The NuVinci hub is a unique internal gear hub in that it utilizes a continuously variable planetary (CVP) transmission. This means that the hub does not have specific gears but instead can be dialed in to any particular gearing in it’s capable range. You can think of it sort of as an analog radio tuner as opposed to a digital tuner with its particular increments. It is developed by the company Fallbrook Technologies which is headquartered in San Diego California.

There are currently two models of the hub  that has been produced, the N171 and the N360. The N360 is the newer of the two and was released in the Fall of 2010. The differences between the N171 and the N360 include:

  • Over 30% Lighter (weighing in at 2450 grams – ~5.4 pounds)
  • 17% Smaller Diameter
  • 360% ratio range (up from 350% for the N171)
  • Less Shifter Rotation (3/4 turn from low to high as opposed to ~2 1/2 to 3 turns on the N171 shifter)




Wheel Building Video

Sprocket Installation

Installing the Hub Interface

Shifter Installation

Installing Shift Cables and Hardware

Fitting the Rear Wheel

Disconnecting the Rear Wheel

Replacing Shifter Cables

Resetting CVP Into Full Overdrive

  1. Phil writes about his manufacturer experience:

    Gruß Marco

  2. My good friend Val Kleitz wrote a review of the hub after testing it.

  3. L.Jonsson


    Is it possible to buy a loose NuVinci Hub + shifter and parts
    not a complete bicycle in the EU?

  4. Rich Wood

    I noted on a recent visit to the NuVinci factory discussion forum on their web site that they seem to be unwilling to provide hard numbers information on the hub’s efficiency. One poster has been asking about it in regard to using it in a streamliner bike for attempted speed record attempts and the NuVinci replies have repeatedly sidestepped the question.

    In stead they have referred to their riding impressions PDF and the report of a pro racer who has tested it. No hard data has been provided regarding efficiency.

    I get the impression that either they do not have the data or the efficiency is not comparable to the Rohloff or other true gear hubs and other forms of transmission. Seeing as how the company is trying to promote the hub for multiple uses, including heavier versions for automotive use I believe, their unwillingness to provide hard data on efficiency seems strange.

    With current energy prices transmissions need to be efficient in automotive applications. Unwillingness or inability to provide data cannot but hurt them in the attempt to promote the adoption of the NuVinci technology.

  5. Bob Carter

    I suspect that the nuvinci efficiency is in the mid 80s at best. Early promotional material mentioned 97% but the figure was quickly expunged! At the greenpower electric racecar final last week the winning car (ours – yeeeeeehah) was running a factory standard shimano alfine & recorded 115 miles; the top nuvinci equipped car recorded 103 miles. Obviously many factors are involved and the gearbox is only one of them, but the fact remains that those cars with these CVTs – which look ideal for the application – have never fulfilled their promise. The Bentley entrant (yes we beat them too…. ) stopped using nuvinci late in the season & got their best result in the last race with an alfine

  6. Larry Webber

    I have one of these. We first put it on my wife’s bike. She is a mechanical engineer and was fascinated with the design. Although she experienced no issues, she quickly noticed the appreciable friction compared to my bike built with a simple coaster brake. Either of us coasting down the hill on her bike was slower than the other. One can sense the friction by putting the bike on a stand and spinning the wheel. Much more than my Shimano coaster brake.

    We just swapped rear wheels so now I have this on my bike. I am larger and stronger than my wife and can better deal with the friction. I hope the friction lessens as I put miles on the bike commuting to work.

    My sense is that if the weight and friction were less then this hub would make a great hub instead of just a good hub. So far no problems.


    • Anonymous

      Larry. Simply put a BMX ratchet gear for freewheeling on the rear rather than the standard gear that comes on the Nuvinci. Since that my Bike rolls faster and will beat almost anything on a downhill run. A friend on the same type of trike but with an Alfine has to pedal while I freewheel just to keep up with me.


  7. Robbie

    Robs numbers- and assuming all other things being equal – it works out at around 87% efficiency. Not a killer on a 10km commute!

    Larry’s comment is entirely valid, but remember that is your rollout (?) friction – the gearing is on the wheelside of the freewheel.

    I’d love to try one on my bike but they are just too heavy for me – they might be better off making it an in frame gearbox, too. That would help with rolling friction and move that weight forward.

    The final point I’d like to make about efficiency is that ratio is a very important component of driveline effiency. Ever tried climbing a long hill without just the right ratio?

