riding. Easy, says I, couldn’t be much more than a quick cage alignment & limit screw ‘fettle’!
How ‘enlightened’ I was that, under load of the rider, the ‘dynamic’ rotating BB (never seen anything like that since my days on the steam railway) arc, combined with the location (the only location) of front mech, actually resulted with tensioning the cable so much that it changed to middle ring on it’s own (after a perfect un-loaded set up I might add).
I must have spent 30 mins trying to establish if I’d ‘missed the point’, or had performed an uber fudge up but no! Sit on the thing, and the front mech changes – brilliant!
I’m clearly in the wrong job. Umm, let’s think...how about marketing a fish for ruck-sac?
First or second generation I drive?
The Second generation I drive was a very effective, I certainly never had any problems with ghost shifting.
Outer cable too short? Wrong type of front mech?
route the cable for top-pull ?
(may need a band-on cable stop)
I thought this thread was going to be about Hope..
Seems a bizarre issue, something else muct be up?
You'd have thought that they would notice this when reviewing the bike on BR.
Never had any issues like that on my brothers one
I've had this on my old I-Drive - it was because I had put too short a length of outer cable on it. Probably you or your mate are equally as inept as I was that day?
The system is really good and completely under-rated.
If it's gen 1, pull all that over engineered c**p out and convert it into an eccentric BB and run it single speed!!
[img] http://www.socaltrailriders.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=43227&stc=1&d=1244003207 [/img]
/\ /\ /\
Not mine, always liked the idea of it though
cable outer +1
so we're looking at;
inept mechanic rather than flawed bike design.
as the result then?
Brilliant thread... STWer finds that GT wasted however many thousands in R&D and sold bikes all over the world that were flawed*. You're obviously in the wrong business.
*My brother has had two I-Drives and never had a problem with ghost shifting on either.
Thought this thread was about the new Rolls Royce Trent engine.
Work colleague of mine had a GT I-Drive and don't ever recall this being an issue.....
Chances are you've done something wrong.
Inept amateur mechanic not nearly as clever as team of engineers and designers for major international manufacturer. Some mistake, surely?
never had any problems like that on my origonal GT Idrive. Must be user error. 🙄
Defect has been identified as being in the space between the bike and the tool bench and he is holding the extra 'unnecessary' bit of cable outer
Defect has been identified as being in the space between the bike and the tool bench and he is holding the extra 'unnecessary' bit of cable outer
😆 Yeh I never had any problem with the 3 i-drives I had plus two of my mates were sweet shifters too. 😆
Ever thought of applying for a job in Halfrauds Mr 'Love Tubs' 😆
If it's gen 1, pull all that over engineered c**p out and convert it into an eccentric BB and run it single speed!!/\ /\ /\
Not mine, always liked the idea of it though
Goes to look for a cheap iDrive frame on eBay...
My main riding mate has an I-drive and it works brilliantly. No problems with shifting either.
....it was produced for Halfords distribution only apparently! It was a cheapy I think...but it still made me laugh.
Cable too short, I've heard them all now 😆
Specific under the BB cable trunking, could braze an eyelet on but it's a lost cause imho. The flaw is in the mech moving with the rear-sus triangle, it's not isolated. Thus, it sets up beautifully in the stand but sitting on it 'virtually' lengthens the cable; bit like bending a bow (as in bow and arrow) backwards with a hinge in the middle....if you catch my drift.
A bit like this one, front mech mounting was on a very short bit length of tube; barely enough for adjustment.
[img] 
[/img]
Essentially, it's a heap of crap!
Love Tubs - you're wrong.
[s]I noticed the OP isn't responding so hiding their shame ?[/s]
Does he/she mean the cable stop is on the frame, not the mech ?
upload a proper picture so we can see the issue...
wwaswas,
wrong = no data stored for this string
I've had several Marins through the workshop where front mech set up is a pain due to the chain only running through the correct part of the cage when the suspension is sagged.
One of the owners is a good foot taller than me and a lot heavier so I can't even check that one by riding it round outside the shop (without upsetting his saddle and suspension settings).
Cable too short, I've heard them all nowSpecific under the BB cable trunking, could braze an eyelet on but it's a lost cause imho. The flaw is in the mech moving with the rear-sus triangle, it's not isolated. Thus, it sets up beautifully in the stand but sitting on it 'virtually' lengthens the cable; bit like bending a bow (as in bow and arrow) backwards with a hinge in the middle....if you catch my drift.
1. Are you running a piece of outer cable from the frame to the swingarm? your supposed to in order to account for the movement of the suspension
2. The mech is supposed to move with the rear triangle, thats the way GT designed it, and it worked fine for the other thousands of iDrives they produced, me thinks your failing to see your mistake and blaming the bike, unless this 'Halfords one' is extra special (hint; its not!)
3. Send us a pic, i could do with a laugh.
:0)
Odds favour the moon falling down, than me doing something wrong....
Ok, what am I missing here 🙄 😉
Granted, the mech is a tad bashed but as I've said it shifts almost 'utterly-butterly' in the stand but load that rear suss....??????
I wasn't going to look at it again, but the STW collective have installed an inferior craftmans complex (ICC) 😛
Must get back to work.
"THE highest level of engineering SHITE ......EVER?"
I half expected this to be about:
the Ever Ready Night Rider lights of 25 years ago that, were almost useless and had a recall on them, were the hightofshite. But despite that they get a mention in one of Stuart Pugh's books on good design.
I've ridden I-drives since '99 and really get on with the system (unlike quite a lot of people) and the only reason to get this problem is as people above have said .
The gear outer between the underneath of the BB housing back to the cable stop on the downtube needs to be longer , a longer section of outer will cure the problem!! Fact.
If the inner has been trimmed too short you might need to replace that too
If it's gen 1, pull all that over engineered c**p out and convert it into an eccentric BB and run it single speed!!
I suspect you'll find that the iDrive gubbinses is still present in that bike, otherwise you couldn't run it as a singlespeed unless you locked the suspension out.
See here... the cable mount is on the other side of the bb, you use a piece of outer cable to connect the frame to the swingwarm, therefore removing the 'lengthening' effect.
[url= http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2030/1910383517_ffa5173652.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/ejcamez/1910383517/ ]GT idrive 021[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/ejcamez/ ]ejcamez[/url], on Flickr
[url= http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2304/1910367671_cd2262a6ef.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/ejcamez/1910367671/ ]GT idrive 017[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/ejcamez/ ]ejcamez[/url], on Flickr
not my pic BTW.
Love Tubs - MemberOdds favour the moon falling down, than me doing something wrong....
you are Sheldon Cooper from the Big Bang Theory (and I claim my 5 pounds).
Friend built it up. I'm assuming he's replaced all the bits correctly...there, perhaps, is the crux of the problem.
Um, will take another look at it.
I remain steadfast that it's an utter pile of shite, sporting p1ss poor design.
[i]not my pic BTW. [/i]
I'd want to distance myself from those shoes too 😉
[i]I remain steadfast that it's an utter pile of shite, sporting p1ss poor design[/i]
It wouldn't stop you being wrong, though.
a perfect example....
[url= http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3624/3459657943_c3da1b5abc.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/10305235@N05/3459657943/ ]I-drive[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/10305235@N05/ ]gt_heini[/url], on Flickr
Friend built it up. I'm assuming he's replaced all the bits correctly...there, perhaps, is the crux of the problem.
I love the smell of back pedalling in the afternoon..
At least this thread had brought a smile to our Autumnal faces 😉
Laughing at your statement KINGTUT........
Love Tubs, are you an 'engineer' by any chance?
Ah, but they [i]look[/i] completely shite, so he has a point.
Ah, but they look completely shite, so he has a point.
1st gen definitely looked grim, second generation is passable to look at.
I remain steadfast that it's an utter pile of shite, sporting p1ss poor design
They are quite clever really, rotating BB means you get the benefit of anti-bob design (in a time of basic shocks) with the benefit of a stiff back end (in a time of crap flexy bushing shod sus bikes). Of course now we have mutiple different (Dave Weagle) anti-bob designs which are just as complex and have even more bearings to wear out.
And the front mech dosnt have to be stationary in relation the the cranks, afteral you will be hovering in one place in the sag anyway, plus, front mechs, a bit of metal shoving a chain over? hardly the pinacle of design ay?
Yep, OP is still here. Stick and stones..... ❗
Now, I really must get back to work which isn't a euphemism for cowardly antics. I really have to go 😥
This is hilarious really. Several people, with direct experience of exactly this bike, have nicely pointed you to the problem. Plus this isn't exactly a niche bike - there are thousands of them out there.
Yet you remain utterly convinced that you can't possibly be wrong?
Why not just check?
