Results 1 to 41 of 41
  1. #1
    Ride it like you stole it
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    85

    Passion lost for SRAM

    Yesterday I bought a new SRAM chain. Considering I have a SRAM cassette, me being the wise guy I am I figured a SRAM chain would be the most compatiable chain to buy. Althought I had been using a Shimano XT without any problems. WRONG. The new SRAM chain I bought is not compatible with the 2004 or older SRAM cassette.

    This seems ludicrous to me, not to mention there tech. specs do not mention this. After repeated trys to get it to work, I went to the MTBR equipment reviews and found that I was not the only one having this problem. So now I am back to a Shimano chain, anyone need a new SRAM chain? See the post below from the equipment post.

    "Overall, it's been a great cassette. I've been beating the crap out of it for 6 months and haven't managed to bend, chip, or in any other way screw up any of the cogs (which is reasonably notable for me...). It's a bit heavy, but I'm over that. Now, here's the interesting part. The 2004 version of this, despite what is advertised, is only compatible with Shimano chains. I had to replace the OEM chain, so I put on a Sram chain (it's a Sram cassette, so it'd seem logical, right?) only to have all sorts of shifting problems and ridiculous amounts of noise. I did some investigating and finally found Sram's dealer technical publications, which listed chain compatibility as being only Shimano for this cassette (it used to be on Sram's website, but the link now leads to the 2005 technical publications). So, I put a Shimano HG-93 chain on it, and it's been great ever since. According to the 2005 technical publications, the compatibility is now Sram, but if you find a 2004 version, beware of that.

    Overall, I am pretty satisfied with this cassette, but I am going to knock a point off for the compatibility thing and the weight. If you need a cassette on the cheap, however, consider this.

  2. #2
    "Ride Lots" - Eddie Mercx
    Reputation: Yeti_Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,316

    while that may be true

    how is it that you've gotten a 2004 cassette to last two years? they usually last about a year give or take and you should usually change a cassette and a chain at the same time anyway.

    I can understand you being upset but it's not really the end of the world that two wear items are incompatible and will both have to replaced soon anyway........

    YR

  3. #3
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    24,050
    Quote Originally Posted by Yeti_Rider
    and you should usually change a cassette and a chain at the same time anyway.
    No, change your chain more frequently and the cassette will last longer.

    Not only that, but how many products sit on the shelf for a year, or are bought online and could be more than a year old. Chain wear is exactly what causes the cassette to wear out.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  4. #4
    Ride it like you stole it
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    85

    Follow up

    I normally change my chain every 3-6 months, I was in Europe for the last four years, the rain and mud played havoc on components there.

    Just a note, I changed out the cassette this morning as well, all is running smooth. I suppose the point of the post is that a normal reasonable person would expect components from the same company to be compatible

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    No, change your chain more frequently and the cassette will last longer.

    Not only that, but how many products sit on the shelf for a year, or are bought online and could be more than a year old. Chain wear is exactly what causes the cassette to wear out.

  5. #5
    Brazen Dropout
    Reputation: Cloud9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by drewwski123
    I suppose the point of the post is that a normal reasonable person would expect components from the same company to be compatible
    A normal reasonable person who knew anything at all about what is involved in making entire product lines of mechanical systems wouldn't think this at all. Can I take a piston from my 4cyl toyota engine and plunk it into my 6cyl engine? No. Can I take last years RAM plunk it into this years computer? They're both from the same MFG, why not? A normal, reasonable person would expect to check compatibility before they buy parts for something.

    MFG's could easily make all the parts they make compatible. It'd certainly be cheaper for them. But after a thousand generations of fully compatible mechanisms, your 1000th generation system would work only marginally better than your 1st. Compatibility is inversely proportional to innovation.

    And anyway, if you think Shimanos stuff is all inter-compat, you haven't even scratched the surface.

  6. #6
    LBS Manager
    Reputation: Johnny Hair Boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,911

    I agree

    Inovation will always lead to incopatability problems and I think Sram has done well in redeisgning every thing for this year to finaly be a complete group. It would have been nice if they listed on their web site what was compatable with what though.

  7. #7
    "Ride Lots" - Eddie Mercx
    Reputation: Yeti_Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,316

    so, then

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    Chain wear is exactly what causes the cassette to wear out.
    if you changed your chain once a week then your cassette would last indefinitely?

    cassettes wear out because there is metal to metal contact between the cassette and chain links. add some dirt, mud, grunge, and other not so lubricious materials and you've got chain and cassette wear happening simultaneously. Not one because of the other.

    granted, changing a chain more frequently will increase the interval between cassette changes but they're both wear items and need reasonably frequent replacement based on how often you ride and what the riding conditions are like. if you never hit mud then you're equipment would last substantially longer than somebody in B.C. who's flogging through puddles all day every day.

    YR

  8. #8
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    24,050
    Quote Originally Posted by Yeti_Rider
    if you changed your chain once a week then your cassette would last indefinitely?


    Are you really that dim or are you trying to be funny?

    Chains stretch with use. That stretched chain then forces the teeth on the cassette to conform, that is where the wear comes from. If you change the chain as you stated in the post above, it would still obviously wear out from contaminants and the metal wear that was still occuring, but chain stretch will kill a cassette much faster than those things, and it's the primary reason that chains wear out.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  9. #9
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,702

    Uh... No

    You failed to mention the specific problem you are having.

    If your cassette is worn, a new chain will skip like mad. I had the same issue. If you let the chain wear past it's limits, and continue to ride, it will kill your cassette. It will widen the space between the teeth.

