Powerlinks don't go together or come apart when squeezed
Comments
-
Manc33 wrote:It does when you have a 52t outer and a 24t inner. Always under tension my ass. Anything smaller than the biggest three sprockets when on the granny 24t... and the rear mech is almost fully collapsed - not under tension. Yes the chain is the right length.
It obviously isn't the right length then - for the reasons you have just given. Try thinking harder - or maybe seek help from a medical professional.0 -
It is the right length. Its just having a big gear range causes this.
Probably why every bike under the sun sold as stock has either smaller chainrings with bigger sprockets (aka MTB) or bigger chainrings with smaller sprockets (Road). If you have both... you must avoid the smaller sprockets on the granny ring or the rear mech will collapse in fact the chain touches itself.
I thought you were all bike guru's? You know this stuff. :roll:0 -
I think the question on everyone's lips is why such a big range at the front chainwheels?
Old style mountain bikes used to have 48-38-28 with a 12-28 or 30 at the rear and this seemed to avoid any loss of tension yet provide a decent spread of gears.0 -
I think i am going to print this whole thread out, frame it and read it every day, it just keeps getting better!
Just so I have this right, you are saying your chain is so loose it touches itself (not in that way) i assume somewhere in the middle of the chainstay? And despite this you claim it is set up correctly? And us questioning this makes us wrong?
To top it off, this causes the links you had previously claimed could not be budged with any amount of force or trying to loosen and click?
Is that it?www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes0 -
Something manufactured for reasonably typical use cases isn't entirely up to the task of entirely unusual use cases. Well Jings, crivens, help ma boab. Of course, it hasn't actually failed, it's just been assumed to.
Outside of Mountain biking, I can't understand the need for that low a gear. 24 pushing 30 would be slower than walking. A cadence of 100 on a 700x25c wheel would equal under 6 Mph.0 -
Here's some useful info:
"KMC constructs Missing Link I, II, 9, and 10 for 7.3mm, 7.1mm, 6.6mm, and 5.9mm respectively; all Missing Links are compatible with Sram, Shimano, and Campy equivalent chains."
Make sure to get the right ones!
Chris De Burgh, the chain touches itself where the lower jockey wheel touches the smallest sprocket (doesn't even have to be the smallest sprocket) when on the 24t chainring, this is when the rear mech is all folded up and no tension is on the chain. How can it touch in the middle of the chainstay?! lol. :roll: How slack do you think my chain is! :P
What would solve this is going to a road rear mech and sacrificing my 11-32t for something like a 11-25t, but I'm not doing it. No point anyway, I just have to avoid small-small (or remotely near to it).
Of an 8-speed cassette only the biggest 3 sprockets are realistically usable on the granny ring without having the rear mech "folded" up.0 -
In that case the chain is way too long. On the two smallest rings the lower jockey wheel should never come up to be anywhere near parallel with the upper jockey wheel. And if you have such an overlong chain so that the big/big combination doesn't yank the derailleur almost off the bike consider the fact that you should never go past the halfway point on your rear cassette while on the big front ring anyway, so you can afford to lose a link or two.0
-
Manc33 wrote:How slack do you think my chain is!
Far too slack, I think we can all agree on that!www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes0 -
So, wait, these links sonically fuse together and can't be removed without using a welding torch, yet you are now afraid that they will spontaneously spring open when you use your 24-32 gear range (which I presume is required in order to make it over Manchester's mountain passes whilst maintaining a cadence of 120 whilst dragging a mobile home).
I suspect that you have inadvertently let us have a clue to your issue, however, by noting that there is in fact more than one type of quick link - for 7, 8, 9 or 10 speed chains.
This will not come as a surprise to those of us who have been cycling for long enough to realise that there is also more than one type of chain and more than one type of cassette and that these things tend to have to me matched in order to work together. That you regard it as sufficiently interesting to include in a post does rather suggest that there is a 75% chance that you have used the wrong one.
May I suggest that you avoid doing your own maintenance? There are all sorts of problems like this in the bike world. Different standards for headsets, bottom brackets, seatposts, bars. My god even wheels come in different sizes, you know.0 -
MisterMuncher wrote:Something manufactured for reasonably typical use cases isn't entirely up to the task of entirely unusual use cases. Well Jings, crivens, help ma boab. Of course, it hasn't actually failed, it's just been assumed to.
Outside of Mountain biking, I can't understand the need for that low a gear. 24 pushing 30 would be slower than walking. A cadence of 100 on a 700x25c wheel would equal under 6 Mph.
I bet you can't walk 6 Mph at 10% uphill......0 -
Smithster wrote:Manc33 wrote:2012 join date lol ^^^
What difference does it make when you joined? I only took up cycling in 2012, but find the use of a Powerlink a fairly basic procedure. It wasn't your broken chain I fixed with a Powerlink on the Wiggle Tour of the Peak last year was it?
2012 was the end of the worldwww.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes0 -
The statement "Powerlinks don't go together or come apart when squeezed" is true because squeezing them wouldn't help anyway, how the hell can your fingers squeeze metal?
The title isn't saying they can't be prized apart, it is saying when squeezed aka by hand. This is the BS the chain makers sell us on, "no tools needed" and so on when tools are needed (and even made and sold for these links).
A powerlink on a KMC chain won't slide on and off - but thats mixing different brands - keeping the brands together (and of course the speeds together) it (a KMC link) slides on and off.
A powerlink also doesn't just slide on and off an SRAM chain it is made for, either.
So the KMC ones are better, because they don't need tools.0 -
It's like poetry done by Les Dawson; you're writing all the right words but not necessarily in the right order.
Nice troll though, and it must be a troll because no one would admit in public to being so dense.0 -
I have enjoyed reading the thread over the past few days, but I think it jinxed me as when I was out today my KMC connecting link broke
. Only one side broke, so I managed to cycle slowly for the next 15 miles in a low gear, but the chain finally snapped 5 miles from home and I was stuck without a spare, and my wife had to pick me up.
I am going to try and fix the chain by getting some new KMC connecting links, but may just get a new chain as well. Do all KMC chains have a quick release connecting link?0 -
I can't believe this thread is still happening. In fact I feel a little guilty for adding to it, I've used power/quick links for years with no problems whatsoever and have never needed anything other than m fingers to open or close them. This on 8, 9 and 10 speed chains. I don't see what the problem is :roll:0
-
I think we should all take a step back, as there must be a mental health issue here...0
-
This thread makes the average daily mail reader look like EinsteinAnd the people bowed and prayed, to the neon god they made.0
-
I read somewhere Einstein was like a "maths front man" that couldn't even do maths. Speculation, but would be funny if true. Same with Darwin, same with Shakespeare. What about that Walter Raleigh bloke, he brought back tobacco that has killed hundreds of millions of people and potatoes that are almost nutritionless! He's a nice chap. :roll: Unless he invented bikes or something then he shouldn't even be famous at all.0
-
Maybe I shouldn't have added to the thread either, but I just thought I'd share my experience today, and ask a question about KMC chains.ravey1981 wrote:I can't believe this thread is still happening. In fact I feel a little guilty for adding to it, I've used power/quick links for years with no problems whatsoever and have never needed anything other than m fingers to open or close them. This on 8, 9 and 10 speed chains. I don't see what the problem is :roll:0 -
Imposter wrote:I think we should all take a step back, as there must be a mental health issue here...
Or a heavy drinker, the weird stuff always happens late in the evening.www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes0 -
ForumNewbie wrote:
Maybe I shouldn't have added to the thread either, but I just thought I'd share my experience today, and ask a question about KMC chains.ravey1981 wrote:I can't believe this thread is still happening. In fact I feel a little guilty for adding to it, I've used power/quick links for years with no problems whatsoever and have never needed anything other than m fingers to open or close them. This on 8, 9 and 10 speed chains. I don't see what the problem is :roll:
In general yes KMC chains are supplied with a missing link. See here http://www.kmcchain.eu/products-connect ... sing_links For the future it is a good Idea to carry a spare missing link in your saddle bag along with a chain tool to enable you to effect a roadside repair.0 -
Its surprising the difference taking one link (1 inch) out makes.
I found my chainstay length is 5mm more than the smallest acceptable chainstay for 54 links, but 8mm less than the smallest acceptable chainstay for 55 links, so I reduced it to 54. It still just about goes into big-big, I can bend the mech swingarm slightly as well when in that gear, but of course pedaling it would damage it, the point is my chain always was too long if I can shift into that gear with a link removed.
With 55 links, big-big was +3 half links (supposed to be +2) so now taking out a full link its big-big +1 half link and who knows, maybe it will improve chain tension a bit. I had it changing from outer to granny on odd shifts, but its because I didn't have the shifter dictating where the front mech stops (although I still made it do it after doing that so I'll have to see).
With a 14t difference on the middle and outer its running on a wing and a prayer lol, but works, just gotta pedal lightly/slowly when changing off the outer. :roll:0 -
The way I set up my chain is,
Put it in small - small
Put the new chain round as it would be in use (ie around the cassette and mechs)
Pull it so there is a little tension on the chain and rear mech bends slightly
Break the chain where the ends cross (making sure you remove the side with the two outer plates are)
Install quick link
Job done
Probably not the best method but works for me.
Feel free to completely ignore this and carry on with whatever the hell it is you do.www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes0 -
Thanks DJ58, yes I intend to in future.DJ58 wrote:ForumNewbie wrote:
Maybe I shouldn't have added to the thread either, but I just thought I'd share my experience today, and ask a question about KMC chains.ravey1981 wrote:I can't believe this thread is still happening. In fact I feel a little guilty for adding to it, I've used power/quick links for years with no problems whatsoever and have never needed anything other than m fingers to open or close them. This on 8, 9 and 10 speed chains. I don't see what the problem is :roll:
In general yes KMC chains are supplied with a missing link. See here http://www.kmcchain.eu/products-connect ... sing_links For the future it is a good Idea to carry a spare missing link in your saddle bag along with a chain tool to enable you to effect a roadside repair.0 -
Manc33 wrote:Its surprising the difference taking one link (1 inch) out makes.
I found my chainstay length is 5mm more than the smallest acceptable chainstay for 54 links, but 8mm less than the smallest acceptable chainstay for 55 links, so I reduced it to 54. It still just about goes into big-big, I can bend the mech swingarm slightly as well when in that gear, but of course pedaling it would damage it, the point is my chain always was too long if I can shift into that gear with a link removed.
With 55 links, big-big was +3 half links (supposed to be +2) so now taking out a full link its big-big +1 half link and who knows, maybe it will improve chain tension a bit. I had it changing from outer to granny on odd shifts, but its because I didn't have the shifter dictating where the front mech stops (although I still made it do it after doing that so I'll have to see).
With a 14t difference on the middle and outer its running on a wing and a prayer lol, but works, just gotta pedal lightly/slowly when changing off the outer. :roll:
The problem as i see it is that a lot of people use online chain length calculators to calculate their chain length. The problem with that is that they are designed to give you a chain length that covers every conceivable gear (big/big, small/small) when anyone who knows anything about derailleur based systems knows that they aren't designed to get every conceivable gear. Your meant to keep the chain straight, which means big chainring only uses the first half of the cassette, middle chainring uses two thirds of the cassette (minus the the two largest and sometimes the smallest) and the granny ring only uses the larger end of the cassette and should never get near the smallest ring.
Therefore, any chain length calculator that gives you all gears on a triple system invariably gives you a long, floppy chain that bashes against your chainstay every time you go over bumps. Over the last few years i've shortened chains on all my triple systems to be just right for the gears i know i use (no big/big, no small,small) which leads to a much tighter chain with snappier shifting and no rattling and banging against the chainstays.
Needless to say, most double and single ring users don't tend to suffer from this as much as triple systems as their chains tend to be shorter anyways, with less gearing range. But with triples and big range cassettes it best to go by feel than follow online chain length calculators.0 -
Manc33 wrote:I read somewhere Einstein was like a "maths front man" that couldn't even do maths. Speculation, but would be funny if true. Same with Darwin, same with Shakespeare. What about that Walter Raleigh bloke, he brought back tobacco that has killed hundreds of millions of people and potatoes that are almost nutritionless! He's a nice chap. :roll: Unless he invented bikes or something then he shouldn't even be famous at all.
Sadly, this just about sums you up.
Why speculate, when it would take a normal person around 10 seconds on google to establish Einstein's academic qualifications.0 -
Einstein was reputedly dyslexic which, despite the common belief is about not being able to read and write properly, actually covers a multitude of symptoms. One of which is an inability to do simple sums but a innate grasp of higher mathematics (dyslexia often manifests as an ability to grasp complex ideas other people struggle with but an inability to grasp simple ones).0
