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

Ruler and Chain Checker are Diverging

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.

Ruler and Chain Checker are Diverging

Old 03-15-23, 11:53 AM
  #51  
Kontact
Senior Member
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,825
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4260 Post(s)
Liked 1,458 Times in 950 Posts
Originally Posted by cyccommute
The roller isn’t wearing. The pin wears and allows the roller to follow something of an elliptical path as it goes over the cog and chainwheel. New chains follow a circular path so they engage the pitch of the cog and chainwheel properly so they don’t wear the edges of the teeth like a chain where the rollers can shift.

The question I have for you is how do your propose to measure roller wear if that is what you think is causing the problem? I can think of no way to measure roller wear separately from pin wear. It is possible, and even quite common, to measure secondary effects to measure a primary phenomena. In chemistry, for example, we often react two chemicals together and then further react the products of that reaction to see what the concentration of the unknown of the first two chemicals are. Pin wear and roller wear are related. Measuring pin wear also measures the effect of the rollers on the cogs.

Frankly, if you are worried about cog wear, you should probably be using one of these. I have one but find them to be mostly useless.
Why would the rollers not wear??? Their surfaces bear the same loads as the rest of the chain.

And why would you need to measure roller wear separate from pin wear? They work together to create pitch. That's what a chain checker does: Measure the composite of pin and roller wear.

Last edited by Kontact; 03-15-23 at 11:59 AM.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-15-23, 12:10 PM
  #52  
cyccommute 
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,274

Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones

Mentioned: 150 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6147 Post(s)
Liked 4,093 Times in 2,325 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact
Why would the rollers not wear??? Their surfaces bear the same loads as the rest of the chain?
Have you ever observed any kind of grooving on a roller? Since the roller is wider than the chainwheel or cog they are rolling over, it should be readily visible. Sheldon Brown has two pictures of extreme chain wear that are illustrative of how chains wear. You can see several different wear patterns on the pin and on the plates. I’m not sure what to call the bit of the plate that stands up away from the body but you can see that is is worn to match the wear in the middle of the pin. The roller may wear it a little also but the pin is seeing the highest concentration of the pressure of riding and the most wear. The whole chain becomes worn and the rollers fit sloppily inside the chain itself.






And why would you need to measure roller wear separate from pin wear? They work together to create pitch.
That’s just a restatement of what I asked you. How would you measure them separately? You are the one who brought up the issue so it is up to you to resolve it. The rest of us use the tools we have a hand…either ruler or a chain checker.
__________________
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!




Last edited by cyccommute; 03-15-23 at 04:32 PM.
cyccommute is offline  
Old 03-15-23, 12:32 PM
  #53  
Kontact
Senior Member
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,825
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4260 Post(s)
Liked 1,458 Times in 950 Posts
Originally Posted by cyccommute
Have you ever observed any kind of growing on a roller? Since the roller is wider than the chainwheel or cog they are rolling over, it should be readily visible. Sheldon Brown has two pictures of extreme chain wear that are illustrative of how chains wear. You can see several different wear patterns on the pin and on the plates. I’m not sure what to call the bit of the plate that stands up away from the body but you can see that is is worn to match the wear in the middle of the pin. The roller may wear it a little also but the pin is seeing the highest concentration of the pressure of riding and the most wear. The whole chain becomes worn and the rollers fit sloppily inside the chain itself.








That’s just a restatement of what I asked you. How would you measure them separately? You are the one who brought up the issue so it is up to you to resolve it. The rest of us use the tools we have a hand…either ruler or a chain checker.
Never said anything about needing to measure them separately. But if the rollers do wear, as you concede, you ought to measure both.

Simultaneously

With a chain checker.As I said in the first place.


