Powerlinks don't go together or come apart when squeezed

ForumNewbie · March 2015

DJ58 wrote:

ForumNewbie wrote:

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:

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.

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.

Help please. I bought KMC 10 speed missing links today to reconnect my chain. However I am struggling to get it properly on the chain. I got both sides pins on okay and tried pulling the chain on either side to lock it on - it is part of the way along the hole but won't move any further. The problem seems to be that at one side the link is really stiff on the pin. They are stuck half way along the hole, so I can't even move them back along to get them off and try and start again.

Any tips or advice on what I can do now to get the link on properly would be appreciated.

Manc33 · March 2015

The KMC ones don't have that little thin bit of metal around the inside of the smaller hole like SRAM ones do. I found I couldn't push the SRAM together (even just the link on its own) but I could with the KMC one. See if it goes together just the link on its own.

Or you could "just squeeze" it and it will go together guaranteed (sarcasm). :roll:

I am taking out my missing link today and replacing it with real chain, I ain't riding around (especially miles away) with that thing rattling around on my chain. Sorry guys there won't be any future pics of it all scratched up. I just don't trust it enough. I know, its fine for everyone else, tell me about it.

I can easily do without it.

ForumNewbie · March 2015

ForumNewbie wrote:

DJ58 wrote:

ForumNewbie wrote:

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:

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.

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.

Help please. I bought KMC 10 speed missing links today to reconnect my chain. However I am struggling to get it properly on the chain. I got both sides pins on okay and tried pulling the chain on either side to lock it on - it is part of the way along the hole but won't move any further. The problem seems to be that at one side the link is really stiff on the pin. They are stuck half way along the hole, so I can't even move them back along to get them off and try and start again.

Any tips or advice on what I can do now to get the link on properly would be appreciated.

My problem now solved. I found a video online that suggested I put chain on big ring (on a workstand) hold the backwheel and press the pedal forward. That worked a treat and the link is now on properly.

chris_bass · March 2015

Manc33 wrote:

The KMC ones don't have that little thin bit of metal around the inside of the smaller hole like SRAM ones do. I found I couldn't push the SRAM together (even just the link on its own) but I could with the KMC one. See if it goes together just the link on its own.

Or you could "just squeeze" it and it will go together guaranteed (sarcasm). :roll:

I am taking out my missing link today and replacing it with real chain, I ain't riding around (especially miles away) with that thing rattling around on my chain. Sorry guys there won't be any future pics of it all scratched up. I just don't trust it enough. I know, its fine for everyone else, tell me about it. I can easily do without it.

So, this thread began with you claiming that these links will never ever come apart and are effectively the same as a normal link. Now, you claim they are so loose they could fall off at any moment and so you are replacing it with a normal link.

Can you not concede you may have done something wrong somewhere along the way?

Manc33 · March 2015

Chris Bass wrote:

So, this thread began with you claiming that these links will never ever come apart and are effectively the same as a normal link.

SRAM ones yes because they need those pliers to get back apart.

KMC ones no because they are loose to start with but I only had a SRAM one when I said that.

Chris Bass wrote:

Now, you claim they are so loose they could fall off at any moment and so you are replacing it with a normal link.

The KMC one is loose.

Chris Bass wrote:

Can you not concede you may have done something wrong somewhere along the way?

There's nothing to concede really, one brand (SRAM) can't be put on and off without tools, making it pointless (might as well use a normal chain breaker and not have the quick link) and the other brand (KMC) is such a loose fit it gets affected when the chain is under less tension and again, might as well just use a normal link and a normal chain breaker.

Having that link back off the chain gives me more peace of mind.

I laughed at that old thread where some guy in some LBS told a customer (the OP) that link is only meant to be used as a temporary thing... everyone in the thread said he doesn't know what he is talking about lol. He was right, these things are a bit of a gimmick and there's no real reason to have one in your chain.

DKay · March 2015

Manc33 wrote:

I laughed at that old thread where some guy in some LBS told a customer (the OP) that link is only meant to be used as a temporary thing... everyone in the thread said he doesn't know what he is talking about lol. He was right, these things are a bit of a gimmick and there's no real reason to have one in your chain.

I laugh at the fact that according to you and the 'LBS guy', thousands and thousands of satisfied quick-link users are all suckers. If they were meant to be temporary, then why do KMC supply a quick link with all of their chains? Think about how many quick links have been sold and currently fitted to how many bikes in the world, without issue. Many thousands, if not millions.

By definition, your experience is not normal.

dabber · March 2015

You must be writing all this b*ll*cks with your tongue firmly in your cheek. Wonderful work on your part keeping this thread alive with absolute nonsense.... very entertaining.

Keep up the great work.

Smithster · March 2015

Manc33 wrote:

Chris Bass wrote:

So, this thread began with you claiming that these links will never ever come apart and are effectively the same as a normal link.

SRAM ones yes because they need those pliers to get back apart.

KMC ones no because they are loose to start with but I only had a SRAM one when I said that.

Chris Bass wrote:

Now, you claim they are so loose they could fall off at any moment and so you are replacing it with a normal link.

