# Opinion needed



## Seats (2 Jun 2016)

I purchased a new road bike recently from Ribble with a Shimano Ultegra Groupset. I've done about 150 miles on it, then during a ride at weekend my chain snapped and when my local bike shop looked at it they said the front large ring had also bent - they had no idea why the circumstances of the chain incident would have caused such a result and suggested I contact my bike supplier. FYI I was pulling away on a slight incline and was on large ring on front and 4 or 5 on rear cassette, when this happened.

I was told by Ribble that cause of the failure was misuse of the equipment as I was in the wrong gear and had put the chain under too much strain.

This response feels completely ridiculous to me. I would be interested what more experienced cylists think about this?


----------



## Accy cyclist (2 Jun 2016)

So they're adamant they're not going to change it at no cost to you?


----------



## MiK1138 (2 Jun 2016)

Does seem a high gear to be pulling away up a hill, but no way it should wreck the chainset unless its made of cheese


----------



## outlash (2 Jun 2016)

Looking at it from Ribble's point of view, it sounds like you've had an accident and you're trying it on. How would the chainring bend otherwise?


----------



## Seats (2 Jun 2016)

Accy cyclist said:


> So they're adamant they're not going to change it at no cost to you?


That's the size of it. I wasn't really even expecting free replacement - cost would have been nice! The person who recommended Ribble to me raved about their customer service and was sure they would replace - it's clearly been a while since he bought a bike from them.! Avoid warranty claims at all costs is clearly their new mantra.


----------



## Seats (2 Jun 2016)

outlash said:


> Looking at it from Ribble's point of view, it sounds like you've had an accident and you're trying it on. How would the chainring bend otherwise?


If that were true I would understand. It's not. They asked for a picture - clearly no accident damage. Understanding how the ring bent is exactly my point - it shouldn't and it did


----------



## Seats (2 Jun 2016)

MiK1138 said:


> Does seem a high gear to be pulling away up a hill, but no way it should wreck the chainset unless its made of cheese


Slight incline - certainly not a hill


----------



## ianrauk (2 Jun 2016)

Pulling away up a hill in the gears you were in shouldn't have caused those problems. What they are saying is the cause is bullcrap.


----------



## Yellow Saddle (2 Jun 2016)

It is your fault, I'm afraid. You botched a shift in one way or another and applied power when the chain was transferring between two rings. It is a simple matter of physics to show that it could not have happened just from some innocent pedaling.

Take it on the chin, have it fixed at your cost and write it off as school fees. Learning always come at a cost.


----------



## MiK1138 (2 Jun 2016)

Yellow Saddle said:


> It is your fault, I'm afraid. You botched a shift in one way or another and applied power when the chain was transferring between two rings. It is a simple matter of physics to show that it could not have happened just from some innocent pedaling.
> 
> Take it on the chin, have it fixed at your cost and write it off as school fees. Learning always come at a cost.


At no point did the OP say he was shifting gear, where did your diagnosis come from?


----------



## mjr (2 Jun 2016)

Probably a bit of a big gear for an uphill start (75"?) and I'd try not to make a habit of that but I think the bike should cope. Could be defective or damaged ring, chain or both - and the risk of that is why I'd try not to make a habit of putting strain on things.

https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/bike-purchase-quandary.178748/ and many other threads have warnings about Ribble. Fit a new front ring (blimey! Ultegra outers are £75?!? ) and chain and avoid them in future?


----------



## martinclive (2 Jun 2016)

Single speed has to cope with 'wrong' gear the whole time and a lot of pressure up hills (although straight chainline helps) - sounds like something else happened to bend the chainring not just being in high gear............


----------



## Dec66 (2 Jun 2016)

Seats said:


> This response feels completely ridiculous to me. I would be interested what more experienced cyclists think about this?


I agree, as does pretty much everyone else here. Yep, you're in the wrong gear for a hill start, but your chainring should be able to cope without bending. At worst, the chain breaks, or slips off the ring, or possibly the hanger on the rear derailleur snaps.

I'm a swine for being in the wrong gear at inopportune moments, and I've never bent a chainring yet. Sounds like yours is/was defective.

EDIT: just reread your OP and you say that you pulled away up a slight incline on the big ring and "4 or 5 on the rear cassette". I don't know exactly what your gearing is but I'm guessing that you were on something like 50/17, and that really shouldn't be an issue, apart from your grimace as you realise what gear you're in and have to stand up on the pedals.


----------



## mjr (2 Jun 2016)

martinclive said:


> Single speed has to cope with 'wrong' gear the whole time and a lot of pressure up hills (although straight chainline helps) - sounds like something else happened to bend the chainring not just being in high gear............


Singlespeed often has thicker chain, ring and sprocket too... it's possible that the indexing might have been slightly out so it started trying to shift once high load was applied, but that still shouldn't bend a ring unless the chain got trapped against the front mech, should it?


----------



## mjr (2 Jun 2016)

Dec66 said:


> I'm a swine for being in the wrong gear at inopportune moments, and I've never bent a chainring yet. Sounds like yours is/was defective.


