[sorry 'bout the new thread, but the other one has degraded]
So, I called SRAM. If the tech guy there knows what he's talking about, the PC48/58 pins are straight thru. I haven't actually pulled one and examined it under a microscope.
So, I think the initial question remains: Even if the plates are tighter initially in nester chains, the resulting fit should be at least as good as we had in the 'ol days after pushing a pin out/in. I don't recall any chain breaks due to pin fitting unless we messed up the job.
Maybe these companies push the power link for legal reasons?
[sorry 'bout the new thread, but the other one has degraded]
So, I called SRAM. If the tech guy there knows what he's talking about, the PC48/58 pins are straight thru. I haven't actually pulled one and examined it under a microscope.
So, I think the initial question remains: Even if the plates are tighter initially in nester chains, the resulting fit should be at least as good as we had in the 'ol days after pushing a pin out/in. I don't recall any chain breaks due to pin fitting unless we messed up the job.
Maybe these companies push the power link for legal reasons?
Comments?
Back "in the 'ol days" was prior to the use of Hyperglide-type cogs (and the notion of shifting under full pedal pressure), which put much higher side loads on a chain.
Back "in the 'ol days" was prior to the use of Hyperglide-type cogs (and the notion of shifting under full pedal pressure), which put much higher side loads on a chain.
Good point! (But someone is going to argue the physics now :-)
Would the last generation of SRAM freewheels be considered "Hyperglide-type cogs" ?
Back "in the 'ol days" was prior to the use of Hyperglide-type cogs (and the notion of shifting under full pedal pressure), which put much higher side loads on a chain.
Good point! (But someone is going to argue the physics now :-)
Would the last generation of SRAM freewheels be considered "Hyperglide-type cogs" ?
Yes, the term applies to any freewheel/cassette with ramped cogs.
[sorry 'bout the new thread, but the other one has degraded]
So, I called SRAM. If the tech guy there knows what he's talking about, the PC48/58 pins are straight thru. I haven't actually pulled one and examined it under a microscope.
So, I think the initial question remains: Even if the plates are tighter initially in nester chains, the resulting fit should be at least as good as we had in the 'ol days after pushing a pin out/in. I don't recall any chain breaks due to pin fitting unless we messed up the job.
Maybe these companies push the power link for legal reasons?
Comments?
I checked one this morning with a reasonably good caliper. The pin was definitely larger in diameter at the ends -- about .003". It also seemed like I could see the bulge with a loupe. The ends of the pin have distinctive impact marks consistent with use of some impact/compression tool.
[sorry 'bout the new thread, but the other one has degraded]
Quoted message said:
So, I called SRAM. If the tech guy there knows what he's talking about, the PC48/58 pins are straight thru. I haven't actually pulled one and examined it under a microscope.
Quoted message said:
So, I think the initial question remains: Even if the plates are tighter initially in nester chains, the resulting fit should be at least as good as we had in the 'ol days after pushing a pin out/in. I don't recall any chain breaks due to pin fitting unless we messed up the job.
Quoted message said:
Maybe these companies push the power link for legal reasons?
Quoted message said:
Comments?
I checked one this morning with a reasonably good caliper. The pin was definitely larger in diameter at the ends -- about .003". It also seemed like I could see the bulge with a loupe. The ends of the pin have distinctive impact marks consistent with use of some impact/compression tool.-
So, I called SRAM. If the tech guy there knows what he's talking about, the PC48/58 pins are straight thru. I haven't actually pulled one and examined it under a microscope.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
So, I think the initial question remains: Even if the plates are tighter initially in nester chains, the resulting fit should be at least as good as we had in the 'ol days after pushing a pin out/in. I don't recall any chain breaks due to pin fitting unless we messed up the job.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Maybe these companies push the power link for legal reasons?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Comments?
Quoted message said:
I checked one this morning with a reasonably good caliper. The pin was definitely larger in diameter at the ends -- about .003". It also seemed like I could see the bulge with a loupe. The ends of the pin have distinctive impact marks consistent with use of some impact/compression tool.
I see a difference of 0.01mm on the sample I have and assume that, like the Shimano chain, the crossed recess at the ends of these pins is part of a peening process. However, the difference is small enough and rounded enough to make reinsertion easy. Rather than a retention mechanism, this might be an assembly feature that allows pins to be mechanically inserted with minimum press fit that is augmented by post peening.
So, I called SRAM. If the tech guy there knows what he's talking about, the PC48/58 pins are straight thru. I haven't actually pulled one and examined it under a microscope.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
So, I think the initial question remains: Even if the plates are tighter initially in nester chains, the resulting fit should be at least as good as we had in the 'ol days after pushing a pin out/in. I don't recall any chain breaks due to pin fitting unless we messed up the job.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Maybe these companies push the power link for legal reasons?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Comments?