    Of course it still works fine with no problems. That is, until you decide you need a new chain. The new chain will not have the same pitch as the worn cassette, so the chain will jump off the cogs when under torque.

    SRAM stuff is perfectly compatable with Shimano stuff. I've been running a mix of Shimano and SRAM for the last 6 years, and never had a compatability issue. As long as you get 9 speed stuff together, or 8/7 speed stuff together you won't have any compatability problems. They are all 1/2" pitch chains. The only difference is the chain width and spacing between the cogs. Shimano and SRAM use the same industry standards. The only exception is SRAMs X derailleurs use a 1:1 cable pull ratio, while Attack use the Shimano 2:1 pull ratio, so you have to use the correct shifters with derailleurs,... And Dura Ace Shimano road stuff uses their own cable pull ratio, so you have to use Dura Ace shifters with Dura Ace derailleurs.

    I dunno who you talked to at SRAM, but they should have mentioned the wear issue.

    BTW, does Drunk Cyclist himself, Big Jonny know you are counterfitting his bracelets? He may not take too kindly to that.
    Last edited by pimpbot; 12-31-2005 at 02:04 PM.

  10. #10
    Ride it like you stole it
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    85

    No comparison

    Cloud9 your comparing apples to oranges. We are talking about two systems that are virtually the same and I assumed most people have enterchanged these components quite often. If you read my entire initial post, you will see that a SRAM component(cassette) requires a Shimano component(chain) to work. I have built many bikes, and changed many cassettes(you will know when your cassette needs to be changed, regardless of age or chain usage), but I have never ran into a compatibility problem with a cassette and chain before. I hope that this post helps to inform others that might run into the same problem. I wasn't trying to start a discussion on the proper changing times for cassettes.

    Happy Trails. Drew

    Quote Originally Posted by Cloud9
    A normal reasonable person who knew anything at all about what is involved in making entire product lines of mechanical systems wouldn't think this at all. Can I take a piston from my 4cyl toyota engine and plunk it into my 6cyl engine? No. Can I take last years RAM plunk it into this years computer? They're both from the same MFG, why not? A normal, reasonable person would expect to check compatibility before they buy parts for something.

    MFG's could easily make all the parts they make compatible. It'd certainly be cheaper for them. But after a thousand generations of fully compatible mechanisms, your 1000th generation system would work only marginally better than your 1st. Compatibility is inversely proportional to innovation.

    And anyway, if you think Shimanos stuff is all inter-compat, you haven't even scratched the surface.

  11. #11
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,702

    Did SRAM tell you this?

    Quote Originally Posted by drewwski123
    Cloud9 your comparing apples to oranges. We are talking about two systems that are virtually the same and I assumed most people have enterchanged these components quite often. If you read my entire initial post, you will see that a SRAM component(cassette) requires a Shimano component(chain) to work. I have built many bikes, and changed many cassettes(you will know when your cassette needs to be changed, regardless of age or chain usage), but I have never ran into a compatibility problem with a cassette and chain before. I hope that this post helps to inform others that might run into the same problem. I wasn't trying to start a discussion on the proper changing times for cassettes.

    Happy Trails. Drew
    ... and again, what is your actual problem? Chain skipping? ghost shifting? no shifting? Please, for the love of God, tell us!

  12. #12
    Chrome Toaster
    Reputation: Hecubus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,850
    Quote Originally Posted by pimpbot
    The only exception is SRAMs X derailleurs use a 1:1 cable pull ratio, while Attack use the Shimano 2:1 pull ratio, so you have to use the correct shifters with derailleurs,... And Dura Ace Shimano road stuff uses their own cable pull ratio, so you have to use Dura Ace shifters with Dura Ace derailleurs.
    The correct pull ratios are actually 1.7:1 for Shimano and 1.1:1 for Sram (60% difference, not 100%). Dura Ace stopped using the non-standard 1.9:1 pull ratio in 1997. Every D/A group since then uses the current standard 1.7:1 pull ratio. The D/A derailleurs still have the provision to route the cable alternately to make them compatible with old 1.9:1 shifters.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,603
    Quote Originally Posted by pimpbot
    You failed to mention the specific problem you are having.

    If your cassette is worn, a new chain will skip like mad. I had the same issue. If you let the chain wear past it's limits, and continue to ride, it will kill your cassette. It will widen the space between the teeth.

    Of course it still works fine with no problems. That is, until you decide you need a new chain. The new chain will not have the same pitch as the worn cassette, so the chain will jump off the cogs when under torque.

    SRAM stuff is perfectly compatable with Shimano stuff. I've been running a mix of Shimano and SRAM for the last 6 years, and never had a compatability issue. As long as you get 9 speed stuff together, or 8/7 speed stuff together you won't have any compatability problems. They are all 1/2" pitch chains. The only difference is the chain width and spacing between the cogs. Shimano and SRAM use the same industry standards. The only exception is SRAMs X derailleurs use a 1:1 cable pull ratio, while Attack use the Shimano 2:1 pull ratio, so you have to use the correct shifters with derailleurs,... And Dura Ace Shimano road stuff uses their own cable pull ratio, so you have to use Dura Ace shifters with Dura Ace derailleurs.

    I dunno who you talked to at SRAM, but they should have mentioned the wear issue.

    BTW, does Drunk Cyclist himself, Big Jonny know you are counterfitting his bracelets? He may not take too kindly to that.
    pimp is spot on here...i had a ghost shift like mad...got a brand new chain and went through adjusting derrailer...could not get it to work, gear 5 just would not hold...took it to lbs, he put on a different cassette and bingo, can shift to all the cogs no problem....the old chain i took off had 2500 miles on it...the chain made a change to the cassette as already mentioned...should have changed the chain more frequently, then would not have had to get new cassette

    if you can afford it...replace both chain and cassette if you put a lot of miles on them
    "He can make even a global summit meeting seem like a kegger." M. Dowd, NY Times, 19 July 2006

  14. #14
    banned
    Reputation: jaco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    656
    Quote Originally Posted by adamantane
    pimp is spot on here...i had a ghost shift like mad...got a brand new chain and went through adjusting derrailer...could not get it to work, gear 5 just would not hold...took it to lbs, he put on a different cassette and bingo, can shift to all the cogs no problem....the old chain i took off had 2500 miles on it...the chain made a change to the cassette as already mentioned...should have changed the chain more frequently, then would not have had to get new cassette

    if you can afford it...replace both chain and cassette if you put a lot of miles on them
    A cassette's supposed to last 2 chain changes, that's it. Its efimerous like a butterfly....

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    162

    Mesure the chain!!

    Regardless of miles time or conditions of use. A new chain will measure 12 inches from one end of a link or a pin to one at 12 inches. Rule of thumb: if the chain measures 12 1/8 inch or less; you can just replace the chain. If the chain measeures 12 1/4 or more you must replace the chain and cassette.

  16. #16
    "Ride Lots" - Eddie Mercx
    Reputation: Yeti_Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,316

    gah

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    Are you really that dim or are you trying to be funny?

    Chains stretch with use. That stretched chain then forces the teeth on the cassette to conform, that is where the wear comes from. If you change the chain as you stated in the post above, it would still obviously wear out from contaminants and the metal wear that was still occuring, but chain stretch will kill a cassette much faster than those things, and it's the primary reason that chains wear out.
    not worth the effort to explain that chains don't technically stretch but wear and that other forces cause a cassette to wear beyond just chain wear. neither one is exclusive to causing a cassette to wear out. contaminants AND chain wear are culprits and it depends on the conditions.

    first, if you used a new chain every day but were constantly in your small big gear combo (tons o torque), you're large cog on the cassette is going to wear out beacuase A) there's METAL TO METAL contact and B) you're generating tons of torgue for extended periods of time which is going to wear the holy fock out of a cassette. where does chain "stretch" factor into this? it doesn't!

    second, if you used a new chain every day and rode in mud and other grunge you're going to essentially sand your cassette to nothing even thought the chain has still not "stretched" if this scenario doesn't cause wear, then add a cup of sand to your engine block and see how well your cylinders handle it...............

    So, forces other than chain wear cause a cassette to wear out.

    Next, factor in economics. Bear with me 'cuz I'm a bit dim now.........an XT cassette costs $75.00 (www.pricepoint.com). an XTR goes for twice that but let's assume most of us are cheap bastards and recognize that an XT and an XTR cassette both perform equally so we don't pony up the extra coin for the bling. If you're a SRAM guy, then a PG 990 costs $60 so you're getting a bargain.

    Now, look at chains. a Shimano XT chain will cost you $23 while an XTR will run $25. A SRAM PC 69 (kinda low end on the chain spectrum) will run $20 while a PC 990 will run $40.

    So, let's look at the SRAM scenario first. I can pay $60 for a cassette and cheap out at $20 for a chain. I can then accept the fact that I should replace my chain periodically to get more cassette life. the break even point then is to only replace ONE chain before I buy a new chain and a CASSETTE! it doesn't benefit me to limit wear on the cassette if it then costs me more in chains. if I run a PC 990 chain then I should never buy a new chain to prolong cassette life. it doesn't make sense economically.

    the Shimano scenario is essentially the same unless you're running XTR in which case it may be cheaper to buy a couple more chains before replacing the cassette but teh end result is still hte same..........buying new chains with more frequency to eliminate wear on the cassette still costs you more money in the long run AND YOUR CASSETTE STILL WEARS OUT.

    I need to go learn me up some though becuase I"m apparently too dim to believe your statements 100% becuase you read them in a magazine or heard them in a bike shop and those sources must always be right.

    Y "if I read it on the internet it must be true" R
    Last edited by Yeti_Rider; 12-31-2005 at 06:18 PM.

  17. #17
    Start slow and taper off
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    790
    Quote Originally Posted by Yeti_Rider
    not worth the effort to explain that chains don't technically stretch but wear and that other forces cause a cassette to wear beyond just chain wear. neither one is exclusive to causing a cassette to wear out. contaminants AND chain wear are culprits and it depends on the conditions.

    I need to go learn me up some though becuase I"m apparently too dim to believe your statements 100% becuase you read them in a magazine or heard them in a bike shop and those sources must always be right.

    Y "if I read it on the internet it must be true" R
    Chains do "stretch", though, as well as wear. Have you ever put a really used chain next to a brand new one? Match them up exactly, then see how the links on the used chain end up not matching up with the new chain. I've seen chains worn to the point where its almost like an extra link compared to the new chain. And yes, I've made sure to count the links. Its a combo of the metal getting a little "longer" over time, and the holes in the links stretching open a bit, but its always been refered to as chain stretch.

    Thats how chain wear tools work as well, by essentially measuring the length of a specific point of chain. If there is a lot of wear (ie stretch), they measure that (depending on the brand tool, either by having the pins match up with a hole, ie good through replace--and the pins match up because they chain is now longer than when new, or measuring the space inbetween the rollers)

    More often than not, though, chains and cassettes wear together. Replace a chain often enough, and you will prolong the life of the cassette. I've seen cassettes last way longer than you think on riders bikes who ride a lot, simply because they're fanatical about changing chains.
    My Artwork

    Hard words break no bones, fine words butter no parsnips.

  18. #18
    "Ride Lots" - Eddie Mercx
    Reputation: Yeti_Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,316

    they didn't "stretch"

    Quote Originally Posted by neveride
    Chains do "stretch", though, as well as wear. Have you ever put a really used chain next to a brand new one? Match them up exactly, then see how the links on the used chain end up not matching up with the new chain. I've seen chains worn to the point where its almost like an extra link compared to the new chain. And yes, I've made sure to count the links. Its a combo of the metal getting a little "longer" over time, and the holes in the links stretching open a bit, but its always been refered to as chain stretch.

    Thats how chain wear tools work as well, by essentially measuring the length of a specific point of chain. If there is a lot of wear (ie stretch), they measure that (depending on the brand tool, either by having the pins match up with a hole, ie good through replace--and the pins match up because they chain is now longer than when new, or measuring the space inbetween the rollers)

    More often than not, though, chains and cassettes wear together. Replace a chain often enough, and you will prolong the life of the cassette. I've seen cassettes last way longer than you think on riders bikes who ride a lot, simply because they're fanatical about changing chains.

    in the sense that the metel didn't just become longer. the pins that hold the links together wore down allowing clearance to develop. over the entire length of chain, this clearance creates a poor fit and the links will seem longer resulting in a chain that also seems longer. But, the chain didn't actually stretch (as in, you can stretch a rubber band) but the chain suffered from wear and that wear caused a poor fit between mating parts. since I'm dim, I don't know the technical jargon but I'd have to fathom a guess that the tolerance between pins decreased and over the length of a chain that decrease allows an out of specification situation.

    as I stated earlier. chains don't actually stretch. it's a misuse of the term.

    From the godfather of the bicycle, www.sheldonbrown.com

    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.


    and you don't need a tool to measure it, you just need a ruler.

    also from sheldon.....

    Measuring Chain Wear

    The standard way to measure chain wear is with a ruler or steel tape measure. This can be done without removing the chain from the bicycle. The normal technique is to measure a one-foot length, placing an inch mark of the ruler exactly in the middle of one rivet, then looking at the corresponding rivet 12 complete links away. On a new, unworn chain, this rivet will also line up exactly with an inch mark. With a worn chain, the rivet will be past the inch mark.

    YR

  19. #19
    Start slow and taper off
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    790
    Quote Originally Posted by Yeti_Rider
    in the sense that the metel didn't just become longer. the pins that hold the links together wore down allowing clearance to develop. over the entire length of chain, this clearance creates a poor fit and the links will seem longer resulting in a chain that also seems longer. But, the chain didn't actually stretch (as in, you can stretch a rubber band) but the chain suffered from wear and that wear caused a poor fit between mating parts. since I'm dim, I don't know the technical jargon but I'd have to fathom a guess that the tolerance between pins decreased and over the length of a chain that decrease allows an out of specification situation.

    as I stated earlier. chains don't actually stretch. it's a misuse of the term.

    From the godfather of the bicycle, www.sheldonbrown.com

    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.


    and you don't need a tool to measure it, you just need a ruler.

    also from sheldon.....

    Measuring Chain Wear

    The standard way to measure chain wear is with a ruler or steel tape measure. This can be done without removing the chain from the bicycle. The normal technique is to measure a one-foot length, placing an inch mark of the ruler exactly in the middle of one rivet, then looking at the corresponding rivet 12 complete links away. On a new, unworn chain, this rivet will also line up exactly with an inch mark. With a worn chain, the rivet will be past the inch mark.

    YR
    Yeah, I know all this, but even sheldon refers to it as "stretch", if only in quotes. The chain is longer, so it stretched, regardless as to whether the metal stretched or play developed. Just like cable don't stretch (housing compresses) but its still refered to as cable stretch. You're splitting hairs regarding commonly used terms, and with the chain, it comes down an interpretation of what stretch means. One definition according to websters is "to extend in length" which is what happens to the chain, meaning, its not really a misuse of the term, but a misinterpretation of what someone is referring to as stretch. But again, splitting hairs.

    Regardless, replacing a chain more often means a cassette will last longer.
    And when you work in a shop, as I used to, its a whole lot simply to line up a chain tool than mark a chain, at least if you work in a shop where the tools are in the right place.
    My Artwork

    Hard words break no bones, fine words butter no parsnips.

  20. #20
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    24,050
    Quote Originally Posted by Gilboy
    Regardless of miles time or conditions of use. A new chain will measure 12 inches from one end of a link or a pin to one at 12 inches. Rule of thumb: if the chain measures 12 1/8 inch or less; you can just replace the chain. If the chain measeures 12 1/4 or more you must replace the chain and cassette.
    From working on and changing out chains on said bikes, damage to the cassette occurs past 1/16th of stretch. Somewhere between 1/32 and 1/16th is where you should replace it. I inform customers that bring in bikes with chains stretched to 1/16th or more that they may have to buy the new cassette and front rings in addition to the chain. It's on a case-by-case basis, but I'd never let a chain go past 1/16th
    Last edited by Jayem; 12-31-2005 at 08:13 PM.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  21. #21
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    24,050
    Quote Originally Posted by Yeti_Rider
    not worth the effort to explain that chains don't technically stretch but wear and that other forces cause a cassette to wear beyond just chain wear. neither one is exclusive to causing a cassette to wear out. contaminants AND chain wear are culprits and it depends on the conditions.

    first, if you used a new chain every day but were constantly in your small big gear combo (tons o torque), you're large cog on the cassette is going to wear out beacuase A) there's METAL TO METAL contact and B) you're generating tons of torgue for extended periods of time which is going to wear the holy fock out of a cassette. where does chain "stretch" factor into this? it doesn't!
    Obviously, I never said that this was not possible, I only said that the chainstretch is the primary factor that casues them to wear, especially when you never change the chain. You're not saying anything here that I don't already know.

    second, if you used a new chain every day and rode in mud and other grunge you're going to essentially sand your cassette to nothing even thought the chain has still not "stretched" if this scenario doesn't cause wear, then add a cup of sand to your engine block and see how well your cylinders handle it...............
    Again, what do you want, a cookie? No kidding it will wear, the ENTIRE drivetrain will wear, front rings included. We're assuming that people clean their drivetrains and lubricate them.


    So, forces other than chain wear cause a cassette to wear out.
    No kidding.
    If you're a SRAM guy, then a PG 990 costs $60 so you're getting a bargain.
    Not really, when I've tried the PG990s I've only gotten about 3 months of use out of them. They don't hold up to what I've experienced on the whole from shimano cassettes. This is not due to mud sand or grit (because we don't have those here), it wasn't the chain stretching (because it was fresh and even changed during the period), it was due to the sram cassette having a softer alloy. The XT is the best bang for the buck that I've found will last, with the sram one I'm buying more cassettes and spending more $$$ in the end.

    So, let's look at the SRAM scenario first. I can pay $60 for a cassette and cheap out at $20 for a chain. I can then accept the fact that I should replace my chain periodically to get more cassette life.
    Not in my experience. To each his own here.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  22. #22
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    24,050
    Quote Originally Posted by Yeti_Rider

    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.
    And you can also often take the chain and feel the "slop" in it, and that the pivots/pins seem "loose", as compared to a new chain.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  23. #23
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    24,050
    Quote Originally Posted by neveride
    And when you work in a shop, as I used to, its a whole lot simply to line up a chain tool than mark a chain, at least if you work in a shop where the tools are in the right place.
    Well, in the shop, it takes me about 10 second to get to the other side of the repair stands, get the ruler off of the opposite wall, then center it on a pin and measure the distance to the 12" pin. You don't have to mark anything, just look at it as you do it. I could use the chain gauge as well, but that would take longer and it's no more accurate in my experience.

    There's also the cassette guage tool, but it's fairly easy to gauge when one of them is bad, and if you know what you are looking for in terms of wear, it's not hard to see either, but as you indicate, certian things come with experience spent working on bikes, and even so, people will do things in different ways that they are comfortable with.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  24. #24
    Ride it like you stole it
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    85

    Huh

    Counterfitting? Oh you mean the little sweat shop I'm running out of my garage. No, I buy them from the same place that the Drunk Cyclist does. This is America remember, it is not against the law to buy something and resale it for a profit, get your facts straight before you make accusations..Thanks

    Quote Originally Posted by pimpbot
    You failed to mention the specific problem you are having.

    If your cassette is worn, a new chain will skip like mad. I had the same issue. If you let the chain wear past it's limits, and continue to ride, it will kill your cassette. It will widen the space between the teeth.

    Of course it still works fine with no problems. That is, until you decide you need a new chain. The new chain will not have the same pitch as the worn cassette, so the chain will jump off the cogs when under torque.

    SRAM stuff is perfectly compatable with Shimano stuff. I've been running a mix of Shimano and SRAM for the last 6 years, and never had a compatability issue. As long as you get 9 speed stuff together, or 8/7 speed stuff together you won't have any compatability problems. They are all 1/2" pitch chains. The only difference is the chain width and spacing between the cogs. Shimano and SRAM use the same industry standards. The only exception is SRAMs X derailleurs use a 1:1 cable pull ratio, while Attack use the Shimano 2:1 pull ratio, so you have to use the correct shifters with derailleurs,... And Dura Ace Shimano road stuff uses their own cable pull ratio, so you have to use Dura Ace shifters with Dura Ace derailleurs.

    I dunno who you talked to at SRAM, but they should have mentioned the wear issue.

    BTW, does Drunk Cyclist himself, Big Jonny know you are counterfitting his bracelets? He may not take too kindly to that.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: big jonny's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    15

    Live Wrong

    Drew –

    You took my idea, you copied it, and you’re selling it.

    The point is not that, as you say, “This is America remember, it is not against the law to buy something and resale it for a profit…” The point is it wasn't your original idea.

    Whether you get them from the same factory or not is irrelevant. We were doing it first. You’re riding my coattails.

    This isn’t a fair use issue. We were first to market the idea.

    Try using your imagination and coming up with something for yourself.

    You’re lame.

  26. #26
    *****************
    Reputation: Bikinfoolferlife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    12,378
    Lame to complain when you're guilty of your own complaint jonny boy...
    "...the people get the government they deserve..."
    suum quique

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,603
    think i missed the by-line on this sopa opera, care to background us
    "He can make even a global summit meeting seem like a kegger." M. Dowd, NY Times, 19 July 2006

  28. #28
    Ride it like you stole it
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    85

    Ok

    You also forgot to mention that I sale them cheaper. I would also hope that you are in on the Trademark and you get a percentage of everyone that is sold?

    Quote Originally Posted by big jonny
    Drew –

    You took my idea, you copied it, and you’re selling it.

    The point is not that, as you say, “This is America remember, it is not against the law to buy something and resale it for a profit…” The point is it wasn't your original idea.

    Whether you get them from the same factory or not is irrelevant. We were doing it first. You’re riding my coattails.

    This isn’t a fair use issue. We were first to market the idea.

    Try using your imagination and coming up with something for yourself.

    You’re lame.

  29. #29
    Freshly Fujified
    Reputation: Call_me_Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    8,200

    Where is Judge Judy?

    Quote Originally Posted by drewwski123
    You also forgot to mention that I sale them cheaper. I would also hope that you are in on the Trademark and you get a percentage of everyone that is sold?
    Where is Judge Judy when you need her? This should be interesting watching two entrepreneurs sort things out in an internet board for mountain bikers.

    Popcorn anyone?
    'If Wal-Mart sold parachutes, who would jump?' Frank Havnoonian (quoting his father) Drexel Hill Cyclery

  30. #30
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,702

    From betterwhois.com

    Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered
    with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
    for detailed information. Domain Name: LIVEWRONG.COM
    Registrar: GO DADDY SOFTWARE, INC.
    Whois Server: whois.godaddy.com
    Referral URL: http://registrar.godaddy.com
    Name Server: PARK3.SECURESERVER.NET
    Name Server: PARK4.SECURESERVER.NET
    Status: REGISTRAR-LOCK
    Updated Date: 17-jul-2005
    Creation Date: 10-aug-2004



    Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered
    with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
    for detailed information. Domain Name: TYKE-A-BYKE.COM
    Registrar: MELBOURNE IT, LTD. D/B/A INTERNET NAMES WORLDWIDE
    Whois Server: whois.melbourneit.com
    Referral URL: http://www.melbourneit.com
    Name Server: YNS1.YAHOO.COM
    Name Server: YNS2.YAHOO.COM
    Status: ACTIVE
    Updated Date: 31-may-2005
    Creation Date: 31-may-2005

    You seen this guy's site? I guess somebody found the function in Word to 'turn page to html.'
    Last edited by pimpbot; 01-02-2006 at 10:23 AM.

  31. #31
    Freshly Fujified
    Reputation: Call_me_Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    8,200

    I don't doubt it

    Quote Originally Posted by pimpbot
    Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered
    with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
    for detailed information. Domain Name: LIVEWRONG.COM
    Registrar: GO DADDY SOFTWARE, INC.
    Whois Server: whois.godaddy.com
    Referral URL: http://registrar.godaddy.com
    Name Server: PARK3.SECURESERVER.NET
    Name Server: PARK4.SECURESERVER.NET
    Status: REGISTRAR-LOCK
    Updated Date: 17-jul-2005
    Creation Date: 10-aug-2004



    Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered
    with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
    for detailed information. Domain Name: TYKE-A-BYKE.COM
    Registrar: MELBOURNE IT, LTD. D/B/A INTERNET NAMES WORLDWIDE
    Whois Server: whois.melbourneit.com
    Referral URL: http://www.melbourneit.com
    Name Server: YNS1.YAHOO.COM
    Name Server: YNS2.YAHOO.COM
    Status: ACTIVE
    Updated Date: 31-may-2005
    Creation Date: 31-may-2005

    And I know DC was doing this long before then.
    </pre>
    The date of the domain registration isn't the issue. The product, and who owns it is the issue. The question in my mind is "If DC invented this product did he cover his a$$?" Does he have the copyright or other protection needed to stop others from selling this product? If he does, then why is the company that makes them selling them to another vendor? Something appears to be wrong in this picture.

    At the risk of this thread getting hijacked any further, I'll zip it and hope the two parties involved resolve the issue offline.
    'If Wal-Mart sold parachutes, who would jump?' Frank Havnoonian (quoting his father) Drexel Hill Cyclery

  32. #32
    Mythical Creature
    Reputation: glenzx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,843

    The real question here...

    ...is if I buy a LiveWrong bracelet from the counterfitter, will it stretch more than the original - wearing out my drivetrain, er, wrist - faster? Or is it really that the pins in the bracelet are wearing bigger holes into the rollers causing wrist - stretch - though we now know to call it stretch is a blatant indication of ignorance? And MOST importantly, are the 2004 real LiveWrong bracelets compatible with the 2006 knock-off braclet drivetrains, or will my cassette wear faster with incompatible wrist lubes? What if I try and MIX Live Strong knock-offs with "REAL" Live Wrong bracelets? I bet my chain would skip like crazy! Wait, but maybe the shfter leverage ratio imbalance would solve the problem - yeah, that's it!

    I am so comfused - Damned industry compatibility issues!

    follow me on Twitter!
    "It's better to regret something you HAVE done, than something you haven't..." -

  33. #33
    banned
    Reputation: gonzostrike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,258
    Quote Originally Posted by drewwski123
    You also forgot to mention that I sale them cheaper. I would also hope that you are in on the Trademark and you get a percentage of everyone that is sold?
    good thing most Americans don't care much about grammar, otherwise nobody would care if you "sale" these counterfeits.

    the correct verb tense you should use is "sell."

    you SELL items.

    items are FOR SALE, or ON SALE.

    you do not SALE items.

    I hope English is your 2d or third language.