It's probable that your bike is built right, but that that section of outer cable that links the front triangle with the BB is slightly too short, so when you squish the suspension it is pulling itself out of it's housing and allowing the inner cable to pull on the mech.
It's an easy mistake to make because if you do a static setup and measure the cable as you would with other bits you'll get tit too short. Look at the picture of the blue one above, it shows how much 'extra' outer cable you should have, it's not a direct run between the two stops at all.
As for the design, I really rated mine, which was a 1999 XCR2000, it was a bit heavy, but for the £1000 I paid for it in 2000 it did a brilliant job and lasted a decade before it needed moving on. I've not ridden one of the modern ones, but would like to see if the design still makes as much sense as it did. For the sceptics; why do you think the design hasn't changed in a decade?
Friend built it up. I'm assuming he's replaced all the bits correctly...there, perhaps, is the crux of the problem.I love the smell of back pedalling in the afternoon..
so does it still ghost shift when back pedalling?
Maybe thats the answer - ride everywhere backwards (and if I was you I would be backing out of here at high speed!)
[i]you get the benefit of anti-bob design (in a time of basic shocks) with the benefit of a stiff back end [/i]
Swallowed any brochures lately?
Not any more than followers of DW's new 'better than the last one I designed and said was the best' suspension designs. You have to remember, when GT first knocked out the Idrive all we had were flexy specializeds, trashcan Oranges and basic air shocks. Ok so it's not perfect but look at some of the rubbish that companies are still trying to tout as the best ever, it was and still is pretty decent.
p.s I'm not saying that because I had one, I had an FSR.
[i]when GT first knocked out the Idrive[/i]
I had a RM Instinct. 4-bar & it didn't 'bob'. My mate had a single pivot Cannondale, that didn't 'bob' either. GT came up with a gash solution to a problem that didn't exist (IMO)
oh they did! they were terrible for it, so were marin and orange.My mate had a single pivot Cannondale, that didn't 'bob' either
Your right tho in that the problem dosnt exist if you adjust your riding to suit the bike. All these anti-bob designs are designed for hardtail riders who jump on normal sus bikes and stomp on the pedals, casuing them to wallow all over the palce, if your capable of pedaling smoothly then you hardly need any anti-bob, in design or damping. Its down to the skill of the rider.
Yeah, that's true, I don't' suffer from pedal bob on my Bullit and that's designed for blating down stuff without pedalling. But regardless, the design is very good in terms of ride quality etc.
S'what I meant Stato 🙂
if your capable of pedaling smoothly then you hardly need any anti-bob, in design or damping. Its down to the skill of the rider.
that sounds to me like [b]you[/b] have to make up for the failings of the design...
simonfbarnes - Memberif your capable of pedaling smoothly then you hardly need any anti-bob, in design or damping. Its down to the skill of the rider.
that sounds to me like you have to make up for the failings of the design...
I'm not sure about that.
Learning how to pedal smoothly (in circles, rather than mashing the pedals) is a basic of road riding and it is hardly going to hurt when riding a MTB, regardless of how what type of suspension?
No Simon, wrong. You (we) just have to make the most of the wonderful invention that is the fully suspended mtb.
Yeah, that's true, I don't' suffer from pedal bob on my Bullit and that's designed for blating down stuff without pedalling.
really? My bullit bobs all over the f@$#%ng place! unless i turn up the LSC then its as stable as a very stable thing with zero bob.
Learning how to pedal smoothly (in circles, rather than mashing the pedals)
the path of your feet is constrained by the pedals, but in any case, off road you often have to modulate the movement of the pedals in maintaining balance and avoiding obstacles, so "smoothness" may be contraindicated...
You (we) just have to make the most of the wonderful invention that is the fully suspended mtb
Not me - I gave up rear suspension as not worth the inconvenience 🙂
rs - My Bulit didn't bob too bad.
sfb - I have both fs and ss rigid. both great for certain situations and unnecessary in others
sfb - ss rigid fixie so pedaling is really constrained
Hi all, please forgive my bumping this thread..but...
After my tongue-in-cheek dig at this bike, and subsequent verbal lambasting, I was almost 100% confident that it was a 'case of the missing cable outer'.
I contacted mate and shot over to sort it for him, but no! I had expected to see the cable stops and evidence that indeed this had been fitted but no...I'm at a loss tbh. The lad is strapped for cash atm and I'd really like to help him out; get out on the trails.
I snapped some pic on mobile (can't access em yet, tried sms to email that's not working either) and will endeavour to post them up.
