Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 76 to 87 of 87
  1. #76
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    730
    Quote Originally Posted by MR_GRUMPY View Post
    Those chain checkers are good for letting you know when to check your chain with a good steel rule.
    ^ This
    I have never seen any of my brand new chains measure .5% elongation with a Park Chain tool. Not even close.

    Works great for me as an easy check to let me know when it's time to get out the ruler. I use KMC and Shimano Ultregra/Dura-ace chains, so I guess really cheap junky chains can have new problems...but never seen it quality products.

  2. #77
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,244
    Maybe next time you draw a detail, that you are going to use to demonstrate a very small variation, you should use a sharp pencil or pen, not a magic marker. I don't think NASA allows magic markers in the shop.
    BANNED

  3. #78
    A wheelist
    Reputation: Mike T.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    11,207
    Quote Originally Posted by thisisthebeave View Post
    I have one of the Park tool chain checkers with .5 on one side and .75 on the other. The .5 side goes in if I give it a little push. Is that time to replace or should it fall into place?

    My CX chain has 350 miles on it (chainring has 350 and cassette has 500) so I'm a little surprised to see a Dura Ace chain remotely close to .5 at this point (being able to push it in).

    My road chain has 1400 miles on it (chainring has almost 5k and cassette has 5k) so that makes a little more sense.
    Do you have a bridge over a river close by? If so, stand in the middle of the bridge and drop that tool into the water. That tool is a solution looking for a problem. Get a 12" steel ruler and learn how to gauge "+1/16th" over 12 inches. This is the magic time to change the chain. My last chain lasted 11,000 miles measuring it this way. The cassette is on its 2nd chain. And I stick to my lube and chain cleaning methods.
    .
    Mike T's home wheelbuilding site - dedicated to providing Newby wheelbuilder's with motivation, information and resources.

    Everything above, up to that blue line, is IMO IMO.

  4. #79
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Lombard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,892
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike T. View Post
    Do you have a bridge over a river close by? If so, stand in the middle of the bridge and drop that tool into the water.
    Won't the trash do? Oh yeah, you don't want to urge to retrieve it.
    “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.” -- Aaron Levenstein

    "Beware of geeks bearing formulas."
    -- Warren Buffett

    "Education is what you get when you read the fine print. Experience is what you get when you don't. -- Pete Seeger



  5. #80
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Kontact's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    3,592
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    The worn chain is CLEARLY elongated in that diagram. Here are the two chains from your diagram side by side:

    Attachment 321523

    It is patently obvious that the distance between the pins AND rollers on the worn (orange) chain is greater.

    We must not be talking about the same thing. Do you have a different version of this diagram that you mixed this one up with?
    Those aren't spaced evenly because I didn't bother with the rollers that weren't in contact with the sprocket. If you'll trouble yourself to measure the link spacing in the important parts of the diagram you'll find them evenly spaced.

    I just never dreamed someone would call me a liar and need to prove it by measuring extraneous parts of the diagram for "evidence".
    Get a better saddle: www.kontactbike.com

  6. #81
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Kontact View Post
    Those aren't spaced evenly because I didn't bother with the rollers that weren't in contact with the sprocket. If you'll trouble yourself to measure the link spacing in the important parts of the diagram you'll find them evenly spaced.

    I just never dreamed someone would call me a liar and need to prove it by measuring extraneous parts of the diagram for "evidence".
    "Extraneous"? The part of the chain NOT on the cog IS is the whole point. What you are showing is a worn chain with increased distance between the pins and rollers.

    Of course the spacing of the two chains ON the cogs is the same. That is going to be true regardless of whether the chain has been elongated between the pins and rollers (I don't think anyone has claimed otherwise). The cog teeth force the pins and rollers to that set distance.

    The tooth wear you indicate in your diagram results from the worn chain elongating to the wider spacing as it leaves the sprocket. So the spacing of the rollers/pins OFF the cog is anything but extraneous - it is in fact critical.

  7. #82
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Kontact's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    3,592
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    "Extraneous"? The part of the chain NOT on the cog IS is the whole point. What you are showing is a worn chain with increased distance between the pins and rollers.

    Of course the spacing of the two chains ON the cogs is the same. That is going to be true regardless of whether the chain has been elongated between the pins and rollers (I don't think anyone has claimed otherwise). The cog teeth force the pins and rollers to that set distance.

    The tooth wear you indicate in your diagram results from the worn chain elongating to the wider spacing as it leaves the sprocket. So the spacing of the rollers/pins OFF the cog is anything but extraneous - it is in fact critical.
    Why do YOU keep telling ME what MY diagram shows?

    It is a diagram of where the rollers end up on the sprocket when the pins are at even intervals but the rollers are worn on the inside. That is all it shows. It does not demonstrate anything about rollers and pins not on the sprocket.
    Get a better saddle: www.kontactbike.com

  8. #83
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    884
    I think some things are getting confused. Park makes 3 different chain checkers. 2 are basically straight edges, just like a ruler. One end is curved to fit snugly into the gap between 2rollers . The other end has 2 tabs Instead of measuring the distance between 2 riv it’s, they measure the distance between the spaces between gaps in the rollers. The 3rd type measures the side to side amount of play in the chain.