I've only ever bent one from use (rather than stuff hitting the bike) - don't try to outsprint a road bike on a folding bike that uses a huge chainring to compensate for its small wheels


----------



## Tin Pot (2 Jun 2016)

Seats said:


> I purchased a new road bike recently from Ribble with a Shimano Ultegra Groupset. I've done about 150 miles on it, then during a ride at weekend my chain snapped and when my local bike shop looked at it they said the front large ring had also bent - they had no idea why the circumstances of the chain incident would have caused such a result and suggested I contact my bike supplier. FYI I was pulling away on a slight incline and was on large ring on front and 4 or 5 on rear cassette, when this happened.
> 
> I was told by Ribble that cause of the failure was misuse of the equipment as I was in the wrong gear and had put the chain under too much strain.
> 
> This response feels completely ridiculous to me. I would be interested what more experienced cylists think about this?



It's a pretty unlikely scenario.

Have they examined the bike?


----------



## Yellow Saddle (2 Jun 2016)

MiK1138 said:


> At no point did the OP say he was shifting gear, where did your diagnosis come from?


Where did it come from?

A chainring cannot bend sideways from an in-plane force. For it to bend, the chain had to apply a lateral (sideways) force to it.
Further, the chainring can resist mild sideways forces such as when you are severely cross-chained in say big-big or small, small. That still won't do it.
The only plausible scenario where the chainring can bend is if the chain is halfway between big and small chainrings, making an acute angle, enough to bend the chainring if enough force is applied to the chain.

He said the chain snapped. We'll it didn't snap. "snap" suggests a tensile break, which it certainly wasn't. The chain broke open by popping a rivet. Then it broke when the sideplate was bent (again by a laterally-applied force). All of this happened underneath the front derailer where the botch-up started.

There is no other explanation. Perhaps you have one? The suggestion that he simply rode along and the chain snapped and chainring bent all by itself doesn't hold water.

The OP may not have been consciously shifting at the time but it is certain that the chain wasn't properly on the ring when he applied the force required to bend it.


----------



## Yellow Saddle (2 Jun 2016)

Dec66 said:


> I agree, as does pretty much everyone else here. Yep, you're in the wrong gear for a hill start, but your chainring should be able to cope without bending. At worst, the chain breaks, or slips off the ring, or possibly the hanger on the rear derailleur snaps.
> 
> I'm a swine for being in the wrong gear at inopportune moments, and I've never bent a chainring yet. Sounds like yours is/was defective.
> 
> EDIT: just reread your OP and you say that you pulled away up a slight incline on the big ring and "4 or 5 on the rear cassette". I don't know exactly what your gearing is but I'm guessing that you were on something like 50/17, and that really shouldn't be an issue, apart from your grimace as you realise what gear you're in and have to stand up on the pedals.



What sort of defect do you suggest? Remember, in your scenario you have two defects to contend with and they have had to occur at the same spot at the same time - a defective chain and defective chainring.


----------



## Yellow Saddle (2 Jun 2016)

Seats said:


> If that were true I would understand. It's not. They asked for a picture - clearly no accident damage. Understanding how the ring bent is exactly my point - it shouldn't and it did


Show us some pictures.


----------



## Dec66 (2 Jun 2016)

Yellow Saddle said:


> The OP may not have been consciously shifting at the time but it is certain that the chain wasn't properly on the ring when he applied the force required to bend it.


Which should have resulted in one of three things; his chain slips across his cassette (if he's between two ratios on the cassette), or the chain slips off his big ring and probably gets jammed between that and his front mech (if he's shifted between his front rings, which is unlikely in the scenario he describes), or his chain breaks.

There is absolutely no way his chain ring should have bent, unless he was applying the sort of force you'd expect from an elephant.


----------



## sight-pin (2 Jun 2016)

I know i shouldn't, but regularly cross chain my Poggio 1.5 (50x32) and used to do the same with the triban 3, and then drop down to the 34 ring if i have to, never had any problems, yes it'll wear more rapidly as we all know.....just lately though i do use the 34 more often when i should.


----------



## TheJDog (2 Jun 2016)

Dec66 said:


> There is absolutely no way his chain ring should have bent



I'd go so far as to say that if the chain was on the ring, and in gear 4 or 5 at the back there is no way the ring COULD have bent.

I'd say Yellow Saddle is almost certainly correct, the chain was coming off the big ring and OP was exerting full power.


----------



## Milkfloat (2 Jun 2016)

Even if the chain was coming off the big ring and putting it under lateral stress, I would expect a few of things:

1.) Ribble would look at the part and at least discuss it, not dismiss the customer without any investigation.
2.) Ribble would discuss it with their rep and at a minimum have this reported back to Shimano, they may be very interested in getting hold of this chainring.

In addition, I would not actually expect a supposed quality part to bend so easily - if Ribble were not playing ball I would work directly with Shimano.


----------



## outlash (2 Jun 2016)

I think some photos of the offending article would be in order here.


