Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Bicycle Mechanics
Reload this Page >

Do Chain Checkers really measure the stated %0.5, %0.75 etc. ?

Notices
Bicycle Mechanics Broken bottom bracket? Tacoed wheel? If you're having problems with your bicycle, or just need help fixing a flat, drop in here for the latest on bicycle mechanics & bicycle maintenance.

Do Chain Checkers really measure the stated %0.5, %0.75 etc. ?

Old 12-15-20, 10:50 PM
  #126  
Racing Dan
Senior Member
 
Racing Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,707
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 976 Post(s)
Liked 117 Times in 86 Posts
Originally Posted by sweeks View Post
Here's that process (new chain on the right). There's no doubt about the elongation. FWIW, the old chain was flagged by three different chain checker tools.

Chains hanging from nails on a level line



Worn chain on the left



Three chain-check tools. The Shimano tool (right) is supposedly not influenced by roller wear.
As far as i can tell from the picture the elongation amounts to 4mm. Assuming its whole chains they are each more than 100 links and at least (100*25,4)/2=1270mm length. Thus, true elongation is only (4/1270)*100=0.3% (!) - Can you verify this?

Imo all three gauges are wrong and flag the chain prematurely, if 0.5% is the gold standard. And 0.5% is only 1/2 the usual engineering standard of 1%.
Racing Dan is offline  
Old 12-15-20, 10:56 PM
  #127  
Skulking
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Posts: 68
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked 88 Times in 34 Posts
Originally Posted by Racing Dan View Post
As far as i can tell from the picture the elongation amounts to 4mm. Assuming its whole chains they are each more than 100 links and at least (100*25,4)/2=1270mm length. Thus, true elongation is only (4/1270)*100=0.3% (!) - Can you verify this?

Imo all three gauges are wrong and flag the chain prematurely, if 0.5% is the gold standard. And 0.5% is only 1/2 the usual engineering standard of 1%.
It may be perspective as we aren't looking straight on at the chains in the first picture, but to me it looks like the old chain is hung higher which would indicate the 4mm we see on the scale isn't an accurate measure of the elongation.
Skulking is offline  
Old 12-16-20, 06:16 AM
  #128  
Sy Reene
Advocatus Diaboli
 
Sy Reene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 6,596

Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3409 Post(s)
Liked 664 Times in 453 Posts
Originally Posted by Racing Dan View Post
As far as i can tell from the picture the elongation amounts to 4mm. Assuming its whole chains they are each more than 100 links and at least (100*25,4)/2=1270mm length. Thus, true elongation is only (4/1270)*100=0.3% (!) - Can you verify this?
Originally Posted by Skulking View Post
It may be perspective as we aren't looking straight on at the chains in the first picture, but to me it looks like the old chain is hung higher which would indicate the 4mm we see on the scale isn't an accurate measure of the elongation.
You both are looking at the inches side of the ruler.. it's at 4/16" which is 1/4". The other side of the ruler is in mm, and it's at about the 10mm mark.
EDIT: Correction, the ruler is marked in tenths on the inches side, so it's at 4/10".

Last edited by Sy Reene; 12-16-20 at 06:22 AM.
Sy Reene is offline  
Old 12-16-20, 09:33 AM
  #129  
Racing Dan
Senior Member
 
Racing Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,707
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 976 Post(s)
Liked 117 Times in 86 Posts
Originally Posted by Sy Reene View Post
You both are looking at the inches side of the ruler.. it's at 4/16" which is 1/4". The other side of the ruler is in mm, and it's at about the 10mm mark.
EDIT: Correction, the ruler is marked in tenths on the inches side, so it's at 4/10".
No its not. Its clearly marked MM on the side im reading and 25.4mm corresponds to 1" as it should. Its 4mm, not 4/10".
Racing Dan is offline  
Likes For Racing Dan:
Old 12-16-20, 09:35 AM
  #130  
Racing Dan
Senior Member
 
Racing Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,707
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 976 Post(s)
Liked 117 Times in 86 Posts
Originally Posted by Skulking View Post
It may be perspective as we aren't looking straight on at the chains in the first picture, but to me it looks like the old chain is hung higher which would indicate the 4mm we see on the scale isn't an accurate measure of the elongation.
The least error prone method would be to hang the chains from the same nail, but I believe this is good enough, if, as stated, the nails are level.
Racing Dan is offline  
Old 12-16-20, 10:17 AM
  #131  
John_E
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 46
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Racing Dan View Post
No its not. Its clearly marked MM on the side im reading and 25.4mm corresponds to 1" as it should. Its 4mm, not 4/10".