    • Pete

      Rohloff states their hub efficiency as falling in the range of 95-98%, similar to derailleur drivetrains, so an efficiency measure of 89% for the Nuvinci is really rather poor.

  8. Trigg

    Yes, you can buy a hub/bicycle conversion kit (priced at some $450) in Europe. Add wheel build, some modification, lots of disappointment… It is a nice idea on paper, but that hub weighs like half a bicycle! In my humble opinion, it’s just too much hub for a bicycle.

    Just stick to Sturmey-Archer. That’ll do anything anyone needs.

    Me? ooooh…. just a bloke who builds all steel bicycles, teaches a bit and ……..

  9. BennyBoy

    I’ve been using this hub for some time now. I can say that without a second thought, this NiVinci is the best thing going in bicycles today! I was a SF bike messenger from age 16~28 and I’ve replaced dozens of drive componets at a cost of thousands of dollars over the years of riding. This hub is a total blessing. Is it heavy? yes! does it really matter? No!

    if your having friction issues, Just ride it! they go away after brake in.

  10. I’m rather surprised by Larry’s comments regarding efficiency, and Bob’s for that matter.

    My wife and I live carfree with kids and put around 15,000 miles on our bikes per year. We have bikes with derailleurs, a bike with an alfine and a bike with a nuvinci. In both our riding experience, which we’ve got around 6,000 miles on the nuvinci now, it is at least as efficient as same bike with derailleur, and I generally keep our drivetrains in very good condition, so we’re not talking neglected derailleur.

    I can also say that it is our favorite drivetrain, and in time as others wear out, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they were displaced by nuvinci’s.

    They are incredibly smooth, quiet, durable, NO maintenance. I would already had to tear down and lube an alfine two times by now or lube a rohloff two times as well. meanwhile the nuvinci just keeps on cruising along smooth as can be without a single hiccup along the way.

    • bobc

      Sorry Anthony, I’m sure the hub is a delight to ride (smooth, quiet, perfect ratio available), I’m talking about electric car racing, where the points/ positions/ distances/ speeds have no predjudices, preferences & only reflect the efficiency of the competitor’s whole package, of which transmission efficiency is a small but significant part. As it happens, a Nuvinci car managed to get a podium position in the last race of this season, maybe it’s starting to get run in ;^)
      I think this was equipped with an automatic gear ratio selection system – an enabling technology in the electric races – which they have taken some time to get reliable enough to finish a race.

  11. Anybody ever matched the NuVinci hub with the Rohloff shifter? Does this work? I have a customer that wants me to build a bike with NuVinci hub, but he likes the look of the Rohloff shifter over the standard NuVinci shifter. I’ve not ever tried this setup and have no idea if it would work. Any thoughts?

  12. There will be a new, very very cool NuVinci Hub soon.. Expect some public News after Taipei Show in the middle of March.

  13. Elliott;

    Check if the Rohloff shifter will pull enough cable to shift the NuVinci hub all of the way. Both hubs require lots of cable pull and use dual cable pull-pull arrangements so the Rohloff shifter should work with the NuVinci hub if the cable pull is adequate. Normal full range cable pull for rhe Rohloff is about 96mm and is controlled/limited at the hub so I am not sure if the shifter itself could handle more or not.

    I have bikes with both hubs but had not considered trying to swap shifters or check total cable pull available from each shifter.

    • Ken

      If my memory serves me correctly one must twist a nu-vinci shifter 2 1/2 turns to shift it through it’s full range of motion. I have not ridden a Rohloff bike in a while, but i do not think it requires that much twist.

  14. Hi, I posted a new Blog Post about the new NuVinci N360. It’s in German but I think there are many German / Swiss Readers here too.

  15. Bob

    I have a big range shift with a mountain drive 2 speed crank, perhaps those are useful on these too?

    low range to high range then fine tune the effort to suit, with the hub.

    How much leverage does it take to make those hubs start slipping?

  16. bobc

    Bob – usually CVTs are arranged so that extra torque causes the rolling surfaces to press harder into each other – result being that they don’t slip, right up until they break!!!
    On other designs I’ve seen “roller and ramp” type thrust washers to achieve this – there’s probably a proper name for it that I don’t know….