The KMC one is loose.

Chris Bass wrote:

Can you not concede you may have done something wrong somewhere along the way?

There's nothing to concede really, one brand (SRAM) can't be put on and off without tools, making it pointless (might as well use a normal chain breaker and not have the quick link) and the other brand (KMC) is such a loose fit it gets affected when the chain is under less tension and again, might as well just use a normal link and a normal chain breaker.

Having that link back off the chain gives me more peace of mind.

I laughed at that old thread where some guy in some LBS told a customer (the OP) that link is only meant to be used as a temporary thing... everyone in the thread said he doesn't know what he is talking about lol. He was right, these things are a bit of a gimmick and there's no real reason to have one in your chain.

No he wasn't right, and he was talking total bollox. I have never heard so much shite in my life. My LBS fits them as standard, and most of mates use them as well, just because it's easier to take off and clean chains. In fact we all rode 92 miles today round the Peak, and I don't remember anyone's chains falling off or rattling. What's next, fitting solid rubber tyres for piece of mind?

veronese68 · March 2015

So, split links were rubbish because they wouldn't come apart. They were some sort of conspiracy from some chain manufacturers or something. That was it as far as you were concerned, you were right we were all mad, brainwashed or both. Then for some reason you decided to revisit them and you found one you could join and take apart again. Then because you have some sort of frankenbike and you try to ride ridiculous gear combinations whilst cross chaining with a chain that's too long you hear a noise, instantly diagnose the split link is coming apart. How you could know this I have no idea, I suspect drugs or large amounts of BS are involved. So now that you have found a split link that works as intended by the manufacturer and with it NOT having failed in any way shape or form you are taking it off because of your insane paranoia.
So there we have i people split links are rubbish because you can't take them off, and they are also rubbish becasue you can.
Jesus wept.

robbo2011 · March 2015

Dabber has it right above, Manc33 is on a wind up. it really is a true masterclass in the art of trolling. Fantastic stuff.

ai_1 · March 2015

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.

More conspiracy theories?
Einstein wasn't great at maths in school. That's not necessarily inconsistent with being a physics genius. I'm not sure why you're bringing it up.
Potatoes are almost nutritionless? Since when? I'd like some documented evidence of this.
Please confirm that I'm wrong in believing that potatoes are in fact a very good source of vitamin B6 and a good source of potassium, copper, vitamin C, manganese, phosphorus, niacin, dietary fiber, and pantothenic acid. They also contain a variety of phytonutrients that have antioxidant activity. Among these are carotenoids, flavonoids, and caffeic acid, as well as unique proteins, such as patatin, which exhibit activity against free radicals.

Walter Raleigh brought back potatoes, not crisps or chips.
Potatoes could be sold as a health food whereas crisps have little to recommend them nutritionally.

chris_bass · March 2015

Veronese68 wrote:

So, split links were rubbish because they wouldn't come apart. They were some sort of conspiracy from some chain manufacturers or something. That was it as far as you were concerned, you were right we were all mad, brainwashed or both. Then for some reason you decided to revisit them and you found one you could join and take apart again. Then because you have some sort of frankenbike and you try to ride ridiculous gear combinations whilst cross chaining with a chain that's too long you hear a noise, instantly diagnose the split link is coming apart. How you could know this I have no idea, I suspect drugs or large amounts of BS are involved. So now that you have found a split link that works as intended by the manufacturer and with it NOT having failed in any way shape or form you are taking it off because of your insane paranoia.
So there we have i people split links are rubbish because you can't take them off, and they are also rubbish becasue you can.
Jesus wept.

Never before has a 12 page thread been summed up so well!

veronese68 · March 2015

Chris Bass wrote:

Never before has a 12 page thread been summed up so well!

Thank you, I'm sure it will go further and nothing will be added but a bit of comedy. Mind you nothing had been added to the depth of knowledge in the first 12 pages either.
I hadn't realised how poor my spelling got as I was getting ranty at the end of that.

chris_bass · March 2015

Veronese68 wrote:

Chris Bass wrote:

Never before has a 12 page thread been summed up so well!

Thank you, I'm sure it will go further and nothing will be added but a bit of comedy. Mind you nothing had been added to the depth of knowledge in the first 12 pages either.
I hadn't realised how poor my spelling got as I was getting ranty at the end of that.

As part of my job I get to read a lot of customer satisfaction surveys and I always skip to the ones that have spelling mistakes and switch randomly between upper and lower case and italics and things. It is the best indicator of someone who is very frustrated so you are not alone!

Manc33 · March 2015

To say they are rubbish because they can and can't be taken off easily is right though. No point having a link like that in a chain. My argument is it might go wrong. Anything on a bike might go wrong but this is preventable - by just having a normal link there.

Only 8 pages to go now...

veronese68 · March 2015

How many chains have failed where joined with a normal pin? That might fail. Are you using a new joining pin every time?

bompington · March 2015

Exactly! That's why I've now taken the radical step of doing without the chain entirely.

