Clean that Chain!!!!

[HLaB]

While we are on about it, my bikes need a good clean, the Bianchi has done three or four dry Sunday club runs and the Purin Hill TT and its now in this state.

The kinesis got soaked a few weeks ago and got a good clean then but I've probably done 250 miles on it since it's now in this state.

The Ridgeback is in dire need of cleaning, its now in this state and definitely a case of 'Clean that chain'


I don't know why but the Bianchi (Campy) seems to clean up better, it also seems to stay cleaner for longer but thats more to do with the environments its ridden in but even when the Kinesis 105 stays in the dry too it seems to get dirtier faster?

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

That looks quite worn to me - the rollers are loose on the pins.

Hm, interesting; IIRC, it was like that when new. Your comment prompted me to open up the new one (Shimano HG53) I have in the garage ready to replace it, and the rollers are loose on the pins of that one as well. I wonder whether that is how they are supposed to be perhaps?

 

[Cubist]

All the more reason to stick with SRAM IMHO,. I got the XT (HG 93) as a bit of a bargain, but it will be replaced by a PG970.

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

All the more reason to stick with SRAM IMHO,. I got the XT (HG 93) as a bit of a bargain, but it will be replaced by a PG970.

I don't see why loose rollers is a problem. Surely it is the pitch of the chain that is important, and that is affected by looseness between the bushings and the pins, not between the rollers and the bushings.

 

[mickle]

I don't see why loose rollers is a problem. Surely it is the pitch of the chain that is important, and that is affected by looseness between the bushings and the pins, not between the rollers and the bushings.

Which neatly gets us into a discussion about the effectiveness of rivet to rivet measurement (which doesn't account for roller slop) versus the use of a proprietary chain checker of the sort made by Rohloff/Park et al (which does).

I use a Park (the old one) for checking chains. And I believe that sloppy rollers do have a negative effect on the knock-on wear to other components and are a pretty good indicator of a chain's condition. A chain with loose rollers cannot hope to fit nicely onto a ring or sprocket and it is precicely this poor interface between components which causes the damage.

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

Which neatly gets us into a discussion about the effectiveness of rivet to rivet measurement (which doesn't account for roller slop) versus the use of a proprietary chain checker of the sort made by Rohloff/Park et al (which does).

I use a Park (the old one) for checking chains. And I believe that sloppy rollers do have a negative effect on the knock-on wear to other components and are a pretty good indicator of a chain's condition. A chain with loose rollers cannot hope to fit nicely onto a ring or sprocket and it is precicely this poor interface between components which causes the damage.

You're right about the difference, but this site cites that as a reason why those tools are not accurate and shouldn't be used.

Sheldon Brown's explanation of chain and sprocket wear, coupled with the explanation on that pardo site, coupled with the fact that many new chains seem to be designed with quite a lot of play in the rollers, have all convinced me that it really is the pin-to-pin distance that matters, not the wear in the roller/bush interface (provided the rollers have worn reasonably equally).

The way I see it, play in the rollers would simply result in a scenario like image C in the following figure taken from the pardo site:

with the rollers seated neatly between the sprocket teeth and the pins all offset by an equal amount.

I'm prepared to be convinced otherwise, but can you explain how play in the rollers would prevent those rollers from seating in the sprockets if the pin-to-pin spacing is correct?

 

[John90]

The chain wear debate is getting a bit too technical for me, but I noticed several mentions of WD40 lubrication earlier in the thread. I was told that was absolutely forbidden on a bike. Not so?

 

[mickle]

You're right about the difference, but this site cites that as a reason why those tools are not accurate and shouldn't be used.

Sheldon Brown's explanation of chain and sprocket wear, coupled with the explanation on that pardo site, coupled with the fact that many new chains seem to be designed with quite a lot of play in the rollers, have all convinced me that it really is the pin-to-pin distance that matters, not the wear in the roller/bush interface (provided the rollers have worn reasonably equally).

The way I see it, play in the rollers would simply result in a scenario like image C in the following figure taken from the pardo site:

with the rollers seated neatly between the sprocket teeth and the pins all offset by an equal amount.

I'm prepared to be convinced otherwise, but can you explain how play in the rollers would prevent those rollers from seating in the sprockets if the pin-to-pin spacing is correct?

Great illustration BTW!

Welll.... Sprocket (I include chain-rings in this definition) wear occurs as a result of excessive loading of individual teeth - when a chain has 'stretched' enough to provide inadequate wrap of the sprocket. Loose rollers cause the chain to drop towards the centre. On a large sprocket the effect of loose rollers is not significant but the smaller the sprocket the closer the pins sit to the centre. The chain's centre line described by its pins do not sit in the centre of the gap between the teeth but drop down into it. The chain with loose rollers therefore behaves just like a chain with an increased pin to pin dimension.

Forgive me if that doesn't make much sense, I'm trying to watch the documentary about Fukoshima.

 

[Cubist]

The chain wear debate is getting a bit too technical for me, but I noticed several mentions of WD40 lubrication earlier in the thread. I was told that was absolutely forbidden on a bike. Not so?

It opens a new debate and gets some forum folk frothing at the mouth, but here goes.

WD40 is a spray designed to disperse water. That is, believe it or not, what the WD stands for. It's solvent carrier has a degreasing effect and so is very good as a cleaner and degreaser, but it strips protective oils off metal surfaces. Used as a chain cleaner it's fine, as long as the chain is lubed carefully afterwards, but some people use it as a lubricant in its own right, so metal surfaces remain unprotected. Mickle is NOT a fan, and the use of the letters and numbers without care has been known to induce apoplexy.

It is, IMHO far better to use GT85. It's solvent carrier still has some cleansing effect, but when it's evaporated the spray leaves behind a protective PTFE film.

And it smells great.

 

[mickle]

It opens a new debate and gets some forum folk frothing at the mouth, but here goes.

WD40 is a spray designed to disperse water. That is, believe it or not, what the WD stands for. It's solvent carrier has a degreasing effect and so is very good as a cleaner and degreaser, but it strips protective oils off metal surfaces. Used as a chain cleaner it's fine, as long as the chain is lubed carefully afterwards, but some people use it as a lubricant in its own right, so metal surfaces remain unprotected. Mickle is NOT a fan, and the use of the letters and numbers without care has been known to induce apoplexy.

It is, IMHO far better to use GT85. It's solvent carrier still has some cleansing effect, but when it's evaporated the spray leaves behind a protective PTFE film.

And it smells great.

You owe me a keyboard.

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

Welll.... Sprocket (I include chain-rings in this definition) wear occurs as a result of excessive loading of individual teeth - when a chain has 'stretched' enough to provide inadequate wrap of the sprocket. Loose rollers cause the chain to drop towards the centre. On a large sprocket the effect of loose rollers is not significant but the smaller the sprocket the closer the pins sit to the centre. The chain's centre line described by its pins do not sit in the centre of the gap between the teeth but drop down into it. The chain with loose rollers therefore behaves just like a chain with an increased pin to pin dimension.

I think what you are saying is, to put it another way, that the movement of the pins towards the centre of the sprocket causes the effective diameter of the sprocket to be smaller (as seen by that chain), so the effective pitch of the sprocket teeth appears slightly shorter. I see the logic, but I need to think about it a bit more.

If the leading pin is hard up against the tooth (just before it leaves the sprocket), which it would be due to the chain tension, then the second pin can't be down in the valley unless the link is stretched (i.e. the pin-bush bearings are worn) because to get there it would have to move round the inside curve of the roller, away from the leading pin. The link to the third pin would tend to pull it down, but that would just cause it to apply a force to the inside front of the second roller and thus to the sprocket tooth, which is what we want. The same applies all the way round as far as I can see.

Once the chain is a bit worn ("stretched"), then I can see that the play in the rollers may even be an advantage, as it would allow the second (and subsequent) pins to be pulled down into the valley a bit by the next link until it contacts the inside of the roller and continues to apply a force to the sprocket. Without the play in the rollers, this would not happen and all of the force would go onto the tooth in front of the leading pin.

As I said, I need to think about it, but I would be surprised if Shimano were to be selling chains that are effectively worm out before they are even installed.

Hope you don't mind discussing this; I find it quite interesting.

 

[potsy]

Potsy even MY bike is cleaner than that!!! I think you need to move those armwarmers so they cover your hands and get polishing mate!!

Spent 10 mins with a semi clean rag on it today-

 

[HLaB]

Its not perfect but I cleaned up the Kinesis tonight:

 

[Theseus]

Its not perfect but I cleaned up the Kinesis tonight:
[attachment=5255:100_5057.JPG] [attachment=5256:100_5059.JPG]

Your chainring teeth look a bit worn.

 

[HLaB]

Your chainring teeth look a bit worn.

Probably, its a bit of a false economy but I can't really afford to replace things at the mo.