And if rollers don't wear, that makes the OP pretty mysterious.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-15-23, 02:14 PM
  #54  
easyupbug 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,652

Bikes: too many sparkly Italians, some sweet Americans and a couple interesting Japanese

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 560 Post(s)
Liked 546 Times in 396 Posts
I have a Mitutoyo dial caliper on my bench so use Campagnolo's hard rule that you toss anything over 132.60mm which, though I have not checked, might be just under 0.5%. It is quick and easy and chains are relatively cheap so I follow their advise to "immediately" replace if even one measurement is over 132.60mm.
easyupbug is offline  
Old 03-15-23, 04:56 PM
  #55  
Lombard
Sock Puppet
 
Lombard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2022
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,701

Bikes: 2014 Cannondale Synapse Carbon, 2017 Jamis Renegade Exploit and too many others to mention.

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1031 Post(s)
Liked 863 Times in 573 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact
Some people put so little energy through their drivetrains that discussions about chain wear, lubricants, etc seemingly don't apply to them. Congrats on your long chain life - you really must not be hammering. You're in the same class of people that go years on the same disc brake pads and object when anyone says they wear quickly - there's always someone like that on a bike forum.
LOL! Well I am known for being a hill spinner rather than a hammerer. Maybe that's part of it. I'm also a fair weather rider - unless I happen to get caught in a rain storm. If I do, the chain gets wiped dry and re-lubed when I get home.

My disc brake pads actually lasted 5000 miles before the rear needed replacing and the front still had life left. Somehow soon after, both pads became contaminated and needed to be replaced.
Lombard is offline  
Likes For Lombard:
Old 03-15-23, 07:52 PM
  #56  
noglider 
aka Tom Reingold
 
noglider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: New York, NY, and High Falls, NY, USA
Posts: 40,691

Bikes: 1962 Rudge Sports, 1971 Raleigh Super Course, 1971 Raleigh Pro Track, 1974 Raleigh International, 1975 Viscount Fixie, 1982 McLean, 1996 Lemond (Ti), 2002 Burley Zydeco tandem

Mentioned: 510 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7287 Post(s)
Liked 2,365 Times in 1,382 Posts
Originally Posted by Koyote
When in doubt, throw it out.
This is my attitude, too. I am pathologically conservative of many things. I compost when I can, I recycle glass, paper, aluminum, blah blah blah. But I do not squeeze all the life I can out of my chains. It's the one place where I allow myself to be wasteful. Cleaning chains is not rewarding, and neither is replacing worn cassettes. Change the chain more often than you should. That's all.
__________________
Tom Reingold, tom@noglider.com
New York City and High Falls, NY
Blogs: The Experienced Cyclist; noglider's ride blog

“When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments.” — Elizabeth West, US author

Please email me rather than PM'ing me. Thanks.
noglider is offline  
Likes For noglider:
Old 03-15-23, 09:26 PM
  #57  
cyccommute 
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,274

Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones

Mentioned: 150 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6147 Post(s)
Liked 4,093 Times in 2,325 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact
Never said anything about needing to measure them separately. But if the rollers do wear, as you concede, you ought to measure both.
And around and around we go. There isn’t a way to measure pin and roller wear separately.

Simultaneously
Captain Obvious has just sailed into view!.

​​​​​​​With a chain checker.As I said in the first place.
Rule or chain checker will work. I don’t object to rules as long as someone isn’t trying to convince me that estimating the measurement is “more accurate”. Personally, a chain checker is quicker and easier and just as good. I’ll go with a chain checker every time.
__________________
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!



cyccommute is offline  
Likes For cyccommute:
Old 03-15-23, 10:13 PM
  #58  
Kontact
Senior Member
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,825
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4260 Post(s)
Liked 1,458 Times in 950 Posts
Originally Posted by cyccommute
And around and around we go. There isn’t a way to measure pin and roller wear separately.

Captain Obvious has just sailed into view!.

Rule or chain checker will work. I don’t object to rules as long as someone isn’t trying to convince me that estimating the measurement is “more accurate”. Personally, a chain checker is quicker and easier and just as good. I’ll go with a chain checker every time.
WTF? You measure just pin wear with a ruler. You measure pin and roller wear together with a chain checker. How is this suddenly new information for you? It's all I've been talking about the whole damn thread.

