Sugino 50t 130 BCD track chainring, any probs using on Shimano double?

Discussion in 'Cycling Equipment' started by Doug, May 11, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Doug

    Doug Guest

    Hey all,

    I'm considering using a 50t Sugino track chainring on a standard Shimano road double crankset.

    Any trouble with this combo? Are these Sugino rings steel or Al? Will they last a bit? I'm not
    quite sure what makes a track ring a track ring. Will the shifting in a 9sp hyperglide setup be
    less than perfect?

    Thanks, Doug
     
    Tags:


  2. John Dacey

    John Dacey Guest

    On Sun, 11 May 2003 19:07:07 GMT, Doug <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Hey all,
    >
    >I'm considering using a 50t Sugino track chainring on a standard Shimano road double crankset.
    >
    >Any trouble with this combo? Are these Sugino rings steel or Al? Will they last a bit? I'm not
    >quite sure what makes a track ring a track ring.

    What makes you think that this chainring is track-specific? Sugino's dedicated track cranks and
    chainrings have shared the 144 bolt circle pattern for quite a long time. The only exception I can
    think of would be their aero-style carbon 'rings, but those were for 110 bolt pattern cranks.

    Measure the width of the chainring at the base of the trough between any two teeth. If it measures 3
    mm. (but that's highly unlikely), it's for 1/2"x1/8" chains and can't be used in a derailleur
    setting. If the measurement is 2 mm. wide at the base of the tooth, I believe you've got one of
    their standard road 'rings and it should work fine as part of a 130 bolt pattern road crank.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - http://www.businesscycles.com John Dacey Business Cycles Miami,
    Florida 305-273-4440
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Now in our twentieth year. Our catalogue of track equipment: seventh
    year online
     
  3. A Muzi

    A Muzi Guest

    "Doug" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > Hey all,
    >
    > I'm considering using a 50t Sugino track chainring on a standard Shimano road double crankset.
    >
    > Any trouble with this combo? Are these Sugino rings steel or Al? Will they last a bit? I'm not
    > quite sure what makes a track ring a track ring. Will the shifting in a 9sp hyperglide setup be
    > less than perfect?

    A Shimano track ring is too thick (1/8") for road chain. There are a half-dozen vendors of 130mm
    road rings in 50tt, including Shimano
    --
    Andrew Muzi http://www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April 1971
     
  4. John Dacey

    John Dacey Guest

    On Sun, 11 May 2003 21:22:24 -0500, "A Muzi" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >A Shimano track ring is too thick (1/8") for road chain.

    Not all Shimano's track chainrings require 1/8" chains. To their great credit, Shimano is the last
    of the big manufacturers who still manufacture a range of 3/32" chainrings and rear sprockets for
    track (in addition to the more common 1/8" stuff). Too bad there isn't a better selection of current
    model 3/32" chains that are good candidates for track use to complement them.

    Even so, Shimano's 3/32" track chainrings would probably make for troublesome front shifting if
    fitted to a 144 pcd road double crank, but it should be theoretically possible to do so.

    -------------------------------
    http://www.businesscycles.com John Dacey Business Cycles, Miami, Florida 305-273-4440 Now in our
    twentieth year. Our catalog of track equipment: seventh year online
    -------------------------------
     
  5. On Mon, 12 May 2003 00:24:18 +0000, John Dacey wrote:

    > Not all Shimano's track chainrings require 1/8" chains. To their great credit, Shimano is the last
    > of the big manufacturers who still manufacture a range of 3/32" chainrings and rear sprockets for
    > track (in addition to the more common 1/8" stuff). Too bad there isn't a better selection of
    > current model 3/32" chains that are good candidates for track use to complement them.

    You are implying an advantage to the 3/32" chain. What would that be? I am not suggesting it isn't
    adequate, but except for a few grams of weight difference there is no advantage to the thinner
    chain/cogs. 1/8" cogs and rings will last longer, since there is more material that has to be worn
    away (but on track bikes this is not a serious matter, since wear is slight with a good chainline
    and most don't get that much mileage).

