Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
- Location
- London
It's less efficient, tires you more. Fine in a race for short term advantage or on a killer sprint you can collapse after. But bad practice. I fairly often see london commuters in too high a gear getting out of the saddle.
Interesting point above about debris possibly being the biggest single cause of wear. Would be interested in more views about this. I definitely don't clean my chains enough. Last time i cleaned one, post clean it failed the chain measurer test but had passed it before. The debris was clearly fooling the park tools measure, reducing the gaps
Interesting point above about debris possibly being the biggest single cause of wear. Would be interested in more views about this. I definitely don't clean my chains enough. Last time i cleaned one, post clean it failed the chain measurer test but had passed it before. The debris was clearly fooling the park tools measure, reducing the gaps
Salty seadog
Space Cadet...(3rd Class...)
Indeed, it is wear not stretch. The rate of which for any given chain is down to the strain put on it.
nickyboy
Norven Mankey
- Location
- You want hills? We got hills
It's less efficient, tires you more. Fine in a race for short term advantage or on a killer sprint you can collapse after. But bad practice. I fairly often see london commuters in too high a gear getting out of the saddle.
Interesting point above about debris possibly being the biggest single cause of wear. Would be interested in more views about this. I definitely don't clean my chains enough. Last time i cleaned one, post clean it failed the chain measurer test but had passed it before. The debris was clearly fooling the park tools measure, reducing the gaps
It's just my feeling. For sure it is wear of the chain that causes the problem. Chains don't stretch. So the question really is what are the components of wear and which of these components are important. Of course increase in force will increase pressure between the wearing parts and accelerate wear. But the other key component is presumably anything that increases friction between these parts
I have no science to back this up but based on my experience of how metal things wear generally it seems that if the surfaces are very clean and well lubricated then wear is minimal. Introduce something between the surfaces rapidly accelerates wear
nickyboy
Norven Mankey
- Location
- You want hills? We got hills
I disagree. My hypothesis is that the main component in wear is debris between moving parts increasing friction. Increased force increases friction but to a lesser degree
Salty seadog
Space Cadet...(3rd Class...)
I agree with that. However this is dependant on how well you clean and maintain your chain. If it is washed out frequently this can be much reduced.
gbb
Squire
- Location
- Peterborough
It's less efficient, tires you more. Fine in a race for short term advantage or on a killer sprint you can collapse after. But bad practice. I fairly often see london commuters in too high a gear getting out of the saddle.
Interesting point above about debris possibly being the biggest single cause of wear. Would be interested in more views about this. I definitely don't clean my chains enough. Last time i cleaned one, post clean it failed the chain measurer test but had passed it before. The debris was clearly fooling the park tools measure, reducing the gaps
I look at being out of the saddle in a different way...I wasn't interested in efficiency, I was interested in increasing fitness, strength etc and you can't do that by finding the easiest way of doing it. That may be why you see commuters, or any other cyclist out the saddle, working hard on increasing fitness etc.
The chain wear question is a mystery to most of us, we all have an experience, an opinion etc etc but none of it is scientific. I've used some pretty rigid and regular cleaning and oiling regimes on my chains but if I'd got 3k miles out of my chains I'd be a happy man indeed, I never generally got half that.
In the end, it's a consumable, use it, maintain is as best as you feel fit, replace it and accept it is my philosophy now.
Spiderweb
Not So Special One
- Location
- North Yorkshire
I know this is way more mileage than is recommended but im loathed to replace it just yet as it rides so smoothly and there looks very little wear on the cassette (see pic). I never degrease but regularly clean and lube my chain and almost always ride this bike on the inner 39T chainring which allows a really straight chain line so this may reduce wear?
The chain is a 9 speed SRAM which cost less than a tenner.
Edit - I am no bike mechanic so anyone with greater knowledge could you let me know if you think the cassette has excessive wear?
Last edited:
Mugshot
Cracking a solo.
That sounds like a rather daft thing to say, if you wont get up a hill unless you stand, then stand, if you fancy stetching your legs a bit by standing up, then stand.
Ajax Bay
Guru
- Location
- East Devon
You were the first to use the word 'stretch' in this thread - of course your interest may have been piqued by something else.
Chains do not snap if increased force is applied, unless they are already damaged (hopefully not). The force needed to break an undamaged chain is beyond the heaviest, most powerful rider to produce. @blazed - please post a video. The main reason chains part is because of a messed up change with significant force applied (eg as the road 'unexpectedly' turns sharply up and the rider finds him/herself at the wrong end of the cassette, stands up to exert maximum force to climb and changes at the same time). Sometimes you just have to stall and sort it out when stationary. @Yellow Saddle must be on sabbatical.
Standing up is sensible - it is a useful variation of position and brings some other muscle groups into play - so a good climbing regime is mostly sitting and short stretches of standing. Worth dropping down a gear (or two) before standing btw. But if the hill is too steep to sit and spin up, as @Mugshot says, stand up and get up it, or give up and walk.
Using the inner (of 2) chainwheels will give a straight chain line when you have the chain on sprocket 4 (of ten, largest is 1).
Using the outer (of 2) chainwheels will give a straight chain line when you have the chain on sprocket 6 (of ten, largest is 1).
I really don't see how staying on the small chainring will "really" give you a 'straighter' chain line (unless you stay permanently on 39/19(say, 55")).
And there is good science to suggest that cross chaining (eg small/small or large/large) scarcely increases the chain system friction (<0.5%) so by corollary, the additional wear caused by cross chaining is minimal. So optimising chain line doesn't matter that much, though that's not a reason not to (deliberate double negative).
@User9609 - please share your graphs again.
Spiderweb
Not So Special One
- Location
- North Yorkshire
When you quoted my post you missed out ' so this may reduce wear?'. I used a question mark because I'm not sure either if a straight chain line reduces wear.
I have a flat commute and use no more than 3 gears, usually 4 or 5 down from the biggest sprocket so almost always a straight chain line, it may explain the longevity of the chain on this bike?
Last edited:
DaveReading
Don't suffer fools gladly (must try harder!)
- Location
- Reading, obvs
I'm guessing you mean down the cassette (ie up a gear) ?
nickyboy
Norven Mankey
- Location
- You want hills? We got hills
Take a look at the thread title smart fella
- Location
- London
Er, no, they clearly mean down. Or do you change up on seeing a dirty great hill? If so, i bow before you.