Captain Obvious? More like Captain Oblivious. Geez.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-16-23, 05:24 AM
  #59  
GhostRider62
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2021
Posts: 4,083
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2332 Post(s)
Liked 2,094 Times in 1,311 Posts
Got a new bike in early December but only 1500 miles on it due to Covid recovery. Took off the chain and cleaned it yesterday. Hung it on a nail alongside a new and degreased chain. Zero wear. Both were exactly the same length. I guess I have no wattage or the Silca wax is doing its job. At $75 per chain, $400 per cassette, and $881 for rings, I'm not guessing on chain wear. It ain't take no rocket surgeryist to remove no doubt. 0.4% and they are in the bin. I have cassettes with over 30,000 miles that are fine.

Pads? I am halfway thru my second set!! I am either fat, brake too much, disc brakes suck, too much rain, too much salt on the road, it is too hilly here or a combination of these.
GhostRider62 is offline  
Likes For GhostRider62:
Old 03-16-23, 06:50 AM
  #60  
shelbyfv
Expired Member
 
shelbyfv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 11,461
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3638 Post(s)
Liked 5,316 Times in 2,701 Posts
Would anyone like to speculate as to why 11speed and up should be replaced at .5 (or whatever fractional corresponds) vs the older .75?
shelbyfv is offline  
Old 03-16-23, 06:56 AM
  #61  
Kontact
Senior Member
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,825
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4260 Post(s)
Liked 1,458 Times in 950 Posts
Originally Posted by shelbyfv
Would anyone like to speculate as to why 11speed and up should be replaced at .5 (or whatever fractional corresponds) vs the older .75?
Since the main difference between chains 5-11 is the width of the sideplates, it may be that by the time you have .5 wear the thin plates have cut well into the hardened pins to the point that things are going to go south more quickly. While wider chain have more sideplate surface area interacting with the pins, which generally don't need to be as hard, causing the progression of pin wear to go more slowly.

Purely speculation, though.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-16-23, 11:35 AM
  #62  
Lombard
Sock Puppet
 
Lombard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2022
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,701

Bikes: 2014 Cannondale Synapse Carbon, 2017 Jamis Renegade Exploit and too many others to mention.

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1031 Post(s)
Liked 863 Times in 573 Posts
Originally Posted by shelbyfv
Would anyone like to speculate as to why 11speed and up should be replaced at .5 (or whatever fractional corresponds) vs the older .75?
Because Big Chain wants you to replace your chain more often. 😆
Lombard is offline  
Likes For Lombard:
Old 03-16-23, 12:33 PM
  #63  
davidad
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 6,660
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 582 Post(s)
Liked 171 Times in 138 Posts
Originally Posted by nomadmax
Just what I thought, crickets.
actually, I can't find a site showing the old shimano checker, but it looks loke the Pedoe's and the newest Park tool model. They are more accurate because they eliminate the roller play and measure the pin center lines.
davidad is offline  
Old 03-16-23, 12:35 PM
  #64  
davidad
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 6,660
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 582 Post(s)
Liked 171 Times in 138 Posts
Originally Posted by Lombard
Because Big Chain wants you to replace your chain more often. 😆
The .5% amounts to the 1/16th inch measurement. I have used this for 20 years and found that the smaller cogs last longer.
davidad is offline  
Old 03-16-23, 12:37 PM
  #65  
davidad
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 6,660
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 582 Post(s)
Liked 171 Times in 138 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact
WTF? You measure just pin wear with a ruler. You measure pin and roller wear together with a chain checker. How is this suddenly new information for you? It's all I've been talking about the whole damn thread.

Captain Obvious? More like Captain Oblivious. Geez.
Your problem is the inability to see the truth.
davidad is offline  
Old 03-16-23, 12:52 PM
  #66  
Kontact
Senior Member
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,825
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4260 Post(s)
Liked 1,458 Times in 950 Posts
Originally Posted by davidad
Your problem is the inability to see the truth.
It is too bad you are unable to articulate whatever it is you think that might be.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-16-23, 01:21 PM
  #67  
mschwett 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2021
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 2,028

Bikes: addict, aethos, creo, vanmoof, sirrus, public ...

