Vee said:
Chalo said:
Vee said:
Why do 1/8" fixed and SS parts continue to exist? Skinny is good.
For starters, you can get 1/8" chains for five bucks.
Sure, but as I mentioned before, you don't get much chain for $5. My
experience is that cheapo KMC chains wear rapidly in bad weather (they
last only hundreds, not thousands, of miles).
I don't notice my 1/8" chains wearing any faster than my 3/32
bushingless chains. My impression has been that the narrower ones wear
faster, but I admit I don't keep track of mileage on my bikes. I try
not to ride in the worst of all possible weather, but I do ride in
Seattle year-round.
An 8-speed chain would have to last 3 to 4 times as long to represent
the same cost per mile. So there is certainly a difference in cost,
but it's obviously not a big deal if you have some reason to prefer the
narrower chain.
Quoted message said:3 questions:
1. Semantically, is "sprocket" interchangeable with "cog"?
Technically, no. But Sheldon did a fine job answering this one.
Quoted message said:2. Couldn't a sprocket/cog simply be manufactured so that it's thicker
in the center?
Sure, if cost is no object. A typical coaster brake sprocket made of
steel plate retails for $4. Compare the kind you describe from Surly
and Chris King at $25 to $50.
Again, it's not a prohibitive difference, but remember that lots of the
bikes using 1/8" chains cost less than $100 altogether.
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:If you were a freestyle rider inclined to bash your chainring against
things (inadvertently or on purpose), you might find that 1/8" or even
3/16" sprocket teeth tolerate such treatment better than any 3/32"
chainring.
More importantly, the 1/8" and 3/16" (and don't forget the Sharp 1/4"😉
BMX chains are harder to grind through. A 3/32" chain will give up
after a single encounter with a concrete ledge.
That's true, but the chain's inner width is unrelated to its sideplate
thickness. If 3/32" sprocket teeth were sturdy enough not to fold over
under such treatment, then extra-heavy 3/32" chains might be the
remedy.
Quoted message said:I still say the wider $5 ones stink for non-BMX applications. I didn't
think about coaster brake bikes, but it's the uncommon rider who puts
significant miles on such a bike.
A large percentage of gearhub-equipped bikes get a lot of use--
probably a higher percentage of them than of derailleur bikes.
Although most of the sprockets on them are compatible with 3/32"
chains, not all of them are.
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:1/8" single-speed chains have been available and freely interchangeable
for generations. Why accomodate traditional components like that to a
chain size (8 speed) that wasn't available 20 years ago and might be
obsolete in another 10?
More specifically, then, why do track/fixed/SS bikes still use 1/8"
parts when it just means more weight?
Longer service life, maybe? Perhaps just the inertia of tradition.
Quoted message said:And do you really think 15-24 speed bikes will cease to exist in 10 years?
No. But just as I can't go into any old bike shop and find a 5-speed
chain anymore, there will more than likely come a day when the chain of
first resort is 12-speed compatible or some such thing, and won't fit
on a 3/32" plate sprocket. But there will still be 1/8" chains around,
and they'll cost the equivalent of five bucks.
Chalo Colina
