Do removable chain links "stretch" more than others?

Ron Ruff said:

I noticed a post on here awhile back, where the author claimed that the
removable link stretched more than the others on his SRAM chains. He
said that he changed that link several times per chain because of this.
Nobody wrote in to disagree... so I was wondering, does this agree with
others' experience?

That is not my experience, so I disagree. Replace the link with your
chain and you're allright. I was wondering how he/she measured it that
the removeable link stretched more?

Quoted message said:

My experience with the SRAM link is pretty short. I had one installed
for about 1,000 miles when it blew apart while shifting down in the
front. Luckily, nothing was damaged. I could only find half the link,
but fortunately I had a chain tool with me...

Never happened to me, butr [censored] happens ;-)

Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu

Ron Ruff said:

I noticed a post on here awhile back, where the author claimed that the
removable link stretched more than the others on his SRAM chains.

I doubt that SRAM links "stretch" more than other links. Remember,
chains only seem to stretch when the pins wear down -- because of
abrasion from the mixture of dirt and grease. Chain "stretch" problems
indicate that the chain needs to be cleaned more frequently and/or
better. IMO, SRAM links make it easier to take the chain off the bike
for a good cleaning.

Quoted message said:

My experience with the SRAM link is pretty short. I had one installed
for about 1,000 miles when it blew apart while shifting down in the
front. Luckily, nothing was damaged. I could only find half the link,
but fortunately I had a chain tool with me...

I've had good experiences with SRAM links. I wonder if it "blew apart"
because it wasn't put togeather properly. They can be a little tricky
to learn to use. A dirty SRAM link is more difficult to put togeather
or to take apart.

Regards,
Larry

Ron Ruff said:

I noticed a post on here awhile back, where the author claimed that the
removable link stretched more than the others on his SRAM chains. He
said that he changed that link several times per chain because of this.
Nobody wrote in to disagree... so I was wondering, does this agree with
others' experience?

Even here if someone says something dumb enough people will just nod and move on
and not bothe arguing.

There are very few people here competent to measure such a thing and anyone who
could measure it would know that chains don't "stretch" they wear.

Ron

"RonSonic" wrote: (clip) There are very few people here competent to
measure such a thing and anyone who could measure it would know that chains
don't "stretch" they wear.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
On your first point, I absolutely agree. The reason we check for wear over a
12" stretch is that is gives us something big enough to measure, by
combining the effect of 24 pins. But, "stretch" is just an informal way of
saying the chain gets longer. I think most of us know that steel doesn't
stretch under operating conditions of a bicycle chain.

Quoted message said:

Leo Lichtman said:

There are very few people here competent to measure such a thing and
anyone who could measure it would know that chains don't "stretch"
they wear.

Quoted message said:

On your first point, I absolutely agree. The reason we check for
wear over a 12" stretch is that is gives us something big enough to
measure, by combining the effect of 24 pins.

Quoted message said:

But, "stretch" is just an informal way of saying the chain gets
longer. I think most of us know that steel doesn't stretch under
operating conditions of a bicycle chain.

You appear to be in favor of dumbing down English. Why should one use
the wrong word to describe chain wear? The misuse of the word stretch
is a holdover from the days when most readers of this newsgroup
believed it was a plastic phenomenon that occurred when pedaling hard.

Whether most people know the difference is not assured and not a
reasonable assumption for its use. There will always be new readers
who are not aware of the difference.

Jobst Brandt

Dear Jobst,

Out of curiosity, can you cite any posts that actually argue
that chains stretch in a plastic sense?

Or is this just myth and lore serving an overwrought
pedantry?

I've read many claims that someone else believes that chains
stretch, but I can't say that I've ever seen the frightful
mien of the actual monster even once, much less oft enough
to endure, then pity, then embrace.

Is the literal belief in chain stretching just a straw man,
or did it really once roam the earth?

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

Out of curiosity, can you cite any posts that actually argue
that chains stretch in a plastic sense?

Or is this just myth and lore serving an overwrought
pedantry?

