SRAM Power Link Question
- Thread starter neon
- Start date
Your experience would mean that the SRAM 9-sp chains are wider that Shimano, correct? I use SRAM PC-99 (with gold powerlink) on my DA triple 9-sp bike, but now am curious if the Shimano chains are indeed thinner.....cydewaze said:
SRAM chains work great for me, BTW. I have done my share of pressing in pins and breaking them off, but much prefer the master link.
That's correct. I applied a Powerlink to my fiancee's Tiagra/105 9-sp equipped Lemond, and noticed that it seemed a little wider (maybe 1mm) than the link it replaced. In fact you could jockey it side to side with your fingers. I had her ride it, and twice while upshifting to the big ring, the Powerlink caught on the front derailleur and stopped the cranks dead in their place until she backpedalled and took another stroke.dhk said:
It was an easy solution. I ditched the Shimano chain for a SRAM, and it works perfectly, and now I have a spare powerlink. I prefer SRAM chains anyway.
Thanks for the reply. I can see where having the master link wider than the chain would not be a good thing. Always learning something new here.cydewaze said:
Good to know others are SRAM fans. I've gotten 6000 miles on the PC-99 chain before hitting the first (0.75%) wear limit on the Park CC-3 gauge, so I'm very happy with the service life and performance. I don't take my chain off for cleaning, but like the master link a lot better than the push pin.
Also like competitive products wherever possible....Shimano got enough of my money for shifters, derailleurs and brakes.
Good deal. I do take my chain off for cleaning (stick it in a tupperware container full of degreaser and shake the hell out of it), so as you can imagine, I prefer the powerlink.dhk said:
I'm on my second season on my PC-99 Hollow Pin chain (i.e. 4500-ish miles). So far no measurable wear. The previous one is on my spare bike, and still shifting well after several years of use.
I know that everyone uses degreaser on chains, but here is what the SRAM manual says about the PC-99 chain:
• Regular lubrication will extend the chain's service life. Apply oil to the chain links rollers and allow to work in.
• Clean dirty chains before oiling. Do not use any grease-dissolving or acidic agents. Cleaning agent must be rinsed off after a few minuteswith water. Apply oil after chain is completely dried.
http://sram.com/_media/techdocs/Chain_all_MTB_08_02.pdf
• Regular lubrication will extend the chain's service life. Apply oil to the chain links rollers and allow to work in.
• Clean dirty chains before oiling. Do not use any grease-dissolving or acidic agents. Cleaning agent must be rinsed off after a few minuteswith water. Apply oil after chain is completely dried.
http://sram.com/_media/techdocs/Chain_all_MTB_08_02.pdf
cydewaze said:Good deal. I do take my chain off for cleaning (stick it in a tupperware container full of degreaser and shake the hell out of it), so as you can imagine, I prefer the powerlink.
I'm on my second season on my PC-99 Hollow Pin chain (i.e. 4500-ish miles). So far no measurable wear. The previous one is on my spare bike, and still shifting well after several years of use.
It's cool. I use a water-soluble degreaser, and after one "shake session" with the degreaser, I do two with plain water. Thus, the degreaser never remains on the chain. I follow the cleaning with a teflon-based spray that penetrates into the links. For re-lubing I use a bottle product like Finish Line or Pedros Ice Wax. The chains run dead silent and last ages.
I think SRAM is worried about the harsher non-water-based degreasers, and having the stuff remain on the chain after cleaning.
I think SRAM is worried about the harsher non-water-based degreasers, and having the stuff remain on the chain after cleaning.
Orpheus said:
