Changing the chain when it less than 0.5% worn?
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Changing the chain when it less than 0.5% worn?
Had my bike at the shop for repair for reasons other than the drivechain. Was told that my chain was worn out, would I want it replaced. I said no, I have a spare new chain at home. From what I can gather he says the shifting was poor because of the chain. The chain probably has 7,000 miles on it. I checked with the Park chain wear tool, and it's not 0.5% worn yet. I don't distrust the bike shop's opinion, but I had always thought it was a matter of just checking the stretch on the chain. Should I be changing chains more frequently than the wear indicator suggests? What are some good rules of thumb here. This is an 11 speed Shimano 105 groupset.
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: socal
Posts: 4,262
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 881 Post(s)
Liked 820 Times
in
620 Posts
The chain and cogs wear together and if you change the chain at the appropriate interval (I've heard it's at 50% of usable life), you don't need to change the cogs and will still have good shifting performance. This should be more economical since it's possible to have the cogs last through a couple of chains. I've never done this opting to wait until the drivetrain needs to be replaced as a unit.
#3
Really Old Senior Member
When actually measuring with a ruler, the .5% on my PARK checker is really .25%. I think your LBS is......
I take the chain off and measure a 3 foot section to reduce the human error to 1/3.
I use the 1 & 37" marks so I don't have to deal with the hook end.
I take the chain off and measure a 3 foot section to reduce the human error to 1/3.
I use the 1 & 37" marks so I don't have to deal with the hook end.
Likes For Bill Kapaun:
#4
Generally bewildered
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Eastern PA, USA
Posts: 3,037
Bikes: 2014 Trek Domane 6.9, 1999 LeMond Zurich, 1978 Schwinn Superior
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1152 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
251 Posts
Pay attention to Bill's "tricks". Especially like the idea of using 3 feet, not 1. BTW, Bill, one slightly different take is to use the 10" and 46" marks. Avoid the hook, avoid the end of the tape that's worn.
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sunny so. cal.
Posts: 904
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 136 Post(s)
Liked 57 Times
in
31 Posts
The chain and cogs wear together and if you change the chain at the appropriate interval (I've heard it's at 50% of usable life), you don't need to change the cogs and will still have good shifting performance. This should be more economical since it's possible to have the cogs last through a couple of chains. I've never done this opting to wait until the drivetrain needs to be replaced as a unit.
Likes For gregf83:
#7
Really Old Senior Member
It doesn't matter what you use as long as you can add 36.
#8
Generally bewildered
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Eastern PA, USA
Posts: 3,037
Bikes: 2014 Trek Domane 6.9, 1999 LeMond Zurich, 1978 Schwinn Superior
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1152 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
251 Posts
Seriously, its an old machinist's trick, and you use "10" so that you don't mess up and forget to subtract the "1", if you start at 1. Starting at the 10 means that if you forget to use 46 and instead use 36, its more obvious. That's the theory, and folks have been using it for at least 100 years or so if I recall reading it in an old machinist's account. May not be too important here, agreed .
Likes For WizardOfBoz:
#9
Really Old Senior Member
Good heavens! Starting with 43, a prime number? It won't work then...
Seriously, its an old machinist's trick, and you use "10" so that you don't mess up and forget to subtract the "1", if you start at 1. Starting at the 10 means that if you forget to use 46 and instead use 36, its more obvious. That's the theory, and folks have been using it for at least 100 years or so if I recall reading it in an old machinist's account. May not be too important here, agreed .
Seriously, its an old machinist's trick, and you use "10" so that you don't mess up and forget to subtract the "1", if you start at 1. Starting at the 10 means that if you forget to use 46 and instead use 36, its more obvious. That's the theory, and folks have been using it for at least 100 years or so if I recall reading it in an old machinist's account. May not be too important here, agreed .
As a Marine Boilermaker (completed apprenticeship in 1971 at Puget Sound NS) we always used 1" or 1'. Or the hook if it wasn't that fussy.
They actually calibrated/repaired (some got beheaded under the shears etc.) our tape measures (tool room) so they were actually quite good.
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 30,225
Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1572 Post(s)
Liked 643 Times
in
364 Posts
If you are going to use one of those chain checker thingies, you would be well advised to calibrate it against a brand new chain.
