Re: Roller Wear in Chains?

Bob said:

Your post resulted in a question of my own, namely- what advantage do
you see in "rotating 3 chains"? If the chain is worn badly enough to
accelerate chain ring/cassette wear when you take it off, it's going to
be just as badly worn when you reinstall it (the "rest" doesn't allow
any healing to take place after all) and if it's not that badly worn
then why replace it?
I'm not poking fun. It's a serious question.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

At the risk of getting flamed I can say that I won't replace a chain
until it breaks and have never worn out a quality gear, front or rear.
My x-mart Huffy has never suffered a chain break and I can't speak for
the gears since I change them when I feel like doing something
different. It has over 5K miles on it and other things have worn out
like the bottom bracket and real wheel bearing race. The Mongoose that
was given to me has now about 2K miles and has only had some flats from
way off road riding. How many miles and of what type are we talking here?

Bill Baka

bbaka said:

It has over 5K miles on it and other things have worn out
like the bottom bracket and real wheel bearing race.

You have not ridden your huffy 5k miles. Can you go a week without
telling some BS story?

Rich

Rich said:

bbaka said:

It has over 5K miles on it and other things have worn out
like the bottom bracket and real wheel bearing race.

You have not ridden your huffy 5k miles. Can you go a week without
telling some BS story?

Rich

Dear Rich,

Last year, I put about 1200 miles on a WalMart Fury
RoadMaster in nine months, starting in March.

It took about thirteen minutes of riding each day after my
normal daily ride on my touring bike (which amounts to about
5k each year).

The bike did suffer a flat rear tire.

Why do you think that Bill couldn't ride his Huffy 5k miles?

Curiously,

Carl Fogel

"Bob" wrote: (clip)what advantage do you see in "rotating 3 chains"? (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The theory is that a chain wears out faster than the sprockets. If you keep
replacing chains, you are putting fresh chains on worn cogs, this
accelerating the wear of both. If you can guess how many chains will have
the same life as the sprockets, and you rotate them, they stay "in pitch"
better, and then you replace everything at once, starting afresh with new
teeth and new links.

The same idea is applied to motorcycles and chainsaws.

Leo Lichtman said:

Quoted message said:

What advantage do you see in "rotating 3 chains"?

Quoted message said:

The theory is that a chain wears out faster than the sprockets. If
you keep replacing chains, you are putting fresh chains on worn
cogs, this accelerating the wear of both. If you can guess how many
chains will have the same life as the sprockets, and you rotate
them, they stay "in pitch" better, and then you replace everything
at once, starting afresh with new teeth and new links.

That's a fuzzy theory at best if you consider what causes sprocket
wear. I posted a picture of an ancient chainwheel that had only a
vestige of teeth but worked well. If the chain is in proper pitch it
loads several sprocket teeth, if it is elongated it bear on only the
first tooth of engagement and causes it to wear more and under high
load to plastically deform.

Quoted message said:

The same idea is applied to motorcycles and chainsaws.

Chains are not affected by worn sprocket because the articulation
occurs under the same load regardless of sprocket or chain wear. The
link hinges on entry onto the chainwheel under full load, just as it
does when exiting a driven sprocket, only there3 the articulation
angle is greater and is the main place where chain wear occurs.

[email hidden]

Leo Lichtman said:

"Bob" wrote: (clip)what advantage do you see in "rotating 3 chains"? (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The theory is that a chain wears out faster than the sprockets. If you keep
replacing chains, you are putting fresh chains on worn cogs, this
accelerating the wear of both. If you can guess how many chains will have
the same life as the sprockets, and you rotate them, they stay "in pitch"
better, and then you replace everything at once, starting afresh with new
teeth and new links.

The same idea is applied to motorcycles and chainsaws.

Sort of off topic but I have had a lot of motorcycles ranging from new
Kawasaki 750cc land rockets to used Honda 160's and only once had to
replace a rear gear. That was a used bike and the gear was worn to nubs
and would ratchet skip terribly if I applied too much throttle. When I
got it off I was somewhat (a lot) dismayed to see that it was not real
steel but some sort of el cheapo metal. I forgot which bike it was but
it was not one of my Kawasakis or Hondas, both of which were built of
good material. If a motorcycle can go well over 10K miles and not need a
chain with its' power then why worry about a bicycle with only human
power wearing out at only 5K miles?
Chainsaws have a chain life of about 2 months with me and an adequate
wood supply.
Just curious.
Bill Baka

bbaka said:

Rich wrote:

Quoted message said:

I ride every day there is even a chance to ride. Some days I only get in
a quick lap of 6 miles and others I approach a Century, and not on some
sissy pavement loop. My summer average is about 30 miles per day, not
racing, not training, just riding.

Woa! There goes the BS meter! I'm guessing you do this all at about
50mph as well, given you could get your trike up to 40 when you were 4.
And if you bend your forks you've got the $200 tool necessary to fix
that as well.

Your a pathlogical liar, Bill, and everyone here knows it.

Rich

Rich said:

bbaka said:

Rich wrote:

Quoted message said:

I ride every day there is even a chance to ride. Some days I only get
in a quick lap of 6 miles and others I approach a Century, and not on
some sissy pavement loop. My summer average is about 30 miles per day,
not racing, not training, just riding.

Woa! There goes the BS meter! I'm guessing you do this all at about
50mph as well, given you could get your trike up to 40 when you were 4.
And if you bend your forks you've got the $200 tool necessary to fix
that as well.

Your a pathlogical liar, Bill, and everyone here knows it.

Rich

I guess that is better than being a proven moron. Pathlogical(?).
At least learn to use your spell checker for the obvious, unless you
came from the Dan Quayle school of spelling. Potato(e).

Bill Baka

I understand that simply switching a clean chain for a dirty one could
make downtime for maintenance shorter but where does a *third* chain
enter into the equation? BTW, White Lightning is good stuff but their
Race Day lube picks up dirt faster than any lube I've ever used.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

I understand that simply switching a clean chain for a dirty one could
make downtime for maintenance shorter but where does a *third* chain
enter into the equation? BTW, White Lightning is good stuff but their
Race Day lube picks up dirt faster than any lube I've ever used.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

So if I replace chains as opposed to "rotating" them and my
rings/cassette are good for 20k miles then I could get 20.5k miles out
of them by "rotating" chains? That added mileage hardly seems worth the
effort. Was the originator of that theory a chain manufacturer by
chance? ;-)

Regards,
Bob Hunt

So if I replace chains as opposed to "rotating" them and my
rings/cassette are good for 20k miles then I could get 20.5k miles out
of them by "rotating" chains? That added mileage hardly seems worth the
effort. Was the originator of that theory a chain manufacturer by
chance? ;-)

Regards,
Bob Hunt