Sram Rival 10spd chainset or Shimano 105

[Yellow Saddle]

My method was not scientific, however, I come from an engineering background. Chains were checked using a chain checking tool replaced when necessary (in excess of 0.6% stretch). Pins were also measured and replaced when worn beyond 0.25mm (tolerance when new never exceeded +/- 0.03mm for either make).

I will say that the last chain used on the SRAM Rival set-up was a Shimano105 (all my LBS had in stock). This was still going strong after 1500 miles.

I look forward to your counter argument which confirms your nonsense theory.

Engineering background, you say. Well that argument is called "call to authority". It doesn't work around here although plenty try. If you were an engineer, you'd know that chains don't stretch. If you were an engineer and understood chains, you'd know that the cut-off point where chains start to eat sprockets is not 0.6% elongation..
If you were an engineer you'd explain what "pins" you replace in your chain.

So, where's your data?

 

[flake99please]

Engineering background, you say. Well that argument is called "call to authority". It doesn't work around here although plenty try. If you were an engineer, you'd know that chains don't stretch. If you were an engineer and understood chains, you'd know that the cut-off point where chains start to eat sprockets is not 0.6% elongation..
If you were an engineer you'd explain what "pins" you replace in your chain.

So, where's your data?

My background is in polymer engineering. Chains do stretch, much like they can expand or contract.

I never said that at 0.6% elongation my sprockets would be eaten. I choose to replace the chain at that elongation as a preventative measure against sprocket wear.

I also never said that pins were replaced. I said that as the pins wear, the entire chain is replaced.

The facts are that in my experience, SRAM Rival chains wear to a point where I feel the need to replace at a distance of approx 500 miles before the Shimano 105 equivalent.

You have still failed to substantiate your nonsense claims (despite my asking twice). Your posts (IMO) look like you're just trolling, so I shall assume we will just have to agree to disagree on the matter.

OP. Apologies for the thread derail.

 

[Yellow Saddle]

My background is in polymer engineering. Chains do stretch, much like they can expand or contract.

I never said that at 0.6% elongation my sprockets would be eaten. I choose to replace the chain at that elongation as a preventative measure against sprocket wear.

I also never said that pins were replaced. I said that as the pins wear, the entire chain is replaced.

The facts are that in my experience, SRAM Rival chains wear to a point where I feel the need to replace at a distance of approx 500 miles before the Shimano 105 equivalent.

You have still failed to substantiate your nonsense claims (despite my asking twice). Your posts (IMO) look like you're just trolling, so I shall assume we will just have to agree to disagree on the matter.

OP. Apologies for the thread derail.

I still don't see how your profession is relevant. All that matters is the facts.

Still no data to back up your original claims?

Would you care to explain the "stretch" mechanism?
I can understand thermal expansion and contraction but don't see the relevance to the topic at hand.
How do you measure these pins? Do you remove the rivets from the chain and measure them? If so, how? How do you replace them when the chain is not worn enough?
How sure are you at the sprockets are still safe at 0.6% elongation? Where does that figure come from?
I'm not sure what claims you'd like me to substantiate, since I've made none.
You gave advice, which I dispute. It is up to you to substantiate your advice, not up to me to substantiate something else.
That's how technical debates work. Politics is different.

 

[FishFright]

[QUOTE="flake99please, post: 4829979, member: 40597"]My background is in polymer engineering. Chains do stretch, much like they can expand or contract.

.....

I also never said that pins were replaced. I said that as the pins wear, the entire chain is replaced.

......[/QUOTE]

flake99please said: ↑
My method was not scientific, however, I come from an engineering background. Chains were checked using a chain checking tool replaced when necessary (in excess of 0.6% stretch). Pins were also measured and replaced when worn beyond 0.25mm

Careful now

 

[flake99please]

[QUOTE="flake99please, post: 4829979, member: 40597"]My background is in polymer engineering. Chains do stretch, much like they can expand or contract.

.....

I also never said that pins were replaced. I said that as the pins wear, the entire chain is replaced.

......

flake99please said: ↑
My method was not scientific, however, I come from an engineering background. Chains were checked using a chain checking tool replaced when necessary (in excess of 0.6% stretch). Pins were also measured and replaced when worn beyond 0.25mm

Careful now[/QUOTE]

My bad.....

The chain was replaced as pins wore to a certain point.

 

[flake99please]

I still don't see how your profession is relevant. All that matters is the facts.

Still no data to back up your original claims?

Would you care to explain the "stretch" mechanism?
I can understand thermal expansion and contraction but don't see the relevance to the topic at hand.
How do you measure these pins? Do you remove the rivets from the chain and measure them? If so, how? How do you replace them when the chain is not worn enough?
How sure are you at the sprockets are still safe at 0.6% elongation? Where does that figure come from?
I'm not sure what claims you'd like me to substantiate, since I've made none.
You gave advice, which I dispute. It is up to you to substantiate your advice, not up to me to substantiate something else.
That's how technical debates work. Politics is different.

My background is not relevant, other than I am capable of using a vernier or digital calipers with some degree of competence.

As for data..... I take measurements of the on a near monthly basis. The pins are measured using digital callipers whilst the chain is fitted. There is no need to remove the rivets, so if measured within tolerance, I continue to use.

The chain is checked using a Park Tools CC2 gauge, as well as measure the distance between 6 lengths of chain. The tool itself states replacing the chain at 0.75%. I choose to replace at 0.6%. I cannot guarantee that at that wear rate anything is safe. I choose to replace sprockets every 2000 miles.