    It is this 3rd checker that can measure a new chain as having significant wear. I have never had either of the first 2 types show wear on a new chain.

    I can’t say if the checker agrees with the ruler. Perhaps Grumpy who uses one method to check on the other method can tell us assuming he is checking straight edge to straight edge. If they disagree it should be the same amount consistently.

    As to the op, this is a go no go checker. The measure is based on the tab falling freely into the gap between the rollers. No force should be used. If the tab is hitting the edge of the far roller, you have a ways to go.

    Marc, I followed your link to the Park website. It is not saying that their checker is the 3rd most accurate.

    The one thing I wonder about the ruler method is when someone says they have 10,000 miles on their chain with no signs of wear.

  9. #84
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    7,992
    Quote Originally Posted by Kontact View Post
    Why do YOU keep telling ME what MY diagram shows?

    It is a diagram of where the rollers end up on the sprocket when the pins are at even intervals but the rollers are worn on the inside. That is all it shows. It does not demonstrate anything about rollers and pins not on the sprocket.
    I haven't really been paying attention here but if the rollers all wear at the same rate, which I think is a fair assumption that they will, I don't see how the point I think you're trying to make is a valid one. The pins will be the same distance apart and any wear on a roller will be offset by wear on all the others.
    A chain checker pushes in opposite direction to the the measurement. A chain in use does not have forces in opposite directions.

  10. #85
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Kontact's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    3,592
    Quote Originally Posted by Jay Strongbow View Post
    I haven't really been paying attention here but if the rollers all wear at the same rate, which I think is a fair assumption that they will, I don't see how the point I think you're trying to make is a valid one. The pins will be the same distance apart and any wear on a roller will be offset by wear on all the others.
    A chain checker pushes in opposite direction to the the measurement. A chain in use does not have forces in opposite directions.
    Sure it does. Look at the diagram. When you pull the chain into the sprocket the rollers will go where they can as the links seek the lowest point due to pedals forces. On the top of the sprocket that puts them where you'd expect - lagging. But by the left side of the sprocket the pins are forcing the rollers to the outside, and by the bottom the rollers no longer have enough room to keep up with the link pins.

    That's because the worn rollers effectively decrease the radius of the sprocket for the pins, decreasing the circumference that they wrap around, making their pitch different than the sprocket's.


    What you're picturing would only work if the rollers had slots worn into them, not larger holes. The holes allow the pins to settle low in the rollers in a way that only happens around the curve of the sprocket.
    Get a better saddle: www.kontactbike.com

  11. #86
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    7,992
    Quote Originally Posted by Kontact View Post
    Sure it does. Look at the diagram. When you pull the chain into the sprocket the rollers will go where they can as the links seek the lowest point due to pedals forces. On the top of the sprocket that puts them where you'd expect - lagging. But by the left side of the sprocket the pins are forcing the rollers to the outside, and by the bottom the rollers no longer have enough room to keep up with the link pins.

    That's because the worn rollers effectively decrease the radius of the sprocket for the pins, decreasing the circumference that they wrap around, making their pitch different than the sprocket's.
    I'm horrible at articulating stuff like that so bear with me but: I was thinking along the lines of internal roller wear and still feel my point is valid with regard to that.

    But it sounds like you are thinking of external which would impact 'seating' of the roller in the cog or ring. I hadn't really considered that but get it now that you mention it, I think.

    Make sense?

  12. #87
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Kontact's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    3,592
    Quote Originally Posted by Jay Strongbow View Post
    I'm horrible at articulating stuff like that so bear with me but: I was thinking along the lines of internal roller wear and still feel my point is valid with regard to that.

    But it sounds like you are thinking of external which would impact 'seating' of the roller in the cog or ring. I hadn't really considered that but get it now that you mention it, I think.

    Make sense?
    External roller wear would do pretty much the same thing as internal, but the diagram accurately depict what happens when the roller hole is enlarged. The diagram lets you look at what happens.
    Get a better saddle: www.kontactbike.com

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Similar Threads

  1. Park Tool CT-4.2 Master Chain Tool
    By lgh in forum Components, Wrenching
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-30-2012, 07:09 PM
  2. Park Tool Chain Tool 4.2 or Shimano TL-CN32 Pro ?
    By omega1848 in forum Components, Wrenching
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-29-2010, 02:19 PM
  3. Can i use Park CT-5 chain tool to remove KMC Z510HX chain?
    By skyliner1004 in forum Components, Wrenching
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-05-2010, 05:36 PM
  4. Accu Gauge pressure gauge junk?
    By ZenNMotion in forum Cyclocross
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-28-2008, 01:44 PM
  5. Chain wear = crank wear & cassette wear? true? false? bs?
    By jakerson in forum Components, Wrenching
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-15-2006, 11:55 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •