alternating chains!

Pete Biggs said:

Quoted message said:

This is massively cheaper in the long run.

My time, and mental health, are some of my most expensive assets!

I do still prefer to ride my bike half an hour longer, than spending
half an hour cleaning the chain (and the garage floor), and lubing it.

I've learned to stay away from grease for lubricating the chain though
- it does stay there longer than oil, but so does the sand the wind
bring upon it :-(

For lubing the chain, I follow the advise a friend of mine learned
from a Kawasaky shop manual - use valvoline type oil to lube the
chain, regularly, and it will last a long time :-)

Cheers,
BigBen.

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 21:30:04 +0100, "Pete Biggs"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

A chainring only needs
replacing when a chain actually skips on it.

Up to a point, Lord Copper. I think it needs replacing when:

o the chain is replaced, and
o the ring teeth are noticeably hooked

Which is where that thirty quid just went...

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

BigBen said:

Quoted message said:

A chainring only needs
replacing when a chain actually skips on it.

How can you tell if the chain is skiping on the sprocket(s), or on the
chairing(s)?

If in doubt, replace chain and sprockets first, then it must be the
chainring if skipping continues. (It nearly always is the sprockets).

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Replace your chain _before_ it is worn out, and you will not have to
replace your cassette and chainrings. It's as simple as that.

[I didn't write that]

Quoted message said:

I find hard to believe in "eternal life" of cassetes and chainrings,
no matter how often you replace chains ;-)

I agree with you, Mrs Ben.

~PB

BigBen said:

Pete Biggs said:

Quoted message said:

This is massively cheaper in the long run.

No I didn't write that.

~PB

Just zis Guy said:

Quoted message said:

A chainring only needs
replacing when a chain actually skips on it.

Up to a point, Lord Copper. I think it needs replacing when:

o the chain is replaced, and
o the ring teeth are noticeably hooked

I don't believe so if it actually works with the new chain.

~PB

in message <[email hidden]>, Pete Biggs

(') said:

Just zis Guy said:

Quoted message said:

A chainring only needs
replacing when a chain actually skips on it.

Up to a point, Lord Copper. I think it needs replacing when:

o the chain is replaced, and
o the ring teeth are noticeably hooked

I don't believe so if it actually works with the new chain.

But if it's already visibly hooked it's going to cause greatly
accelerated wear to the new chain, because instead of spreading the
load evenly over the twenty or so links which are engaged with the
chainring, a worn chainring will concentrate it on just one or two (as,
indeed, a worn sprocket will).

So the new chain won't last so long.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; ... exposing the violence incoherent in the system...

In article said:

Simon Brooke said:

If you replace your chains _before_ they are worn out, you will never
have to replace your cassette or chainrings.

It's an exaggeration to say "never" because chains that have only
/slightly/ elongated will still cause some sprocket wear (ie. before they
have reached "12 1/16"😉. A frequently used sprocket can wear enough to
cause skipping after just a very few new chains in some cases. It depends
on many factors, including how often chains are cleaned.

And alternating chains can extend the time that takes, because it takes
longer for all the chains to reach that 12 1/16, as well as helping a
more thorough cleaning policy. So it's not a substitute for checking chain
length and replacing when appropriate, but it can be worthwhile depending
how you value the time spent compared with the cost of new chains.

No, alternating doesn't help from a wear point of view & yes, if you use a
chain beyond it's wear limit, it will knacker your chainrings, but, by using
2-3 chains, this will take 2 or 3 time as long (depending on amount of
chains), as opposed to the life span of 1 chain!
Pete Biggs <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Simon Brooke said:

Alternating them _does_ _not_ _help_ from a wear point of view. If you
continue to use a chain after it has stretched beyond its wear limit
you will knacker your cassette and chainrings. It doesn't matter how
many chains you have in your alternating set, you will still knacker
your cassette and chainrings.

But that can take a very VERY LONG TIME, and has to be offset against the
cost of replacement chain at about ten quid a time.

I'd say it comes down to the chainrings: cost and how quickly they wear,
which will depend on model, size and useage.. A chainring only needs
replacing when a chain actually skips on it.

Quoted message said:

Replace your chain _before_ it is worn out, and you will not have to
replace your cassette and chainrings. It's as simple as that.

Simple but not always true!

~PB

So if a chain is replaced before it's totally knackered, a rear casseyye &
front chainring will accept a new one!, this isn't so in my experience!
Surely it needs to be totally compatible!
Pete Biggs <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Simon Brooke said:

If you replace your chains _before_ they are worn out, you will never
have to replace your cassette or chainrings.