__________________
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
Likes For Retro Grouch:
#11
Senior Member
I've never been able to get more than half that life from the best chains made. If your new chain doesn't skip under heavy pedaling pressure with any of the sprockets, count yourself lucky and change sooner next time. Elongation is not the only type of wear that's important. I've had chain skip occur after replacing a campy 10 chain with 6000 miles on it showing less tha than .25% elongation.
#12
Generally bewildered
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Eastern PA, USA
Posts: 3,037
Bikes: 2014 Trek Domane 6.9, 1999 LeMond Zurich, 1978 Schwinn Superior
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1152 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
251 Posts
That's 2 prime numbers. It must be my Asperger's.
As a Marine Boilermaker (completed apprenticeship in 1971 at Puget Sound NS) we always used 1" or 1'. Or the hook if it wasn't that fussy.
They actually calibrated/repaired (some got beheaded under the shears etc.) our tape measures (tool room) so they were actually quite good.
As a Marine Boilermaker (completed apprenticeship in 1971 at Puget Sound NS) we always used 1" or 1'. Or the hook if it wasn't that fussy.
They actually calibrated/repaired (some got beheaded under the shears etc.) our tape measures (tool room) so they were actually quite good.
Shears seem to be the bête noire of tape measures (and sometimes machinist's scales!). I suppose that, today, there's been more than one smart phone, too!
Thanks for mentioning your Marine Boilermaker skill. That's very cool.
#13
Senior Member
7000 miles is plenty to get out of the chain. I recently replaced the entire drive train: chain rings, chain and cassette, which had about the same miles as your chain. I modified my chain rings to be more like what I needed, 46/30 instead of 38/26. The 38 ring was like shark's teeth.
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,064
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 350 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 122 Times
in
90 Posts
This is how you measure chain wear accurately. You measure to the inside of the rollers at 2 locations and subtract, using calipers. Subtracting the 2 dimensions from each other will give you the dimension from the same side of rollers, so in essence the center to center dimension without the effect of roller wear. Do it at multiple sections of chain and average.
Likes For tomtomtom123:
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicago area
Posts: 2,551
Bikes: Airborne "Carpe Diem", Motobecane "Mirage", Trek 6000, Strida 2, Dahon "Helios XL", Dahon "Mu XL", Tern "Verge S11i"
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 980 Post(s)
Liked 582 Times
in
399 Posts
My first chain checker was the Park CC-2. I found that on a new chain I couldn't even get the pins into the chain links(!). I contacted Park Tools and was told that the CC-2 is calibrated at the 1% mark. I've since found that this is basically true. I will notice when the reading is 0.75 and this trips the alarm to stock a new chain. The minute it hits 1.0 I replace the chain. By the ruler method, the chain isn't *quite* worn 1%. This has also been my experience with a Spin Doctor "go/no-go" chain checker and a Shimano TL-CN42 (another "go/no-go" tool).
So basically I consider the chain check tools to be "advance-notice" devices, and they are faster and easier to use than a steel ruler, which means I check the chain wear a lot more often than I would otherwise.
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,064
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 350 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 122 Times
in
90 Posts
I have the Shimano tool and it's difficult to know when you're just at the borderline of the pass/fail because just a light push will make it go through. When my chain was at a point where the Shimano tool needed a slightly harder push to get through, my calipers measured around 0.4-0.5% stretch. I had a BBB or X-tools or some other generic tool that measures to the opposite sides of the rollers to include roller wear and it measured 0.75%.
Last edited by tomtomtom123; 04-08-20 at 02:52 PM.
Likes For tomtomtom123:
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicago area
Posts: 2,551
Bikes: Airborne "Carpe Diem", Motobecane "Mirage", Trek 6000, Strida 2, Dahon "Helios XL", Dahon "Mu XL", Tern "Verge S11i"
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 980 Post(s)
Liked 582 Times
in
399 Posts
I agree. That's why I like the Park tool, even though it doesn't compensate for roller wear and gives the "1%" reading a tad bit early. That's a good time to change the chain. If I ever *really* want the exact state of my chain, I have the steel ruler.