----------



## Yellow Saddle (2 Jun 2016)

Dec66 said:


> Which should have resulted in one of three things; his chain slips across his cassette (if he's between two ratios on the cassette), or the chain slips off his big ring and probably gets jammed between that and his front mech (if he's shifted between his front rings, which is unlikely in the scenario he describes), or his chain breaks.
> 
> There is absolutely no way his chain ring should have bent, unless he was applying the sort of force you'd expect from an elephant.



The mess didn't start at the cassette. That had nothing to do with it. The problem was at the front. Had the mess started at the cassette and the chain popped a link open back there with an open plate facing forward, it would have ripped the front derailer off but not bent the chainring. Had the chain broken open with a forward-facing open plate and it had cleared the FD, it would have hooked on the RD cage and ripped that out.

A bent chainring is a sure sign of a chain jamming between the FD and chainring. Careful examination of the FD will show the necessary scarring.

Perfectly in-plane, chainrings are extremely rigid. This can be demonstrated by standing next to the bike, pulling the front brake and jumping down on a crank. This test is done by mechanics to identify a worn rear sprocket or worn hub pawls with no ill effects on the chain or chainring.


----------



## Jody (2 Jun 2016)

Yellow Saddle said:


> Had the chain broken open with a forward-facing open plate and it had cleared the FD, it would have hooked on the RD cage and ripped that out.
> 
> Perfectly in-plane, chainrings are extremely rigid.



I had this happen a few weeks ago when the plate popped off whist riding. It made it to the RD, twisted the cage and sent it into the back wheel. The chain was about 3 weeks old and the new mech was on its first ride #gutted

Front rings are extremely strong. I have hit mine on rocks/logs etc and only ever put the big ring slightly out of true.


----------



## Jody (2 Jun 2016)

User said:


> This. I suggest you go back to Ribble quoting the Sale of Goods Act. Clearly the chainring was defective and not fit for purpose. If they still refuse, take it to Trading Standards.



Its £20 for a chain. Dip your hand in a pocket and put a new chain on.


----------



## Tin Pot (2 Jun 2016)

Wasn't there a fuss on here about changes to the law - retailers now have to take back any bike for any reason within a month or something?


----------



## Yellow Saddle (2 Jun 2016)

User said:


> This. I suggest you go back to Ribble quoting the Sale of Goods Act. *Clearly the chainring was defective and not fit for purpose.* If they still refuse, take it to Trading Standards.



What makes you think it is so clear that the chainring is defective? The OP just gave more evidence that has previously botched a shift and popped a chain. For a chainring to be defective so that it bends it would have to have a very clear flaw in the material. I am 100% sure that photographic evidence will not show such a defect.


----------



## Jody (2 Jun 2016)

User said:


> If you'd bothered reading the thread properly you'd have noticed that it wasn't just the chain that was the issue...



Iv'e read the OP. A slightly bent chainring won't cause a chain to pop and there is no way of proving it arrived bent from Ribble. Suck it up, put a chain on and get back riding.


----------



## Dec66 (2 Jun 2016)

Yellow Saddle said:


> The mess didn't start at the cassette. That had nothing to do with it. The problem was at the front. Had the mess started at the cassette and the chain popped a link open back there with an open plate facing forward, it would have ripped the front derailer off but not bent the chainring. Had the chain broken open with a forward-facing open plate and it had cleared the FD, it would have hooked on the RD cage and ripped that out.
> 
> A bent chainring is a sure sign of a chain jamming between the FD and chainring. Careful examination of the FD will show the necessary scarring.
> 
> Perfectly in-plane, chainrings are extremely rigid. This can be demonstrated by standing next to the bike, pulling the front brake and jumping down on a crank. This test is done by mechanics to identify a worn rear sprocket or worn hub pawls with no ill effects on the chain or chainring.


Hang on. The only reason I mentioned the cassette is because you said (with no supporting evidence) that he's not properly engaged the gear.

So, taking your unsupported hypothesis, he's either between gears on his cassette (which would make the chain jump); he's not engaged one or other of his front rings (in which case his chain jumps, or jams); or, rarely, the chain breaks (which it did).

On no account, ever, should the ring bend, unless you're an African bull elephant.


----------



## Jody (2 Jun 2016)

Dec66 said:


> On no account, ever, should the ring bend, unless you're an African bull elephant.



edit: Funny bit has now been edited by the mods


----------



## Yellow Saddle (2 Jun 2016)

Dec66 said:


> Hang on. The only reason I mentioned the cassette is because you said (with no supporting evidence) that he's not properly engaged the gear.
> 
> So, taking your unsupported hypothesis, he's either between gears on his cassette (which would make the chain jump); he's not engaged one or other of his front rings (in which case his chain jumps, or jams); or, rarely, the chain breaks (which it did).
> 
> On no account, ever, should the ring bend, unless you're an African bull elephant.


Mentioning the cassette confuses the issue. Take it out of the equation. "The gear" in question is the front, not the back. I've explained the sequence of events and the implausible sequence of events.

The chain jammed and lodged between chainrings, putting it at an angle. This angle is easily exploited by an even moderate force on the pedals to create a sideways force that bends a chainring. A chainring is only 2mm thick and made from alumiinium. It is easily bent laterally - you can do that by fitting a 150mm shifting spanner over the blade and with one hand, bend it over. A bull elephant is not needed and a leg is certainly up to the job if a hand is. However, to make it bend sideways by putting an in-plane force on it is neigh impossible. I've already explained what test you can perform to attempt such a bend.


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Jun 2016)

User said:


> ...


@User - why is it (ie what is the rationale for) your opinion that clearly the chainring is/was defective?


----------



## Yellow Saddle (2 Jun 2016)

User13710 said:


> That wasn't the OP, who hasn't posted since page 1.


Duly noted.


----------



## Jody (2 Jun 2016)

User said:


> As others have pointed out, the chain ring should not have bent under the conditions described in the OP. That would indicate it was defective.



Surely if its defective due to materials or the manufacturing process there will be evidence. Same goes for damage or mis-use.


----------



## mickle (2 Jun 2016)

Seats said:


> I purchased a new road bike recently from Ribble with a Shimano Ultegra Groupset. I've done about 150 miles on it, then during a ride at weekend my chain snapped and when my local bike shop looked at it they said the front large ring had also bent - they had no idea why the circumstances of the chain incident would have caused such a result and suggested I contact my bike supplier. FYI I was pulling away on a slight incline and was on large ring on front and 4 or 5 on rear cassette, when this happened.
> 
> I was told by Ribble that cause of the failure was misuse of the equipment as I was in the wrong gear and had put the chain under too much strain.
> 
> This response feels completely ridiculous to me. I would be interested what more experienced cylists think about this?



This, quite clearly, is not the whole story. 

I'm no cheerleader for Shi**no - but Ultegra chain rings are mass produced by robots and are subject to very rigorous quality assurance. They don't vary. Shi**no don't produce a batch of sh!t ones on a Friday afternoon. And Ribble are clutching at straws too.

Could the failure of the chain have caused the damage to the chain ring? It could conceivably bend a tooth or two but not the ring. So nope. Could a bent chain ring cause the chain to fail? Definitely not. Which leaves us with the only likely secenario: That the event that caused the chain to fail also damaged the chain ring. or put another way; the event that bent the chain ring also damaged the chain. The bike's been dropped onto its ring or bashed by another bike's pedal.


----------



## Dec66 (2 Jun 2016)

Yellow Saddle said:


> A chainring is only 2mm thick and made from alumiinium. It is easily bent laterally - you can do that by fitting a 150mm shifting spanner over the blade and with one hand, bend it over



Because sticking a spanner on the ring at a right angle and pushing down is just like a chain being slightly out of kilter, yes?


----------



## jonny jeez (2 Jun 2016)

Call me suspicious.

But a new member coming onto an internationally visited cycle forum only to complain about a particular brand.

Has a slight whiff to it.


----------



## Levo-Lon (2 Jun 2016)

As above...could be sour grapes


----------



## MiK1138 (2 Jun 2016)

jonny jeez said:


> Call me suspicious.
> 
> But a new member coming onto an internationally visited cycle forum only to complain about a particular brand.
> 
> Has a slight whiff to it.


To be fair we can only reasonably complain about the brands we use.


----------



## MiK1138 (2 Jun 2016)

User said:


> Don't be silly now... we should be complaining about the suppliers we haven't used....


Sorry, I forgot where i was for a moment there...


----------



## 2clepto (2 Jun 2016)

im appreciating the bickering from the senior members, it gets us to half the meat which is crucial and sometimes very very funny.

imo i think someone could have maliciously bent the chainring with a foot for some reason...ive also only had cheap £3.50 chains snap on me and i cross chain alot, preferring the flexibility at the expense of the wear, i also like to push the parts within reason to really see how far theyll go. i did most of my destructive mistakes messing with bikes when i was younger. altho a year ago i buy an ultegra chain on sale for £15, use it a few months, service hte bike, forgot the chain was in the degreaser while trying a stronger degrease mix and the chain lost all its sheen and looks a little tatty. it went back on though and is still operating very well.

i just cant see how the OP would not notice a bent chainring before the event.

i think theres alot of accuracy in what yellow saddle said and it sounds plausible.

i have had a few chainrings bent on bikes ive bought but one i remember was resting on the chainrings as it came with no wheels and i see a few people selling various bikes in this way, but the OP purchased a new bike and rode it a few months? so it can only be a event with the OP because he wouldve returned the bike when noticing the bent chainring, unless he had a bent chainring that functioned well, which i havent seen before, maybe once, i cant recall with any accuracy, but rarely if ever.

the only time ive bent a chainring is with a vice. and ive clattered a few off rocks and things.

ive had a mid range ribble racer frramset before and didnt like it.


----------



## jonny jeez (2 Jun 2016)

MiK1138 said:


> To be fair we can only reasonably complain about the brands we use.