  17. Pete

    I have a Sturmey Archer 8 hub and have ridden bikes with SA 3, Shimano 7, Alfine 8 and Alfine 11 hubs. After much research and pondering over discussion about lower efficiency in the Nuvinci N360, I decided that i wanted to get an N360 eventually. I have disliked and suffered with deraillers for a long time and the final straw came when my rear derailer inexplicably took a dive into my rear wheel. I gritted my teeth & bought an N360 laced into a DT Swiss TK540 700C rim with DT Swiss Alpine III spokes and a Surley 20 t cog. All I can say is: WOW!! The guys at NuVinci are right: I just did not notice any loss of efficiency. The benefit of having the exact correct ratio so my pedalling cadence is perfect seems to far outweigh any possible small loss of mechanical effiency. The benefit of always being able to get to an approprite gear ratio in any circumstance -at a standstill, up-hill, under max load, whatever, is huge! I think that the N360 has the 7 & 8 speed products above beat by a very wide margin. Any advantage over the Alfine 11 is much less clear. the Alfine 11 is a superb hub and clearly has the N360 beat on range of gearing. I feel that the shifting system in the N360 is better – the twin cable pull-pull system like the Rohloff seems to me to be a more secure way of shifting. The Alfine 11 is certainly much better in that regard than the other Shimano hubs and (even more so) the Sturmey Archer products. No hesitation or back-pedalling required when shifting the 11 speed. It just does’nt seem to shift quite as well as the N360 under load. Being able to have “in between” ratios is also very nice, particularly at the top end of the range.The price advantage of the N360 is significant – my complete wheel with superior components and cog cost less than the price of an Alfine 11 hub alone (ie without even a small parts kit or shifter, without which the hub is useless). Further, if a shifter cable breaks, you are not stuck in a high or low gear like the SA, Shimano or Sram products (or any derailler). You can change ratios at the hub by hand (no tools) to get an acceptable ratio to get you home. I have fixed the more limited range of the N360 by retaining a double chainwheel (for now at least) and rear derailler set in a fixed gear position to maintain chain tension / allow use of different chainwheels. One of these days, I am going to get a Metropolis Patterson up front to finally get rid of the last derailer components (look out, Rohloff). A big advantage with the NuVinci is that it can be bought in versions which can accept standard 6-bolt discs or Shimano-type roller brake or splined disk. After-market conversion kits are available to change brake types. To my mind, this is a distict advantage over a Rohloff with their proprietary 4-bolt discs. NuVinci also offer special quick release bolts to eliminate the need to carry a decent 15mm or bigger wrench in your tool kit I am not a fast rider and only ever ride alone for fun on road and hard-packed trails. My rides are quite long – 60 to 120km in a hilly city and can be up to 8 hours in the saddle.1 to 2 times per week. If you are a competitive rider, you are probably better off staying with a high-end derailler. If you whine incessantly about every last gram of weight, the N360 is not for you. If you are a weekend cyclist or are a commuter who wants a really good gear range, RELIABILITY, MINIMAL MAINTENANCE, don’t like being caught in a high gear at a traffic light or bottom of a hill, have trouble figuring out derailler gear shifts, you should think very seriously about the advantages of the N360 and don’t worry about nit-picking comments regarding weight or effiency. All in all, the N360 is a fantastic hub and I am very pleased I bought one.

  18. Mike

    Initial review of Nuvinci N360 on a recumbent tandem.
    After one week/100 miles.

    Bike ‘specs:
    BikeE E2 recumbent tandem
    rear shock
    weighing in at 75 pounds with tools, waterbottles and lights
    over 400 pounds of bike, riders and backpacks
    (that’s over 180 kilos for you Unamericans)
    set up as a daily commuter in the Berkeley, CA USA area
    70-100 miles per week
    Nuvinci N360 hub
    20″ rear wheel, laced 1-cross
    Install and wheelbuild by El Sobrante Cyclery, 94803
    (thanks, Ken!)
    32 tooth and 48t chainrings
    18t rear cog
    deraileur acting as a chain tensioner

    The Nuvinci N360 seems very well constructed, is viscerally pleasant to ride, idiot-proof and seamless to operate and can never miss a shift. It suffers the demerits of heavy weight (around 4 pounds), and relative inefficiency compared to a sprocket drive (I estimate 80% as efficient). I recommend it highly for low-maintenance cruiser/commuter use, non-competitive tandems, and especially, for recumbent tandems, but I don’t recommend it for going fast. If you ever see one on a bike, you’ve gotta try it.

    Full story, with tangents:
    Watching the drive train on our tandem wear away, daily, I knew it was soon headed for the great metal recycling bin in the sky. I like internal geared hubs (IGH) because of low maintenance and that they can downshift while stopped or stalled, which is a BIG deal on a recumbent (a ‘bent), where there’s no standing on the pedals to help regain forward movement again. I hoped the Nuvinci would also “solve” a tandem-specific issue of the Stoker and Captain coordinating getting off and on the power during shifts. With a standard IGH or sprocket drive, one has to ease up on the pedals in order to get a nice, quiet shift, and with a worn drivetrain, some pedal finesse is required to get certain shifts, such as down onto the granny ring. That all can be challenging for two people to coordinate, particularly on a hill or when a stall looms if choosing to obey a stop sign or avoid a sudden hazard (eg., from not obeying the stop sign). With the Nuvinci, however, the Captain can shift without notice and the ratio change will just happen seamlessly without upsetting anyone, since the drive is never disengaged.

    On my tandems (yes, plural), I have the cranks set to be out-of-phase by 90 degrees between the Captain and Stoker. There is a chain that connects the two sets of cranks and one typically synchronises them in-phase so that both people’s feet move together, left/left,, right/right,, left/left,, etc, with essentially two big power pulses per rotation. However, the cranks can also be set out of phase: front left then rear left, front right then rear right, left, left, etc., to give four smaller power pulses per rotation. When I did this I noticed almost a gear cog-worth increase in power (we were climbing hills in the next higher gear than usual). This is on both the normal tandem and the ‘bent one, which has a rear shock that will compress a little with each power pulse. In addition to better performance, four little pulses should be easier on the drivetrain overall. On normal tandems one has to make sure both pedals are “up” on the inside of turns so that somebody doesn’t strike an inside pedal on the ground (catastrophy!). The pedals/cranks on the ‘bent tandem, however, are mounted so high that they can’t hit in a turn, so no worries no matter what their phase setup.

    One issue I ran into when planning an internal geared hub was the amount of torque the hub can handle, which becomes an issue on a bike with two people torquing the drivetrain. Some manufacturers give input values for their hubs, either in an actual torque value or a chainring to sprocket ratio, eg., a 32t ring with a 16t cog gives a ratio of 2:1. Some hubs specify 2:1, Nuvinci says 1.8:1 and some don’t say at all, and I assume those ratios are for the strongest riders likely to use their hub. That minimum ratio and the reduction ratio of the lowest gear inside the hub is crucial as it says how steep a hill I can climb, and in Berkeley, we have hills! I figure that even though I’m not as strong as a pro rider, I may actually be able to spaz out the same peak torque once or twice, and with the stoker pedalling too (in phase), we could conceivably exceed pro torque in a moment of panic. But crank torque differs depending on whether one stands on the pedals or sits. Some back of the envelope calculations: just how much more torque does standing on the pedals impart than when sitting down and pedalling? Figure that if one is climbing a hill at the same speed then the power output is the same. Power is torque times rpm or pedalling cadence. Let’s say cadence while standing is 1/2 of sitting (say, 45 vs. 90). The cogs used for a standing climb are usually two to three higher (smaller) than sitting, for example a 24t down to a 16t. 16/24 is 2/3. 1/2 of 2/3 is 1/3. In other words, on the ‘bent where one can’t stand, a person may only be able to apply 1/3 of the torque as standing, and fudging a little more by assuming that one can push back into the seat a bit, maybe a person could put out 1/2 the torque. On the ‘bent tandem, both of us together sitting still won’t put out MORE torque than one person standing, and with an out-of-phase crank setup we’re putting out substantially less peak torque than one person standing. This also seems about right from how poorly we can climb hills compared with every normal bike we’ve ridden and with everyone who passes us up the hills… At any rate we’re running the 1.8:1 minimum input ratio (for a solo rider), to the Nuvinci, and can climb anything on our commute so the minimum is minimum enough for our needs.

