View Single Post
Old 06-19-19, 02:32 PM
  #17  
HarborBandS
HarborBandS
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Chicago Western Suburbs
Posts: 406
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 237 Post(s)
Liked 45 Times in 30 Posts
Originally Posted by Caliper View Post
Hmmm, somebody clearly didn't read the link... Loose *rollers* are cited in the link as a cause for a false stretch reading in most chain stretch measurement devices. Essentially, the clearance at the rollers adds to the wear reading from the pin wear despite that the roller clearance does not come into play when the chain is loaded as on the bicycle. I'll see what a pin-to-pin measurement shows later...

I see what you're saying. You're thinking that the loose rollers are not indicating that your pins have moved further apart. I'm assuming your chain wear indicator uses the rollers for measurement, in that case. I think the older one I had 25 years ago in the shop used a roller location on the back, and a pin location on the front.


Is it really okay to have a chain with play in the rollers? If power is applied to a chain roller and there is some play in the system, the roller will move forward. The next roller to engage the tooth will then be in a more backward position when it engages the tooth. If it has the same amount of play as the roller in front of it, it will move forward without a lot of resistance and the pin-to-pin distance will be fine, but doesn't this additional "gnashing" of parts just create more grinding? Or maybe less?

Last edited by HarborBandS; 06-19-19 at 02:55 PM.
HarborBandS is offline