Sure but to start an account simply to do so seem a trifle odd.


----------



## 2clepto (2 Jun 2016)

"seem a trifle odd" lol the odd are the majority.


----------



## nickyboy (2 Jun 2016)

jonny jeez said:


> Sure but to start an account simply to do so seem a trifle odd.



This ^^^

How about this scenario....

Cyclist buys bike and does something to damage it. Makes up a story to try to get it replaced but Retailer won't wear it and Manufacturer won't wear it.

Decides to try his luck here to get some tech support to his story. Gives us the spurious story but is disheartened by folk seeing through the story so doesn't post photos and doesn't engage with posters

The only strage one is the Manufacturer saying it was caused by setting off in too high a gear...but we only have the OP's post to back this up


----------



## kiriyama (2 Jun 2016)

Could this be the scenario?

OP sets off in a gear a bit too high, quickly shifts down on the front derailleur, puts whole body weight on the peddles, chain forced into a very dodgy angle. (Due to derailer trying to move it inwards) dodgy angle chain pulls on chainring and bends it inwards, then chain can't take the forces it wasn't designed to take and breaks.

Just buy new parts and put it down to experience. or post pictures of all the damage so we can see. I can't see an Ultegra chainring having a fault in it like that. I presume they are CNC'ed high quality aluminium.


----------



## nickyboy (2 Jun 2016)

User said:


> Or it could be someone feels they've been let down by the supplier and decides to do some research on the internet. They find this forum and register to ask some questions.
> 
> What's really so suspicious about that? How many people do you think have come across and joined this forum because of issues/questions they've been researching?
> 
> ..


Well I guess it was the combination of a very unlikely explanation for the damage combined with being asked for more info by posters who were somewhat disbelieving but failing to reply. But as you say, it may all be quite true and I'm being cynicial. But then again, maybe not


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Jun 2016)

User said:


> As others have pointed out, the chain ring should not have bent under the conditions described in the OP. That would indicate it was defective.


Under the conditions described in the OP, the chain ring would not bend like the OP was told it had by the (at least some experience, probably lots) Ribble guy. So a rational person, like yourself, might reasonably judge that the whole story was not told (perhaps because the OP was unaware, or otherwise) and you've seen the analyses others have offered, with reasons. I just think that your jumping to the "it's defective" standpoint is facile.


----------



## Roadrider48 (2 Jun 2016)

The OP is probably frightened to come back. 
You'll have him confessing next!


----------



## Kestevan (2 Jun 2016)

All sounds a bit fishy to me..however. Irrespective of the actual cause I'd not expect the clowns at Ribble to do anything to help.... Their customer service is nothing short of abysmal in my experience.


----------



## Seats (2 Jun 2016)

mickle said:


> This, quite clearly, is not the whole story.
> 
> I'm no cheerleader for Shi**no - but Ultegra chain rings are mass produced by robots and are subject to very rigorous quality assurance. They don't vary. Shi**no don't produce a batch of sh!t ones on a Friday afternoon. And Ribble are clutching at straws too.
> 
> Could the failure of the chain have caused the damage to the chain ring? It could conceivably bend a tooth or two but not the ring. So nope. Could a bent chain ring cause the chain to fail? Definitely not. Which leaves us with the only likely secenario: That the event that caused the chain to fail also damaged the chain ring. or put another way; the event that bent the chain ring also damaged the chain. The bike's been dropped onto its ring or bashed by another bike's pedal.


Sorry to disappoint you but non of those things came to pass. 150 miles only, no accidents - honest!1


----------



## Seats (2 Jun 2016)

Roadrider48 said:


> The OP is probably frightened to come back.
> You'll have him confessing next!


Not frightened and nothing to confess.


----------



## Ajax Bay (2 Jun 2016)

Kestevan said:


> I'd not expect the clowns at Ribble to do anything to help..


But they have helped. They heard a description of what happened when and immediately before the chain broke, they took the trouble to look at the chain and the chainwheel and alerted the OP to his bent chainwheel, and then gave him/her an opinion that it was not a manufacturing defect but the "cause of the failure was misuse of the equipment as [he/she] was in the wrong gear and had put the chain under too much strain."
This may be not what the OP wanted to hear but that's not being 'unhelpful' in the proper sense of the word.


----------



## Seats (2 Jun 2016)

Kestevan said:


> All sounds a bit fishy to me..however. Irrespective of the actual cause I'd not expect the clowns at Ribble to do anything to help.... Their customer service is nothing short of abysmal in my experience.


What the hell is fishy about this simple question. I raised a perfectly reasonable question and so many people just assume I'm trying it on - sign of the sad society we now live in - guilty until proved innocent!


----------



## Seats (2 Jun 2016)

nickyboy said:


> This ^^^
> 
> How about this scenario....
> 
> ...


For gods sake what do want - a bloody video of the incident.


----------



## outlash (2 Jun 2016)

A picture of the chainring would help tremendously......


----------



## Tenacious Sloth (2 Jun 2016)

I bodged a front change on my hybrid last year and foolishly continued to apply power.