Quoted message said:
I checked one this morning with a reasonably good caliper. The pin was definitely larger in diameter at the ends -- about .003". It also seemed like I could see the bulge with a loupe. The ends of the pin have distinctive impact marks consistent with use of some impact/compression tool.
I see a difference of 0.01mm on the sample I have and assume that, like the Shimano chain, the crossed recess at the ends of these pins is part of a peening process. However, the difference is small enough and rounded enough to make reinsertion easy. Rather than a retention mechanism, this might be an assembly feature that allows pins to be mechanically inserted with minimum press fit that is augmented by post peening.
Jobst Brandt
Did you really get 0.01mm? That's a lot less than I got.
"Peter Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Peter Cole said:
> So, I called SRAM. If the tech guy there knows what he's talking > about, the PC48/58 pins are straight thru. I haven't actually > pulled one and examined it under a microscope.
Quoted message said:
> So, I think the initial question remains: Even if the plates are > tighter initially in nester chains, the resulting fit should be at > least as good as we had in the 'ol days after pushing a pin out/in. > I don't recall any chain breaks due to pin fitting unless we messed > up the job.
Quoted message said:
> Maybe these companies push the power link for legal reasons?
Quoted message said:
> Comments?
Quoted message said:
I checked one this morning with a reasonably good caliper. The pin was definitely larger in diameter at the ends -- about .003". It also seemed like I could see the bulge with a loupe. The ends of the pin have distinctive impact marks consistent with use of some impact/compression tool.
I see a difference of 0.01mm on the sample I have and assume that, like the Shimano chain, the crossed recess at the ends of these pins is part of a peening process. However, the difference is small enough and rounded enough to make reinsertion easy. Rather than a retention mechanism, this might be an assembly feature that allows pins to be mechanically inserted with minimum press fit that is augmented by post peening.
Jobst Brandt
Did you really get 0.01mm? That's a lot less than I got.
That would be .0003937" How the heck did you guys measure it? It would have to be with a .0001" indicator. -tom
> So, I called SRAM. If the tech guy there knows what he's talking > about, the PC48/58 pins are straight thru. I haven't actually > pulled one and examined it under a microscope.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> So, I think the initial question remains: Even if the plates are > tighter initially in nester chains, the resulting fit should be at > least as good as we had in the 'ol days after pushing a pin out/in. > I don't recall any chain breaks due to pin fitting unless we messed > up the job.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> Maybe these companies push the power link for legal reasons?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> Comments?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
I checked one this morning with a reasonably good caliper. The pin was definitely larger in diameter at the ends -- about .003". It also seemed like I could see the bulge with a loupe. The ends of the pin have distinctive impact marks consistent with use of some impact/compression tool.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
I see a difference of 0.01mm on the sample I have and assume that, like the Shimano chain, the crossed recess at the ends of these pins is part of a peening process. However, the difference is small enough and rounded enough to make reinsertion easy. Rather than a retention mechanism, this might be an assembly feature that allows pins to be mechanically inserted with minimum press fit that is augmented by post peening.
Quoted message said:
Did you really get 0.01mm? That's a lot less than I got.
I got 3.64mm in the middle and 3.65mm at the widest part of the end, crosswise to the slotted feature on the ends of the pin.
>> So, I called SRAM. If the tech guy there knows what he's talking >> about, the PC48/58 pins are straight thru. I haven't actually >> pulled one and examined it under a microscope.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>> So, I think the initial question remains: Even if the plates are >> tighter initially in nester chains, the resulting fit should be at >> least as good as we had in the 'ol days after pushing a pin out/in. >> I don't recall any chain breaks due to pin fitting unless we messed >> up the job.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>> Maybe these companies push the power link for legal reasons?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>> Comments?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> I checked one this morning with a reasonably good caliper. The pin > was definitely larger in diameter at the ends -- about .003". It > also seemed like I could see the bulge with a loupe. The ends of > the pin have distinctive impact marks consistent with use of some > impact/compression tool.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
I see a difference of 0.01mm on the sample I have and assume that, like the Shimano chain, the crossed recess at the ends of these pins is part of a peening process. However, the difference is small enough and rounded enough to make reinsertion easy. Rather than a retention mechanism, this might be an assembly feature that allows pins to be mechanically inserted with minimum press fit that is augmented by post peening.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Did you really get 0.01mm? That's a lot less than I got.
Quoted message said:
That would be .0003937" How the heck did you guys measure it? It would have to be with a .0001" indicator.
Repeatably with a Mitutoyo digital caliper with 0.00mm resolution. This is a new unused chain pin.
