Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I converted my old Hard Rock MTB to fixed. Since it's a low budget experiment, I used the original 1988 3/32" chain. It worked fine, but even with a straight chainline, it made some noise. So I bought a new 1/8" chain, and much to my surprise the links are a different length. That is, when you lay them on the floor side by side, the pins are slightly farther apart on the old chain.

The new chain is 1/8" x 1/2". I thought 1/2" was standard. Is there another length?

What size chain will work best with my 16t dura-ace cog? It's a 3/32", so I know 3/32" or 1/8" will work, but is there another dimension I need to get right?

Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
656 Posts
stupidgringo said:
I converted my old Hard Rock MTB to fixed. Since it's a low budget experiment, I used the original 1988 3/32" chain. It worked fine, but even with a straight chainline, it made some noise. So I bought a new 1/8" chain, and much to my surprise the links are a different length. That is, when you lay them on the floor side by side, the pins are slightly farther apart on the old chain.

The new chain is 1/8" x 1/2". I thought 1/2" was standard. Is there another length?

What size chain will work best with my 16t dura-ace cog? It's a 3/32", so I know 3/32" or 1/8" will work, but is there another dimension I need to get right?

Thanks.
there is no difference,in length, between 1/8" and 3/32". Your old chain is just old and worn out. When a chain gets worn it experiences 'chain stretch'. Look at this article from Sheldon Brown for more info. Any chain 3/32" or 1/8" should work fine. You might want to consider replacing your chainring and cog at the same time.
 

·
Arrogant roadie.....
Joined
·
4,232 Posts
How did you manage to go fixed on a Hardrock frame? Don't they have vertical dropouts???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
I installed the new chain, and it works great.

I had seen Sheldon Brown's article about chain stretch, but this is different. The links are not worn - they're actually longer, and I know the chain didn't stretch. Right now, each chain is the same number of links, but the old chain is about 1/2" longer from end to end.

The original chainrings were Shimano Biopace circa 1988. I wonder if they used a different chain...

And Pcrap is correct. Early Hardrocks had horizontal dropouts. This one is 1988.
 

·
Steaming piles of opinion
Joined
·
10,503 Posts
stupidgringo said:
I installed the new chain, and it works great.

I had seen Sheldon Brown's article about chain stretch, but this is different. The links are not worn - they're actually longer, and I know the chain didn't stretch. Right now, each chain is the same number of links, but the old chain is about 1/2" longer from end to end.

The original chainrings were Shimano Biopace circa 1988. I wonder if they used a different chain...

And Pcrap is correct. Early Hardrocks had horizontal dropouts. This one is 1988.
Nope, same chain. I had an old Ross with Biopace. You have some version of stretch/wear. 1/2" seems like a lot, but there's no other standard.
 

·
NeoRetroGrouch
Joined
·
6,491 Posts
stupidgringo said:
I installed the new chain, and it works great.

I had seen Sheldon Brown's article about chain stretch, but this is different. The links are not worn - they're actually longer, and I know the chain didn't stretch. Right now, each chain is the same number of links, but the old chain is about 1/2" longer from end to end.

The original chainrings were Shimano Biopace circa 1988. I wonder if they used a different chain...

And Pcrap is correct. Early Hardrocks had horizontal dropouts. This one is 1988.
That's what a worn chain looks like. You can't see the wear - it's on the internal pins and bushings which makes each link a little longer. - TF
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top