The result was a jammed chain and bent teeth on the front-middle chainring, so YS's diagnosis is plausible.

Nothing else I've read here seems any more plausible.

Graham


----------



## Seats (2 Jun 2016)

So taking the advice of the more reasonable posts I decided to 'suck it up' and have purchased a new chainset - had to spend £120 as could find a rim only that could be delivered within the next 2 weeks. Obviously didn't get it from Ribble - sorry to disappoint all you cynics out there, but it was never about the money. Evans provided a very efficient and friendly service. The rim has honestly failed through no fault of mine, in my opinion, and clearly Ribble don't give a shoot and think I'm on the make. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. I have attempted to contact Shimano - but my god they make even that impossible. I can only find a Twitter address - and that just told me to contact Ribble - clearly they don't like to speak to customers direct about real issues but rather prefer to tweet to give the false impression they are accessible and up with the times!

So back on the road. Thanks to all those who provided useful opinion and to those who just assumed I was after something for nothing - get a life!


----------



## screenman (2 Jun 2016)

Tenacious Sloth said:


> I bodged a front change on my hybrid last year and foolishly continued to apply power.
> 
> The result was a jammed chain and bent teeth on the front-middle chainring, so YS's diagnosis is plausible.
> 
> ...



I have done the same whilst racing and it had the same effect, YS is bang right.


----------



## Crandoggler (2 Jun 2016)

Bodged changes, crunched chains, thrown chains off, changed whilst going up hill and over fast bumps, jammed chain in between rings, thrown chain over the top, dropped it off the bottom, thrown bike in my car numerous times, dropped bike on chain rings, forced it in a van and whatever else. Not so much as a bent tooth and I've certainly never snapped a chain. All from a bloke weighing over 100kg. 

Either the bike has been damaged, or ultegra is made out of cheese.


----------



## bonsaibilly (2 Jun 2016)

Yellow Saddle said:


> What makes you think it is so clear that the chainring is defective? The OP just gave more evidence that has previously botched a shift and popped a chain. For a chainring to be defective so that it bends it would have to have a very clear flaw in the material. I am 100% sure that photographic evidence will not show such a defect.



Chicken/Egg.

Is it not possible that the chainring was already bent before the bike was purchased, ie the defect was not that it *could* get bent but that it already *was*? Then it was a matter of time rather than timing that if (relatedly or un-) the chain came off or apart because of either defective chain or user error, and caused one to examine the bike more closely than it had been at the point when it was purchased, the chainring *might* have been assumed to have got bent as a result of the chain... instead of being assumed to have been already bent.

As has been said, and I've no empirical evidence to the contrary, chainrings don't bend on a ride unless you have a bloody good go at bending them.

BB


----------



## bonsaibilly (2 Jun 2016)

Ajax Bay said:


> Under the conditions described in the OP, the chain ring would not bend like the OP was told it had by the (at least some experience, probably lots) Ribble guy. So a rational person, like yourself, might reasonably judge that the whole story was not told (perhaps because the OP was unaware, or otherwise) and you've seen the analyses others have offered, with reasons. I just think that your jumping to the "it's defective" standpoint is facile.



It was a different bike shop that told the OP the chain ring was bent, and the OP didn't say what evidence the shop had for saying it was the chain breaking that had caused it.

BB


----------



## Jody (2 Jun 2016)

Seats said:


> What the hell is fishy about this simple question. I raised a perfectly reasonable question and so many people just assume I'm trying it on - sign of the sad society we now live in - guilty until proved innocent!



Because if the chain ring was bent to a point of damaging the chain then you would have noticed way before. It would have to be really bent and even then it's unlikely. If the chain was fitted incorrectly it could fail, but it won't bend the rings at the same time. 

For the sake of 20 quid stick a new chain on and get riding. Or take 1 link out for free and get riding. Is it really worth persuing?


----------



## bonsaibilly (2 Jun 2016)

Ajax Bay said:


> But they have helped. They heard a description of what happened when and immediately before the chain broke, they took the trouble to look at the chain and the chainwheel and alerted the OP to his bent chainwheel, and then gave him/her an opinion that it was not a manufacturing defect but the "cause of the failure was misuse of the equipment as [he/she] was in the wrong gear and had put the chain under too much strain."
> This may be not what the OP wanted to hear but that's not being 'unhelpful' in the proper sense of the word.



OP:
"when my local bike shop looked at it they said the front large ring had also bent - they had no idea why the circumstances of the chain incident would have caused such a result"

So a) it wasn't Ribble who helpfully alerted the OP to his bent chainwheel as you have suggested; and b) [assuming the local bike shop is bona fide] there is a professional bike mechanic's opinion that there is at most a less than 100% confidence that the chain incident caused the bent chainring problem - that should have been enough for a company such as Ribble to say "okay, it's a new bike; Consumer Rights Act mate; here's a new chainring/chainset; now be more careful in the future". Of course they were never going to do that, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't've.

BB


----------



## bonsaibilly (2 Jun 2016)

Jody said:


> Because if the chain ring was bent to a point of damaging the chain then you would have noticed way before. It would have to be really bent and even then it's unlikely. If the chain was fitted incorrectly it could fail, but it won't bend the rings at the same time.
> 
> For the sake of 20 quid stick a new chain on and get riding. Or take 1 link out for free and get riding. Is it really worth persuing?



But it is possible that the two events are completely unrelated; that the chainring was already bent although a) not to the extent it would damage the chain and/or b) not to the extent that the OP would have noticed it before (which would depend among other things on the extent of the bentness and the experience level and/or OCD of the OP); and that the chain incident occurred because of the way the OP pedalled off in too high a gear.

I haven't seen any post on this thread that grasps this possibility - although to be fair the OP hasn't shown us photos of the bent chainring - although clearly the local bike shop felt that it was unusual that the two problems might be somehow related to each other. Which feeling would make sense if they, actually, weren't.

BB


----------



## bonsaibilly (2 Jun 2016)

For the sake of 20 quid stick a new chain on and get riding. Or take 1 link out for free and get riding. Is it really worth persuing?[/QUOTE said:


> PS - surely it's going to cost the OP the price of a new chainring or chainset, too?
> 
> BB


----------



## Jody (2 Jun 2016)

Glad to hear it's sorted OP but a whole new chainset seems a bit excessive. But if it's being replaced you can send the old one and chain to Shimano for inspection under warranty.


----------



## 2clepto (2 Jun 2016)

its like a detective mystery this thread...i love it, lol.


----------



## bonsaibilly (2 Jun 2016)

Seats said:


> So taking the advice of the more reasonable posts I decided to 'suck it up' and have purchased a new chainset - had to spend £120 as could find a rim only that could be delivered within the next 2 weeks. Obviously didn't get it from Ribble - sorry to disappoint all you cynics out there, but it was never about the money. Evans provided a very efficient and friendly service. The rim has honestly failed through no fault of mine, in my opinion, and clearly Ribble don't give a shoot and think I'm on the make. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. I have attempted to contact Shimano - but my god they make even that impossible. I can only find a Twitter address - and that just told me to contact Ribble - clearly they don't like to speak to customers direct about real issues but rather prefer to tweet to give the false impression they are accessible and up with the times!
> 
> So back on the road. Thanks to all those who provided useful opinion and to those who just assumed I was after something for nothing - get a life!



To be fair to Shimano, your contract is with the retailer not the manufacturer so they were legally obliged to refer you back to Robble, I think.

BB


----------



## mjr (2 Jun 2016)

outlash said:


> A picture of the chainring would help tremendously......


Are newly registered people allowed to post pictures here?


----------



## Spinney (2 Jun 2016)

If he can't he can PM one of us and we'll sort something out.


----------



## Seats (2 Jun 2016)

Ajax Bay said:


> But they have helped. They heard a description of what happened when and immediately before the chain broke, they took the trouble to look at the chain and the chainwheel and alerted the OP to his bent chainwheel, and then gave him/her an opinion that it was not a manufacturing defect but the "cause of the failure was misuse of the equipment as [he/she] was in the wrong gear and had put the chain under too much strain."
> This may be not what the OP wanted to hear but that's not being 'unhelpful' in the proper sense of the word.


No they didn't. They asked for a picture - which shows nothing - and said it was misuse. They did not ask to see the item - that was my local bike shop. Rob;e were poor!


----------



## Seats (2 Jun 2016)

No much to see I think - but here it is.


----------



## Cubist (2 Jun 2016)




----------



## mickle (2 Jun 2016)

Seats said:


> View attachment 130506
> 
> 
> No much to see I think - but here it is.



Hold on. Is the actual chain ring bent or is it just a tooth or teeth that are bent?


----------



## Seats (2 Jun 2016)

mickle said:


> Hold on. Is the actual chain ring bent or is it just a tooth or teeth that are bent?


Chain ring is bent - difficult to show in pic! But you all asked.


----------



## outlash (2 Jun 2016)

User said:


> OK, can I ask for a better photo?



Given it's bent, wouldn't a top down image show the damage better?


----------



## Tim Hall (2 Jun 2016)

User said:


> OK, can I ask for a better photo?


One from an "end on" view would show any bend better.


----------



## Roadrider48 (2 Jun 2016)

Seats said:


> Not frightened and nothing to confess.


It was sarcasm!


----------



## mickle (2 Jun 2016)

Video please. In HD. And 3D.


----------



## outlash (2 Jun 2016)

mickle said:


> Video please. In HD. And 3D.



4K, live in the now.


----------



## bonsaibilly (3 Jun 2016)

mickle said:


> Hold on. Is the actual chain ring bent or is it just a tooth or teeth that are bent?



Given that it's the teeth that do the biting, I reckon that's a moot question. Or are you about to recommend the Mickle Method for attacking a chainring with a hammer? BB


----------



## bonsaibilly (3 Jun 2016)

Seats said:


> Chain ring is bent - difficult to show in pic! But you all asked.



