| |
Main
Date: 01 Apr 2007 00:29:39
From: Fred
Subject: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
I have a 24 speed bike but may convert it to 27 or 30 gears, depending on
what parts I can get at the right price. Question is are the chains thinner
for use with 9 or 10 gear cassettes? If so are they as robust?
|
|
| |
Date: 12 Apr 2007 08:27:29
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
On Apr 11, 11:10 pm, Chris BeHanna <c...@behanna.org > wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:16:09 +0000, Bill wrote:
>
> > Why 10 speeds anyway?
>
> It'd be darned nice to switch from my 30/42/52 triple and a 9sp 12-25
> rear to a 36/53 double and a 12-27 or 12-28 10sp rear 'round these parts.
>
Why? If you would be served by a 36/28 low gear, you can get virtually
the same low by using a 12-23 9sp cassette with your existing crank,
and you'll have closer spacing on the rear than you have now.
|
| | |
Date: 13 Apr 2007 00:38:36
From: Chris BeHanna
Subject: Re: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 09:27:29 -0700, Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> On Apr 11, 11:10 pm, Chris BeHanna <c...@behanna.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:16:09 +0000, Bill wrote:
>>
>> > Why 10 speeds anyway?
>>
>> It'd be darned nice to switch from my 30/42/52 triple and a 9sp 12-25
>> rear to a 36/53 double and a 12-27 or 12-28 10sp rear 'round these parts.
>>
>
> Why? If you would be served by a 36/28 low gear, you can get virtually
> the same low by using a 12-23 9sp cassette with your existing crank,
> and you'll have closer spacing on the rear than you have now.
That's an interesting thought. As I responded to Frank, though, it's not
like I'm planning to throw away serviceable parts. If I actually do this,
it'll be when it's time to replace my chainrings anyway.
--
Chris BeHanna
|
| |
Date: 12 Apr 2007 08:13:23
From:
Subject: Re: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
On Apr 12, 12:10 am, Chris BeHanna <c...@behanna.org > wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:16:09 +0000, Bill wrote:
>
> > Why 10 speeds anyway?
>
> It'd be darned nice to switch from my 30/42/52 triple and a 9sp 12-25
> rear to a 36/53 double and a 12-27 or 12-28 10sp rear 'round these parts.
Help me understand why.
Do you simply not like shifting over three front rings? Or do you
need the extra one-half mph the 53-12 will give you at 100 rpm during
those downhill sprints (i.e. around 35 mph) ?
Just curious.
- Frank Krygowski
|
| | |
Date: 13 Apr 2007 00:36:42
From: Chris BeHanna
Subject: Re: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 09:13:23 -0700, frkrygow wrote:
> On Apr 12, 12:10 am, Chris BeHanna <c...@behanna.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:16:09 +0000, Bill wrote:
>>
>> > Why 10 speeds anyway?
>>
>> It'd be darned nice to switch from my 30/42/52 triple and a 9sp 12-25
>> rear to a 36/53 double and a 12-27 or 12-28 10sp rear 'round these parts.
>
> Help me understand why.
>
> Do you simply not like shifting over three front rings?
I'm running Shimano 105. Maybe your rig is different, but I have found
that there is no way to get it to shift crispy to the middle ring, and it
is somewhat clunky to get from the middle ring to the big ring. Going
back down, I sort of have to "catch" the chain with a small movement of
the left shifter to keep it from skipping the middle ring and simply going
all the way down to the small ring.
I've futzed and futzed and futzed, and still it's like this.
So, in one case, I'm after improved shifting.
The other argument is that going to a double will make me stronger.
Keeping a 27 or 28 cog in the rear will still give me a bailout that is
close to, although still a little bigger than, my current bailout of 30x25.
> Or do you
> need the extra one-half mph the 53-12 will give you at 100 rpm during
> those downhill sprints (i.e. around 35 mph) ?
As long as I'm converting over (not yet, but when my chainrings wear
out, I'm strongly considering it), why not?
If nothing else, a 53T front ring should give somewhat better chain life
than a 52T ring, as 53 is not only relatively prime to the number of links
in the chain, it is actually prime, so it's going to be relatively prime
to each and every cog, too. It may sound like numerology, but keeping
driveline components relatively prime to each other is actually a standard
practice in driveline engineering, as it spreads out the wear pattern
better.
--
Chris BeHanna
|
| | | |
Date: 13 Apr 2007 19:53:53
From: David L. Johnson
Subject: Re: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
Chris BeHanna wrote:
> to each and every cog, too. It may sound like numerology, but keeping
> driveline components relatively prime to each other is actually a standard
> practice in driveline engineering, as it spreads out the wear pattern
> better.
Nah, it sounds like BS. Only if you never shift would it matter. Any
shifting will change the relative positions enough to even out any
exposure. But the only way in which the "wrong" ratios could ever
effect chain wear is if the chainring had an even number of teeth, so
that each time a tooth touched the chain, it always hit either an inner
side plate in front, or (converesly) in back of the tooth. But, but, how
do you suggest that this would affect drivetrain wear? BTW, the number
of teeth in the sprocket won't affect the supposed wear on the
chainring. Similarly, the number of links of the chain is irrelevant,
since any chain has to use full pairs of links, inner and outer. OK, if
you get a half-link it would change, but that is not worth fussing about.
So, what is relatively prime to what is indeed BS, although it sounds
mathematical.
The only other idea you could have here is that the 37th link on the
chain is particularly wearing (as opposed to being identical with every
other link on that chain). If so, then the way to ensure that that bad
link hits a given tooth only 1/37th of the time is to have....an odd
number of teeth on the chainring. Again, the number of teeth on the cog
is irrelevant, it cannot matter if you shift gears, and it doesn't
matter anyway since all the links are alike.
--
David L. Johnson
If all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach
a conclusion. -- George Bernard Shaw
|
| | | | |
Date: 17 Apr 2007 07:40:24
From: Wolfgang Strobl
Subject: Re: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
"David L. Johnson" <david.johnson@lehigh.edu >:
>Chris BeHanna wrote:
>
>> to each and every cog, too. It may sound like numerology, but keeping
>> driveline components relatively prime to each other is actually a standard
>> practice in driveline engineering, as it spreads out the wear pattern
>> better.
>
>Nah, it sounds like BS.
Well, no. It sounds like a holdover from bicycles with internal-gear
hubs.
>Only if you never shift would it matter. Any
>shifting will change the relative positions enough to even out any
>exposure.
Not so, when operating an internally geared hub.
--
Wir danken für die Beachtung aller Sicherheitsbestimmungen
|
| | | | | |
Date: 17 Apr 2007 10:56:29
From: Dane Buson
Subject: Re: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
Wolfgang Strobl <news2@mystrobl.de > wrote:
> "David L. Johnson" <david.johnson@lehigh.edu>:
>>Chris BeHanna wrote:
>>
>>> to each and every cog, too. It may sound like numerology, but keeping
>>> driveline components relatively prime to each other is actually a standard
>>> practice in driveline engineering, as it spreads out the wear pattern
>>> better.
>>
>>Nah, it sounds like BS.
>
> Well, no. It sounds like a holdover from bicycles with internal-gear
> hubs.
Also, I know a number of fixed gear and SS riders who talk about these
sorts of things. Luckily my preferred gear ratio for Seattle has a 17
tooth rear cog, so I never had to worry about it much.
>>Only if you never shift would it matter. Any
>>shifting will change the relative positions enough to even out any
>>exposure.
>
> Not so, when operating an internally geared hub.
Which reminds me, I need to check the ratio on my folder and finish
setting it up with the S7 hub.
--
Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org
"Scissor-bomb"
-Gnat
|
| |
Date: 12 Apr 2007 07:31:08
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
On Apr 11, 10:10 pm, Chris BeHanna <c...@behanna.org > wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:16:09 +0000, Bill wrote:
>
> > Why 10 speeds anyway?
>
> It'd be darned nice to switch from my 30/42/52 triple and a 9sp 12-25
> rear to a 36/53 double and a 12-27 or 12-28 10sp rear 'round these parts.
>
> --
> Chris BeHanna
Right 10s shifter, compact crank, new 53t ring, triple FD, 12-27 10s
cogset and chain and bob's yer uncle.
|
| | |
Date: 13 Apr 2007 00:30:15
From: Chris BeHanna
Subject: Re: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 08:31:08 -0700, Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> On Apr 11, 10:10 pm, Chris BeHanna <c...@behanna.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:16:09 +0000, Bill wrote:
>>
>> > Why 10 speeds anyway?
>>
>> It'd be darned nice to switch from my 30/42/52 triple and a 9sp 12-25
>> rear to a 36/53 double and a 12-27 or 12-28 10sp rear 'round these parts.
>
> Right 10s shifter, compact crank, new 53t ring, triple FD, 12-27 10s
> cogset and chain and bob's yer uncle.
Why a triple FD (which I have already, conveniently enough)?
Apart from the shifter, this sounds pretty economical to do.
--
Chris BeHanna
|
| |
Date: 10 Apr 2007 16:48:28
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
On Apr 10, 3:19 pm, "David L. Johnson" <david.john...@lehigh.edu >
wrote:
> Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
>
> > Plates are thinner and pins are shorter. More expensive but not
> > drastically less robust than 8s..MUCH more expensive tho, particularly
> > 10s.
>
> To be precise, 10-speed anything is way more expensive. 8-speed Campy
> parts are now more expensive than comparable 9-speed (cassettes are not
> only more expensive in 8-speed, but hard to find, and when you do you
> have essentially zero choice of gears).
>
> --
>
> David L. Johnson
>
> If all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach
> a conclusion. -- George Bernard Shaw
Not hard to find for bike shops and yes 12-23 and 13-26...if you are
having a hard time finding Campag 8s cogsets, it's the bike shops that
are being lazy...
|
| |
Date: 10 Apr 2007 16:46:02
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
On Apr 10, 12:47 pm, "David Bonnell" <dbonn...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On 31, 11:16 am, "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <p...@vecchios.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On 31, 6:29 am, "Fred" <gene...@zaradise.net.uk> wrote:
>
> > > I have a 24 speed bike but may convert it to 27 or 30 gears, depending on
> > > what parts I can get at the right price. Question is are the chains thinner
> > > for use with 9 or 10 gear cassettes? If so are they as robust?
>
> > Plates are thinner and pins are shorter. More expensive but not
> > drastically less robust than 8s..MUCH more expensive tho, particularly
> > 10s.
>
> I snapped the chain on my 10-speed bike last year.
shimano??
Replacement chain
> was close to $50. I have never snapped a chain on my 8- or 9- speed
> bikes. Even if I did, replacement chains are dirt cheap. YMMV.
> Honestly, I don't see a big motivation to switch to 10-speed...you
> generally save a few grams and get smoother shifting, but the costs
> (parts/maintenance) are significant.
>
> If you're *really* determined to have a 10-speed bike, I would suggest
> buying a new (stock) bike rather than upgrading an old one. To
> upgrade, you generally need to replace shifters, crankset, derailleur,
> and cassette.
My Aunt Harold's mustache. For shimano and Campagnolo all you need is
the shifter, cogset and chain...NO need to change cranks, ders and
such.
In replacing the cassette, you may require new hubs
> (and perhaps wheels).
Only if the bike is about 2 decades old is shimano or a decade old if
Campagnolo. PLUS most hubs are convertible to 10s, freehub only.
Your current frame may make upgrading a hassle
> (and chances are that you wouldn't realize it until *after* you've
> purchased parts). I'm sure I'm missing something here. Not only
> that, but I've seen 10-speed bikes going for just over $1k. $1500
> gets you a pretty decent ride these days.
|
| |
Date: 10 Apr 2007 18:17:36
From: David L. Johnson
Subject: Re: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
Fred wrote:
> I have a 24 speed bike but may convert it to 27 or 30 gears, depending on
> what parts I can get at the right price. Question is are the chains thinner
> for use with 9 or 10 gear cassettes? If so are they as robust?
Yes, they are thinner, or, to be precise, the side plates are thinner.
Are they as robust? My experience (between 8 and 9-speed chains, no
10-speed for me yet) is that there is little difference between the
durability of the two sizes.
--
David L. Johnson
If all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach
a conclusion. -- George Bernard Shaw
|
| |
Date: 10 Apr 2007 12:47:25
From: David Bonnell
Subject: Re: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
On 31, 11:16 am, "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <p...@vecchios.com >
wrote:
> On 31, 6:29 am, "Fred" <gene...@zaradise.net.uk> wrote:
>
> > I have a 24 speed bike but may convert it to 27 or 30 gears, depending on
> > what parts I can get at the right price. Question is are the chains thinner
> > for use with 9 or 10 gear cassettes? If so are they as robust?
>
> Plates are thinner and pins are shorter. More expensive but not
> drastically less robust than 8s..MUCH more expensive tho, particularly
> 10s.
I snapped the chain on my 10-speed bike last year. Replacement chain
was close to $50. I have never snapped a chain on my 8- or 9- speed
bikes. Even if I did, replacement chains are dirt cheap. YMMV.
Honestly, I don't see a big motivation to switch to 10-speed...you
generally save a few grams and get smoother shifting, but the costs
(parts/maintenance) are significant.
If you're *really* determined to have a 10-speed bike, I would suggest
buying a new (stock) bike rather than upgrading an old one. To
upgrade, you generally need to replace shifters, crankset, derailleur,
and cassette. In replacing the cassette, you may require new hubs
(and perhaps wheels). Your current frame may make upgrading a hassle
(and chances are that you wouldn't realize it until *after* you've
purchased parts). I'm sure I'm missing something here. Not only
that, but I've seen 10-speed bikes going for just over $1k. $1500
gets you a pretty decent ride these days.
|
| | |
Date: 10 Apr 2007 21:16:09
From: Bill
Subject: Re: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
David Bonnell wrote:
> On 31, 11:16 am, "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <p...@vecchios.com>
> wrote:
>> On 31, 6:29 am, "Fred" <gene...@zaradise.net.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> I have a 24 speed bike but may convert it to 27 or 30 gears, depending on
>>> what parts I can get at the right price. Question is are the chains thinner
>>> for use with 9 or 10 gear cassettes? If so are they as robust?
>> Plates are thinner and pins are shorter. More expensive but not
>> drastically less robust than 8s..MUCH more expensive tho, particularly
>> 10s.
>
> I snapped the chain on my 10-speed bike last year. Replacement chain
> was close to $50. I have never snapped a chain on my 8- or 9- speed
> bikes. Even if I did, replacement chains are dirt cheap. YMMV.
> Honestly, I don't see a big motivation to switch to 10-speed...you
> generally save a few grams and get smoother shifting, but the costs
> (parts/maintenance) are significant.
>
> If you're *really* determined to have a 10-speed bike, I would suggest
> buying a new (stock) bike rather than upgrading an old one. To
> upgrade, you generally need to replace shifters, crankset, derailleur,
> and cassette. In replacing the cassette, you may require new hubs
> (and perhaps wheels). Your current frame may make upgrading a hassle
> (and chances are that you wouldn't realize it until *after* you've
> purchased parts). I'm sure I'm missing something here. Not only
> that, but I've seen 10-speed bikes going for just over $1k. $1500
> gets you a pretty decent ride these days.
>
Why 10 speeds anyway? All my MTBs are 3 front and 7 rear, giving me 21
speeds and I have never broken a chain. Also I have never felt like
there was a gear missing between shifts. Your legs can go from 0 to 120
RPM, which is already a lot more range than a car engine has. They may
make some sense for 'some' of the racer types, but I would hate to be
standing on the pedals climbing (attacking?) a hill when the chain
broke, possibly leading to a near neuter event.
Bill Baka
|
| | | |
Date: 12 Apr 2007 00:10:06
From: Chris BeHanna
Subject: Re: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:16:09 +0000, Bill wrote:
>
> Why 10 speeds anyway?
It'd be darned nice to switch from my 30/42/52 triple and a 9sp 12-25
rear to a 36/53 double and a 12-27 or 12-28 10sp rear 'round these parts.
--
Chris BeHanna
|
| |
Date: 31 Mar 2007 06:16:50
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
On 31, 6:29 am, "Fred" <gene...@zaradise.net.uk > wrote:
> I have a 24 speed bike but may convert it to 27 or 30 gears, depending on
> what parts I can get at the right price. Question is are the chains thinner
> for use with 9 or 10 gear cassettes? If so are they as robust?
Plates are thinner and pins are shorter. More expensive but not
drastically less robust than 8s..MUCH more expensive tho, particularly
10s.
|
| | |
Date: 10 Apr 2007 18:19:36
From: David L. Johnson
Subject: Re: Chain life on 27/30 speed bikes.
|
Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> Plates are thinner and pins are shorter. More expensive but not
> drastically less robust than 8s..MUCH more expensive tho, particularly
> 10s.
>
To be precise, 10-speed anything is way more expensive. 8-speed Campy
parts are now more expensive than comparable 9-speed (cassettes are not
only more expensive in 8-speed, but hard to find, and when you do you
have essentially zero choice of gears).
--
David L. Johnson
If all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach
a conclusion. -- George Bernard Shaw
|
|