I'm not sure exactly what data you're looking for, for me to substantiate my claims. I never logged any measurement data, but noted at what mileage chains (or any parts for that matter) were replaced. The facts (for me) are that at certain points in distance travelled, the SRAM Rival equipped bike required chains at an earlier distance than the Shimano 105 equivalent.

I also stated that the last chain fitted on the SRAM was a Shimano, and that had over 400 miles further travelled without reaching my replacement threshold before being written off.

You stated my opinion was nonsense so let's simplify things.

2 products (tyres) wear through to the carcass at differ rates. If Brand A wore out every 1500 miles, and Brand B wore out every 2000 miles, would you not say that Brand A wore at a greater rate than Brand B?

My own experience with SRAM chains has been that they require replacing (at my replacement threshold) at an earlier rate than the Shimano 105 chains.

If I were to choose between the 2 systems again, I would choose SRAM Rival as I prefer the double-tap method of gear change. I would fit a Shimano 105 chain though.

 

[Yellow Saddle]

My background is not relevant, other than I am capable of using a vernier or digital calipers with some degree of competence.

As for data..... I take measurements of the on a near monthly basis. The pins are measured using digital callipers whilst the chain is fitted. There is no need to remove the rivets, so if measured within tolerance, I continue to use.

The chain is checked using a Park Tools CC2 gauge, as well as measure the distance between 6 lengths of chain. The tool itself states replacing the chain at 0.75%. I choose to replace at 0.6%. I cannot guarantee that at that wear rate anything is safe. I choose to replace sprockets every 2000 miles.

I'm not sure exactly what data you're looking for, for me to substantiate my claims. I never logged any measurement data, but noted at what mileage chains (or any parts for that matter) were replaced. The facts (for me) are that at certain points in distance travelled, the SRAM Rival equipped bike required chains at an earlier distance than the Shimano 105 equivalent.

I also stated that the last chain fitted on the SRAM was a Shimano, and that had over 400 miles further travelled without reaching my replacement threshold before being written off.

You stated my opinion was nonsense so let's simplify things.

2 products (tyres) wear through to the carcass at differ rates. If Brand A wore out every 1500 miles, and Brand B wore out every 2000 miles, would you not say that Brand A wore at a greater rate than Brand B?

My own experience with SRAM chains has been that they require replacing (at my replacement threshold) at an earlier rate than the Shimano 105 chains.

If I were to choose between the 2 systems again, I would choose SRAM Rival as I prefer the double-tap method of gear change. I would fit a Shimano 105 chain though.

Before we go any further, can you please describe, perhaps even take a photo, of this pin-measuring process? I'll take up your other points once I'm clear what we are talking about here.

 

[raleighnut]

My background is not relevant, other than I am capable of using a vernier or digital calipers with some degree of competence.

As for data..... I take measurements of the on a near monthly basis. The pins are measured using digital callipers whilst the chain is fitted. There is no need to remove the rivets, so if measured within tolerance, I continue to use.

The chain is checked using a Park Tools CC2 gauge, as well as measure the distance between 6 lengths of chain. The tool itself states replacing the chain at 0.75%. I choose to replace at 0.6%. I cannot guarantee that at that wear rate anything is safe. I choose to replace sprockets every 2000 miles.

I'm not sure exactly what data you're looking for, for me to substantiate my claims. I never logged any measurement data, but noted at what mileage chains (or any parts for that matter) were replaced. The facts (for me) are that at certain points in distance travelled, the SRAM Rival equipped bike required chains at an earlier distance than the Shimano 105 equivalent.

I also stated that the last chain fitted on the SRAM was a Shimano, and that had over 400 miles further travelled without reaching my replacement threshold before being written off.

You stated my opinion was nonsense so let's simplify things.

2 products (tyres) wear through to the carcass at differ rates. If Brand A wore out every 1500 miles, and Brand B wore out every 2000 miles, would you not say that Brand A wore at a greater rate than Brand B?

My own experience with SRAM chains has been that they require replacing (at my replacement threshold) at an earlier rate than the Shimano 105 chains.

If I were to choose between the 2 systems again, I would choose SRAM Rival as I prefer the double-tap method of gear change. I would fit a Shimano 105 chain though.

So basically Shimano chains wear better than SRAM ones. Which is the cheaper?

 

[Yellow Saddle]

@flake99please Any progress on describing that pin measuring procedure?

 

[flake99please]

So basically Shimano chains wear better than SRAM ones. Which is the cheaper?

In my experience, yes. My LBS sold the SRAM chain at £2 less than current Shimano price.

@flake99please Any progress on describing that pin measuring procedure?

No. What part of measuring the pin/roller with a digital calliper don't you understand?

 

[al-fresco]

Erm <waves to OP> as you said that you ARE going to change to a double then 105 is the line of least resistance - you can keep your existing shifters and derailleurs, you can mix and match SRAM/Shimano 10 speed cassettes and chains. But if you're using indexed 105 shifters they won't pull the right amount of cable to match a SRAM Rival rear derailleur so you'd need to replace the shifters as well. So staying with 105 would be the cheapest option. Personally I prefer SRAM to Shimano but not enough to fork out for new shifters.

 

[Yellow Saddle]

No. What part of measuring the pin/roller with a digital calliper don't you understand?

Well, do you measure the pin or the roller. There is no such thing as a pin/roller. Either it is a pin (called a rivet on a chain) or a roller. It can't be both.

If you measure the pin, how do you get to it?

 

[flake99please]

I measure the roller. Apologies for the confusion.