Chain comparison

[Minion]

The quarterly English version of Tour magazine has an interesting comparison of chain wear and performance:

 

http://www.tour-qtr.com/epaper_4_2011

 

The problem with most conventional chain checking tools is immediately apparent: according to one of these, every single tested chain has reached it's wear limit. In fact, the majority of them have functional life left and a few have not even reached half of the actual wear limit.

 

The chart is also useful for comparing the value of various chains e.g. most of the generic chains have close to twice the wear of the OEM equivalents (except SRAM). They would need to be almost 50% cheaper before offering better long-term value.

[no calves]

so i should ditch my sram chain?????

[Delgado]

Measure 10 inner & outer links with an inch ruler is the safest way to check.

[Minion]

Measure 10 inner & outer links with an inch ruler is the safest way to check.

Yip, that's how they got the chain joint wear values.

[Johan Bornman]

Interesting reading.

 

I can't figure out what the difference is between chain joint wear and roller and chain joint wear.

 

I'm also absolutely surprised that within brands, the wear rate differs between chains from different gruppo's. I just cannot see them using different steel for different chains. I think the test wasn't repeated often enough to smooth out the date. There is very little difference within for instance, the various chains in the Shimano line-up.

 

I totally disagree with Tour's chain care tips and I wish they told us a bit more about how they measured the chains.

 

I'm worried about their method of lubrication. They say they used the original lubrication for 5 hours, then cleaned and oiled the chain. This doesn't make all things equal since Connex ship almost clean chains and some brans ship them packed with grease.

 

 

I recently came across some chain wear data from Connex/Wipperman. I've attached the PDF. Needless to say, the Connex chains came out tops and in complete contradiction to the Tour test.

 

Tour claims that durability isn't decreased as chain width decreases and I would have liked to see a comparative 9/10 speed test to verify that.

 

However, they measured elongation to 1%, which is double the sensible wear limit.

Chainwear_Test_10_Speed_10-JUN-2010.pdf

[Daniel XTR]

Look who conducted the test, then tell me it's unbiased.

Yes, ive found SRAM softer in the past.

Just try be objective in the reading?

[Minion]

I can't figure out what the difference is between chain joint wear and roller and chain joint wear.

I interpreted joint wear as meaning the elongation of the chain over time i.e. the increase in pitch from one pin to the next. In this context, they mentioned hanging the chain from a nail and determining it's overall length.

Roller and joint wear is what the Park Tool checker etc. measure. They mention these measuring some joint wear, as well as roller wear (which they mention doesn't affect pitch or performance).

[Johan Bornman]

I interpreted joint wear as meaning the elongation of the chain over time i.e. the increase in pitch from one pin to the next. In this context, they mentioned hanging the chain from a nail and determining it's overall length.

Roller and joint wear is what the Park Tool checker etc. measure. They mention these measuring some joint wear, as well as roller wear (which they mention doesn't affect pitch or performance).

Thanks, I now understand. All commercial chain checkers (except for one) use the roller as a reference point. This is of course highly inaccurate and plays in the favour of whoever sells chains.