Talk:Cogset

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Cycling This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cycling, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cycling on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CyclingWikipedia:WikiProject CyclingTemplate:WikiProject Cyclingcycling articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Should freewheel (bicycle part) and cassette (bicycle part) have separate articles be merged into a new article? They both discuss the rear cogset or cluster of a derailleur systems. But If so, what should the new name be? Cogset or cluster? --Christopherlin 21:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: A freewheel includes the ratcheting system where as a cassette does not. Cassette using system have the ratching in the hub or bottom braket (latter is rare)--Ray 01:54, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, freewheel opens with "An earlier design of a cogset", and casettte opens with "It is a later development of a cogset." Threaded and threadless headsets, for instance, are discussed in the same article. --Christopherlin 02:43, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support: OK I am fickle. Having one page for freewheels and cassettes makes sense as long as they explain the differences. I would suggest having cassette as the main page with freewheel re-directed to it. Many more folks in the US know cassette more than freewheel. --Ray 11:16, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge finished. --Christopherlin 14:54, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i feel like a bit of a dumbass, but i think that this article is a bit hard to understand if you don't have a familiarity with mechanical things and how they work...

Lequis 21:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I suppose it's a little late but I oppose this. A freewheel is not a subset of cassette so it makes little sense to have them on the same page under the name cassette. If there is a name under which both mechanism fall then it might make sense to have them on the same page otherwise they should be split again. gren グレン 22:48, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While I think the merging of the cassette and freewheel articles was probably wise, but I don't see how it makes sense to put them both under Cassette, I agree with the above concerns of Grenavitar. It looks like the original idea was to merge them under the name cogset, or similar. Why wasn't that done? I perpose moving this article to a page named "Cogset" Keithonearth (talk) 09:54, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm sorry not to get any feedback on this matter, but I think the above comments, and the logic of having both Freewheels and Cassettes on a page with a name that they are a genuine subset of justifies moving the page to "cogset". I've done it, and some work modifying links. I hope that makes sense for everyone.--Keithonearth (talk) 06:06, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good move. -AndrewDressel (talk) 13:23, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought this was resolved satisfactorily 4 years ago, but now there is a new merger proposal. If there is no new argument for it, I see no more reason to merge now than there was before. -AndrewDressel (talk) 15:15, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Powerglide II (SRAM), Openglide (SRAM), Ultra-Drive (Campy) are all the 'same' as hyperglide. Mentioning just hyperglide is biased. I imagine that I am missing others from smaller cassette makers (american classic, sampson?). The question is should the section be rewritten to mention ALL of the different types that I and others can think of, or should it not mention any others. At the very least it should not single out Hyperglide as ALL(?) other cassette makers have a similar approach. If Shim@no was the first (and this can be cited) I see no problem with mentioning that they were first. Thoughts??? Ender8282 (talk) 00:20, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concur. Will change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmsg (talk • contribs) 09:49, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've completed a diagram of a Freehub vs freewheel hub, much like the one already up. While it's not perfect, I think that it shows the differences more clearly than the one up now. It is a SVG file, so anyone can edit it if they want. I chose not to include words because they are not readable as a thumbnail, and I think the image is understandable even when small. If people think the original is better but it back up, and let me know what you like about it. (maybe I should add words to mine? Or depict the cut away of the freehub body differently?)--Keithonearth (talk) 09:00, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keith, that is a very slick diagram you've created. I like it a lot. I do think it would benefit from some annotations. If a reader cannot read the words as presented in the article, they can always click on it to see an enlarged version. What SVG editor did you use? I downloaded a free one once and found it took more time to learn than I was willing to invest. -AndrewDressel (talk) 13:41, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you, or others think of this version? ( 3rd from top) Preferable to the bare image? I've been using inkscape, I don't know much about graphics editors but I like inkscape. --Keithonearth (talk) 08:33, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and put the labelled the diagram up, and made it a bit bigger than a default thumbnail. --Keithonearth (talk) 21:33, 9 December 2008

Excellent. -AndrewDressel (talk) 15:39, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can we do a quick straw poll here? How many East-of-the-Atlantic people think that "shifting" would be obvious to a speaker of non-American English? "Shifting" is referred to in the UK as "changing gear". I'm all in favour of standardising the language on this page in one form or the other and wouldn't have a problem with US English being used, I'm just concerned that it should be understandable to UK readers. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 01:19, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For when someone questions my attempt to standardize on "sprocket" instead of "cog" for a toothed wheel that engages a chain in Wikipedia bicycle related articles, here are my reasons:

1. Sheldon Brown lists in his glossary:

• Sprocket: A toothed wheel or gear that is part of a chain drive. The front sprockets are also commonly called chainwheels or chainrings, but most adult cyclists use this term mainly to refer to the rear sprockets. The rear sprockets individually are also commonly called cogs or gears; as a group they are referred to as a block, cassette, cluster or freewheel.
• Cog: Popular term for a rear sprocket. Originally, "cog" referred to just a single tooth on a "cog wheel." Then "cog wheel" was shortened by popular usage to "cog."

1. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary has these entries:

• sprocket (noun) - 1 : a toothed wheel whose teeth engage the links of a chain
• cog (noun) - 1 : a tooth on the rim of a wheel or gear

1. The Oxford English Dictionary has these entries:

• sprocket, n. 2. b. ellipt. A sprocket-wheel, esp. that of a cycle; and (Cinematogr.), one that propels film by engaging with perforations along its edge.
• cog, n. 2. 1. a. One of a series of teeth or similar projections on the circumference of a wheel, or the side of a bar, etc., which, by engaging with corresponding projections on another wheel, etc., transmit or receive motion.

2. 2. Short for: b. a cog-wheel.

All of these lead me to believe that, while "cog" may be used colloquially, "sprocket" is the term that should be used in an encyclopedia. -AndrewDressel (talk) 18:59, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cogset. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081205181751/http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~hadland/page35.htm to http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~hadland/page35.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:33, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"The entire cassette is held on the hub by means of a threaded lockring." But the diagram does not call out a "lockring". It has "lock nut". Are they the same thing? If so, should this be clarified? Fholson 12:29, 11 July 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fholson (talk • contribs)

Note that for those of us that do not know what a cogset is, it does not help to say that a cogset is a set of cogs. What is a cog? Is it the same thing as what is commonly called a gear? I have heard other bicyclists ask me how many gears my bike has but never how many cogs. Sam Tomato (talk) 04:06, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]