3/32 or 1/8 drivetrain for flip flop hub?
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 69
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
3/32 or 1/8 drivetrain for flip flop hub?
Wondering if there is an advantage to one or the other when using a flip flop hub that will see use on both the fixed and the freewheel side. 130 bcd. I’m kind of leaning towards going 3/32 for the lighter weight but that’s not a major concern. The biggest thing would be durability of the drivetrain so I’m not constantly spending money replacing worn parts. I’m a small dude that pushes lower gears so I guess that could help in the longevity of the drivetrain? Thanks for any help.
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: PHL
Posts: 9,948
Bikes: Litespeed Catalyst, IRO Rob Roy, All City Big Block
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1332 Post(s)
Liked 398 Times
in
194 Posts
Doesn't really matter in a practical sense, unless you're using a 3/32 chain (which would not be compatible with 1/8 parts).
#3
aire díthrub
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: chatham-savannah
Posts: 553
Bikes: Raleigh Competition, Pashley Roadster Sovereign, Mercian Vincitore Speciale
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 259 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 55 Times
in
35 Posts
Unless you’re an actual track racer, then 1/8 doesn’t offer you any advantage. I know a lot of people will take issue with that, but I don’t know of any evidence one could cite to refute it. A 3/32 chain is plenty strong enough for every day fixed or single speed use. Which one you choose should more or less depend on the rest of your drivetrain. 1/8 components for fixed/ss are more common because they’re more popular, so you have a wider selection generally. But that’s really only true if you have a 144bcd crank. If you have a 130bcd crank, then you actually have a larger selection in 3/32 chainrings. you can purchase 3/32 cogs/freewheels and chainrings just as easily and cheaply as 1/8. I run 3/32 on my ss/fixed, have been for years. Good thing about 3/32 components is that they are compatible with a 1/8 chain. Obviously 1/8 isn’t compatible with 3/32 chains, but I’m sure you knew that. You wanna run 3/32, go for it mate. As far as longevity, I don’t think you’ll get less life out of a 3/32 setup, especially if you’re pushing an easier ratio. I normally push 78 (ss) and 88 (fixed) inches using a connex 808 chain with no issues.
Last edited by seamuis; 10-05-18 at 08:25 AM.
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: PHL
Posts: 9,948
Bikes: Litespeed Catalyst, IRO Rob Roy, All City Big Block
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1332 Post(s)
Liked 398 Times
in
194 Posts
The Germans used 11-speed chains and sprockets at the Rio Olympics and won the match sprint on them. The strength argument for 1/8 is pretty much void but there probably is a difference in durability over time. For the average user, just go with whatever's more convenient/afforardable for you.
https://bikerumor.com/2017/03/09/bfs...xed-gear-bike/
https://bikerumor.com/2017/03/09/bfs...xed-gear-bike/
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,830
Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder
Mentioned: 128 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4746 Post(s)
Liked 3,861 Times
in
2,510 Posts
The plus of 1/8" chains is that they are harder to throw off the cog. Not an issue on the track where cranksets are of high quality and round and chain slack is carefully monitored. Where flats are never repaired then the wheel but back on in the dark by an inebriated rider. Where potholes are never hit. But in the real world of road fix gears, 1/8" chains are simply more rock-solid and stay on better, allow you to use cogs and chainrings longer and are more forgiving with lower quality cranksets, hubs and cogs (that don't run especially round, leading to the chain tightening and loosening every revolution and requiring more slack at its slackest to keep the tightest from being too tight.
I started on 3/32" chains and rode them for 25 years. Life has simply been better since I switched. 1/8" starts at higher prices, but over time, that levels out as everything lasts longer.
Ben
I started on 3/32" chains and rode them for 25 years. Life has simply been better since I switched. 1/8" starts at higher prices, but over time, that levels out as everything lasts longer.
Ben
#7
aire díthrub
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: chatham-savannah
Posts: 553
Bikes: Raleigh Competition, Pashley Roadster Sovereign, Mercian Vincitore Speciale
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 259 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 55 Times
in
35 Posts
The plus of 1/8" chains is that they are harder to throw off the cog. Not an issue on the track where cranksets are of high quality and round and chain slack is carefully monitored. Where flats are never repaired then the wheel but back on in the dark by an inebriated rider. Where potholes are never hit. But in the real world of road fix gears, 1/8" chains are simply more rock-solid and stay on better, allow you to use cogs and chainrings longer and are more forgiving with lower quality cranksets, hubs and cogs (that don't run especially round, leading to the chain tightening and loosening every revolution and requiring more slack at its slackest to keep the tightest from being too tight.
the only true advantage of a track chain is it’s better performance under high torque load, because that’s what it was specifically designed for. This goes back to the first sentence of my first comment ...”unless you’re a track racer...”
i ride a dura ace 7400 130bcd crank on a 7400 bb, using an early dura ace 3/32 road chainring. I run a connex 808 chain. A white industries freewheel and an EAI deluxe fixed cog. My chainring isn’t 100% perfectly true round. It’s not even remotely an issue. Been running for years and I routinely push about 90 inches on fixed. I’ve had more than one dura ace track chainring that wasn’t perfectly round as well, just for FYI. I knew someone would end up spouting this nonsense in defence of 1/8, because if heard it many times before but none of it’s true. More importantly none of it matters if the OP has a 130bcd crank and has already stated they were using an easier ratio.
to the OP: for easier clarification to get above this cloud of nonsense, both 1/8 and 3/32 are perfectly fine for everyday use. there is absolutely no danger in using 3/32 unless you don’t setup your drivetrain properly, and I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt in believing you’re smart enough to do it proper.
Last edited by seamuis; 10-05-18 at 09:45 PM.
#8
Old fart
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Appleton WI
Posts: 24,936
Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3571 Post(s)
Liked 3,368 Times
in
1,916 Posts
IMO, there's no benefit to running 3/32" chain on a SS/FG bike.
#9
aire díthrub
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: chatham-savannah
Posts: 553
Bikes: Raleigh Competition, Pashley Roadster Sovereign, Mercian Vincitore Speciale
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 259 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 55 Times
in
35 Posts
lighter weight.
Much larger selection of chainring sizes and styles.(especially if you’re running 130bcd like the OP)
Larger selection of quality chains.
equal selection of quality cogs and freewheels.
Running 3/32 gives you cross compatibility with 1/8 chains should decide to use one.
There are track specific/track quality components for 3/32 if you choose to spend that much.
bonus: if you have a slightly mismatched chainline, a 3/32 chain which is designed for side flex, is more forgiving and is less likely to be thrown off.
there are individual benefits to both sizes and running either one is perfectly fine, but to say there is no benefits to 3/32 is just silly. I get that in a way, we’re all just defending our personal choices but I would argue there are more practical benefits to 3/32 for the average non sport/competition rider. The main reason track riders still predominantly use 1/8 is part tradition and part performance on the track. If you’re not on the track or you’re pushing less than 100 inches, then using 1/8 is perfectly fine, but perfectly unnecessary.
Much larger selection of chainring sizes and styles.(especially if you’re running 130bcd like the OP)
Larger selection of quality chains.
equal selection of quality cogs and freewheels.
Running 3/32 gives you cross compatibility with 1/8 chains should decide to use one.
There are track specific/track quality components for 3/32 if you choose to spend that much.
bonus: if you have a slightly mismatched chainline, a 3/32 chain which is designed for side flex, is more forgiving and is less likely to be thrown off.
there are individual benefits to both sizes and running either one is perfectly fine, but to say there is no benefits to 3/32 is just silly. I get that in a way, we’re all just defending our personal choices but I would argue there are more practical benefits to 3/32 for the average non sport/competition rider. The main reason track riders still predominantly use 1/8 is part tradition and part performance on the track. If you’re not on the track or you’re pushing less than 100 inches, then using 1/8 is perfectly fine, but perfectly unnecessary.
Last edited by seamuis; 10-06-18 at 05:54 PM.
#10
Old fart
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Appleton WI
Posts: 24,936
Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3571 Post(s)
Liked 3,368 Times
in
1,916 Posts
Ok. I'll give you that, if the trivial weight savings is important to you.
1/8" chain can use every 3/32" ring or cog out there, and any 1/8" ring or cog. So, 1/8" chain will actually give you more selection.
Isn't that what I wrote?
Much larger selection of chainring sizes and styles.(especially if you’re running 130bcd like the OP)
Larger selection of quality chains.
equal selection of quality cogs and freewheels.
Running 3/32 gives you cross compatibility with 1/8 chains should decide to use one.
equal selection of quality cogs and freewheels.
Running 3/32 gives you cross compatibility with 1/8 chains should decide to use one.