Accepted that most cameras will be crap at expressing a chainring that's bent on the fore-aft plane, but even so, photographing it face-on is about as useful as a dart-gun in a Cincinnati zoo enclosure.

BB


----------



## bonsaibilly (3 Jun 2016)

Seats said:


> View attachment 130506
> 
> 
> No much to see I think - but here it is.



That does, to me at least, look like a chain has scraped the bejaysus off a chainring's paintwork over a specific arc of the chainring's circumference, although it doesn't look like it's bent it laterally.

I'm still going for the already-bent-when-purchased conspiracy theory. In my humble opinion there are reasons why some retailers can offer freakishly lower standard prices than others for what's effectively the same bike in manufacturing terms... eg one reason might be they're honest about their markups and passionate about giving their customers/the cycling community a great and long-term leg-up; or eg they do all their components in-house a la Giant; or eg another reason might be they source B condition components (stuff that came off the production line slightly below the QA threshold) for their builds.

Hey, I'm a cynic, fowgeddaboudit.

BB


----------



## mickle (3 Jun 2016)

bonsaibilly said:


> Given that it's the teeth that do the biting, I reckon that's a moot question. Or are you about to recommend the Mickle Method for attacking a chainring with a hammer? BB



Nope. Adjustable spanner.


----------



## mickle (3 Jun 2016)

A secret supply chain of B condition components? Wow.


----------



## mickle (3 Jun 2016)

A bent ring wouldnt have made it through (amongst other quality assurance thresholds) the shop's PDI.

Assuming this was a bike supplied to the customer complete and ready to roll - rather than in a box with the front wheel, pedals and seat out.


----------



## Tojo (3 Jun 2016)

Even these days of CNC and lazer measuring accuracy, thing still seem to creep through ye olde QC department......I like the conspiracy theory, does Giant have there own little area 51.....


----------



## bonsaibilly (3 Jun 2016)

Tojo said:


> Even these days of CNC and lazer measuring accuracy, thing still seem to creep through ye olde QC department......I like the conspiracy theory, does Giant have there own little area 51.....



Nope they're good. Ribble do, though. It's called Preston. bb


----------



## Jody (3 Jun 2016)

@Seats Visually how much lateral play is there in that chain ring? 1mm, 5mm, 10mm?


----------



## bonsaibilly (3 Jun 2016)

mickle said:


> A bent ring wouldnt have made it through (amongst other quality assurance thresholds) the shop's PDI.
> 
> Assuming this was a bike supplied to the customer complete and ready to roll - rather than in a box with the front wheel, pedals and seat out.



Okay I'll try again - I have had two bikes from shops where "the shop's PDI" was a half-assed job - in one case that included providing me with a bike with a bent ring.

So it is possible and plausible that not all shops' QA procedures are what you are certain they must be. BB


----------



## jonny jeez (3 Jun 2016)

Seats said:


> to those who just assumed I was after something for nothing - get a life!



I'm off to the shops to see if they have one in my size.


----------



## jonny jeez (3 Jun 2016)

bonsaibilly said:


> I'm still going for the already-bent-when-purchased conspiracy theory.
> .
> 
> BB



Oooo, can I play?

I'm going for professor plum, on the grassy Knowle, with the lead chainring.


----------



## PhilDawson8270 (3 Jun 2016)

bonsaibilly said:


> another reason might be they source B condition components (stuff that came off the production line slightly below the QA threshold) for their builds.
> 
> Hey, I'm a cynic, fowgeddaboudit.
> 
> BB



There's no way Shimano or any of them would knowingly ship out components with their name on it that didn't mean their QA threshold.


----------



## bonsaibilly (3 Jun 2016)

http://fish.shimano.com/content/sac-fish/en/home/customer-service/service-centre.htmlhtml

They certainly accept the possibility it might happen for their fishing wing. What makes you say they wouldn't do similar on bike parts? Bb


----------



## Seats (3 Jun 2016)

Shimano have asked me to drop the ring into their local distributor to get it assessed - at least they are taking me seriously! Pity about RIBBLE Customer Service though - especially since the bike itself is so good!

But I think it was probably Colonel Mustard with the Candle stick in the workshop prior to shipping!!


----------



## PhilDawson8270 (3 Jun 2016)

bonsaibilly said:


> http://fish.shimano.com/content/sac-fish/en/home/customer-service/service-centre.htmlhtml
> 
> They certainly accept the possibility it might happen for their fishing wing. What makes you say they wouldn't do similar on bike parts? Bb



erm? Not sure what your link is supposed to show? Any help with a quote from it that supports your position?


----------



## bonsaibilly (3 Jun 2016)

I'm sure you can read that page in 2 minutes, it says something about it towards the bottom. Bb


----------



## PhilDawson8270 (3 Jun 2016)

bonsaibilly said:


> I'm sure you can read that page in 2 minutes, it says something about it towards the bottom. Bb



I have read the page, but nothing in there that supports your opinion.


----------



## bonsaibilly (3 Jun 2016)

You haven't read it properly then.


----------