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1272 Post(s)
Liked 1,382 Times in 707 Posts
Originally Posted by GhostRider62
Got a new bike in early December but only 1500 miles on it due to Covid recovery. Took off the chain and cleaned it yesterday. Hung it on a nail alongside a new and degreased chain. Zero wear. Both were exactly the same length. I guess I have no wattage or the Silca wax is doing its job. At $75 per chain, $400 per cassette, and $881 for rings, I'm not guessing on chain wear. It ain't take no rocket surgeryist to remove no doubt. 0.4% and they are in the bin. I have cassettes with over 30,000 miles that are fine…
i’m with you, first hand experience is that with a modern drivetrain a worn chain wears an expensive cassette shockingly fast. unfortunately my chain cleaning / lubing regime hasn’t been as effective, hitting the .5 in less than 2,500 miles, twice in a row.
__________________
mschwett is online now  
Old 03-16-23, 03:36 PM
  #68  
Racing Dan
Senior Member
 
Racing Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 2,224
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1332 Post(s)
Liked 316 Times in 214 Posts
Originally Posted by easyupbug
I have a Mitutoyo dial caliper on my bench so use Campagnolo's hard rule that you toss anything over 132.60mm which, though I have not checked, might be just under 0.5%. It is quick and easy and chains are relatively cheap so I follow their advise to "immediately" replace if even one measurement is over 132.60mm.
Really?

Measuring my own (non campy) chains from new, in the way recommended by campy, they measure right about 132.25mm according to my digital calliper. 132.6mm is then 0.26% "wear" before binning it, and the campy method even includes roller wear (enlargement of the hole in the roller, - the outer diameter stays roughly the same), that in my experience is more pronounced than actual chain elongation. Seems overly conservative to me and I've certainly gone much further with no issues. 133+ mm before I even consider replacing the chain.
Racing Dan is offline  
Old 03-16-23, 03:49 PM
  #69  
Racing Dan
Senior Member
 
Racing Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 2,224
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1332 Post(s)
Liked 316 Times in 214 Posts
Originally Posted by shelbyfv
Would anyone like to speculate as to why 11speed and up should be replaced at .5 (or whatever fractional corresponds) vs the older .75?
Good question. Who came up with these values and why. Industry standard is 1% and there is no logical reason it why its either 0.5% or 0.75% depending on 10s vs 11s. In shimano cassettes the actual cogs are identical in 10s vs 11s. Only spacing and # of cogs differ slightly. Not to mention its unclear if its 0.5% actual elongation or roller wear should be included. Park used to have a tool that included roller wear, now they have one that doesn't, but the recommended values stay the same even if different methods give very different results. Makes no sense what so ever.
Racing Dan is offline  
Old 03-16-23, 05:35 PM
  #70  
cyccommute 
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,274

Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones

Mentioned: 150 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6147 Post(s)
Liked 4,093 Times in 2,325 Posts
Originally Posted by Racing Dan
Good question. Who came up with these values and why. Industry standard is 1% and there is no logical reason it why it’s either 0.5% or 0.75% depending on 10s vs 11s. In shimano cassettes the actual cogs are identical in 10s vs 11s. Only spacing and # of cogs differ slightly. Not to mention it’s unclear if its 0.5% actual elongation or roller wear should be included. Park used to have a tool that included roller wear, now they have one that doesn't, but the recommended values stay the same even if different methods give very different results. Makes no sense what so ever.
SRAM says to replace at 0.8% without specifying cassette speeds. KMC says to replace the chain between 0.75% and 1%, again, without specifying speeds. I can’t find anything from Shimano. Park Tool says to replace 10 speed and below at 0.75% and 11 speed and above at 0.5%. Pick your poison.

The rule method, by the way, replaces chains at 0.5%. 0.75% would be 3/32” and 1% would be a full 1/8”.

11 speed and above chains are thinner with regards to overall width. Perhaps the thinking is to replace them at 0.5% since the pressure on the pin is greater.
__________________
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!



cyccommute is offline  
Old 03-16-23, 05:40 PM
  #71  
easyupbug 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,652

Bikes: too many sparkly Italians, some sweet Americans and a couple interesting Japanese

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 560 Post(s)
Liked 546 Times in 396 Posts
Originally Posted by Racing Dan
Really?

Measuring my own (non campy) chains from new, in the way recommended by campy, they measure right about 132.25mm according to my digital calliper. 132.6mm is then 0.26% "wear" before binning it, and the campy method even includes roller wear (enlargement of the hole in the roller, - the outer diameter stays roughly the same), that in my experience is more pronounced than actual chain elongation. Seems overly conservative to me and I've certainly gone much further with no issues. 133+ mm before I even consider replacing the chain.
Very interesting. When I get back in town I measure a few new chains as I can not imagine they would vary from your figures and report back.
easyupbug is offline  
Old 03-16-23, 05:48 PM
  #72  
cyccommute 
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,274

Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones

Mentioned: 150 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6147 Post(s)
Liked 4,093 Times in 2,325 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact
WTF? You measure just pin wear with a ruler. You measure pin and roller wear together with a chain checker. How is this suddenly new information for you? It's all I've been talking about the whole damn thread.

Captain Obvious? More like Captain Oblivious. Geez.
Pin wear and any roller wear (which is vanishingly small) are combined in any measurement you make on a chain. I will not say that chain checkers are more accurate or measure roller wear over the rule method. The amount of wear measured with both methods is the same and either method can be used. I find the chain checker to be quicker to use with the same result. If you think differently it is up to you to demonstrate how the measurements can be disconnected.

Again, my main objection to the rule method is the use of a 12” rule and the estimation of the 1/16” wear while simultaneously claiming that the rule method is “more accurate”. Get a 13” rule and I’d have zero problems with the method. I still don’t think it is more accurate than a chain checker.
__________________
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!



cyccommute is offline  
Old 03-16-23, 06:17 PM
  #73  
Kontact
Senior Member
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,825
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4260 Post(s)
Liked 1,458 Times in 950 Posts
Originally Posted by cyccommute
Pin wear and any roller wear (which is vanishingly small) are combined in any measurement you make on a chain. I will not say that chain checkers are more accurate or measure roller wear over the rule method. The amount of wear measured with both methods is the same and either method can be used. I find the chain checker to be quicker to use with the same result. If you think differently it is up to you to demonstrate how the measurements can be disconnected.

Again, my main objection to the rule method is the use of a 12” rule and the estimation of the 1/16” wear while simultaneously claiming that the rule method is “more accurate”. Get a 13” rule and I’d have zero problems with the method. I still don’t think it is more accurate than a chain checker.
The rollers have zero influence on how elongated the chain gets from pin and link wear and absolutely will not show up if you measure the chain with a ruler. Pin to pin distance is entirely a measure of how the inner links and pins contact each other. Having a ring around the two won't change that.

You can disassemble the chain and remove all the rollers and it will be the same length when you put it back together without them.
Kontact is offline  
Old 03-16-23, 07:03 PM
  #74  
sweeks
Senior Member
 
sweeks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicago area
Posts: 2,541

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

Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 978 Post(s)
Liked 574 Times in 395 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact
You can disassemble the chain and remove all the rollers and it will be the same length when you put it back together without them.
This reminds me of the ShelBroCo Bicycle Chain Cleaning System.
sweeks is offline  
Likes For sweeks:
Old 03-16-23, 08:53 PM
  #75  
easyupbug 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,652

Bikes: too many sparkly Italians, some sweet Americans and a couple interesting Japanese

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 560 Post(s)
Liked 546 Times in 396 Posts
Originally Posted by Kontact
The rollers have zero influence on how elongated the chain gets from pin and link wear and absolutely will not show up if you measure the chain with a ruler. Pin to pin distance is entirely a measure of how the inner links and pins contact each other. Having a ring around the two won't change that.

You can disassemble the chain and remove all the rollers and it will be the same length when you put it back together without them.
Again bringing up the Campagnolo hard recommendation, just as a quality chain checker takes in any roller wear the Campagnolo measurement will as it measure roller to roller on a vernier caliper.
easyupbug is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.