Last edited by JohnDThompson; 10-06-18 at 06:08 PM.
#11
aire díthrub
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: chatham-savannah
Posts: 553
Bikes: Raleigh Competition, Pashley Roadster Sovereign, Mercian Vincitore Speciale
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 259 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 55 Times
in
35 Posts
the weight savings isn’t trivial, especially if you want to run larger sprockets and chainrings. The cogs, chainrings, chains and often the cranks are all lighter weight. Every defence so far of 1/8 is only beneficial to someone putting down heavy torque pushing heavy gears on a velodrome. Which, surprise! is exactly where 1/8 shines. But the OP isn’t a track racer and they aren’t building a track bike. So I’ll defer you back to my very first sentence in this thread and then repeat: both are fine, but for the non sport/competition rider, there are more practical benefits to 3/32 over 1/8.
#13
Old fart
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Appleton WI
Posts: 24,936
Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3571 Post(s)
Liked 3,368 Times
in
1,916 Posts
#14
cowboy, steel horse, etc
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: The hot spot.
Posts: 44,807
Bikes: everywhere
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12639 Post(s)
Liked 7,529 Times
in
3,990 Posts
#15
aire díthrub
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: chatham-savannah
Posts: 553
Bikes: Raleigh Competition, Pashley Roadster Sovereign, Mercian Vincitore Speciale
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 259 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 55 Times
in
35 Posts
Here, have a 🍪 for your experience. Cheers mate.
Last edited by seamuis; 10-07-18 at 11:17 PM.
#17
Not actually Tmonk
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 13,943
Bikes: road, track, mtb
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2506 Post(s)
Liked 2,964 Times
in
1,575 Posts
#19
cowboy, steel horse, etc
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: The hot spot.
Posts: 44,807
Bikes: everywhere
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12639 Post(s)
Liked 7,529 Times
in
3,990 Posts
My Raleigh Preston came with 1/8" chain, but 3/32" cog and chainring. I dunno whether to blame the British or the Chinese.
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Georgia
Posts: 782
Bikes: I don't even
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked 191 Times
in
77 Posts
The main benefit of 1/8" chain is that you can mix and match 1/8" and 3/32" cogs and chainrings without issues. Run a 3/32" cog on one side of your flip/flop hub and a 1/8" cog on the other -- no problem. Run a 3/32" chainring with a 1/8" cog -- no problem. Run a 1/8" chainring with a 3/32" cog -- no problem.
IMO, there's no benefit to running 3/32" chain on a SS/FG bike.
IMO, there's no benefit to running 3/32" chain on a SS/FG bike.
Most of my experience is on the track, but this holds even more true there. Whoever is running 3/32" chain is always odd man/woman out whenever they are looking to borrow a different cog or chainring, but 1/8" users can borrow any gear from anyone. Mix and match does not present any problems in the real world.
Weight difference is negligible. On the street where so many riders use no brakes, why someone would want to shave weight from their only means of stopping is beyond me.
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Georgia
Posts: 782
Bikes: I don't even
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked 191 Times
in
77 Posts
Wondering if there is an advantage to one or the other when using a flip flop hub that will see use on both the fixed and the freewheel side. 130 bcd. I’m kind of leaning towards going 3/32 for the lighter weight but that’s not a major concern. The biggest thing would be durability of the drivetrain so I’m not constantly spending money replacing worn parts. I’m a small dude that pushes lower gears so I guess that could help in the longevity of the drivetrain? Thanks for any help.
#22
working on my sandal tan
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 22,625
Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers), All-City Space Horse (hers)
Mentioned: 98 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3868 Post(s)
Liked 2,560 Times
in
1,574 Posts
Look at the badass new guy in this thread! He knows all the decent bike mechanics, and if they approve of 1/8" chain on 3/32" sprockets, they're not decent!
#23
Clark W. Griswold
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: ,location, location
Posts: 13,280
Bikes: Foundry Chilkoot Ti W/Ultegra Di2, Salsa Timberjack Ti, Cinelli Mash Work RandoCross Fun Time Machine, 1x9 XT Parts Hybrid, Co-Motion Cascadia, Specialized Langster, Phil Wood Apple VeloXS Frame (w/DA 7400), R+M Supercharger2 Rohloff, Habanero Ti 26
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4254 Post(s)
Liked 3,867 Times
in
2,580 Posts
I just wanted to say that whatever standard you choose to run unless it is my standard you are probably doing it wrong.