New chain test from Lennard Zinn / Velo News
#2
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 36
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
I agree with shimano in terms of the test having limited translation to the real world. Even if you increase the average speed to 12mph, most of these chains only lasted about 1000 miles, and everyone who rides a lot knows that a chain should last at least twice that long with minimal lubrication, and will go longer if you maintain it frequently.
Also it looks like the campy chain got something wrong towards the beginning of the test. the slope of the curve is similar to the winning connex chain.
Also it looks like the campy chain got something wrong towards the beginning of the test. the slope of the curve is similar to the winning connex chain.
#3
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,656
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4756 Post(s)
Liked 1,537 Times
in
1,006 Posts
Unfortunately, for whatever reason, Campy got the short end of the stick re: the value judgement. Every other brand had some pricepoint options (value to high end) tested.. For whatever reason, this seems always be the case .. never includes the potenza/centaur level (nor even Chorus in this test).
Also worth noting how curious it is that different testing orgs can come up with results sometimes at odds with each other, eg from ZeroFriction's tests
Also worth noting how curious it is that different testing orgs can come up with results sometimes at odds with each other, eg from ZeroFriction's tests
#4
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,656
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4756 Post(s)
Liked 1,537 Times
in
1,006 Posts
"...For a chick-magnet like the 11sB chain, I think this is a small price to pay..."
#5
Senior Member
I suspect that the application of excessive abrasives reduces all chain lives significantly. If that had not been done, the testing might have taken 3-4 times as long. I wanted to test Jobst Brandt's contention that as long as a chain wasn't used beyond 1% elongation, the mating sprockets would not be damaged. I rode a Campy 10 chain for 6,000 miles or 350 hours and measured no more than .25% elongation over the full length. Although the elongation was small, rollers had a very large amount of wear, especially on the hole in the roller and the side clearance was twice that of a new chain. The two most used sprockets, my 19 and 21 both skipped with a new chain. That proved that with this chain elongation was irrelevant, compared to roller wear.
I recently checked a KMC x11.93 chain against my chorus 11 chains with similar mileage and found the KMC to have at least .3% elongation, while the campy chains were nearly like new.
The only difference between a record and chorus chain, that I know of is the hollow pins on the record model.
I recently checked a KMC x11.93 chain against my chorus 11 chains with similar mileage and found the KMC to have at least .3% elongation, while the campy chains were nearly like new.
The only difference between a record and chorus chain, that I know of is the hollow pins on the record model.
#6
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,656
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4756 Post(s)
Liked 1,537 Times
in
1,006 Posts
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Land of Enchantment
Posts: 468
Bikes: Domane SLR7 Project One
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 152 Post(s)
Liked 173 Times
in
105 Posts
A quick check of online prices in USA and I don't see the Connex chain for anywhere close to the price they are using (11sX for $58.99, not $47) while all the Shimano chains are available for way less than they are showing (DA for $35.34, not $44). Kind of invalidates the cost results IMHO. To the point it really doesn't make much a difference to me even with waxing them and running 3 chains in rotation.
#8
Senior Member
#9
Forum Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Kalamazoo MI
Posts: 20,667
Bikes: Fuji SL2.1 Carbon Di2 Cannondale Synapse Alloy 4 Trek Checkpoint ALR-5 Viscount Aerospace Pro Colnago Classic Rabobank Raleigh C50 Cromoly Hybrid Legnano Tipo Roma Pista
Mentioned: 59 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3100 Post(s)
Liked 6,634 Times
in
3,799 Posts
We have deleted the article as posting the full article breaks the Fair Use rules. Posting the link, and maybe a paragraph from the article is okay, but not the full text.
#10
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,656
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4756 Post(s)
Liked 1,537 Times
in
1,006 Posts
A quick check of online prices in USA and I don't see the Connex chain for anywhere close to the price they are using (11sX for $58.99, not $47) while all the Shimano chains are available for way less than they are showing (DA for $35.34, not $44). Kind of invalidates the cost results IMHO. To the point it really doesn't make much a difference to me even with waxing them and running 3 chains in rotation.
[EDIT] Sorry, my mistake.. I hastily assumed the "X" in 11sX was meant to stand for any letter that might designate eg. a color
Last edited by Sy Reene; 02-15-20 at 05:45 PM.
#11
Senior Member
I don't understand the overthinking. If you have an 11 speed cassette, that means that you've spent a lot of money on your bike. And have a lot of money to spend. So just buy a chain measuring device, measure your chain regularly, and then buy the cheapest chain, which is probably a KMC which is a very good product and just replace it There was that that hard?
__________________
Il faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace
1980 3Rensho-- 1975 Raleigh Sprite 3spd
1990s Raleigh M20 MTB--2007 Windsor Hour (track)
1988 Ducati 750 F1
Il faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace
1980 3Rensho-- 1975 Raleigh Sprite 3spd
1990s Raleigh M20 MTB--2007 Windsor Hour (track)
1988 Ducati 750 F1
Likes For San Rensho:
#12
Occam's Rotor
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 7,248
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2366 Post(s)
Liked 2,331 Times
in
1,164 Posts
I don't understand the overthinking. If you have an 11 speed cassette, that means that you've spent a lot of money on your bike. And have a lot of money to spend. So just buy a chain measuring device, measure your chain regularly, and then buy the cheapest chain, which is probably a KMC which is a very good product and just replace it There was that that hard?
#13
don't try this at home.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: N. KY
Posts: 5,958
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 982 Post(s)
Liked 517 Times
in
355 Posts
The article mentioned 0.75% elongation. I try to keep it at 1/16 inch in 12 inches, measured with a steel ruler. (It's kind of difficult to be accurate: you have to look straight at the ruler lines, measure against the edge of the pin, and hold the other end in place without moving.) 12 1/16 is 12.0625 inches, or .0625%.
They were doing the equivalent of a 150 pound rider only riding up an 8% grades at 8 mph, 90 rpm, with muddy water on the chain. 1000 miles would be reasonable!
Yes, my Campagnolo 10 speed chains had extremely low elongation, even after 3500-4000 miles. But the chains seemed to have a lot more flex side-to-side. I didn't notice much cassette wear. I tended to replace the chain around 3500 miles before going on a biking vacation, just to not worry about riding an older chain out of town.
I wonder how the rollers can get this worn without showing much chain elongation.
I agree with shimano in terms of the test having limited translation to the real world. Even if you increase the average speed to 12mph, most of these chains only lasted about 1000 miles, and everyone who rides a lot knows that a chain should last at least twice that long with minimal lubrication, and will go longer if you maintain it frequently.
Also it looks like the campy chain got something wrong towards the beginning of the test. the slope of the curve is similar to the winning connex chain.
Also it looks like the campy chain got something wrong towards the beginning of the test. the slope of the curve is similar to the winning connex chain.
I suspect that the application of excessive abrasives reduces all chain lives significantly. If that had not been done, the testing might have taken 3-4 times as long. I wanted to test Jobst Brandt's contention that as long as a chain wasn't used beyond 1% elongation, the mating sprockets would not be damaged. I rode a Campy 10 chain for 6,000 miles or 350 hours and measured no more than .25% elongation over the full length. Although the elongation was small, rollers had a very large amount of wear, especially on the hole in the roller and the side clearance was twice that of a new chain. The two most used sprockets, my 19 and 21 both skipped with a new chain. That proved that with this chain elongation was irrelevant, compared to roller wear.
I recently checked a KMC x11.93 chain against my chorus 11 chains with similar mileage and found the KMC to have at least .3% elongation, while the campy chains were nearly like new.
The only difference between a record and chorus chain, that I know of is the hollow pins on the record model.
I recently checked a KMC x11.93 chain against my chorus 11 chains with similar mileage and found the KMC to have at least .3% elongation, while the campy chains were nearly like new.
The only difference between a record and chorus chain, that I know of is the hollow pins on the record model.
I wonder how the rollers can get this worn without showing much chain elongation.
#14
Full Member
I run the Connex 8SX and am a big fan. Really lowers maintenance for me, very durable and I really like the way the connex link works when it's time to take the chain apart to remove it. I've had a lot more trouble taking apart a SRAM chain when it's due for a change due to corrosion, ended up having to use the chain tool to take it apart at a regular link.
#15
Senior Member
A 12 inch precision ruler is best used with the chain off the bike, after it's cleaned. Just place one end on the edge of a pin. If the pin at the other end is almost half exposed, you have reached 0.5% elongation. A full half pin would be close to about 0.6%.
I have a 9/64 inch hole drilled in the top of a work bench and another 53.5 inches away. A 10D framing nail will fit snugly in the hole to hold one end of the chain. The hole at the opposite end is the length of a new chain, without the quick link. If it was 53.75 inches away, it would represent a wear of just less than .5%. I prefer to tape a 6 inch precision ruler with the center at 53.5 inches so I can measure chains of several different lengths.
Campy says to use vernier calipers and measure between the rollers. A new chain measures 131.6mm. They say to replace the chain at 132.6mm, which is a .76% increase in length, but since it's measured between rollers, most of the length increase is roller wear, not an increase in chain pitch.
I have a 9/64 inch hole drilled in the top of a work bench and another 53.5 inches away. A 10D framing nail will fit snugly in the hole to hold one end of the chain. The hole at the opposite end is the length of a new chain, without the quick link. If it was 53.75 inches away, it would represent a wear of just less than .5%. I prefer to tape a 6 inch precision ruler with the center at 53.5 inches so I can measure chains of several different lengths.
Campy says to use vernier calipers and measure between the rollers. A new chain measures 131.6mm. They say to replace the chain at 132.6mm, which is a .76% increase in length, but since it's measured between rollers, most of the length increase is roller wear, not an increase in chain pitch.
#16
Senior Member
I go through at least 15 chains before I have to replace a cassette and even more chains before I have to replace the chainrings. In fact, the last time I had to replace the cassette was because I let ran a chain that was beyond spec and it messed up the cassette. If I had replaced it, I probably could have gotten a few more chains out of it. In other words, cassettes and chainrings last almost forever if you replace the chain well within the wear limit.
__________________
Il faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace
1980 3Rensho-- 1975 Raleigh Sprite 3spd
1990s Raleigh M20 MTB--2007 Windsor Hour (track)
1988 Ducati 750 F1
Il faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace
1980 3Rensho-- 1975 Raleigh Sprite 3spd
1990s Raleigh M20 MTB--2007 Windsor Hour (track)
1988 Ducati 750 F1
Likes For San Rensho:
#17
Senior Member
I go through at least 15 chains before I have to replace a cassette and even more chains before I have to replace the chainrings. In fact, the last time I had to replace the cassette was because I let ran a chain that was beyond spec and it messed up the cassette. If I had replaced it, I probably could have gotten a few more chains out of it. In other words, cassettes and chainrings last almost forever if you replace the chain well within the wear limit.
15 chains might cost $300-600, unless you're the person referring to $10 chains for his vintage 5 to 7 speed bikes.
Last edited by DaveSSS; 02-16-20 at 11:41 AM.
#18
Occam's Rotor
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 7,248
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2366 Post(s)
Liked 2,331 Times
in
1,164 Posts
I go through at least 15 chains before I have to replace a cassette and even more chains before I have to replace the chainrings. In fact, the last time I had to replace the cassette was because I let ran a chain that was beyond spec and it messed up the cassette. If I had replaced it, I probably could have gotten a few more chains out of it. In other words, cassettes and chainrings last almost forever if you replace the chain well within the wear limit.
#19
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
The article mentioned 0.75% elongation. I try to keep it at 1/16 inch in 12 inches, measured with a steel ruler. (It's kind of difficult to be accurate: you have to look straight at the ruler lines, measure against the edge of the pin, and hold the other end in place without moving.) 12 1/16 is 12.0625 inches, or .0625%.
If you were using 0.0625% as your criteria,I just lowered your chain costs by a factor of 100!
Sounds like 3/32 is the 0.75% mark.
#20
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
BTW, the use of sand and water to create accelerated wear is consistent with other engineering testing methods. In testing plastic parts to failure, it is often the case that the part will last a really long time making the test impractical. What is done is to raise the temperature of the testing. Every 10°C or so doubles the rate of many chemical and some physical processes. In any case, we can use "time-temperature superposition" to be able to test the part at high temperature in a reasonable amount of time to predict what will happen at lower service temperatures.
That said, the accelerated wear in this test may not be a practical indicator of chain life if folks use a different lubricant, and/or clean their chains often, and/or don't ride in dirty or gritty or wet conditions. I'm a fair-weather road bike rider. Rarely do I ride on dusty roads. We read above that folks get (sometimes) 1000s of hours of life from their chains, not 160. If I was a NYC courier riding in all conditions with lots of road grit, and didn't to the maintenance on my company bike, the test might be very applicable. For me, not so much.
Frictional differences between chains are pretty small - about 1-2 watts, according the test cited below. Still, Shimano and Campy seemed to be signficantly (0.5 to 2 W) lower in friction.
https://cyclingtips.com/2019/12/the-...ncy-comparison
That said, the accelerated wear in this test may not be a practical indicator of chain life if folks use a different lubricant, and/or clean their chains often, and/or don't ride in dirty or gritty or wet conditions. I'm a fair-weather road bike rider. Rarely do I ride on dusty roads. We read above that folks get (sometimes) 1000s of hours of life from their chains, not 160. If I was a NYC courier riding in all conditions with lots of road grit, and didn't to the maintenance on my company bike, the test might be very applicable. For me, not so much.
Frictional differences between chains are pretty small - about 1-2 watts, according the test cited below. Still, Shimano and Campy seemed to be signficantly (0.5 to 2 W) lower in friction.
https://cyclingtips.com/2019/12/the-...ncy-comparison
#21
Non omnino gravis
I too get around 4 chains per cassette. Fifteen chains would be over 45,000 miles per cassette, and simply does not seem like a thing that could ever happen... for me.
The Zinn test is nice in that it confirms my bias, I've been using nothing but PC-1110 and FSA Team Issue for the past ~2.5 years, and have never paid more than $17 per chain.
Getting 6,000-7,000 out of each chain pair, and using an a basic formula of (total annual miles / annual* chain cost) x (total annual miles / total annual hours) = somewhere around 10¢ per hour, using my cheapo chains.
*I just replace the chainsets annually, even if the wear is a little low. Spitting mileage between two bikes, I don't get near wearing all four chains out in a typical 10,000 mile year, but the chains are cheap.
The Zinn test is nice in that it confirms my bias, I've been using nothing but PC-1110 and FSA Team Issue for the past ~2.5 years, and have never paid more than $17 per chain.
Getting 6,000-7,000 out of each chain pair, and using an a basic formula of (total annual miles / annual* chain cost) x (total annual miles / total annual hours) = somewhere around 10¢ per hour, using my cheapo chains.
*I just replace the chainsets annually, even if the wear is a little low. Spitting mileage between two bikes, I don't get near wearing all four chains out in a typical 10,000 mile year, but the chains are cheap.
#22
Hear myself getting fat
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Inland Northwest
Posts: 754
Bikes: Sir Velo A Sparrow
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked 265 Times
in
134 Posts
I use the Dura Ace chains. Never measure, clean it about every 350-400 miles or so with a plastic thing that snaps on it, lube with Rock n Roll (I think) and then replace. I go about 2100-2300 miles per chain. Got about 4,500 miles out of my last cassette, just put it on the trainer since I got an 11/34 put on the bike there’s some life left in the cassette I’m sure.
Think I paid $32 for my last few DA chains. I love puting on a new chain. Just like I get new bar tape every year or even twice a year.
These tests are interesting and it’s cool to see how deep in the weeds people get into their chains.
Think I paid $32 for my last few DA chains. I love puting on a new chain. Just like I get new bar tape every year or even twice a year.
These tests are interesting and it’s cool to see how deep in the weeds people get into their chains.
#23
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,656
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4756 Post(s)
Liked 1,537 Times
in
1,006 Posts
#24
Non omnino gravis
Every single test done by Connex shows that the chains made by Connex last the absolute longest... but they're so expensive, only the boutique chains like the KMC Diamond Coat cost more-- so the cost per mile never works out in their favor.
Beyond that test, I've used 3 Connex chains-- two in 10-speed and one in 11-speed. They last the exact same amount of miles as the sub-$20 chains.
The hardcore, obsessed with marginal gains are gonna run pre-broken in UFO chains and never think about the cost. I'm sitting here tracking consumables down to the dime, trying to minimize the annual financial burden of a hobby.
The only thing we know for sure is that the 12-speed dudes are gonna be soaking up the "early adopter tax" for a while.
Beyond that test, I've used 3 Connex chains-- two in 10-speed and one in 11-speed. They last the exact same amount of miles as the sub-$20 chains.
The hardcore, obsessed with marginal gains are gonna run pre-broken in UFO chains and never think about the cost. I'm sitting here tracking consumables down to the dime, trying to minimize the annual financial burden of a hobby.
The only thing we know for sure is that the 12-speed dudes are gonna be soaking up the "early adopter tax" for a while.
#25
Senior Member
I don't understand the overthinking. If you have an 11 speed cassette, that means that you've spent a lot of money on your bike. And have a lot of money to spend. So just buy a chain measuring device, measure your chain regularly, and then buy the cheapest chain, which is probably a KMC which is a very good product and just replace it There was that that hard?