>> So, I called SRAM. If the tech guy there knows what he's talking >> about, the PC48/58 pins are straight thru. I haven't actually >> pulled one and examined it under a microscope.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>> So, I think the initial question remains: Even if the plates are >> tighter initially in nester chains, the resulting fit should be at >> least as good as we had in the 'ol days after pushing a pin out/in. >> I don't recall any chain breaks due to pin fitting unless we messed >> up the job.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>> Maybe these companies push the power link for legal reasons?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>> Comments?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> I checked one this morning with a reasonably good caliper. The pin > was definitely larger in diameter at the ends -- about .003". It > also seemed like I could see the bulge with a loupe. The ends of > the pin have distinctive impact marks consistent with use of some > impact/compression tool.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
I see a difference of 0.01mm on the sample I have and assume that, like the Shimano chain, the crossed recess at the ends of these pins is part of a peening process. However, the difference is small enough and rounded enough to make reinsertion easy. Rather than a retention mechanism, this might be an assembly feature that allows pins to be mechanically inserted with minimum press fit that is augmented by post peening.
Quoted message said:
Did you really get 0.01mm? That's a lot less than I got.
I got 3.64mm in the middle and 3.65mm at the widest part of the end, crosswise to the slotted feature on the ends of the pin.
Jobst Brandt
Odd, I got 3.61 and 3.68, repeatable, unused PC-48.
>>> So, I called SRAM. If the tech guy there knows what he's >>> talking about, the PC48/58 pins are straight thru. I haven't >>> actually pulled one and examined it under a microscope.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>>> So, I think the initial question remains: Even if the plates >>> are tighter initially in nester chains, the resulting fit >>> should be at least as good as we had in the 'ol days after >>> pushing a pin out/in. I don't recall any chain breaks due to >>> pin fitting unless we messed up the job.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>>> Maybe these companies push the power link for legal reasons?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>>> Comments?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>> I checked one this morning with a reasonably good caliper. The >> pin was definitely larger in diameter at the ends -- about >> .003". It also seemed like I could see the bulge with a loupe. >> The ends of the pin have distinctive impact marks consistent >> with use of some impact/compression tool.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> I see a difference of 0.01mm on the sample I have and assume > that, like the Shimano chain, the crossed recess at the ends of > these pins is part of a peening process. However, the difference > is small enough and rounded enough to make reinsertion easy. > Rather than a retention mechanism, this might be an assembly > feature that allows pins to be mechanically inserted with minimum > press fit that is augmented by post peening.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Did you really get 0.01mm? That's a lot less than I got.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
I got 3.64mm in the middle and 3.65mm at the widest part of the end, crosswise to the slotted feature on the ends of the pin.
Quoted message said:
Odd, I got 3.61 and 3.68, repeatable, unused PC-48.
My chain supply is much older than yours. These are Sachs PC-48's from before SRAM and before people began complaining of separated chains that they had improperly installed. I bought a large box of these because I have several bicycles in my family that need chains occasionally. I'm getting near the bottom of the box and will get some more before this chain type becomes extinct.
<[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Tom Nakashima said:
Quoted message said:
>>> So, I called SRAM. If the tech guy there knows what he's talking >>> about, the PC48/58 pins are straight thru. I haven't actually >>> pulled one and examined it under a microscope.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>>> So, I think the initial question remains: Even if the plates are >>> tighter initially in nester chains, the resulting fit should be at >>> least as good as we had in the 'ol days after pushing a pin out/in. >>> I don't recall any chain breaks due to pin fitting unless we messed >>> up the job.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>>> Maybe these companies push the power link for legal reasons?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>>> Comments?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
>> I checked one this morning with a reasonably good caliper. The pin >> was definitely larger in diameter at the ends -- about .003". It >> also seemed like I could see the bulge with a loupe. The ends of >> the pin have distinctive impact marks consistent with use of some >> impact/compression tool.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> I see a difference of 0.01mm on the sample I have and assume that, > like the Shimano chain, the crossed recess at the ends of these pins > is part of a peening process. However, the difference is small enough > and rounded enough to make reinsertion easy. Rather than a retention > mechanism, this might be an assembly feature that allows pins to be > mechanically inserted with minimum press fit that is augmented by post > peening.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Did you really get 0.01mm? That's a lot less than I got.
Quoted message said:
That would be .0003937" How the heck did you guys measure it? It would have to be with a .0001" indicator.
Repeatably with a Mitutoyo digital caliper with 0.00mm resolution. This is a new unused chain pin.
Jobst Brandt
That's pretty darn good on a new chain pin. I wouldn't expect the form (runout) of the diameter cylinder to be < .0001" but perhaps they can hold that tolerance. I was guessing the form to be at least > .00025" -tom