    One question I’ve read while researching the Nuvinci is, how much less efficient is it compared with a regular external sprocket drive? Nobody gives any numbers or data. Well, for over a week now we’ve climbed the hill to work in “full underdrive” of the N360 on the 32t ring, and it feels a bit easier than the 32/28 combo on the old drive. The gain ratio calculator on says that 32/28 on our old setup with those wheels, etc, was a 1.6, while the N360 at full underdrive is at 1.2. Hmm, one is 75% of the other, which by my math gives a 25% loss as an “upper limit” for the hub. Up that hill with the N360 at full underdrive it is harder to pedal than the old 32/32, which has a gain ratio of 1.4, which when divided into 1.2 gives 86%, or a 14% loss as the “lower limit” for that hub. My guess is that the loss of the N360 is somewhere in the middle, around 20%, which is substantial; other internal geared hubs probably lose only half that. In other ratios the loss seems roughly the same or at least similar; the Nuvinci seems overall a tad slower than the old drive. Now, that said, after riding the N360 for a week, I don’t really care! Yes it feels slower, but the overall experience is WAY mellower than with the sprockets and deraileur. Look at the above numbers and realize we’ve left the realm of normal bikes and ride more of a human-powered land-yacht. It still takes about the same time to get to work, we don’t ever discuss the finer points of tandem communication while the chain skates around on the cassette, and we can power the pedals all the time instead of having these constant excuses to go slack, or struggling to avoid a shift. I can shift reactively instead of pro-actively; I don’t have to anticipate hills, stops or anything. Immediately it was obvious to both of us that this kind of drive on a non-racing tandem bike is the way to go. As Captain, I now constantly and almost subconsciously creep the ratio up or down to meet our immediate needs and to keep us working up a sweat (like a good DJ in a dance hall). With deraileur and cassette I was driving my Stoker nuts with all this compulsive shifting and the occasional ominous sound of the chain rattling, skipping and grinding from cog to cog, threatening a mis-shift, but with the Nuvinci nobody cares or really even notices the shifts. We just sit back, pedal away and enjoy the ride!

    Would I recommend a N360? I sure wouldn’t get one for my solo bike: While I like the idea of an IGH, I have no problem shifting gears in a typical 3 or more-speed hub or cassette when I’m pedaling by myself. There would be no real advantage of the N360 and yet all the penalties of weight and drive inefficiency. I would recommend they try one, all those people who seem to use only one gear on their multi-speed bikes. We’ve all seen them – they ride around in one gear that has become so hook-worn that it probably couldn’t shift out if they wanted it to, while all the other cogs are pristine. These people seem to have an issue with shifting in general, maybe they fear the rattle of a perpetually out-of adjustment shifter or can’t quite get a clean shift with whatever arrangement and technique they suffer. The N360 is so fundamentally different to shift that they might really like it, and a N360 out of adjustment will still have a lot of range that’s easy to use. And I would unhesitatingly recommend that tandem riders, both normal and ‘bent, consider a Nuvinci. They/we have the problems that this particular IGH solves quite nicely.

    So, Fallbrook, don’t miss out on marketing this hub to tandem users! Make whatever input ratio recommendations you need to insure the reliability of the hub for tandem use, specify out-of-phase cranks or whatever, but don’t miss this opportunity. This is a GREAT innovation for non-competitive tandem riders. I see you have this Harmony auto-shifter for the N360. If it is anything like the hub, I bet it has a huge, heavy battery, but works flawlessly. Get the Harmony to work on regular, non-electric-bikes and the two together would be awesome for tandems. There would be no arguing about the shifts, they would just happen! The ultimate maintenance-free bike? Put the N360 and Harmony on a shaft-drive comfort/commuter bike like the ones Dynamic sells, with a front generator hub to charge the Harmony battery and power lights, and run those thick, thorn-proof inner-tubes (that hold air for a month). It would be a bike almost as slow (and heavy) as a tortoise, but it would ride on forever and only need some air and a squirt of grease on the shaft every month/1000 miles! And I can’t wait for the next Nuvinci version.

    If you’re in the Berkeley area and want to try the N360 on the land-yacht, give a shout to:
    conboymike a t yahoo d o t com


    • Jake

      Thanks Mike for detailed posting of tandem N360 use. We’ve been riding one (on a regular tandem) for a couple months now and don’t intend to go back anytime soon. I agree that the slow constant gear change under load as we accelerate is an unbelievable joy, although it requires more wrist torque than changing without load. Happy stoker as there are no more jolting gear changes.

      I kept the triple chainring in place to extend the gearing, and the rear der to act as a chain tensioner.

    • Anonymous

      Longer term review of Nuvinci N360 on a recumbent tandem

      It has been a year or so now since I installed the Nuvinci on my ‘bent Bike E2, and my wife and I have ridden around 1400 miles on it. I can’t say my opinion has changed at all since the first 100 miles; it has only solidified. The hub performs exactly the same, it shows no signs of change (eg., wear), and has become my single favorite bit of tech on that bike, at least while riding it (the LED solar christmas lights I strung along the frame is my favorite tech just looking at the bike – trippy at night!)
      I/we like that hub so much that I’ve put one on my regular, upright tandem, yep, a repeat customer! This will be a bit of a test for that hub: with the relatively big 700c wheels I’ll have to exceed the recommended input ratio a lot in order to retain the same low gear ratio that I have with a regular sprocket cassette hub, which as it is barely gets us up the hills around here. My current low gear has me at a 1.4 gain ratio of pedal travel to wheel turn ( gear ratio calculator), which gets us up all the hills on our rides, but one. With the Nuvici-recommended lowest input ratio of 1.8:1, the gain ratio would be (also) 1.8, which with the hub’s slight inefficiency would feel like 2.25, and that rules out a bunch of hills. Either my stoker and I will have to stand up on the pedals (and still not get up some of the hills), or I’ll have to gear much lower. With the stock triple chainrings and a 19 tooth rear sprocket I have 36/19 with the middle ring which is above the recommended ratio of 1.8:1. I figure, pedals out-of-phase, we can stand on the pedals and not over-torque the hub. And I still have the 24 tooth granny ring… for a ratio of 24/19 or around 1.3:1, WAY lower than recommended. But given what I’ve experienced with the hub on the ‘bent bike and what I’ve read about this hub, I’m gambling the $300+, voiding my warranty and giving 1.3:1 a try. Remember, standing puts out something like 3 times as much torque as sitting. I’m betting that if we never, ever stand on the pedals while in the low ring, the hub will work fine forever. And we’ll be able to climb most all the hills.
      So far at around 100 miles the hub is working perfectly. We can climb all the hills either standing in the middle chainring or sitting with the smallest ring. Somebody posted a review about a Nuvinci hub on a Surly mountain bike, with the comment that the hub felt like it was slipping a tiny bit under high torque although it really wasn’t slipping. Now that I can actually stand on the pedals with this hub I feel something like that but it isn’t like slippage, more like the cush drive on a motorcycle. It is as if there is a rubber bushing in the drive train so you don’t feel a metal on metal shock when snapping power to the pedals, but something slightly softer. Maybe that’s why riding with this drive is commonly reported to feel so good on the knees. The 1000 mile report will be interesting…

      • Jake

        Glad to hear everything is going well with your n360 tandems. I’ve had no problems either, apart from some minor traction fluid leakage.

      • Ben


        We just bought our first tandem, a Fandango MTB 29er, we are running a 44/33/22 to a 13-34. Assuming the Nuvinci 360 could handle the torque, would we improve our low range capabilities running a single cog up front or would we still need to run a 2x or even a 3x.

        Do you think the hub is strong enough for those sudden applications of torque, where we are creeping along and have to suddenly pedal hard, standing at times, lots of abrupt transitions, etc…

        Thanks for all your detailed comments, not sure I understand the ratios you discussed, but I’ll do some research and see if I can figure out where we stand in our potential use.

        I don’t mind experimenting, but I don’t want to throw about $600-700 on a wheel when I’m not that disappointed in how out current gear train is working.


      • Jake

        Hi Ben,

        I think you’d need to keep the triple chainset to ensure you have a wide enough gear range for tandem use.

        You would be seriously exceeding the torque spec for N360 by running a 22T front with the standard 18T Nuvinci sprocket, and your you have the additional stoker power too!

        I’d suggest that you just enjoy your tandem as it is. Many miles down the road you may need to replace the drivetrain ( or rear wheel) and then would be a good time to make a choice on a hub gear or not.

        We only ride around town, and generally on use the middle chainring and the nuvinci, but the other two chainrigngs come in useful on the occasional trip out of town and into the hills.


  19. Are there any exploded views of the inside of the Nuvinci 360? I want to know what’s under the big cover behind the sprocket.

  20. john b

    I know the N360 is sealed for life, but surely the axle bearings need maintenance occasionally? Has anyone done this, and how is it done?

  21. Cliff Smith

    WHY ? does the NuVinci N360 technical manual give shift cable end lengths 120mm and 111mm .
    Park tool gives 117mm and 114mm ? ? ?

  1. 1 Nuvinci 360 Technical Videos «

    […] with Fallbrook Technologies, makers of the Nuvinvi hub) posted 9 instructional videos for the Nuvinci 360 which is a continuously variable transmission hub. They cover wheel building, sprocket […]

  2. 2 Flywheel Bicycle with NuVinci Hub and Regenerative Braking «

    […] Maxwell von Stein has created a bicycle using a NuVinci 360 hub with a chain ring adapter connecting the power output of the hub to a flywheel. This allows the […]

  3. 3 Continuously Variable Bicycle Gear Hub

    […] NuVinci N360. How it works. Reviews of 2007 and 2010 models: 1 / 2 / 3. The gear is used on the flywheel bicycle mentioned last week and can also be applied in […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s