There are many advantages. Time (and money of course) taken on lube & maintenance has dropped practically to zero. There is no risk at all of links coming undone, nor is there any danger of them welding themselves shut. The overall weight of my bike has been dramatically reduced, since, after a couple of months of running the chainless setup, I had the sudden flash of inspiration that I could also remove all the rest of the running gear!

There are a couple of downsides too, it's true - I go through shoes a lot faster pushing my way along, and I somehow don't seem to be holding my place on the Strava leaderboards very well.

But I figure that maybe going fast is just something that THEY* want you to do, so why should I play along?

*THEY being the ziono-americo-reptilio-fascist military-banking-industrial complex, of course

cougie · March 2015

There was a bloke 'scooting' round the Etape Cymru last year - on a big wheel scooter thing. He made it round all 90 miles and he wasn't anywhere near as slow as I'd have thought. You could be onto something Bompington.

chris_bass · March 2015

bompington wrote:

Exactly! That's why I've now taken the radical step of doing without the chain entirely.

There are many advantages. Time (and money of course) taken on lube & maintenance has dropped practically to zero. There is no risk at all of links coming undone, nor is there any danger of them welding themselves shut. The overall weight of my bike has been dramatically reduced, since, after a couple of months of running the chainless setup, I had the sudden flash of inspiration that I could also remove all the rest of the running gear!

There are a couple of downsides too, it's true - I go through shoes a lot faster pushing my way along, and I somehow don't seem to be holding my place on the Strava leaderboards very well.

But I figure that maybe going fast is just something that THEY* want you to do, so why should I play along?

*THEY being the ziono-americo-reptilio-fascist military-banking-industrial complex, of course

People - don't listen to this nonsense, he is clearly in cahoots with a large shoe conglomerate and is try to increase their sales.

I, on the other hand, have the solution - I run bare footed carrying the bike above my head. I have not had to do any maintenance and my times have not been significantly reduced (i should point out i was previously running a 20t chainring and a 42t largest gear on the cassette)

keezx · March 2015

Manc33 wrote:

To say they are rubbish because they can and can't be taken off easily is right though. No point having a link like that in a chain. My argument is it might go wrong. Anything on a bike might go wrong but this is preventable - by just having a normal link there.

Only 8 pages to go now...

So you're afraid of Murpy's.......
Any chain has a abnormal link, because3 the end user has to close it.
I has yet to be proven which abnormal link is better/more reliable.
I have far more confidence in a powerlink closed by myself, then a pushed pin by you....

darkhairedlord · March 2015

I am surprised Manc33 actually gets a chance to ride the blooming bike, what with the daily rebuilds, modifications and fitting the wrong parts. Jesus, no wonder he can't get up that hill, he only rides it once a month and then after watching you tube videos all night and day. How does he have time to work too?

Smithster · March 2015

Just do away with the bike completely. Totally maintenance free!

DKay · March 2015

Smithster wrote:

Just do away with the bike completely. Totally maintenance free!

UCI illegal. Defo under the 15.8lb limit.

Manc33 · March 2015

Its called a missing link because you've got to be one to use one. :P

imposter2.0 · March 2015

Manc33 wrote:

Its called a missing link because you've got to be one to use one. :P

You tried to use one and failed.

ddraver · March 2015

Imposter wrote:

Manc33 wrote:

Its called a missing link because you've got to be one to use one. :P

You tried to use one and failed.

ai_1 · March 2015

Manc33 wrote:

Its called a missing link because you've got to be one to use one. :P

Be one what?
I thought only creationists believed in this supposed "missing link" nonsense. Are you a creationist as well as a conspiracy theorist? What an odd combination!....or is it?

Manc33 · March 2015

The missing link has already been discovered, some years back - by a German bike chain manufacturer. :twisted:

veronese68 · March 2015

I'd heard the missing link was from Manchester and rides a frankenbike. ;-)

Manc33 · March 2015

Veronese68 wrote:

I'd heard the missing link was from Manchester and rides a frankenbike. ;-)

Hey its nearly setup right now. :P

My chain was shifting from outer to granny, someone online said the only time that happens (assuming the cable is setup right) is if the outer indexing screw is a bit too far in, it makes the front mech spring to the left too fast, so I sorted the front mech by pulling the shifter and holding it THEN just screwing the outer limit screw to just touch it, then letting go of the lever.

Setting it up that way the chain was going off the outer, I noticed on the shifter after clicking it to the outer position, there's a tiny bit more play and the FD can be moved about 2mm to the right, so I just screwed in the outer limit screw so it touched the mech in that position and that was it, no strain on the front mech because the screw is too far in and no shifting right off the outer because the screw is in enough.

Again my sig springs to mind, after all this is just a front derailleur setup.

Setting up a triple is a nightmare, the best way I have found up to now is just have it so it only just changes from middle to granny and needs the complete shove of the upshift from granny to middle to change it. Then you have it changing both ways. The outer takes care of itself (making sure that pesky outer screw is neither in too far or out too far). Rear mechs are so much easier to setup I don't even know where to start lol.

Powerlinks don't go together or come apart when squeezed

Comments

Categories