kmc z-chain

Just put a 7sp z chain on my commuter, with the missing link.
I'm curious why the missing link is needed? The chain looks normal to
me, but the instructions say it could break if the original pins are
reinserted. What benefits are there to construct a chain this way?

Also it says the missing link can only be removed with a chain tool, but
I thought you could unlink these things by squeezing the rollers
together with pliers? If I use a chain tool to remove it, will it be ok
to reuse a few times or does one need to buy a new missing link each time?

Thanks guys.

Jacobe Hazzard wrote:
> Just put a 7sp z chain on my commuter, with the missing link.
> I'm curious why the missing link is needed? The chain looks normal to
> me, but the instructions say it could break if the original pins are
> reinserted. What benefits are there to construct a chain this way?

the benefit is that the chain doesn't break on you. if you have extreme
angle deviation, the leverage between the plates can pop the outer plate
off the rivet. the solution is to peen the rivet head sufficiently to
form a ridge that keeps the plate in place. removal of that rivet
breaks the ridge and it cannot easily be re-peened, especially not while
retaining necessary plate separation.

solution: use a special join link.

>
> Also it says the missing link can only be removed with a chain tool, but
> I thought you could unlink these things by squeezing the rollers
> together with pliers? If I use a chain tool to remove it, will it be ok
> to reuse a few times or does one need to buy a new missing link each time?

if the factory spec says use new one eack time, that's what you should
do. it's better to sue them for ripping you off for purchasing excess
links than it is to try suing for broken teeth because you didn't pay
attention to their instructions.

>
> Thanks guys.

Jacobe Hazzard wrote:
> Just put a 7sp z chain on my commuter, with the missing link.
> I'm curious why the missing link is needed? The chain looks normal to
> me, but the instructions say it could break if the original pins are
> reinserted. What benefits are there to construct a chain this way?

the benefit is that the chain doesn't break on you. if you have extreme
angle deviation, the leverage between the plates can pop the outer plate
off the rivet. the solution is to peen the rivet head sufficiently to
form a ridge that keeps the plate in place. removal of that rivet
breaks the ridge and it cannot easily be re-peened, especially not while
retaining necessary plate separation.

solution: use a special join link.

>
> Also it says the missing link can only be removed with a chain tool, but
> I thought you could unlink these things by squeezing the rollers
> together with pliers? If I use a chain tool to remove it, will it be ok
> to reuse a few times or does one need to buy a new missing link each time?

if the factory spec says use new one eack time, that's what you should
do. it's better to sue them for ripping you off for purchasing excess
links than it is to try suing for broken teeth because you didn't pay
attention to their instructions.

>
> Thanks guys.

jim beam wrote:
> Jacobe Hazzard wrote:
>
>> Just put a 7sp z chain on my commuter, with the missing link.
>> I'm curious why the missing link is needed? The chain looks normal to
>> me, but the instructions say it could break if the original pins are
>> reinserted. What benefits are there to construct a chain this way?
>
>
> the benefit is that the chain doesn't break on you. if you have extreme
> angle deviation, the leverage between the plates can pop the outer plate
> off the rivet. the solution is to peen the rivet head sufficiently to
> form a ridge that keeps the plate in place. removal of that rivet
> breaks the ridge and it cannot easily be re-peened, especially not while
> retaining necessary plate separation.
>
> solution: use a special join link.

But regular (re-usable rivet type) chains exist and I have never broken
one nor heard of any breaking in the manner you describe. Is there
indeed a risk of such ordinary chains breaking, or does this z-chain use
rivets that are less able to hold together without peens but have some
other advantage?

>>
>> Also it says the missing link can only be removed with a chain tool,
>> but I thought you could unlink these things by squeezing the rollers
>> together with pliers? If I use a chain tool to remove it, will it be
>> ok to reuse a few times or does one need to buy a new missing link
>> each time?
>
>
> if the factory spec says use new one eack time, that's what you should
> do. it's better to sue them for ripping you off for purchasing excess
> links than it is to try suing for broken teeth because you didn't pay
> attention to their instructions.

Who said anything about lawsuits? The instructions don't mention
anything about reusing the links, only that they must be removed with a
chain tool.

Jacobe Hazzard wrote:

> Just put a 7sp z chain on my commuter, with the missing link.
> I'm curious why the missing link is needed? The chain looks normal to
> me, but the instructions say it could break if the original pins are
> reinserted. What benefits are there to construct a chain this way?
>
> Also it says the missing link can only be removed with a chain tool, but
> I thought you could unlink these things by squeezing the rollers
> together with pliers? If I use a chain tool to remove it, will it be ok
> to reuse a few times or does one need to buy a new missing link each time?

I believe the KMC snaplink is just as reuseable as any other
( if snapped open - not if destroyed with a chain tool!).
The 'one time use' admonishment seems to be somewhere
between 'don't sue us' and 'buy a new part from us'.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Jacobe Hazzard wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>
>> Jacobe Hazzard wrote:
>>
>>> Just put a 7sp z chain on my commuter, with the missing link.
>>> I'm curious why the missing link is needed? The chain looks normal to
>>> me, but the instructions say it could break if the original pins are
>>> reinserted. What benefits are there to construct a chain this way?
>>
>>
>>
>> the benefit is that the chain doesn't break on you. if you have
>> extreme angle deviation, the leverage between the plates can pop the
>> outer plate off the rivet. the solution is to peen the rivet head
>> sufficiently to form a ridge that keeps the plate in place. removal
>> of that rivet breaks the ridge and it cannot easily be re-peened,
>> especially not while retaining necessary plate separation.
>>
>> solution: use a special join link.
>
>
> But regular (re-usable rivet type) chains exist and I have never broken
> one nor heard of any breaking in the manner you describe. Is there
> indeed a risk of such ordinary chains breaking, or does this z-chain use
> rivets that are less able to hold together without peens but have some
> other advantage?

there's little/no risk on bikes where there's not much derailleur angle.
no, rivets are all similar in design, they just vary slightly in the
peening method. again, if you had a peening tool & could be sure of
doing it /and/ maintaining the same plate spacing, you could re-use any
rivet for sure. the difficulty [& the safety factor] come from the fact
that it's hard to do.

>
>>>
>>> Also it says the missing link can only be removed with a chain tool,
>>> but I thought you could unlink these things by squeezing the rollers
>>> together with pliers? If I use a chain tool to remove it, will it be
>>> ok to reuse a few times or does one need to buy a new missing link
>>> each time?
>>
>>
>>
>> if the factory spec says use new one eack time, that's what you should
>> do. it's better to sue them for ripping you off for purchasing excess
>> links than it is to try suing for broken teeth because you didn't pay
>> attention to their instructions.
>
>
> Who said anything about lawsuits?

me. that's your only hope of injury remedy.

> The instructions don't mention
> anything about reusing the links, only that they must be removed with a
> chain tool.

but don't you want to re-use? i simply explained what happens when you
use the chain tool & the issue with reassembly of used rivets.

When I first began using KMC chains I also thought the "Missing Link"
was a reusable item similar to the Sram Powerlink. It is not. Once
connected it cannot be disconnected by use of bare hands. I was able to
reuse mine only by disconnecting it by using a pair of needle-nose
pliers. I won't go into detail on how I de-linked it, suffice to say
that after a couple of times doing it, I said "the heck with it" and
pulled out a Powerlink and used it. The Powerlink quick release link is
reusable and in my opinion separates easily without the need for tools.

try colored paper clips to hold the snap links in the assumed position
for assembling in reverse order-the clips can be wound around a spoke
to hold the front half in place while struggling with the expletive
deleted deray cage.
the shimano chain pins-see nashbar-are dandy in the toolbox for the
time when the chain gioves up in one or two places but the remainder is
ok-crosschaining while the chain is gritted-
but using the replacement pins more than once expands the sideplates
and chain degradation results.
thus the reusable link

"Kenny" <Postoasted@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1112287260.569718.55550@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> When I first began using KMC chains I also thought the "Missing Link"
> was a reusable item similar to the Sram Powerlink. It is not. Once
> connected it cannot be disconnected by use of bare hands. I was able to
> reuse mine only by disconnecting it by using a pair of needle-nose
> pliers. I won't go into detail on how I de-linked it, suffice to say
> that after a couple of times doing it, I said "the heck with it" and
> pulled out a Powerlink and used it. The Powerlink quick release link is
> reusable and in my opinion separates easily without the need for tools.
>

Similar results for me. If you take the easy route by using the chain tool
to remove the KMC link, it's probably not a good idea to reuse. If you can
back it out with needle-nose my guess would be it's ok to reuse, but it's
not made to be easy to do this. I did this once or twice.

However, after reading posts about chain care here in rbt, I no longer take
my chain off to clean. I just wipe it down with a rag and re-oil and wipe
off excess about every two weeks or after rain. I have road bikes and live
in the flats and I get at least 4000 miles before they stretch more than
1/16" (in 12") and get replaced.

--Art