I need to check chain wear, are these short chain wear tools good to use?
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,138
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Liked 2,959 Times
in
1,640 Posts
When these chain checker tool arguments arise, does anyone else scratch their head at the comments that say chain checker tools are inaccurate, and steel rulers are the only way to go? If using a steel ruler is your preferred method, more power to ya. But why would an otherwise very reputable tool company suddenly jeopardize their reputation and put their brand on less-than-accurate tools? If the QA in the tool’s production is questionable, why can the QA in production of a steel ruler be questionable? — Dan
This won't hurt those selling them, because no actual harm is done. Who's to know how much longer a chain might have lasted, or whether leaving it on longer might have hurt the cassette, or not.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
Likes For FBinNY:
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 13,052
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
Liked 4,079 Times
in
2,641 Posts
When these chain checker tool arguments arise, does anyone else scratch their head at the comments that say chain checker tools are inaccurate, and steel rulers are the only way to go? If using a steel ruler is your preferred method, more power to ya. But why would an otherwise very reputable tool company suddenly jeopardize their reputation and put their brand on less-than-accurate tools? If the QA in the tool’s production is questionable, why can the QA in production of a steel ruler be questionable? — Dan
A crude example to demonstrate how this becomes a much greater issue for chain checkers than a long ruler. With a ruler, the rollers never enter into the calcs. It is just pin to pin distance. Your typical chain checker pushes 2 rollers apart and works with that distance. So there is the "stretch" between those X number of pins plus the slop of the two end rollers. A chain could be made that had that slop from day one. It simply wouldn't matter to you, the bike or the shifting. But that chain would flunk from day one.
I believe some chain checkers use methods that do not have this issue. I haven't studied this as it never mattered to me. I just use the ruler. Works. But if I had to get a checker, I'd do that research and fully expect the checkers that do it right to be considerably more expensive. And that's before considering quality. Just, is this designed to get the right answer or just measure the total stretch and calculate what should be acceptable from that?
#28
Mad bike riding scientist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,512
Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones
Liked 4,338 Times
in
2,433 Posts
When these chain checker tool arguments arise, does anyone else scratch their head at the comments that say chain checker tools are inaccurate, and steel rulers are the only way to go? If using a steel ruler is your preferred method, more power to ya. But why would an otherwise very reputable tool company suddenly jeopardize their reputation and put their brand on less-than-accurate tools? If the QA in the tool’s production is questionable, why can the QA in production of a steel ruler be questionable? — Dan
The issue of “over-estimating” wear, is something of a red herring as well. Let’s assume that a chain is worn out at 0.75% which is about 3/32” over a 12” chain. Let’s also assume that that happens at 3000 miles as well as assuming that wear is linear (probably isn’t but the math is easier). If the chain checker reads 0.75% at 2500 miles, that’s 500 miles of chain wear you are missing out on.
And how far off are the chain checkers? I’ve done my own tests with several and found them to be spot on, independent of the type of chain checker…short, long, roller isolating or not…when compared to a rule or tape measure. If the checker were off by 10%…which they aren’t…that’s going to be 300 miles too little mileage. If they are off by 1%…which they might…that’s 30 miles. Either one is hardly something to get all hot and bothered about. Chains should be cheap or, more correctly, an expensive chain doesn’t provide for a significant increase in wear mileage. Paying more for a chain is just paying for cosmetics for the most part.
I also have questions about the accuracy of using a rule. I find the photos of people using a 12” rule and then estimating 1/8” and claiming the method to be “more accurate” to measure chain wear highly amusing. You cannot not have an accurate measurement if estimation is involved. If you measure the 1/8” directly, that can be accurate but that depends on other factors as well. Was the chain stretched when the measurement was made or was there slack in the chain? If a tape measure is used what is the variance in the measurement due to the movement of the hook end of the tape measure? The hook can easily move that 1/8” depending on where the hook is in relation to the end of the tape.
