Forum menu
I'm sure then people will just whinge about snapping chains, which is more likely to be with hamfisted riding than bad equipment!
I can't deny I'm ham fisted at times, usually when it comes to giving things that extra wee tighten. I've gotten good at extracting sheared bolts. I've never snapped a chain while shifting though, only when putting the power down. I'm sure if you only weigh 9st wet through then you'll have no problem with 10 speed chains but as the current crop aren't up to the job I doubt making them thinner and lighter is going to help us clydesdales. After snapping a chain last year because I had decided to run it into the ground rather than swapping at the .75 wear point, I decided that the injuries I got were most undesirable and I would change them at the correct wear point. I have yet to get one reach it without snapping but I suspect that is down to too many snowy, icy rides. Did you not get any snow in your muddy fields this winter?
EDIT: I'm talking crap.
DeVs: Lose weight?
(runs and hides)
9st wet through then you'll have no problem with 10 speed chains
I was 16 stone when I started using 10 speed chains, as above yet to have one snap, OK I'm a lot lighter now but I'm still 13.6 stone on a very very very good day.
I'm 10.5 stone and have snapped a lot of chains, including KMC, Shimano and SRAM. In the case of Shimano and SRAM I've snapped the sideplates clean in half.
I broke a brand new Dura Ace chain after 200 yards, not on the joining pin either.
I've broken probably ten 9 speed ones, and one 10 speed one on my cross bike, which I think was in part to doing tonnes of 15 second efforts from a standing start in training.
Chains break, it's not that regular, it won't be that much more regular with 10 speed ones!
Seeing as it is nearly always the pins that fail strengthening those in a narrower chain is altogether possible. To that end Campag 11 speed chains are stronger than their 10 speed.
Oh I've had a couple of 9sp shimano chains go at he pin, probably user error and as I've stated above two 9sp SRAM chains have cracked on the side plate.
DeVs: Lose weight?(runs and hides)
No need to hide I'll never catch you! You can't play 2nd row forward or prop at ragdoll weight so I don't try to lose anymore weight. God knows what I'd have to do to shift that much anyways, I'm out biking nearly everyday and get 100 proper hilly offroad miles a week in roughly.
If it's muscle: stop working out, if it's fat: eat less!
Campag 11 speed chains are stronger than their 10 speed
They also need to be joined with a special £200 chain tool, or Campag won't be responsible if they break. 🙄
http://cozybeehive.blogspot.com/2009/06/campagnolo-11-speed-chain-failure.html
I know this is STW, and everyone is a mechanical genius, but personally I can see the benefit of having bike parts that are resistant to a bit of ham-fistedness or neglect.
If it's muscle: stop working out, if it's fat: eat less!
I bet your granny sucks a mean egg! 😀
It's muscle and apart from the odd press up and sit up I don't work out. I don't even go to rugby training anymore as I'm trying to retire. You miss the point though. I don't want to be lighter, I want kit that can take the strain. I just hope the 9 speed stuff drops in price once the 10 speed stuff is out. Those that think that lighter and thinner chains will be just as strong are burying their heads in the sand. They will be more expensive and changed more often. It's a real clever sales strategy. I think that I can't be arsed with changing to 8sp on the bikes I have now considering that most of my riding is SS now anyways, but the next bike I build will be 8 sp if you can still get it. Gashing your abdomen on the stem just where your trousers sit is no fun!
I for one welcome our new 10-speed overlords. 9-speed was already established when I got into mountain biking so I haven't had the opportunity yet to grumble to anyone who'll listen that my drivetrain was so much better back in the olden days before they upped the number of sprockets. 10-speed will give me that opportunity. 🙂
LOL @ ChrisL
God knows what I'd have to do to shift that much anyways
I merely responded to that 🙂
Those that think that lighter and thinner chains will be just as strong are burying their heads in the sand
I am going to disagree there, and reiterate that it's certainly possible to make a thinner chain stronger as the weak link (excuse the pun) is not, nor will it become the sideplates.
2X10, can't see the point of it really, give me 2/9 any day. However, a 32/30 on the front coupled with a 11/36 on the rear may be a winner if you can fit something to prevent the chain from falling while using a bash guard. Shorter cage rear mech, so less rear mech banging the chain stay.
Should I get very worried and buy a few chain/xt cassette now to keep running a few year?
similar arguments as to why tubeless won't "catch on" - it did
and adjustable seatposts were slagged on this very forum, now you all want them.
even DIRT were praising SRAM for the XX stuff - its progress, get over it
However, a 32/30 on the front coupled with a 11/36 on the rear may be a winner if you can fit something to prevent the chain from falling while using a bash guard
Either would be too small IMO, 34 would be more sensible for a 1x10.
I don't really see why you can say 2x9 is great, but 2x10 is pointless!
34/36 won't be enough. I am using the 22/30 or 22/30 quite often (you know hills with rock and so on etc etc) as I hate pushing/carrying my bike.
2x10 is pointless because made for XC unles you keep the 22/32 on the front and get a 36 at the rear, but then 22/36 might actually bit a tad too small.
2x10 is pointless because made for XC
So it's not pointless, it's made for XC. How is 2x9 any different anyway? You can run exactly the same ratios you are the moment, and either have the same cassette for smaller gaps, or a bigger cassette for a wider range of gears.
Is it just because you're French and have to whinge about something?
As an aside... you have so little momentum in 22/30 (weird bottom gear that...) that you're probably just as likely to get up stuff in a slightly higher gear pushing harder!
[url= http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/ ]http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/[/url]
As an aside... you have so little momentum in 22/30 (weird bottom gear that...) that you're probably just as likely to get up stuff in a slightly higher gear pushing harder!
Erm unless it's a very technical and steep climb (22/30 is the smaller front cog and the next to big rear cog so not "weird")? Second what is exactly the point of a 2X10 if I run exactly the same range of gear?
Because you can! And if you don't want to, then here's a novel idea... don't!
More likely is that you'll keep the same rings, run a wider cassette and be able to stick in the big ring for longer, or have an extra gear for when it all goes wrong! Or you can run bigger rings and keep the same bottom gear.
Well if its just for XC then it's not for me then.
similar arguments as to why tubeless won't "catch on" - it did
Not for me it didn't.
and adjustable seatposts were slagged on this very forum, now you all want them.
I don't