  34. #34
    Malty goodness
    Reputation: DakotaJockey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by gonzostrike
    good thing most Americans don't care much about grammar, otherwise nobody would care if you "sale" these counterfeits.

    the correct verb tense you should use is "sell."

    you SELL items.

    items are FOR SALE, or ON SALE.

    you do not SALE items.

    I hope English is your 2d or third language.
    If you're going to be a dick about it, then please try and understand that the beginning of each sentence begins with a capital letter. You can tell where this would because it's the next letter after each period.
    Oh wait...that's punctuation...not grammar. My bad.
    Don't do anything I wouldn't do if I weren't in your shoes.

  35. #35
    May contain nuts
    Reputation: Haggis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,961
    Quote Originally Posted by Gilboy
    Regardless of miles time or conditions of use. A new chain will measure 12 inches from one end of a link or a pin to one at 12 inches. Rule of thumb: if the chain measures 12 1/8 inch or less; you can just replace the chain. If the chain measeures 12 1/4 or more you must replace the chain and cassette.
    I've been converted to the "wear everything out and then replace the lot" faction... I get enormous mileage out of a single chain/cassette/small & middle chainrings...

    Basically I found I could never pre-empt a worn cassette or chainring by replacing the chain. I put a new chain on when the original chain measured exactly 305.5mm, which is well under the recommended 306.4mm (new chain being 304.8mm), and the chainring would grab the chain or the cassette would slip under load...

    I put it down to the amount of hill work I do and that I'm a bigger guy. Aluminium chainrings just don't last no matter how often the chain is changed... Lighter riders may be able to do it but I can't...
    Attached Images Attached Images

  36. #36
    Weird huh?
    Reputation: cmdrpiffle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,260

    my take on this(since no one asked)

    Go back to friction shifters.

    The extreme close tolerances demanded of todays shifting systems (chains, cogs, etc) are there to facilltate the shifting systems themselves. "Your chain is worn too much when...." "your cassette is worn out when..." etc., ad nauseam

    If you throw the lever, or turn the click....and something is worn out of spec... it don't work. At that point it is considered 'worn', and must be 'replaced'.

    Nice replicating revenue source for the manufacturers yes?

    With friction shifters (thumb is nice) you just move the derailleur thru its range. When it's in gear, and not making too much racket...it's properly shifted. With said thumbshifters (friction) you will notice at least a 4 fold increase in the life of a.chains b.chainrings c. cogs (cassettes).

    Why? because although 'out of tolerance in terms of acceptable wear', the system is still able to function. Just not up to the pre-set tolerance of the indexed system.

    My point? Kinda lost actually !
    Anyway, for those of us who've ridden bicycles prior to the advent of indexed shifting, I'll give you the 'real' way to tell if your chain is worn, or your cogs are worn, or your chainrings are worn, it's easy:

    Torque skips. You stand and hammer, and something slips, IE, the chain will skip teeth on the cogs or the chainrings. The idea is to keep the same chain, rings, cogs mated as a set. Sometimes for more than 2 years !! Replace the whole lot at once and be done with it. Rings, cogs, chain.

    My secondary point: "my chain is worn and must be replaced"
    how do you know?
    "because Avimano says to buy this measure thingee, and when the line gets to this pointer, then the chain is crap, and must be replaced"
    Or, better yet...."because it's been on there for 6 months, and I ride every day"
    Um huh.

    A lot of good folks here simply can't afford to replace these expensive parts on some sort of regular maintenance schedule. Bike stuff is too friggin expensive as it is. Fact is, most of this stuff is extremely well made equipment, that can last far longer than the manufacturer is going to recommend. It's just not going to shift as precisely as it wears. So what! If you can afford to replace a cassette every year (I can't) then do so.
    If you can't.......don't buy into some of the very serious marketing going on, and realize that you've got a lot of options here. Hell, I still haven't seen the suggestion to reverse your chain! Do it. You'll get a bit more life out of it and the contacting components. Probably because they're labeled 'this side out' or some such.
    My real point is don't think something doesn't work because some manufacturer tell you it doesn't. If you push on the pedals, and the back wheel goes around...it's working on some level. It's all about what you can accept, and or afford.

    Cheers,

    Cmdr 'just ask me' Piffle
    Poaching Demo...that's why we can't have nice things...

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: poff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,068
    Get a SS, and all of your problems will be solved!

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pedaler845's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,126
    Im one who replaces the (used to be pc69 in the old line) chain if I catch it before 1/8" stretch, on an xt 9sp. cassette. I dont quite understand how friction shifters do what cable tension adjustments do on an indexed (and worn) set up. IMHO, I tried the friction setting just once and based on that I consider indexed shifting to be faster and more precise. Additionally, Ive had good luck with a steel Deore middle ring @ $11. And I think the lube industry is bs as ATF is the best Ive ever used. I wait til the chain is dry and lube each pin. I get a little over a season's use then replace all. Back to the original post, I would add that both manufacturers recent price jumps which seems to be 70% in 1.5 years sucks hard. I'd like to try an SRAM cassette when I can find an 11-34 with a better ratio. Unfortunately there's no price difference between them that I can see. I'm now considering reversing my chain when I "see" 1/16" stretch!

  39. #39
    singletrack bound
    Reputation: Tone No Balone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,511

    Amen!

    Quote Originally Posted by poff
    Get a SS, and all of your problems will be solved!
    I think we need this weather to break so we all can go ride!
    I never did care for 9 speeds anyway, or chainrigs for that matter!
    Quite entertaining though.....

  40. #40
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,702

    Uh, no

    Quote Originally Posted by cmdrpiffle
    Go back to friction shifters.