Sorry that I may have added to the confusion. Yes, I've seen a few
posts on this NG where the author thought that chains actually
stretched in a plastic sense... but I know better. I put "stretch" in
quotes to indicate that it was a measured lengthening, but did not
explain myself.

The person who contended that the Powerlink wore more quickly than the
others, said he measured it. I suppose it would be possible to measure
with one of those chain-check tools, by checking a section that
includes the link, and comparing it to one that doesn't. If the
difference is very great it should be noticable... at least by the time
you are getting ready to replace the chain.

-Ron

Carl Fogel said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Out of curiosity, can you cite any posts that actually argue that
chains stretch in a plastic sense?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Or is this just myth and lore serving an overwrought pedantry?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Sorry that I may have added to the confusion. Yes, I've seen a few
posts on this NG where the author thought that chains actually
stretched in a plastic sense... but I know better. I put "stretch"
in quotes to indicate that it was a measured lengthening, but did
not explain myself.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The person who contended that the Powerlink wore more quickly than
the others, said he measured it. I suppose it would be possible to
measure with one of those chain-check tools, by checking a section
that includes the link, and comparing it to one that doesn't. If
the difference is very great it should be noticeable... at least by
the time you are getting ready to replace the chain.

Quoted message said:

Any idea of what was actually said in these posts to help find
them--some phrase or name?

Too bad you joined this newsgroup since then. The FAQ:

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/chain-care.html

Was written to resolve the chain myth and lore of the past. Exchanges
like the recent ones about head bearing fretting went on at great
length by writers who were convinced they had stretched their chain on
a steep grade. Besides, why do you care. You seem to have a quest to
find a contradiction in anything I have written to wreck.bike in the
past 20 years.

Quoted message said:

Searching for "stretch" just seems to produce anti-stretch
posts--like you, they use the word because it's convenient and rolls
off the keyboard more easily than "elongate," not because they
believe that chains resemble taffy.

Keep up the good work!

Quoted message said:

I'm willing to believe that true "stretch" fanatics exist, but I
haven't been able to track one down yet.

Today they are a dwindling tribe but with skill we could recruit new
ones through suitable wording in chain wear postings.

Quoted message said:

Perhaps someone with an elephantine memory will point me to an
actual post in which the monster exhibits itself, naked and
unashamed.

Quoted message said:

Hopefully,

I suppose you mean "I hope" or are you afraid to offer even that
opinion? I suppose you could rework that to be a rhetorical question.

Jobst Brandt

<[email hidden]> wrote: You appear to be in favor of
dumbing down English. (CLIP)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I find it amusing that you think I wish to "dumb down" the language, and to
tell me this, you use the term "dumbing down." That's not good English.
That's street slang, and has no more place in a discussion between us than
the term "stretch" in a discussion of chain elongation.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Hopefully,

I suppose you mean "I hope" or are you afraid to offer even that
opinion? I suppose you could rework that to be a rhetorical question.

Don't you just hate rhetorical questions.

Ron

Quoted message said:

Carl Fogel said:

Quoted message said:

>Out of curiosity, can you cite any posts that actually argue that
>chains stretch in a plastic sense?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>Or is this just myth and lore serving an overwrought pedantry?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Sorry that I may have added to the confusion. Yes, I've seen a few
posts on this NG where the author thought that chains actually
stretched in a plastic sense... but I know better. I put "stretch"
in quotes to indicate that it was a measured lengthening, but did
not explain myself.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The person who contended that the Powerlink wore more quickly than
the others, said he measured it. I suppose it would be possible to
measure with one of those chain-check tools, by checking a section
that includes the link, and comparing it to one that doesn't. If
the difference is very great it should be noticeable... at least by
the time you are getting ready to replace the chain.

Quoted message said:

Any idea of what was actually said in these posts to help find
them--some phrase or name?

Too bad you joined this newsgroup since then. The FAQ:

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/chain-care.html

Was written to resolve the chain myth and lore of the past. Exchanges
like the recent ones about head bearing fretting went on at great
length by writers who were convinced they had stretched their chain on
a steep grade. Besides, why do you care. You seem to have a quest to
find a contradiction in anything I have written to wreck.bike in the
past 20 years.

but jobst, /lots/ of people contradict stuff you have written. it
happens when you've made the mistake of holding yourself up to be an
expert on a subject on which you are most evidently not. or, er,
"misrepresent" yourself as say "the inventor of stress relief" when in
fact the process you misname pre-dates your birth.

most people, when confronted by their errors, or by subjects outside of
their experience, either accept reality or keep quiet. you do neither.
the fact that the /number/ of subjects on which you choose to
shamelessly make some of these ridiculous assertions seems to know no
bounds is what really draws ire among what you doubtless perceive to be
your protagonists, not merely your lack of reality. but even if the
breadth of your guessing, bluster and f[r]ictional "fact" didn't
provoke, your manner would still.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Searching for "stretch" just seems to produce anti-stretch
posts--like you, they use the word because it's convenient and rolls
off the keyboard more easily than "elongate," not because they
believe that chains resemble taffy.

Keep up the good work!

Quoted message said:

I'm willing to believe that true "stretch" fanatics exist, but I
haven't been able to track one down yet.

Today they are a dwindling tribe but with skill we could recruit new
ones through suitable wording in chain wear postings.

Quoted message said:

Perhaps someone with an elephantine memory will point me to an
actual post in which the monster exhibits itself, naked and
unashamed.

Quoted message said:

Hopefully,

I suppose you mean "I hope" or are you afraid to offer even that
opinion? I suppose you could rework that to be a rhetorical question.

Jobst Brandt

"Ron Ruff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I noticed a post on here awhile back, where the author claimed that the
removable link stretched more than the others on his SRAM chains. He
said that he changed that link several times per chain because of this.
Nobody wrote in to disagree... so I was wondering, does this agree with
others' experience?

My experience with the SRAM link is pretty short. I had one installed
for about 1,000 miles when it blew apart while shifting down in the
front. Luckily, nothing was damaged. I could only find half the link,
but fortunately I had a chain tool with me...

-Ron

I installed a removable link on a Campagnolo 10-speed chain a while back and
found that, yes, it did wear more rapidly than the rest of the chain. This
was determined by using a Rohloff chain gauge to measure different sections
of chain. When I measured a section of chain with the removable link in it I
saw more elongation (or "stretch"😉 than when I measured any section w/o the
removable link in it. I don't recall what brand the removable link was,
though.
--
mark

mark said:

I installed a removable link on a Campagnolo 10-speed chain a while back and
found that, yes, it did wear more rapidly than the rest of the chain. This
was determined by using a Rohloff chain gauge to measure different sections
of chain. When I measured a section of chain with the removable link in it I
saw more elongation (or "stretch"😉 than when I measured any section w/o the
removable link in it.

Thanks, that was the kind of info I was looking for. I'm still waiting
to hear from someone who has measured their chain similarly, and *not*
found greater elongation across the removable link. Maybe no one has?

BTW, I installed the chain clean and new and rode it for 1,000 miles
before the Powerlink blew apart... so I don't really see an excuse for
it.

-Ron

Leo Lichtman said:

<[email hidden]> wrote: You appear to be in favor of
dumbing down English. (CLIP)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I find it amusing that you think I wish to "dumb down" the language, and to
tell me this, you use the term "dumbing down." That's not good English.
That's street slang

You'll have to justify that, since (a) your version and his do not mean
the same thing (I am in favour of exploring the moon but I do not wish
to explore the moon); and (b) he uses a typical phrasal verb where the
-ing use is that of the typical verb equipped for noun work where the
agent is not specified. I am in favour of paying down the deficit but I
do not wish to pay down the deficit

mark said:

"Ron Ruff" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I noticed a post on here awhile back, where the author claimed that the
removable link stretched more than the others on his SRAM chains. He
said that he changed that link several times per chain because of this.
Nobody wrote in to disagree... so I was wondering, does this agree with
others' experience?

My experience with the SRAM link is pretty short. I had one installed
for about 1,000 miles when it blew apart while shifting down in the
front. Luckily, nothing was damaged. I could only find half the link,
but fortunately I had a chain tool with me...

