I think it could work. I don't need anything smaller than a 22 but for others with a 4 arm crank who would prefer a 20 tooth chainring... Cut a ring out of 1 mm thick steel. Drill 4 holes to fit a current 4 arm mtb design (64 spacing). Drill 5 holes to fit an older 5 arm mtb design (58 spacing). Attach the adaptar to the 4 arm crankarms. Attach a 20 tooth 58 chainring to the adaptor. You could even make an adaptor for a rear cog (18, 19).
I realize why you would use such a thin piece, to keep from messing up the chainring spacing, but are you sure 1mm would be stiff enough not to buckle under load?
May you have the wind at your back. And a really low gear for the hills! Chris
Maybe not. But since its a very small ring maybe it will.
"Chris Zacho "The Wheelman"" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
I realize why you would use such a thin piece, to keep from messing up the chainring spacing, but are you sure 1mm would be stiff enough not to buckle under load?
May you have the wind at your back. And a really low gear for the hills! Chris
Maybe not. But since its a very small ring maybe it will.
"Chris Zacho "The Wheelman"" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
I realize why you would use such a thin piece, to keep from messing up the chainring spacing, but are you sure 1mm would be stiff enough not to buckle under load?
Since it's such a small ring, the load will be very high. Imagine standing on the pedal. Look at the ratio between the crankarm length and the radius of that little sprocket. Your weight times that ratio is the force applied on that 1mm thick ring. Dicey.
Better idea: get a 94/58 crankset.
--
David L. Johnson
__o | Become MicroSoft-free forever. Ask me how. _`\(,_ | (_)/ (_) |