Do removable chain links "stretch" more than others?

[Sandy]

Dans le message de news:[email protected],
41 <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> Leo Lichtman wrote:
>> "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.

OK, that was moronic. Stretch, elongate, worn, all mean not good, in a
primitive linguistic pattern even you can ken. There is no myth to dispel.
Unless you are talking about "stretching" the truth, which was not done.
And, if "stretch" acts to get someone to change a chain more on time than
his custom, it did good.

This technical newsgroup (somehow, that is not often met in practice, here)
could use lessons in communicating.

> Stretch does have a specific meaning in
> mechanical engineering, as one particular mode of elongation, the two
> being coextensive but not synonymous.

Glad you aren't writing so that people could understand. Maybe they just
skipped your message, one may hope.

 

[Sandy]

Dans le message de
news:[email protected],
41 <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> Sandy wrote:
>
>> 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!
>
Polite, thoughtful, intriguing, as usual.

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 00:57:34 GMT, "Leo Lichtman"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>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."

It's a fricking gerund. "to dumb down" is a verb, "dumbing down" is its
gerund, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with, say, 'being struck dumb'
or other uses of dumb in the deaf-and-dumb meaning.

Jasper

 

[41]

Sandy wrote:

> OK, that was moronic. Stretch, elongate, worn, all mean not good, in a
> primitive linguistic pattern

Yeah, that's the point.

Say, I notice you aren't using your usual dishonest "Bonne route!" any
more, so perhaps you are in the market for a new pithy phrase.
Seriously, have you considered "Vas chier, Univers!", because that's
what you always really mean. It's the entire content of your posts
anyway. You could stop repeating yourself and save a lot of bandwidth!!

 

[Robin Hubert]

[email protected] wrote:
> Robin Hubert writes:
>
>
>>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

Yes, that would be the correct method, but by replacing the link and
observing that the click went away was evidence enough for me. Next
time I might bother to measure things.

The SRAM "Powerlinks" have often been problematic with opening/closing,
but the original Superlinks (same copyright, different manufacturer)
have always opened and closed easily. Different tolerances?


Robin Hubert

 

[[email protected]]

now in use- a shaft worn power link: ridge at pin center, signufficant
wear shaft sides (both).
reason-sloth, time paucity, moved, lost other used links for unknown
reasons beyond stupidity, poor eyesight, and prep

amlfunctions-none that i can see.

 

[Leo Lichtman]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:6TsHe.6785$p%[email protected]...
> Robin Hubert writes:
>
>> 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,(clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Since a chain manufacturer controls the diameters of both pins and holes, it
is possible for him to get a very close fit. The manufacturer of of a
"universal" link does not know in advance what the hole size will be, so it
is reasonable to think he would tend to make the pins on the small side. If
this is true, that would make your idea about small pins inevitable. A
smaller pin would wear faster, and would be partly "worn out" even when new.

 

[[email protected]]

above it was mentioned in passing that i'm running worn power
link-both pin sides (4) worn leaving a middle ridge.
ungulating this on way back i thought this may be a good idea!!
said ridge wears a shallow groove in bushings ID for a lube reservoir
then install fresh links
but run a clean chain or.....
the manufacturers idea may be true of Connex but consider sales lost if
sram really did stick their nose in the air about use only on virgin
goats

 

[Leo Lichtman]

<[email protected]> wrote: above it was mentioned in passing that i'm
running worn power link-both pin sides (4) worn leaving a middle ridge.
ungulating this on way back i thought this may be a good idea!! said ridge
wears a shallow groove in bushings ID for a lube reservoir then install
fresh links but run a clean chain or..... the manufacturers idea may be true
of Connex but consider sales lost if sram really did stick their nose in the
air about use only on virgin goats
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I didn't clip any of this, because it's impossible to edit. After reading
it a few times, I partially understood it--I'm giving up and going to the
next post.

 

[[email protected]]

have you tried telluride?

 

[Bill Sornson]

[email protected] wrote:

> have you tried telluride?

have you told tryuride?

 

[[email protected]]

someone writes:

> have you tried telluride?

Telluride is in Colorado:

http://www.shownontheweb.com/RR/html/rgs__telluride_to_ouray.html
http://steamcad.railfan.net/goose.htm

Jobst Brandt

 

[[email protected]]

Telluride is in Colorado:

prove it!

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 17:22:10 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>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.

If you break your chain a lot, though, even if it's not toolless, it'll be
cheaper with the powerlink than by pushing in an expensive replacement pin
every time. Plus you get only one weak link instead of many at each place
that you broke the chain.

Jasper

 

[[email protected]]

Jasper Janssen writes:

>> 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.

> If you break your chain a lot, though, even if it's not toolless,
> it'll be cheaper with the powerlink than by pushing in an expensive
> replacement pin every time. Plus you get only one weak link instead
> of many at each place that you broke the chain.

My SRAM chains don't offer an expensive replacement pin. I get along
fine with my chain pliers that press out pins and reinsert them just
fine.

Jobst Brandt

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 19:51:03 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>Jasper Janssen writes:
>
>> If you break your chain a lot, though, even if it's not toolless,
>> it'll be cheaper with the powerlink than by pushing in an expensive
>> replacement pin every time. Plus you get only one weak link instead
>> of many at each place that you broke the chain.
>
>My SRAM chains don't offer an expensive replacement pin. I get along
>fine with my chain pliers that press out pins and reinsert them just
>fine.

Didn't SRAM move to peened pins as well recently?

Jasper

 

[Robert Perkins]

[email protected] wrote:

> My SRAM chains don't offer an expensive replacement pin. I get along
> fine with my chain pliers that press out pins and reinsert them just
> fine.

Which model do you use? -- Rob Perkins