-Ron

I installed a removable link on a Campagnolo 10-speed chain a while back and
found that, yes, it did wear more rapidly than the rest of the chain. This
was determined by using a Rohloff chain gauge to measure different sections
of chain. When I measured a section of chain with the removable link in it I
saw more elongation (or "stretch"😉 than when I measured any section w/o the
removable link in it. I don't recall what brand the removable link was,
though.

My experience with "Superlinks" is that they do, in fact, wear out
before the chain. I'm not sure of the mode, but the result is that they
get sloppy, causing a clicking each time around the cassette. This is
on 9sp Campag. and Shimano.

Robin Hubert

"41" wrote: You'll have to justify that, (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"Dumb" means unable to speak. As Mr. Brandt used it, it meant
"unintelligent." My objection was to his loose use of a word in objecting
to my loose use of a word. Had it been in a different context, I would have
had no objection whatever.

Leo Lichtman said:

"41" wrote: You'll have to justify that, (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"Dumb" means unable to speak. As Mr. Brandt used it, it meant
"unintelligent." My objection was to his loose use of a word in objecting
to my loose use of a word. Had it been in a different context, I would have
had no objection whatever.

Well, he can speak for himself, but from what I read his objection was
not to the loose use of a word. It was to the misleading use of a word
(in a supposedly technical newsgroup, yet), such that people who don't
know better will then read the description and believe that chains
deform plastically instead of wear, so propagating yet another
hard-to-dispel myth. Stretch does have a specific meaning in mechanical
engineering, as one particular mode of elongation, the two being
coextensive but not synonymous. I don't see anyone being misled into
thinking that English is in danger of becoming mute.

Stupid is not yet the lead meaning of 'dumb' for the dictionaries, but
it is in the list for surely every one of them, and furthermore no one
uses it to mean mute anymore because it IS offensive and who wants to
pick on the mute? They have it tough enough already.

Dans le message de
news:[email hidden],
Leo Lichtman <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

"41" wrote: You'll have to justify that, (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"Dumb" means unable to speak. As Mr. Brandt used it, it meant
"unintelligent." My objection was to his loose use of a word in
objecting to my loose use of a word. Had it been in a different
context, I would have had no objection whatever.

Leo -

You wrote nothing incoherent, so don't bother defending yourself.
I think you communicated your ideas to all, including the involuntary troll
(in all senses) himself.
Mr Brandt likes to play author and literary critic, but he has amassed a
grand total of zero points, whilst trying to do so.

I wonder what his copyeditor has to say ...
--
Bonne route !

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR

Robin Hubert said:

My experience with "Superlinks" is that they do, in fact, wear out
before the chain. I'm not sure of the mode, but the result is that
they get sloppy, causing a clicking each time around the cassette.
This is on 9sp Campagnolo and Shimano.

I think rather than deduce what wears by chain sounds or a Rohloff
Caliber that measures over multiple links, measuring pin diameter of
the Superlink and an arbitrary pin from the remaining chain would
reveal whether there is a difference.

Two effects could contribute, 1: the pins on the Superlink may be
smaller in diameter than the standard pins causing more rapid wear,
and 2: The material of these pins is softer. Both of these can be
decisively determined by measuring pin diameter and wear grooves in
pins.

As I have mentioned, I decided not to use the SRAM link for two
reasons.

The oddest one, that is rare and probably unrepeatable, occurred after
installing a new chain that skipped over a worn 16t sprocket on its
maiden run. The link was in a position adjacent to the skip that the
inertia of the advancing chain was great enough to open the link and
let it fall on the road. I retrieved the link, reinstalled it and
used it for many miles.

However, what convinced me to not use the link was that after
reasonable road miles, enough fine grit had gotten between its side
plates to prevent manually pressing them together to open the link.
After several removals with pliers pushing diagonally across the link
I found no benefit in using them in the sense that I think it was
intended... to open the chain without tools.

Jobst Brandt

Sandy said:

You wrote nothing incoherent, so don't bother defending yourself.

Finally, an explanation! You think the only reason to defend a position
is because it is incoherent. This certainly illuminates your activities
here. Keep up the flow! Et "Bonne Route" vers l'enfer!

e