Essentially
1. The front mech is a strange sort of cantilever 'over the top' type of pull (I only know XT, Ult, DA). A cable outer would not work/fit with this, unless the lads failed to fit all of it? It looks and functions ok however.
2. The plastic cable guide running under the BB sort of tapers out to nothing and so again, I can't see evidence or how to 'butt-up' a cable outer.
3. His frame is similar to the pictures posted, but still differs.
Any tips would be welcomed, like I say he's a sound bloke and I'd like to help him out.
Cheers.
Is that an e-type front mech?
I have one of those on my Scott Strike and they are a bitch to set up, especially adjusting the little screws.
Doesn't contribute much to this post but my Scott runs without a cable outer.
I think without pics of the mech and frame it's going to be a nightmware to diagnose.
The key thing is that there is insufficient 'slack' in the cable outer so that when the suspension moves the inner cable is pulled rather than the outer moving with it - that's the problem you need to solve.
The mech is designed to move vertically when the suspension moves, but not laterally across the rings. If it's ghost shifting the outer is too short.
1. The front mech is a strange sort of cantilever 'over the top' type of pull (I only know XT, Ult, DA). A cable outer would not work/fit with this, unless the lads failed to fit all of it? It looks and functions ok however.
Front mechs dont have cable stops fitted (ignoring the new Shimano bolt on format as he wont have one of those).
2. The plastic cable guide running under the BB sort of tapers out to nothing and so again, I can't see evidence or how to 'butt-up' a cable outer.
Have a look at my picture again, there is a cable stop on the front of the BB, it might be in a different place on his frame but the principle still applies (unless he has a DH frame and is trying to fit a front mech, in which case, slap him round the face and call him an idiot)
Any tips would be welcomed, like I say he's a sound bloke and I'd like to help him out
No offence but do him a favour and help him by taking him to a decent bike shop, there are probably a number of other things wrong if you cant solve this issue and the guys safety may be on the line here.
sorry but now not intrested in thread have been side tracked by the ss'ed frame earlyer may be another option to the kona a
You would not believe the lengths I've been to in order to access/transfer these photos .....how many dodgy software sits?
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
you couldn;t just do a shot of the cable where it leaves the down tube and passes towards the BB could you? 😉
I'd say that was a top pull mech and you're using it bottom pull - the cable routing around the mech looks like it's wrong.
I still think you'll need to sort out outer cable length from downtube to BB though...
I see no outer cable stops.
agree with wwaswas-looks like a top pull used incorrectly (or is it a dual pull?). And as many many respondents have said, using a too-short section of housing (even with the correct front mech 😛 will cause the front mech to move as the cable tugs it.
edit; ambrose, the outer stop is at the front of the BB housing just out of shot in the final pic. This then feeds the inner into a plastic channel around the bottom of the BB (which is clear in the pic). The final section of outer cable needs a curve in it to provide enough length to accommodate the BB housing rotating, if the outer is straight or almost straight from the frame to the BB housing mounted stop it will do as the OP describes (speaking from experience).
I got a '99 XCR2000 as an insurance replacement for a stolen FSR, so had no vested interest in defending or liking it. It rode as well as the FSR or any other FS design I've ridden, the eccentric bearings were well sealed and never died, and the bike is still seeing regular action as a mates girlfriend's bike.
GT went bust in 2001 due to financial mismanagement IIRC (no cash to pay bills) rather than poor product. They were bought up (along with Schwinn) by Pacific who initially said they would concentrate on the low end of the market and only sell bikes up to the ~$300 mark, but thankfully someone there recognised the value and history of the GT brand, the quality and distinctiveness of the I-drive design and the profit to be had in higher end bikes. I understand the company who owns Pacific now owns Cannondale (who went bust in ~2003).
Not that the last bit solves your mech problem 😳
we believe you went to a lot of trouble, but you still didn't get the shot we all want to see...
you've got the same shot twice, twice.
we want to see how the cable gets from the downtube to the BB shell.
see here, the red circle? thats a cable stop, you need to run a cable outer to this from the frame.
[url= http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1333/5166822275_85ddcbf282.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/dickyelsdon/5166822275/ ]3459657943_c3da1b5abc_z[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/dickyelsdon/ ]dickyelsdon[/url], on Flickr
Looks like a dual pull mech, so the cable looks fine at that point. I'm still going for outer cable too short between frame and bb shell rather than bad engineering on gts behalf.
Was this the inspiration for the iDrive perchance?
[img] 
?w=470[/img]