Gatters
Senior Member
- Location
- Right Here
proper chain checkers don't rely on eyesight like a steel rule does
Do you not want a 13" ruler so you can accuarately measure more than 12"?Twelve inch steel ruler.
Ideally yes. Good find in the link. I keep meaning to scribe lines at 12 1/16 and 12 1/8 inches but never get round to it.Do you not want a 13" ruler so you can accuarately measure more than 12"?
http://www.tredz.co.uk/.Ice-Toolz-Stainless-Spoke-Ruler_37752.htm
In a similar vein to @Drago would that be one spoke to rule them all?Do you not want a 13" ruler so you can accuarately measure more than 12"?
http://www.tredz.co.uk/.Ice-Toolz-Stainless-Spoke-Ruler_37752.htm
We don't need another thread moderated due to a linguistic disagreement.Or if regicide doesn't appeal then a 12" engineering rule might be better.
I thought of you when I typed that.
Chain tools are only inaccurate if you don't use your head. I can understand the roller play giving an inaccurate reading if you push each end pin as hard as you can when measuring, but who does that?
I have the Park one and I position the pins up to the point where you can obviously feel the added tension from pushing against the rollers. Not difficult to do and has provided consistent measurements compared to a steel rule.
Fair enough @dddd. ...Going back to your post about averaging the measurements on poorer quality chains, wouldn't it be better to actually take the worst measurement as your wear guide?
If you were assessing a tyre, you wouldn't see a spot on the tyre that you could clearly see the casing through, but average it over the rest of the tyre that you couldn't?