    The extreme close tolerances demanded of todays shifting systems (chains, cogs, etc) are there to facilltate the shifting systems themselves. "Your chain is worn too much when...." "your cassette is worn out when..." etc., ad nauseam

    If you throw the lever, or turn the click....and something is worn out of spec... it don't work. At that point it is considered 'worn', and must be 'replaced'.

    Nice replicating revenue source for the manufacturers yes?

    With friction shifters (thumb is nice) you just move the derailleur thru its range. When it's in gear, and not making too much racket...it's properly shifted. With said thumbshifters (friction) you will notice at least a 4 fold increase in the life of a.chains b.chainrings c. cogs (cassettes).

    Why? because although 'out of tolerance in terms of acceptable wear', the system is still able to function. Just not up to the pre-set tolerance of the indexed system.

    My point? Kinda lost actually !
    Anyway, for those of us who've ridden bicycles prior to the advent of indexed shifting, I'll give you the 'real' way to tell if your chain is worn, or your cogs are worn, or your chainrings are worn, it's easy:

    Torque skips. You stand and hammer, and something slips, IE, the chain will skip teeth on the cogs or the chainrings. The idea is to keep the same chain, rings, cogs mated as a set. Sometimes for more than 2 years !! Replace the whole lot at once and be done with it. Rings, cogs, chain.

    My secondary point: "my chain is worn and must be replaced"
    how do you know?
    "because Avimano says to buy this measure thingee, and when the line gets to this pointer, then the chain is crap, and must be replaced"
    Or, better yet...."because it's been on there for 6 months, and I ride every day"
    Um huh.

    A lot of good folks here simply can't afford to replace these expensive parts on some sort of regular maintenance schedule. Bike stuff is too friggin expensive as it is. Fact is, most of this stuff is extremely well made equipment, that can last far longer than the manufacturer is going to recommend. It's just not going to shift as precisely as it wears. So what! If you can afford to replace a cassette every year (I can't) then do so.
    If you can't.......don't buy into some of the very serious marketing going on, and realize that you've got a lot of options here. Hell, I still haven't seen the suggestion to reverse your chain! Do it. You'll get a bit more life out of it and the contacting components. Probably because they're labeled 'this side out' or some such.
    My real point is don't think something doesn't work because some manufacturer tell you it doesn't. If you push on the pedals, and the back wheel goes around...it's working on some level. It's all about what you can accept, and or afford.

    Cheers,

    Cmdr 'just ask me' Piffle
    Friction shifted bikes suffer the exact same fate.

    I have an 80's Raleigh road bike with downtube friction shifters that had the exact same issue. I was lucky enough to get one of those rare Suntour Ultra6 gearing systems. This was when they decided that it would be really cool to cram 6 cogs on a freewheel into a 120mm O.L.D. rear hub. Great, except a year or two later, the standard moved the O.L.D. to 126mm. So my standard got orphaned. Oh, there was one mfg still making Ultra6 freewheels... but they cost more $$$ that it was worth.

    All this, because I broke my chain and had to replace it. I replaced the chain to find that it would skip like crazy because the freewheel/cogset was worn. I broke down and replaced it with a 5 speed cassette until I found the right part at a reasonable price. As luck would so have it, I found a new Ultra6 cassette at a swap meet (after looking for a year) for $10. Boo-yah! Fat lot of good that did... I converted it to a fixie a year later

    You're not looking at the right point of wear. The pitch changed as the chain wore out, and that extra stress on each tooth of the cassette wears them apart ruining that too. It has nothing to do with the cog spacing or indexing. THis is a problem with indexed and non-indexed gearing systems.

    Personally, I love index shifting. As long as it is adjusted, it is a simple touch of a lever to up or down shift. I would never go back... except for vintage factor, not because it is better in any way shape or form.

    What would reversing your chain do? Pulling force is the same front and back. The inner bearing plates and pins to wear to an oval... this would happen if the chain were going either way. I have never seen a chain (and I've bought a LOT of them) that has a label for 'this side out'. I've used SRAM, Shimano and KMC chains.
    Last edited by pimpbot; 01-02-2006 at 05:34 PM.

  41. #41
    Ride it like you stole it
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    85

    The Trademark

    Hopefully to clear all of this up, the trademark is registered to ARC Marketing, a company out of California I believe. I hope that the Drunk Cyclist, if he is the originator of the LiveWrong bracelet is getting a cut from them. I started selling(i apologize for my previous bad grammar) them while living in Europe, I doubt that I was taking a cut of the DC's market. I only put them on the web to use the domain name that I already owned and was not currently selling a product on it. To everyone's relief, the Tyke-a-byke, my next counterfitting project should be taking off very soon. It is a childrens wooden bike with no pedals, more of a scooter bike I guess. I have started manufacturing them in my garage with my chinese sweat shop that was previously employed making LIVEWRONG bracelets. They are happy to be employed on a new project. If the drunk cyclist would like to get in on this venture, let me know.
    Thanks to everyone for taking so much interest in this.

    And by the way my bike is working fine now, new chain and new cassette.

    Later Drew

    OTE=Call_me_Clyde]The date of the domain registration isn't the issue. The product, and who owns it is the issue. The question in my mind is "If DC invented this product did he cover his a$$?" Does he have the copyright or other protection needed to stop others from selling this product? If he does, then why is the company that makes them selling them to another vendor? Something appears to be wrong in this picture.

    At the risk of this thread getting hijacked any further, I'll zip it and hope the two parties involved resolve the issue offline.[/QUOTE]

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •