Has anyone noticed 10 speed chains wearing out quicker than 9 speed? There must be less metal in the chain and cassette so do they wear out quicker?

not that i’ve noticed

Nope, not noticed that. 1×10 they last longer than they did on 2×9.

Cassette sprockets are just closer together on the 10sp, not necessarily thinner by a massive amount.

IAUI, the side plates are thinner on a 10sp chain, but the gaps where the cog teeth go are the same size. This makes 10sp chains marginally more likely to fail under load or shifting.

However, since chain ‘wear’ as MTBers understand it is caused by micro-grit getting into the spaces in the chain links and grinding away at the metal, it’s unlikely that the thickness of the side plates would make a huge amount of difference.

readthepostby doug at basquemtb he says it’s the same.

In theory as a 10 speed chain has thinner side plates than a 9 speed, it will stretch quicker. However as most 10 speed set ups use 1 chainring at the front instead of 2 or 3, there should be less extreme chain lines (which cause a lot of premature wear). So I don’t think the majority or people will not notice any faster wear at all.

In theory as a 10 speed chain has thinner side plates than a 9 speed, it will stretch quicker.

I dont think so. Chains dont stretch due to this they “stretch” due to the roller on the pin wearing.

I agree with DoctorRad

Chains dont stretch due to this they “stretch” due to the roller on the pin wearing.

Yes, this is the reason why chains stretch but the parts of the chain that actually stretch are the side plates. Thinner metal will stretch faster than thicker metal.

Mine are lasting longer on all my bikes.

Mine are lasting longer on all my bikes.

Are you running a 1×10 setup?

the parts of the chain that actually stretch are the side plates. Thinner metal will stretch faster than thicker metal.

Wrong. Just utterly wrong.

Please read previous posts! It’s the pins and rollers that wear, causing slackness. Not actual metal stretching.

dr rad is correct, the chain doesnt physically ‘stretch’ what happens is every joint (pins, side plates and bush) wears slightly, so, for example 0.01mm per link, multiplied by 116 links becomes 1.16mm, also, when it starts to wear it wears the sprockets and chainring(s) too, and that wear contributes to the chain wear, accelerating it.
i run a 9 speed setup on one bike, and 10 speed on the others, i havent noticed any difference between them.

Please read previous posts! It’s the pins and rollers that wear, causing slackness. Not actual metal stretching.

So why is it when you measure a stretched chain, 12 links are longer than 12 links on a new chain?

If each individual roller were the only parts that wear then a worn chain would not be longer than a new chain.

Shelton Brown says:

Chain “Stretch”
Cyclists often speak of chain “stretch”, as if the side plates of an old chain were pulled out of shape by the repeated stresses of pedaling. This is not actually how chains elongate. The major cause of chain “stretch” is wearing away of the metal where the rivet rotates inside of the bushing (or the “bushing” part of the inside plate) as the chain links flex and straighten as the chain goes onto and off of the sprockets. If you take apart an old, worn-out chain, you can easily see the little notches worn into the sides of the rivets by the inside edges of the bushings. With bushingless chains, the inside edge of the side plate hole that rubs against the rivet has a smooth radius instead of a sharp corner. This probably contributes to the greater durability of bushingless chains.

http://sheldonbrown.com/chains.html

Explain how this chain has stretched then.

So why is it when you measure a stretched chain, 12 links are longer than 12 links on a new chain?
If each individual roller were the only parts that wear then a worn chain would not be longer than a new chain.

Get some digital calipers and compare the length of the side plates if you don’t believe us! 🙂

It’s the pins going slack that does it. Can’t think of a better way of explaining it TBH.

each individual roller were the only parts that wear then a worn chain would not be longer than a new chain.

Ahh. I see. You are misunderstanding.
It’s not the ROLLERS. It’s the PINS through the middle of them. Pins wear, joint develops slackness.

More slackness = Longer chain

Got that now? 🙂

Yes, this is the reason why chains stretch but the parts of the chain that actually stretch are the side plates.

Hhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah.
No.

the holes in the side plates wear, and the pin that goes through that hole wears, take a new chain and an old worn out chain and measure 1 side plate on each, they will both be the same size. but measure the pins, and the holes in the side plates and comparing new with old will show up the difference.

Hello

Thanks for the backup guys!!! 😉 🙂

Ah, i see.

Feel silly now. 😥

Ah, i see.
Feel silly now.

Ahh, we’ve all done it sometime! 😀

I cant believe for years i thought it was the actual metal stretching. Now my legs don’t feel as strong as they use to be.

Ahh, we’ve all done it sometime!

Crown race anyone?

of course you thought it was the chain stretching, we describe it as, er, chain stretch . . . .
i mean, what else would you think it was?

In theory as a 10 speed chain has thinner side plates than a 9 speed, it will stretch quicker. However as most 10 speed set ups use 1 chainring at the front instead of 2 or 3, there should be less extreme chain lines (which cause a lot of premature wear). So I don’t think the majority or people will not notice any faster wear at all.

Arn’t you more likely to have a more extreme chain line on 1×10 than 2×9/10 or 3×9/10 if you are using your gears in the best way? Use middle rear range in the middle ring,Big rear range in the small ring and small rear range in the big ring