You are right, if the final roller was straight when drawing that line (seems a bit rotated in the picture) then this pretty much confirms my readings and suspicion that chain checkers are over measuring the stretch.

Of course this is the average stretch maybe a section is stretched and others are not.
John_E is offline  
Old 12-16-20, 10:21 AM
  #132  
Sy Reene
Advocatus Diaboli
 
Sy Reene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 6,596

Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3409 Post(s)
Liked 664 Times in 453 Posts
Originally Posted by Racing Dan View Post
No its not. Its clearly marked MM on the side im reading and 25.4mm corresponds to 1" as it should. Its 4mm, not 4/10".
?? Exactly, 25.4mm is at the 1" mark. On the 25.4mm side of the ruler that aligns with the big 1, the lower black drawn line is at the 10mm mark (2 hashes below the 8). On the inch side, the line goes thru the 4th hash mark (out of 10). Ignore where the MM letters are; no idea why it looks that way. It's an odd ruler with tenths of inches, and every 8mm as a marking (instead of cms).

Sy Reene is offline  
Old 12-16-20, 10:42 AM
  #133  
John_E
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 46
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Sy Reene View Post
?? Exactly, 25.4mm is at the 1" mark. On the 25.4mm side of the ruler that aligns with the big 1, the lower black drawn line is at the 10mm mark (2 hashes below the 8). On the inch side, the line goes thru the 4th hash mark (out of 10). Ignore where the MM letters are; no idea why it looks that way. It's an odd ruler with tenths of inches, and every 8mm as a marking (instead of cms).

No it is not. If you look at the whole ruler 1" is divided into 64 parts hence 10mm ~ 25.19/64"

If you look at the original picture 1" mark on the right corresponds to ~25.4 on the MM side(left side).

So MM is the milimeter side and difference is around 4mm!!!
John_E is offline  
Likes For John_E:
Old 12-16-20, 10:53 AM
  #134  
Sy Reene
Advocatus Diaboli
 
Sy Reene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 6,596

Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3409 Post(s)
Liked 664 Times in 453 Posts
Originally Posted by John_E View Post
No it is not. If you look at the whole ruler 1" is divided into 64 parts hence 10mm ~ 25.19/64"

If you look at the original picture 1" mark on the right corresponds to ~25.4 on the MM side(left side).

So MM is the milimeter side and difference is around 4mm!!!
hmm.. so it's a ruler that measures to 64ths of an inch on one side, and in mms on the other. Ok. The scale is weird though if that's the case. The overall width of the ruler, if you rotate the width down the scale, is then a really skinny approx 11mm wide ruler.
Sy Reene is offline  
Old 12-16-20, 04:07 PM
  #135  
davidad
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 6,417
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 489 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 100 Times in 88 Posts
Originally Posted by Racing Dan View Post
As far as i can tell from the picture the elongation amounts to 4mm. Assuming its whole chains they are each more than 100 links and at least (100*25,4)/2=1270mm length. Thus, true elongation is only (4/1270)*100=0.3% (!) - Can you verify this?

Imo all three gauges are wrong and flag the chain prematurely, if 0.5% is the gold standard. And 0.5% is only 1/2 the usual engineering standard of 1%.
The shimano elimates roller wear in the chain and it is accurate.
davidad is offline  
Old 12-16-20, 06:17 PM
  #136  
Racing Dan
Senior Member
 
Racing Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,707
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 976 Post(s)
Liked 117 Times in 86 Posts
Originally Posted by davidad View Post
The shimano elimates roller wear in the chain and it is accurate.
"accurate" how?

If it flags a chain that is only 0.3% elongated, as we see in this instance, I beg to differ.
Racing Dan is offline  
Old 12-16-20, 06:27 PM
  #137  
_ForceD_
Senior Member
 
_ForceD_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 1,511

Bikes: Several...from old junk to new all-carbon.

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 646 Post(s)
Liked 205 Times in 119 Posts
I just want to say that Im surprised and impressed that were on page six of this thread.

Dan
_ForceD_ is offline  
Likes For _ForceD_:
Old 12-16-20, 08:17 PM
  #138  
dwmckee
Senior Member
 
dwmckee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 2,091

Bikes: Co-Motion Cappuccino Tandem,'88 Bob Jackson Touring, Co-Motion Cascadia Touring, Open U.P., Ritchie Titanium Breakaway, Frances Cycles SmallHaul cargo bike. Those are the permanent ones; others wander in and out of the stable occasionally as well.

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 251 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 136 Times in 87 Posts
I have seen way too many drivetrains in need of total replacement because the owner went way too far trying to save a few bucks on a chain. Bottom line is to change before it is worn out and use a good gauge (or ruler) often to determine when to change. Even if you did not get the last 300 miles out of the chain that you might have been able to squeeze, that is better than going too far. An ounce or prevention...

Gauges likely have an inherent error likely when in use (due to misuse or machining variance) so if they are a bit too conservative and overestimate wear that is better than the converse.
dwmckee is offline  
Likes For dwmckee:
Old 12-16-20, 08:52 PM
  #139  
sweeks
Senior Member
 
sweeks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicago area
Posts: 1,610

Bikes: Airborne "Carpe Diem", Motobecane "Mirage", Trek 6000, Strida 2, Dahon "Helios XL", Dahon "Mu XL", Tern "Verge S11i"

Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 651 Post(s)
Liked 149 Times in 113 Posts
Originally Posted by Racing Dan View Post
As far as i can tell from the picture the elongation amounts to 4mm. Assuming its whole chains they are each more than 100 links and at least (100*25,4)/2=1270mm length. Thus, true elongation is only (4/1270)*100=0.3% (!) - Can you verify this?

Imo all three gauges are wrong and flag the chain prematurely, if 0.5% is the gold standard. And 0.5% is only 1/2 the usual engineering standard of 1%.
Originally Posted by Skulking View Post
It may be perspective as we aren't looking straight on at the chains in the first picture, but to me it looks like the old chain is hung higher which would indicate the 4mm we see on the scale isn't an accurate measure of the elongation.
I probably should repeat the exercise with better attention to details. The chains were hung from nails placed on a level line. The ruler is marked in millimeters. The chain checkers, with the possible exception of the Shimano gauge, definitely exaggerate the amount of wear, predisposing to early replacement of the chain. I will say that I subscribe to the notion that chains are cheaper than gears, so I don't feel too bad about getting slightly less wear out of a chain.
I'll see if I can get some better documentation. Thanks for all the comments.
sweeks is offline  
Likes For sweeks:
Old 12-17-20, 01:03 AM
  #140  
John_E
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 46
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by sweeks View Post
I probably should repeat the exercise with better attention to details. The chains were hung from nails placed on a level line. The ruler is marked in millimeters. The chain checkers, with the possible exception of the Shimano gauge, definitely exaggerate the amount of wear, predisposing to early replacement of the chain. I will say that I subscribe to the notion that chains are cheaper than gears, so I don't feel too bad about getting slightly less wear out of a chain.
I'll see if I can get some better documentation. Thanks for all the comments.
Your demonstration is very much appreciated and it is exactly the kind of measurement I was hoping to get.

As long as the nails are level (when measured with a water level) it should be good.
Your measurements, given it is accurate, clearly shows that these tools are over measuring the wear significantly. %0.5 report is given as early as %0.25-0.3.

Once again the point of this whole thread is whether these tools are measuring what they claim to measure. Otherwise I am still ok with changing the chains early instead of having to change an expensive cassette.

I am curious what was the exact reading on the parktool one that shows percentages?
Please let us know if you remeasure your chains.

Last edited by John_E; 12-22-20 at 12:59 AM.
John_E is offline  
Old 12-17-20, 08:07 AM
  #141  
pdlamb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: northern Deep South
Posts: 6,507

Bikes: Fuji Touring, Novara Randonee

Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1439 Post(s)
Liked 561 Times in 374 Posts
Six pages and we're discussing how to read a ruler. Was there a snowstorm somewhere?
pdlamb is offline  
Likes For pdlamb:
Old 12-17-20, 09:12 AM
  #142  
DaveSSS 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Loveland, CO
Posts: 6,217

Bikes: TWO Cinelli superstar disc with SRAM Force AXS

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 576 Post(s)
Liked 251 Times in 202 Posts
If you want to hang chains from a nail to measure elongation, only use one nail and place the rule very accurately with the center at 53 or 54 inches. 0.5% on a 54 inch chain is 0.27 inch. I use a machinist's rule with 0.01 inch markings.

It's a lot easier to measure horizontally with the nail in a bench top and the rule taped to the bench. I've also used a board with a nail at one end and the rule at the other. You can then hang the measuring board if you want.

Last edited by DaveSSS; 12-19-20 at 10:42 AM.
DaveSSS is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.