    The biggest difference is that 1/8" chain still comes with full bushings, which is a better design
    than typical derailleur chains.

    --

    David L. Johnson

    __o | As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not _`\(,_ | certain, and as
    far as they are certain, they do not refer to (_)/ (_) | reality. -- Albert Einstein
     
  6. John Dacey

    John Dacey Guest

    On Fri, 16 May 2003 21:27:02 -0400, "David L. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >On Mon, 12 May 2003 00:24:18 +0000, John Dacey wrote:
    >
    >> Not all Shimano's track chainrings require 1/8" chains. To their great credit, Shimano is
    >> the last of the big manufacturers who still manufacture a range of 3/32" chainrings and rear
    >> sprockets for track (in addition to the more common 1/8" stuff). Too bad there isn't a
    >> better selection of current model 3/32" chains that are good candidates for track use to
    >> complement them.
    >
    >You are implying an advantage to the 3/32" chain.

    Drat. I meant to infer it.

    >What would that be? I am not suggesting it isn't adequate, but except for a few grams of weight
    >difference there is no advantage to the thinner chain/cogs. 1/8" cogs and rings will last longer,
    >since there is more material that has to be worn away (but on track bikes this is not a serious
    >matter, since wear is slight with a good chainline and most don't get that much mileage).

    If all things were otherwise equal (which of course they're not), for many the weight issue alone
    would be enough. I have heard several elite endurance track riders comment that they feel that a
    3/32" chain spins up more easily. Before you dismiss this, consider that the weight difference can
    be far more than "a few grams" as you claim. From the weights section of Damon Rinard's pages
    archived by Sheldon
    B., an Izumi track chain (and it's been drilled!!!) weighs 534 grams; by comparison a Regina 50-SL
    weighs 250 grams. That's a swing that approaches a few_hundred_grams and doesn't account for a
    fractional further saving with a 2 mm sprocket and chainring.

    >The biggest difference is that 1/8" chain still comes with full bushings, which is a better design
    >than typical derailleur chains.

    That was my point in bemoaning the current lack of 3/32" chains with this feature. Perhaps you
    missed a recent thread on track chains that ran concurrently with this one. An excerpt from one of
    my replies there read in part: ..."The rollers of chains that are supported by full bushings will
    generally have higher load carrying capabilities than bushingless chains whose rollers are borne by
    bulges stamped into their inner link plates. Since many track events put large peak loads on the
    chain (standing-start time trials, sprinting, etc.), fully bushed chains should ordinarily be more
    capable of dealing with those loads than bushingless ones in these circumstances. The bushings will
    minimize the lateral flexibility of the chain.

    Additionally, most modern bushingless chains designed for multi-speed use have had their link plates
    bulged, bevelled, chamfered, contoured, cut away and otherwise shaped to actually make it easier for
    the chain to slide off the gear to which it's currently engaged. That's obviously not a welcome
    feature in a track bike. The ideal link profile for a track chain will be a shape that helps keep
    the links captive on the sprockets they engage (rather than to facilitate shifting), and the
    resulting generous link proportions may also restrict side flex in the chain. That there are limited
    choices of
    3/32" chains that fit this description any more and that have fully bushed roller support is what
    likely keeps 1/8" drivetrain parts the predominant format chosen by track riders".

    Vide:http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&frame=right&th=ae34fc3516c2b974&seekm=y0V%

    -------------------------------
    http://www.businesscycles.com John Dacey Business Cycles, Miami, Florida 305-273-4440 Now in our
    twentieth year. Our catalog of track equipment: seventh year online
    -------------------------------
     
  7. Tom Ace

    Tom Ace Guest

    John Dacey wrote:

    > From the weights section of Damon Rinard's pages archived by Sheldon
    > B., an Izumi track chain (and it's been drilled!!!) weighs 534 grams; by comparison a Regina 50-SL
    > weighs 250 grams. That's a swing that approaches a few_hundred_grams and doesn't account for a
    > fractional further saving with a 2 mm sprocket and chainring.

    Not to mention that a chain is rotating (or at least "moving") mass. ;)

    Tom Ace
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...