How long do your components last?

elbowloh

I honestly don't know...

How the feck do you all keep track of this info?

greenamex2

elbowloh wrote:

I honestly don't know...

How the feck do you all keep track of this info?

Strava and a Garmin GPS

And too much time on my hands at work!

rhodrich

greenamex2 wrote:

Ultegra 11 speed chain - About 1000 miles when it hits "0.75" on my chain checker
FSA BB86 bottom bracket - 700 miles
Shimano Ultegra bottom bracket - 4000 miles
Rear derailleur pulleys - 4000 miles
FSA crankset - 1500 miles (and then almost impossible to get big ring)
Tyres - 1000-1300 miles on Cyclocross/gravel tyres. Currently back to Schwalbe Mondial's...hate them...indestructible but uncomfortable and can't cope with slimey mud
FSA headset - 4000 miles

700 miles out of a bottom bracket? I'd have to be changing mine once a month if I got that out of it!
1500 miles out of a crankset seems seriously short too.

greenamex2

Rhodrich wrote:

greenamex2 wrote:

Ultegra 11 speed chain - About 1000 miles when it hits "0.75" on my chain checker
FSA BB86 bottom bracket - 700 miles
Shimano Ultegra bottom bracket - 4000 miles
Rear derailleur pulleys - 4000 miles
FSA crankset - 1500 miles (and then almost impossible to get big ring)
Tyres - 1000-1300 miles on Cyclocross/gravel tyres. Currently back to Schwalbe Mondial's...hate them...indestructible but uncomfortable and can't cope with slimey mud
FSA headset - 4000 miles

700 miles out of a bottom bracket? I'd have to be changing mine once a month if I got that out of it!
1500 miles out of a crankset seems seriously short too.

BB - The FSA one wasn't sealed adequately for all the mud I ride in. The Shimano ones seem a lot better.
Crankset - The teeth on the crank were fine, just wouldn't shift onto the big ring no matter how the derailleur was adjusted. Due at least in part to the "assistance pin things rounding off". The shimano Ultegra one showed no such issues either straight after the show or thousands of miles later. Might have been a one off, couldn't be bothered to faff around any more.

rick_chasey

Curious to see the relationship between rider weight and component lifetime.

greenamex2

Rick Chasey wrote:

Curious to see the relationship between rider weight and component lifetime.

I weigh 65Kg ish, with a 10Kg ish bike and accessories.

But cycle in mud. Lots of mud. Usually just me and the mountain bike commuters this time of year.

Moonbiker

assette 1,550 early death
cassette 2,237
cassette 2,435
cassette 2,514
cassette 2,732
cassette 2,776
cassette 2,953
chain 1,271 1st time swapping out after only 5% wear
chain 1,550 early death
chain 1,736
chain 2,237
chain 2,435
chain 2,476
chain 2,732
chain 2,776
chain 2,953

Shouldn't casssetes last longer than chains?

Pretty sure my ones last about twice as long & I replace chains when they get to .75 on the chain checker gauge not reccorded the milage though.

If I wait till chain is 100% worn on gauge always new one slips on the cassete so need a new cassette also.

Think i remeber that someone posted they have some kind of system were they use 3 chains that they rotate useage of to prolong cassete life.

EDIT here:

https://forum.cyclinguk.org/viewtopic.php?t=80105

rower63

Moonbiker wrote:

Shouldn't casssetes last longer than chains?

Yes, that's why I've just lately adopted a new regime, of replacing the chain as soon as my measure tool shows 0.5% elongation (which equates to around 0.4% by my actual measurement). I did consider the rotating-chain route, but chose this instead for now. I might test that later.

I've only just started this regime, so we'll see how it goes. I'm currently on my 2nd chain on each of two bikes, one has adopted the new chain without any complaint at all, the other has one problem sprocket: it skips on the 16-tooth when a sufficiently high load is put on it, such as starting off from stationary in slightly too high a gear. I allowed the chain a little further after the 0.5% mark before swapping that one out, so annoyingly I may have to get a new 16t for it.

tgotb

rower63 wrote:

I've only just started this regime, so we'll see how it goes. I'm currently on my 2nd chain on each of two bikes, one has adopted the new chain without any complaint at all, the other has one problem sprocket: it skips on the 16-tooth when a sufficiently high load is put on it, such as starting off from stationary in slightly too high a gear. I allowed the chain a little further after the 0.5% mark before swapping that one out, so annoyingly I may have to get a new 16t for it.

Is it possible that you do a disproportionate amount of riding in the 16T? Maybe the 2:1 thing only works well if you spread the wear over several sprockets?

What you should really do is switch to Di2 with a computer that records which gear you're in. Then you can record the wear on individual sprockets...

rower63

TGOTB wrote:

Is it possible that you do a disproportionate amount of riding in the 16T?

yes I think that's likely ... we'll see

veronese68

TGOTB wrote:

What you should really do is switch to Di2 with a computer that records which gear you're in. Then you can record the wear on individual sprockets...

Don’t encourage him

rower63

Veronese68 wrote:

TGOTB wrote:

What you should really do is switch to Di2 with a computer that records which gear you're in. Then you can record the wear on individual sprockets...

Don’t encourage him

luckily I'm a Campagnolophile, not even that feature tempts me to betray

ugo.santalucia

I never quite understood the point of measuring chain elongation. Firstly, what you are actually trying to measure is a pretty small quantity and even measuring it with the appropriate tool, leads to disproportionate errors. Secondly, the myth that an elongated chain will wear out other components quicker and lead to other catastrophic consequences is just that, a myth... if you replace your chain every two months to avoid replacing your chainring... well, you are probably financially better off replacing your chain less often and replacing the chainring when you need to, unless of course you run chainrings made of gold (read Dura Ace) and cheap chains.

Some numbers:

My non commuting bike does about 4500 miles per year, I typically go through 2 chains and one cassette. The big chainring tends to last a couple of years, whereas the small chainring tends to outlast the groupset itself.

That said, I have owned some pretty shoot chains over the years... the 6-8 speed HG50 chains did only last about 100 miles before I could see so much light between chain and chainring that was almost impossible to ride safely... but at 6 quid a pop, you can't expect anything decent.

bondurant

Why is it a myth? I can't say I would agree, but willing to be won over if there is a believable explanation.

ugo.santalucia

Bondurant wrote:

Why is it a myth? I can't say I would agree, but willing to be won over if there is a believable explanation.

Because I never measured chain stretch and yet my components' wear is normal. I am sure if I measured it, I would replace chains a lot more often.

itboffin

those mileage numbers do seem very low, i generally get 1.5 to 2 years from a chain and cassettes I think i've only binned a couple ever, not this or last year but previous years i've been riding 8-10k miles a year.

i'm not a light rider and i was riding in all seasons but religiously clean and check my bikes after every ride

greenamex2

itboffin wrote:

those mileage numbers do seem very low, i generally get 1.5 to 2 years from a chain and cassettes I think i've only binned a couple ever, not this or last year but previous years i've been riding 8-10k miles a year.

i'm not a light rider and i was riding in all seasons but religiously clean and check my bikes after every ride

What speed chain? Mine is 11.

itboffin

all 10 speed i only went 11 on one of my fleet this year and i've been mostly injured on and off for the last two so very little mileage thus far

tgotb

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Bondurant wrote:

Why is it a myth? I can't say I would agree, but willing to be won over if there is a believable explanation.

Because I never measured chain stretch and yet my components' wear is normal. I am sure if I measured it, I would replace chains a lot more often.

So your argument is that chain elongation causing wear to other components is a myth because you don't measure it, and you *think* that if you did measure it, it would encourage you to replace your chain more often than you do?

I think I prefer R63's data-driven approach...

ugo.santalucia

TGOTB wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Bondurant wrote:

Why is it a myth? I can't say I would agree, but willing to be won over if there is a believable explanation.

Because I never measured chain stretch and yet my components' wear is normal. I am sure if I measured it, I would replace chains a lot more often.

So your argument is that chain elongation causing wear to other components is a myth because you don't measure it, and you *think* that if you did measure it, it would encourage you to replace your chain more often than you do?

I think I prefer R63's data-driven approach...

Yes, basically.

The wear tool is designed to make you buy a new chain... I know people who use it and they have never measured a chain that was within the limits, other than a brand new one.
I therefore assume, being a very average cyclist in every respect, that I would be no different. Use the tool and you will replace the chain every 2 weeks...

I am sure IT Boffin above has some fairly stretched chains and yet seems to experience long life out of the other components.

On the other hand, do you have evidence of components worn prematurely because of a stretched chain?

timothyw

How do you know when to change the chain if you never check it?


Personally, I change the chain when the checker says because for a couple of reasons:

- My cleaning regime is pretty poor anyway, so if I am changing the chain early, at least it's running that bit smoother than otherwise
- I've popped chains a couple of times (although yes, very rare) - usually it's fairly quick and not outrageously expensive to buy a chain somewhere local to where it has gone - presumably if you are using a worn chain you'd also need to replace your cassette, which would be considerably more expensive and time consuming to fix.
- Even if cassettes aren't particularly expensive, they are more so than chains, and so I want to maximise their life. Some that I use are also becoming rare and harder/more expensive to find (eg 10 speed 5700 11-28)

I guess in the event of chain popping you could put in a quick link but this wouldn't work very well if the roller/some other part of the chain has been lost back down the road?

I think cleaning is the main one for me - properly cleaning a chain is hard and time consuming - although the truth is in practice chains last a long time (according to the checker), particularly in good weather.

ugo.santalucia

TimothyW wrote:

How do you know when to change the chain if you never check it?
.

I don't... I change it twice a year more or less... typically in march/April before the Audax season and then at the end of summer

cruff

ugo.santalucia wrote:

TGOTB wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Bondurant wrote:

Why is it a myth? I can't say I would agree, but willing to be won over if there is a believable explanation.

Because I never measured chain stretch and yet my components' wear is normal. I am sure if I measured it, I would replace chains a lot more often.

So your argument is that chain elongation causing wear to other components is a myth because you don't measure it, and you *think* that if you did measure it, it would encourage you to replace your chain more often than you do?

I think I prefer R63's data-driven approach...

Yes, basically.

The wear tool is designed to make you buy a new chain... I know people who use it and they have never measured a chain that was within the limits, other than a brand new one.
I therefore assume, being a very average cyclist in every respect, that I would be no different. Use the tool and you will replace the chain every 2 weeks...

I am sure IT Boffin above has some fairly stretched chains and yet seems to experience long life out of the other components.

On the other hand, do you have evidence of components worn prematurely because of a stretched chain?

Wait...

There's a chain wear tool that's sensitive enough to detect changes after two weeks? That's news to me. I've never seen one that suggested I change my chain after anything less than about 4 months (I do about 10,000 miles a year, and get about 2500 miles out of a chain)

I'm also an absolute chopper, whose base cadence is about 80, ride about 95% of my time in the big ring, halfway down the block, and regularly make some pretty agricultural shifts (cos, see chopper )

bondurant

I have anecdotal experience - not evidence - of a cassette that lasted one chain over winter a few years ago because at the time I was not aware that chains needed to be changed at a certain point. And, on the other hand, I also have experience of cassettes that last a long time with chains being swapped out more frequently after I measure (with a ruler, not a chain checker) when they get too stretched.

On balance I think I believe the myth as my experience matches that of other people, whereas you are the first I have come across who says the opposite. That's why I was interested to see if you had something other that your opinion to prove the point.

tgotb

ugo.santalucia wrote:

On the other hand, do you have evidence of components worn prematurely because of a stretched chain?

Yeah, I do.

I check my chains fairly regularly. On my commuting bike, I see a steady increase in elongation, which seems to be strongly correlated with mileage, but only weakly with weather. I don't have R63's stats to back this up, but it seems that, for me, chains last a bit longer in the Summer than the Winter, but not massively. I generally seem to get through about 2 chains a year (that's probably 6,000 miles), replacing them when they reach 0.75%. I just replace the cassette if the chain skips after replacing it, and they generally seem to last around 3-4 chains. Small chainrings last 2-3 years (again, I replace them when they skip with a new chain), I've never worn out a large one.
On a handful occasions I've forgotten to check the chain, or been too lazy to replace it, and it's exceeded 1%. Every single time I've done this, the replacement chain has skipped, and I've had to replace the cassette. On at least 2 occasions, this was a cassette that was only as old as the chain.
Chains are 10-speed KMC X93, cassettes are Shimano 105.

Slightly off-topic, on the CX bikes they go a full season without any significant elongation (which isn't very surprising - the actual mileage is pretty low) but by that stage they're looking fairly ropey - lots of sideways play, which impacts the shifting. Experience has taught me that if I don't replace them at this point they're in significant danger of breaking, so they get replaced as part of the post-season servicing session. At a wild guess, I'd estimate they do less than 500 miles each.

tgotb

Cruff wrote:

I'm also an absolute chopper, whose base cadence is about 80, ride about 95% of my time in the big ring, halfway down the block, and regularly make some pretty agricultural shifts (cos, see chopper )

I wonder whether your riding style causes more or less chain wear than mine (120rpm, only use the big ring on special occasions). Assumingly we go similar speeds, your chain will be under quite a lot more tension, but mine will do more revolutions.

R63 - please can you spend a year riding at 80rpm, then another year at 120rpm, and report back?

cruff

TGOTB wrote:

Cruff wrote:

I'm also an absolute chopper, whose base cadence is about 80, ride about 95% of my time in the big ring, halfway down the block, and regularly make some pretty agricultural shifts (cos, see chopper )

I wonder whether your riding style causes more or less chain wear than mine (120rpm, only use the big ring on special occasions). Assumingly we go similar speeds, your chain will be under quite a lot more tension, but mine will do more revolutions.

R63 - please can you spend a year riding at 80rpm, then another year at 120rpm, and report back?

I reckon it probably does, you know. Less souplesse = more stress

That might, however, be offset by the fact that my 17, 19 and 21t sprockets carry 95% of the load, so I reckon I shift less than you

cruff

Also, evidence that excessive use of a chain causes wear to a cassette is absolutely not anecdotal. Chain pitch is a thing - I have first hand evidence of this (and yes, I'm aware that 'first hand evidence' is anecdotal by its very nature, before any smart-arses pipe up). I used to run chains literally until they snapped. This invariably resulted in chain skip under load when I put a spanking new chain on the old cassette (most often when torquing it away from lights - and usually resulting in a rapid, painful and embarrassing meeting of top tube and bollocks). It took me three goes at this before I read up on it - now replace my chain well in advance of it snapping and get at least three cassettes worth of wear out of each chain

rick_chasey

Cruff wrote:

TGOTB wrote:

Cruff wrote:

I'm also an absolute chopper, whose base cadence is about 80, ride about 95% of my time in the big ring, halfway down the block, and regularly make some pretty agricultural shifts (cos, see chopper )

I wonder whether your riding style causes more or less chain wear than mine (120rpm, only use the big ring on special occasions). Assumingly we go similar speeds, your chain will be under quite a lot more tension, but mine will do more revolutions.

R63 - please can you spend a year riding at 80rpm, then another year at 120rpm, and report back?

I reckon it probably does, you know. Less souplesse = more stress

That might, however, be offset by the fact that my 17, 19 and 21t sprockets carry 95% of the load, so I reckon I shift less than you

You’d have to all ride at the same power however.

cruff

Rick Chasey wrote:

Cruff wrote:

TGOTB wrote:

Cruff wrote:

I'm also an absolute chopper, whose base cadence is about 80, ride about 95% of my time in the big ring, halfway down the block, and regularly make some pretty agricultural shifts (cos, see chopper )

I wonder whether your riding style causes more or less chain wear than mine (120rpm, only use the big ring on special occasions). Assumingly we go similar speeds, your chain will be under quite a lot more tension, but mine will do more revolutions.

R63 - please can you spend a year riding at 80rpm, then another year at 120rpm, and report back?

I reckon it probably does, you know. Less souplesse = more stress

That might, however, be offset by the fact that my 17, 19 and 21t sprockets carry 95% of the load, so I reckon I shift less than you

You’d have to all ride at the same power however.

True. I reckon I'm probably putting out more power (cos fat...)