It's an exaggeration to say "never" because chains that have only
/slightly/ elongated will still cause some sprocket wear (ie. before they
have reached "12 1/16"😉. A frequently used sprocket can wear enough to
cause skipping after just a very few new chains in some cases. It depends
on many factors, including how often chains are cleaned.

Quoted message said:

This is massively cheaper in the long run.

Not always when using inexpensive cassette and chainrings, or when
intending to replace the chainrings (or bike!) before all that long
anyway.

~PB

Can ou tell me how to find out the 0.75% elongation. My chain is a sram
pc-59.
Also cleaning it, i live where there's lots of millstone grit & this gets in
your links, you can hear it crush between links & chainrings when peddling,
nasty!I guess cleaning is imperative!
Also a good lube, using oil & grease stays on but also attracts grit! I'm
using a thin teflon based product! Whats best!
Cheers
Paulmouk <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"gary" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hi
I used to fit a chain, rear cassette, & chain rings & find out that when

the

Quoted message said:

chain wears out, i have to replace not just the chain, but the whole

lot!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

costly [censored] man!
Is it just me that does this, but by running a couple of chains,
alternating them, extends the wear from the gearing !
Does anyone else do this, is it common knowledge! & how often do you all

run

Quoted message said:

each chains between alternating!
Cheers

I used to do that but now I don't bother. I bought a Rohloff Caliber?

chain

Quoted message said:

checker a few years ago and now replace chains at 0.75% elongation.
The check only takes a couple of seconds to carry out.
I haven't had to replace a cassette since.

Paul.

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Pete Biggs

(') said:

Just zis Guy said:

> A chainring only needs
> replacing when a chain actually skips on it.

Up to a point, Lord Copper. I think it needs replacing when:

o the chain is replaced, and
o the ring teeth are noticeably hooked

I don't believe so if it actually works with the new chain.

But if it's already visibly hooked it's going to cause greatly
accelerated wear to the new chain,

I don't believe it does accelerate chain wear.

Quoted message said:

because instead of spreading the
load evenly over the twenty or so links which are engaged with the
chainring, a worn chainring will concentrate it on just one or two
(as, indeed, a worn sprocket will).

So the new chain won't last so long.

Chains wear out from the inside. The chain elongates as the pins on the
inside wear. This has nothing to do with the state of the sprockets, it
happens just from the links working and rotating in normal use (and grit
in there will accelerate wear). Then the increased pitch wears the
sprockets. I don't believe it works the other way round. Any /external/
wear is negligible to the point of being irrelevant, in any situation, in
comparison with what's going on the inside.

I noticed that Jobst Brandt recently said in r.b.t that there's nothing
wrong with using a chainring until there's not enough material on the
teeth to actually drive the chain [paraphrasing].

~PB

Arthur Clune said:

m-gineering <[email hidden]> wrote:

: use three chains, and clean them all at once. Hang them from a nail and
: start with the shortest. Replacing depends on the usage, with a muddy
: MTB intervals are ofcourse much shorter than with a sunny weatherbike.

God, life is too short.

Just replace your chains frequently. They are cheap enough. One of
my cassettes is on its 5th or 6th chain (I've lost count)

I've been reading this thread and the same words were ringing in my ears -
"Life's too short" , in fact they're words that my LBS came out with
when I popped
in to show them my worn chain ( the chainset/chain/cassette had been
replaced a year earlier)
Both 53 and 39 chainrings were also worn, the 53 a little more so.
There wasn't a lot in the cost of 2 chainrings versus a new chainset so
we agreed on a chainset + chain.
Then I was thinking of skimping by not buying a cassette.
"How many miles is you do on this?" Will asked.
"9-10,000" I answered.
"jeez, Dave , life's too short to start worrying about 20 quid here and
there when you
consider how many miles you're doing a year" he answered.
And when you think about it , £110 for a new drive-chain isn't much in
the bigger scheme of things.
btw, my rims last about 20,000 miles and I've now accepted I need new
wheels every two years
and chain/chainset/cassette every year.

davep

gary said:

So if a chain is replaced before it's totally knackered,

Long before it's totally knackered, just before it starts to really
knacker, more like.

Quoted message said:

a rear
casseyye & front chainring will accept a new one!, this isn't so in
my experience! Surely it needs to be totally compatible!

No, not if you replace the chain soon enough. You've just left it too
long in your experience.

~PB

Pete Biggs said:

Quoted message said:

a rear
casseyye & front chainring will accept a new one!, this isn't so in
my experience! Surely it needs to be totally compatible!

No, not if you replace the chain soon enough. You've just left it too
long in your experience.

Absolutely. I have never worn out a front chainring (bent in half yes, worn
out no) and have gone through a large number of chains and cassettes over
the years.

...d

gary said:

Can ou tell me how to find out the 0.75% elongation. My chain is a
sram pc-59.

Forget percentage and the special guages that measure it (because guages
such as Park CC2 take into account some irrelevant factors and give very
different results for different makes of chain). Measure what should be
12 inches and replace the chain when that length has elongated to 12 1/16
inches. (Using imperial units because chains still use a 1" pitch and
these numbers are easy to remember). See the Sheldon Brown article I
mentioned earlier.

Quoted message said:

Also cleaning it, i live where there's lots of millstone grit & this
gets in your links, you can hear it crush between links & chainrings
when peddling, nasty!I guess cleaning is imperative!
Also a good lube, using oil & grease stays on but also attracts grit!
I'm using a thin teflon based product! Whats best!

It's difficult. Wax lubes are cleanest but they're expensive, don't last
long and don't actually lubricate brilliantly. Oily products make the
chain get dirty quicker. Anyway, a chain is easily cleaned simply by
dropping it into a jar of white spirit and shaking. And easily joined
again with a Powerlink.

~PB

ps. Note that the *pitch* of a chainring doesn't alter at all as it wears,
the centre to centre distances remain the same, therefore there's no pitch
mismatch when a new chain is used with a worn chainring. It's pitch
mismatch that causes wear. It's just that some material dissapears from
the teeth. If too much is missing then it won't hang on and drive the
chain, but until that point, no problem.

I can appreciate the desire to replace rings when they look so bad that
they spoil the look of a nice bike, or when they're so bad that skipping
is imminent (though that's hard to guess), but from what I understand,
there's no advantage to replacing before that.

~PB

David Martin said:

Absolutely. I have never worn out a front chainring (bent in half yes, worn
out no) and have gone through a large number of chains and cassettes over
the years.

Oddly, my last chain replacement required a new front chainring but
*not* a rear cassette (OK, the fourth gear is a bit skippy, but I can
live with that until I get paid :-). I'm still trying to figure out
how it wore the front so much more than the back.

R.

Pete Biggs said:

Forget percentage and the special guages that measure it (because
guages such as Park CC2 take into account some irrelevant factors and
give very different results for different makes of chain). Measure
what should be 12 inches and replace the chain when that length has
elongated to 12 1/16 inches. (Using imperial units because chains
still use a 1" pitch and these numbers are easy to remember). See
the Sheldon Brown article I mentioned earlier.

Would that be the one which says "All modern bicycles use 1/2" pitch"? :-)

--

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
World Domination?
Just find a world that's into that kind of thing, then chain to the
floor and walk up and down on it in high heels. (Mr. Sunshine)

Pete Biggs <[email hidden]> wrote:

: I can appreciate the desire to replace rings when they look so bad that
: they spoil the look of a nice bike, or when they're so bad that skipping
: is imminent (though that's hard to guess), but from what I understand,
: there's no advantage to replacing before that.

Having seen someone headbutt the tarmac after there chain slipped off the
front chainring when powering uphill (it was a very worn chainring) I'm
pretty cautious about replacing mine.

Once they look visible shark-toothed, I buy a new one. Given that this
takes about 3 years of regular riding on a Campag chorus big ring and that
they cost ~£30 this doesn't seem to excessive to me. I find I get about
four years out of the inner ring. I would put this down to my enormous
strength meaning I keep it in the big ring all the time, but I fear
it's probably not ;(

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune PGP/GPG Key: http://www.clune.org/pubkey.txt
Don't get me wrong, perl is an OK operating system, but it lacks a
lightweight scripting language -- Walter Dnes

Pete Biggs <[email hidden]> wrote:

: It's difficult. Wax lubes are cleanest but they're expensive, don't last
: long and don't actually lubricate brilliantly. Oily products make the
: chain get dirty quicker. Anyway, a chain is easily cleaned simply by
: dropping it into a jar of white spirit and shaking. And easily joined
: again with a Powerlink.

It is difficult. I use proper oil in winter and on my commuter (when I just
want it to stay put). In summer I use a teflon based lube on the best bike
and accept that I'll have to re-apply it frequently.

One point that's often overlooked is that the way to lube a chain with oil
is to lube it, leave it for a while and then *wipe the chain with a clean
dry rag* to remove most of the oil on the outside of the chain.

Doing this does really help to keep chains clean.

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune PGP/GPG Key: http://www.clune.org/pubkey.txt
Don't get me wrong, perl is an OK operating system, but it lacks a
lightweight scripting language -- Walter Dnes