__________________
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
#29
Sr Member on Sr bikes
The one I use, the Park CC-4 is 9 inches long. I.e. it checks the wear over 9 inches(9 links). Using a steel ruler, presumably 12 inches/12 links. Most of the wear check tools I’ve seen are similar, and check the wear of several inches/links, rather than just a couple of links. So is the 3 more inches using a steel ruler going to make that much of a difference?
Dan
Likes For _ForceD_:
#30
Droid on a mission
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Palm Coast, FL
Posts: 1,014
Bikes: Diamondback Wildwood Classic
Liked 290 Times
in
200 Posts
Thanks, I should have checked and seen that
__________________
JoeTBM (The Bike Man) - I'm a black & white type of guy, the only gray in my life is the hair on my head
www.TheBikeMenOfFlaglerCounty.com
JoeTBM (The Bike Man) - I'm a black & white type of guy, the only gray in my life is the hair on my head
www.TheBikeMenOfFlaglerCounty.com
#31
Senior Member
I use a Park CC4 or Pedros Chain Checker Plus for quick on the bike checks. Between my wife and I we have 10 bikes I maintain, including 8, 9, 10 and 12 speed road and MTB. I've switched the 8 and 9 all to 10 speed chains, fwiw, to simplify. I do have one of the smaller, older Park chain tools (3?) but switched to the above versions because the 12 speed AXS flat top chain recommends them. I haven't actually compared the results. Maybe I will.
If the tools show wear, I would take off the chain and hang it from a nail and double check with a steel ruler. But, it's hardly worth the effort - like someone said, the possible over-kill with the chain checkers is trivial in the big picture. SOmetimes I think we over think things.
If the tools show wear, I would take off the chain and hang it from a nail and double check with a steel ruler. But, it's hardly worth the effort - like someone said, the possible over-kill with the chain checkers is trivial in the big picture. SOmetimes I think we over think things.
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 13,052
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
Liked 4,079 Times
in
2,641 Posts
...
The one I use, the Park CC-4 is 9 inches long. I.e. it checks the wear over 9 inches(9 links). Using a steel ruler, presumably 12 inches/12 links. Most of the wear check tools I’ve seen are similar, and check the wear of several inches/links, rather than just a couple of links. So is the 3 more inches using a steel ruler going to make that much of a difference?
Dan
The one I use, the Park CC-4 is 9 inches long. I.e. it checks the wear over 9 inches(9 links). Using a steel ruler, presumably 12 inches/12 links. Most of the wear check tools I’ve seen are similar, and check the wear of several inches/links, rather than just a couple of links. So is the 3 more inches using a steel ruler going to make that much of a difference?
Dan
#33
Mad bike riding scientist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,512
Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones
Liked 4,338 Times
in
2,433 Posts
The rollers hardly matter. Wear occurs at the pin. Just measuring from pin to pin without taking the elongation of the chain into account will lead to inaccurate results as well. The chain needs to be pulled tight to measure correctly. If the chain is off the bike, hang the chain to measure it or if it is on the bike, it would be best to measure the chain on its bottom run where the derailer spring puts tension on the chain. Or just use a chain checker that isn’t as inaccurate as many would lead us to believe.
__________________
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
Likes For cyccommute:
#34
Sr Member on Sr bikes
Here’s the thing about comparing a checker tool vs. the steel ruler. On the checker tool (pictured) the difference between OK, 0.5, and 0.75 is just that little notch that I have the nail pointing to. That’s a small measurement. Between making sure the chain is tight, and holding the ruler still, and precisely in the middle (or the edge) of a rivet (and dealing with anything else that could affect the measure like light/shadows, etc)…how can you know that you’re not off by just a smidge, and thereby getting an inaccurate measurement? The chain checker tool takes care of that. — Dan
Likes For _ForceD_:
#35
Mad bike riding scientist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,512
Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones
Liked 4,338 Times
in
2,433 Posts
Here’s the thing about comparing a checker tool vs. the steel ruler. On the checker tool (pictured) the difference between OK, 0.5, and 0.75 is just that little notch that I have the nail pointing to. That’s a small measurement. Between making sure the chain is tight, and holding the ruler still, and precisely in the middle (or the edge) of a rivet (and dealing with anything else that could affect the measure like light/shadows, etc)…how can you know that you’re not off by just a smidge, and thereby getting an inaccurate measurement? The chain checker tool takes care of that. — Dan
__________________
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
#36
aged to perfection
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: PacNW
Posts: 1,897
Bikes: Dinucci Allez 2.0, Richard Sachs, Alex Singer, Serotta, Masi GC, Raleigh Pro Mk.1, Hetchins, etc
Liked 1,317 Times
in
698 Posts
I like this chain indicator. it's longer than the other tools and therefore the span of measured chain is longer, so more accurate, which is why the little short tools don't work. Can't measure chain elongation very well over a span of 2-3 links, the level of precision required is just too great.
Sadly I do not know where I got it or who made it.
/markp
Sadly I do not know where I got it or who made it.
/markp
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Ellensburg,WA
Posts: 3,200
Bikes: Schwinn Broadway, Specialized Secteur Sport(crashed) Spec. Roubaix Sport, Spec. Crux
Liked 179 Times
in
91 Posts
I like this chain indicator. it's longer than the other tools and therefore the span of measured chain is longer, so more accurate, which is why the little short tools don't work. Can't measure chain elongation very well over a span of 2-3 links, the level of precision required is just too great.
Sadly I do not know where I got it or who made it.
/markp
Sadly I do not know where I got it or who made it.
/markp
__________________
Sir Mark, Knight of Sufferlandria
Sir Mark, Knight of Sufferlandria
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,138
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Liked 2,959 Times
in
1,640 Posts
The amounts involved in chain wear are in the range of 0.001" or so. They wouldn't be measurable with the tools at hand except for cumulative effect. Measuring over greater lengths creates the multiplier needed for the job ie.0.001"/pin x 100 links = 1/10", easily read with the naked eye.
Also, when measuring with a method that conflates roller slop and pin wear, a greater span reduces the effect of roller slop, making the method truer to one for pin wear only.
So, as they say, "Size matters."
Last edited by FBinNY; 05-08-24 at 05:46 PM.
#39
I like this chain indicator. it's longer than the other tools and therefore the span of measured chain is longer, so more accurate, which is why the little short tools don't work. Can't measure chain elongation very well over a span of 2-3 links, the level of precision required is just too great.
Sadly I do not know where I got it or who made it.
/markp
Sadly I do not know where I got it or who made it.
/markp
https://www.ebay.com/itm/124645390485
Looks neat:
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,138
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Liked 2,959 Times
in
1,640 Posts
Called the Speedtech CW-1089. Pricey for NOS but some cheaper used ones.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/124645390485
Looks neat:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/124645390485
Looks neat:
Maybe I should have hung onto a few.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Ellensburg,WA
Posts: 3,200
Bikes: Schwinn Broadway, Specialized Secteur Sport(crashed) Spec. Roubaix Sport, Spec. Crux
Liked 179 Times
in
91 Posts
Sorry, but no.
The amounts involved in chain wear are in the range of 0.001" or so. They wouldn't be measurable with the tools at hand except for cumulative effect. Measuring over greater lengths creates the multiplier needed for the job ie.0.001"/pin x 100 links = 1/10", easily read with the naked eye.
Also, when measuring with a method that conflates roller slop and pin wear, a greater span reduces the effect of roller slop, making the method truer to one for pin wear only.
So, as they say, "Size matters."
The amounts involved in chain wear are in the range of 0.001" or so. They wouldn't be measurable with the tools at hand except for cumulative effect. Measuring over greater lengths creates the multiplier needed for the job ie.0.001"/pin x 100 links = 1/10", easily read with the naked eye.
Also, when measuring with a method that conflates roller slop and pin wear, a greater span reduces the effect of roller slop, making the method truer to one for pin wear only.
So, as they say, "Size matters."
When I had excellent eyesight I could read a 64th inch scale on a rule. Frank you seem to be claiming that with a rule, which most advocate a 10 inch one, that you are looking for .010" over ten inches. That's a hundredth of an inch! Parallax errors are greater than that. It is the method of measurement that gives one accuracy, not the distance measured. But no one is actually measuring chain wear, tools that act as a go/ no go gauge do not measure, they indicate wear limits. Exceed those limits and you risk damage to your drivetrain such that a new chain no longer fits.
__________________
Sir Mark, Knight of Sufferlandria
Sir Mark, Knight of Sufferlandria
#42
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,138
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Liked 2,959 Times
in
1,640 Posts
It's a case of typing faster than thinking, compounded by a typo.
I actually meant 0.1" stretch over 10", based 1% stretch. Divided by 20 links that would be 0.005" per pin.
But the point that measuring over more length improves accuracy still holds.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Ellensburg,WA
Posts: 3,200
Bikes: Schwinn Broadway, Specialized Secteur Sport(crashed) Spec. Roubaix Sport, Spec. Crux
Liked 179 Times
in
91 Posts
Mia culpa. I don't know who Frank is, but assume you meant me.
It's a case of typing faster than thinking, compounded by a typo.
I actually meant 0.1" stretch over 10", based 1% stretch. Divided by 20 links that would be 0.005" per pin.
But the point that measuring over more length improves accuracy still holds.
It's a case of typing faster than thinking, compounded by a typo.
I actually meant 0.1" stretch over 10", based 1% stretch. Divided by 20 links that would be 0.005" per pin.
But the point that measuring over more length improves accuracy still holds.
__________________
Sir Mark, Knight of Sufferlandria
Sir Mark, Knight of Sufferlandria
#44
Really Old Senior Member
A tenth of an inch is much more noticeable. We'll have to agree to disagree on the accuracy statement. 1% is 1% no matter the difference in measuring length. I submit that if you wait until 1% elongation then you will be replacing the rest of your drivetrain much sooner. If you replace the wear item (chain) before it damages your cassette and chain rings then you are better off.
A longer span will provide greater resolution. That will allow one to READ the results more accurately.
#45
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 2,552
Bikes: Drysdale/Gitane/Zeus/Masi/Falcon/Palo Alto/Raleigh/Legnano
Liked 727 Times
in
444 Posts
Recent rides with a friend, his wife came along, she was experiencing a skip/jump under load but "there's nothing wrong with my bike!" Couple of days ago, he and I replaced her chain (I've converted him to waxing)... problem gone.
__________________
Larry:1958 Drysdale, 1961 Gitane Gran Sport, 1974 Zeus track, 1988 Masi Gran Corsa, 1974 Falcon, 1980 Palo Alto, 1973 Raleigh Gran Sport, 1974 Legnano. Susan: 1976 Windsor Profesional.
Larry:1958 Drysdale, 1961 Gitane Gran Sport, 1974 Zeus track, 1988 Masi Gran Corsa, 1974 Falcon, 1980 Palo Alto, 1973 Raleigh Gran Sport, 1974 Legnano. Susan: 1976 Windsor Profesional.
#46
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,138
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Liked 2,959 Times
in
1,640 Posts
However, I think you might have misinterpreted my point, possibly owing to a poor choice of words.
Yes, 1% is 1%, as 1/2% is 1/2%. However, whatever replace point you prefer, it's easier to measure if you multiply the tiny difference by measuring the accumlated wear over a greater distance.
FWIW I don't buy into the chain gauge arguments. Whatever guideline one chooses, it's just that ----- a guideline. Just as you wouldn't stop and look for service stations if you odometer reads 3,000* miles since your last oil change, I use a broad strokes approach and use measurement to decide that's it's time to consider changing when convenient.
*if that's when you change oil, otherwise pick any number.
Likes For FBinNY: