|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
9/10/11/12 Speed Gruppo
"Effects of Lateral Chain Misalignment (Cross-Chaining) on Drivetrain Efficiency & Effects of Chainring Size on Drivetrain Efficiency" at
https://www.ceramicspeed.com/media/3...ize-report.pdf has persuaded me that I will not be buying a 12- or 11-speed group! Nor 10-speed, nor even 9-speed. Andre Jute My Rohloff Speed 14 chainline is straight |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
9/10/11/12 Speed Gruppo
On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 9:30:11 AM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote:
"Effects of Lateral Chain Misalignment (Cross-Chaining) on Drivetrain Efficiency & Effects of Chainring Size on Drivetrain Efficiency" at https://www.ceramicspeed.com/media/3...ize-report.pdf has persuaded me that I will not be buying a 12- or 11-speed group! Nor 10-speed, nor even 9-speed. Andre Jute My Rohloff Speed 14 chainline is straight I can't find the testing now but Connex did some tests of their 11 speed chains and had almost no losses from full cross chained to straight chains. Over the years they have developed the science of chains so well that they are so flexible that you simply don't get much in the way of loses. This is proven by their wear tests as well since the wear test includes pushing the chains all of the way from one extreme to the other. https://bikerumor-wpengine.netdna-ss...st-results.jpg |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
9/10/11/12 Speed Gruppo
On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:14:43 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
wrote: On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 9:30:11 AM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote: "Effects of Lateral Chain Misalignment (Cross-Chaining) on Drivetrain Efficiency & Effects of Chainring Size on Drivetrain Efficiency" at https://www.ceramicspeed.com/media/3...ize-report.pdf has persuaded me that I will not be buying a 12- or 11-speed group! Nor 10-speed, nor even 9-speed. Andre Jute My Rohloff Speed 14 chainline is straight I can't find the testing now but Connex did some tests of their 11 speed chains and had almost no losses from full cross chained to straight chains. Over the years they have developed the science of chains so well that they are so flexible that you simply don't get much in the way of loses. This is proven by their wear tests as well since the wear test includes pushing the chains all of the way from one extreme to the other. https://bikerumor-wpengine.netdna-ss...st-results.jpg You didn't read the test. It did not include cross chaining as you say. See: https://www.connexchain.com/en/tests...ance-test.html If you had read the frigging test you would have (if you can comprehend what you read) seen that the test used: drive train front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links reference chain: 63 links Or in simple terms, that you might understand, one sprocket in the front and one in the back. No cross chaining whatsoever. -- cheers, John B. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
9/10/11/12 Speed Gruppo
On Wednesday, February 19, 2020 at 4:49:49 PM UTC, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Monday, February 17, 2020 at 5:04:39 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote: On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:14:43 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 9:30:11 AM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote: "Effects of Lateral Chain Misalignment (Cross-Chaining) on Drivetrain Efficiency & Effects of Chainring Size on Drivetrain Efficiency" at https://www.ceramicspeed.com/media/3...ize-report.pdf has persuaded me that I will not be buying a 12- or 11-speed group! Nor 10-speed, nor even 9-speed. Andre Jute My Rohloff Speed 14 chainline is straight I can't find the testing now but Connex did some tests of their 11 speed chains and had almost no losses from full cross chained to straight chains. Over the years they have developed the science of chains so well that they are so flexible that you simply don't get much in the way of loses. This is proven by their wear tests as well since the wear test includes pushing the chains all of the way from one extreme to the other. https://bikerumor-wpengine.netdna-ss...st-results.jpg You didn't read the test. It did not include cross chaining as you say. See: https://www.connexchain.com/en/tests...ance-test.html If you had read the frigging test you would have (if you can comprehend what you read) seen that the test used: drive train front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links reference chain: 63 links Or in simple terms, that you might understand, one sprocket in the front and one in the back. No cross chaining whatsoever. -- cheers, John B. That must be why the magazine description of the testing said that the chains were moved from 3" in one direction and then 3" in the other. Funny thing how actually watching the tests done seems to show things that might not otherwise be mentioned. But I'm sure that you know much more than the people who actually attended the testing. Just like Frank knows a great deal more about the height of tree limbs above the bike lane than someone that was actually struck by the limb. Between the two of you, you lick the platter clean don't you? That dog wants it's platter back, and its food too! -- AJ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
9/10/11/12 Speed Gruppo
On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 08:49:44 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
wrote: On Monday, February 17, 2020 at 5:04:39 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote: On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:14:43 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 9:30:11 AM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote: "Effects of Lateral Chain Misalignment (Cross-Chaining) on Drivetrain Efficiency & Effects of Chainring Size on Drivetrain Efficiency" at https://www.ceramicspeed.com/media/3...ize-report.pdf has persuaded me that I will not be buying a 12- or 11-speed group! Nor 10-speed, nor even 9-speed. Andre Jute My Rohloff Speed 14 chainline is straight I can't find the testing now but Connex did some tests of their 11 speed chains and had almost no losses from full cross chained to straight chains. Over the years they have developed the science of chains so well that they are so flexible that you simply don't get much in the way of loses. This is proven by their wear tests as well since the wear test includes pushing the chains all of the way from one extreme to the other. https://bikerumor-wpengine.netdna-ss...st-results.jpg You didn't read the test. It did not include cross chaining as you say. See: https://www.connexchain.com/en/tests...ance-test.html If you had read the frigging test you would have (if you can comprehend what you read) seen that the test used: drive train front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links reference chain: 63 links Or in simple terms, that you might understand, one sprocket in the front and one in the back. No cross chaining whatsoever. -- cheers, John B. That must be why the magazine description of the testing said that the chains were moved from 3" in one direction and then 3" in the other. Funny thing how actually watching the tests done seems to show things that might not otherwise be mentioned. But I'm sure that you know much more than the people who actually attended the testing. Just like Frank knows a great deal more about the height of tree limbs above the bike lane than someone that was actually struck by the limb. Between the two of you, you lick the platter clean don't you? Nope: You said "Wippermann-connex-chain-11-speed-wear-test-results.jpg" which shows the results of a test using only a drive and driven sprocket. As I pointed out in my reference (above) the test consisted of: front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links The test with several driven sprockets and the resulting loss in power from cross chaining was a totally different test and conducted by CeramicSpeed. Not Whippermann. see: https://www.velonews.com/2019/05/gea...etrains_493185 I believe that the original testing was done by Jason Smith at his company "FrictionFacts", which he sold to CeramicSpeed in 2014. In short Tom, just as I've been saying all these years, "You simply do not know what you are talking about". I might add that there was a long discussion of the cross chaining test right here in RBT. -- cheers, John B. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
9/10/11/12 Speed Gruppo
On Wednesday, February 19, 2020 at 10:11:22 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 08:49:44 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Monday, February 17, 2020 at 5:04:39 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote: On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:14:43 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 9:30:11 AM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote: "Effects of Lateral Chain Misalignment (Cross-Chaining) on Drivetrain Efficiency & Effects of Chainring Size on Drivetrain Efficiency" at https://www.ceramicspeed.com/media/3...ize-report.pdf has persuaded me that I will not be buying a 12- or 11-speed group! Nor 10-speed, nor even 9-speed. Andre Jute My Rohloff Speed 14 chainline is straight I can't find the testing now but Connex did some tests of their 11 speed chains and had almost no losses from full cross chained to straight chains. Over the years they have developed the science of chains so well that they are so flexible that you simply don't get much in the way of loses. This is proven by their wear tests as well since the wear test includes pushing the chains all of the way from one extreme to the other. https://bikerumor-wpengine.netdna-ss...st-results.jpg You didn't read the test. It did not include cross chaining as you say. See: https://www.connexchain.com/en/tests...ance-test.html If you had read the frigging test you would have (if you can comprehend what you read) seen that the test used: drive train front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links reference chain: 63 links Or in simple terms, that you might understand, one sprocket in the front and one in the back. No cross chaining whatsoever. -- cheers, John B. That must be why the magazine description of the testing said that the chains were moved from 3" in one direction and then 3" in the other. Funny thing how actually watching the tests done seems to show things that might not otherwise be mentioned. But I'm sure that you know much more than the people who actually attended the testing. Just like Frank knows a great deal more about the height of tree limbs above the bike lane than someone that was actually struck by the limb. Between the two of you, you lick the platter clean don't you? Nope: You said "Wippermann-connex-chain-11-speed-wear-test-results.jpg" which shows the results of a test using only a drive and driven sprocket. As I pointed out in my reference (above) the test consisted of: front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links The test with several driven sprockets and the resulting loss in power from cross chaining was a totally different test and conducted by CeramicSpeed. Not Whippermann. see: https://www.velonews.com/2019/05/gea...etrains_493185 I believe that the original testing was done by Jason Smith at his company "FrictionFacts", which he sold to CeramicSpeed in 2014. In short Tom, just as I've been saying all these years, "You simply do not know what you are talking about". I might add that there was a long discussion of the cross chaining test right here in RBT. -- cheers, John B. the tests at Wiperman we - An in-line 5 hour run with original lubrication. - A offset test to both left and right side for 5 min at 50 Hz and then 10 hours at 100 Hz after independent applications of water, oil and sand to the chain. - An inline 15 hour test at 100 Hz with above mentioned pollutants, which is then repeated every 15 hours after cleaning until chains show a 1% change (or 8mm increase from DIN specified length of 800.10 mm). This change happens due to wear of pins against the roller. Wait a minute - did it say something about left and right? Apparently your Alzheimer's is getting worse. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
9/10/11/12 Speed Gruppo
On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 11:17:22 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
wrote: On Wednesday, February 19, 2020 at 10:11:22 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote: On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 08:49:44 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Monday, February 17, 2020 at 5:04:39 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote: On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:14:43 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 9:30:11 AM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote: "Effects of Lateral Chain Misalignment (Cross-Chaining) on Drivetrain Efficiency & Effects of Chainring Size on Drivetrain Efficiency" at https://www.ceramicspeed.com/media/3...ize-report.pdf has persuaded me that I will not be buying a 12- or 11-speed group! Nor 10-speed, nor even 9-speed. Andre Jute My Rohloff Speed 14 chainline is straight I can't find the testing now but Connex did some tests of their 11 speed chains and had almost no losses from full cross chained to straight chains. Over the years they have developed the science of chains so well that they are so flexible that you simply don't get much in the way of loses. This is proven by their wear tests as well since the wear test includes pushing the chains all of the way from one extreme to the other. https://bikerumor-wpengine.netdna-ss...st-results.jpg You didn't read the test. It did not include cross chaining as you say. See: https://www.connexchain.com/en/tests...ance-test.html If you had read the frigging test you would have (if you can comprehend what you read) seen that the test used: drive train front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links reference chain: 63 links Or in simple terms, that you might understand, one sprocket in the front and one in the back. No cross chaining whatsoever. -- cheers, John B. That must be why the magazine description of the testing said that the chains were moved from 3" in one direction and then 3" in the other. Funny thing how actually watching the tests done seems to show things that might not otherwise be mentioned. But I'm sure that you know much more than the people who actually attended the testing. Just like Frank knows a great deal more about the height of tree limbs above the bike lane than someone that was actually struck by the limb. Between the two of you, you lick the platter clean don't you? Nope: You said "Wippermann-connex-chain-11-speed-wear-test-results.jpg" which shows the results of a test using only a drive and driven sprocket. As I pointed out in my reference (above) the test consisted of: front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links The test with several driven sprockets and the resulting loss in power from cross chaining was a totally different test and conducted by CeramicSpeed. Not Whippermann. see: https://www.velonews.com/2019/05/gea...etrains_493185 I believe that the original testing was done by Jason Smith at his company "FrictionFacts", which he sold to CeramicSpeed in 2014. In short Tom, just as I've been saying all these years, "You simply do not know what you are talking about". I might add that there was a long discussion of the cross chaining test right here in RBT. -- cheers, John B. the tests at Wiperman we - An in-line 5 hour run with original lubrication. - A offset test to both left and right side for 5 min at 50 Hz and then 10 hours at 100 Hz after independent applications of water, oil and sand to the chain. - An inline 15 hour test at 100 Hz with above mentioned pollutants, which is then repeated every 15 hours after cleaning until chains show a 1% change (or 8mm increase from DIN specified length of 800.10 mm). This change happens due to wear of pins against the roller. Wait a minute - did it say something about left and right? Apparently your Alzheimer's is getting worse. Strange, isn't it that you posted a reference to the wippermann-connex test: https://bikerumor-wpengine.netdna-ss...st-results.jpg Which doesn't mention anything about the equipment used or how the test was accomplished. I searched for some details of that test and I found https://www.connexchain.com/en/tests...ance-test.html Which contains a reference to the pretty picture that you referenced and includes the details: drive train front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links reference chain: 63 links Now you come up with all kind of details that aren't mentioned by the "connexchain site". Is this another Tommy moment? Where you don't remember and just make it up? -- cheers, John B. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
9/10/11/12 Speed Gruppo
On Friday, February 21, 2020 at 4:47:48 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 11:17:22 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Wednesday, February 19, 2020 at 10:11:22 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote: On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 08:49:44 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Monday, February 17, 2020 at 5:04:39 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote: On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:14:43 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 9:30:11 AM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote: "Effects of Lateral Chain Misalignment (Cross-Chaining) on Drivetrain Efficiency & Effects of Chainring Size on Drivetrain Efficiency" at https://www.ceramicspeed.com/media/3...ize-report.pdf has persuaded me that I will not be buying a 12- or 11-speed group! Nor 10-speed, nor even 9-speed. Andre Jute My Rohloff Speed 14 chainline is straight I can't find the testing now but Connex did some tests of their 11 speed chains and had almost no losses from full cross chained to straight chains. Over the years they have developed the science of chains so well that they are so flexible that you simply don't get much in the way of loses. This is proven by their wear tests as well since the wear test includes pushing the chains all of the way from one extreme to the other. https://bikerumor-wpengine.netdna-ss...st-results.jpg You didn't read the test. It did not include cross chaining as you say. See: https://www.connexchain.com/en/tests...ance-test.html If you had read the frigging test you would have (if you can comprehend what you read) seen that the test used: drive train front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links reference chain: 63 links Or in simple terms, that you might understand, one sprocket in the front and one in the back. No cross chaining whatsoever. -- cheers, John B. That must be why the magazine description of the testing said that the chains were moved from 3" in one direction and then 3" in the other. Funny thing how actually watching the tests done seems to show things that might not otherwise be mentioned. But I'm sure that you know much more than the people who actually attended the testing. Just like Frank knows a great deal more about the height of tree limbs above the bike lane than someone that was actually struck by the limb. Between the two of you, you lick the platter clean don't you? Nope: You said "Wippermann-connex-chain-11-speed-wear-test-results.jpg" which shows the results of a test using only a drive and driven sprocket. As I pointed out in my reference (above) the test consisted of: front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links The test with several driven sprockets and the resulting loss in power from cross chaining was a totally different test and conducted by CeramicSpeed. Not Whippermann. see: https://www.velonews.com/2019/05/gea...etrains_493185 I believe that the original testing was done by Jason Smith at his company "FrictionFacts", which he sold to CeramicSpeed in 2014. In short Tom, just as I've been saying all these years, "You simply do not know what you are talking about". I might add that there was a long discussion of the cross chaining test right here in RBT. -- cheers, John B. the tests at Wiperman we - An in-line 5 hour run with original lubrication. - A offset test to both left and right side for 5 min at 50 Hz and then 10 hours at 100 Hz after independent applications of water, oil and sand to the chain. - An inline 15 hour test at 100 Hz with above mentioned pollutants, which is then repeated every 15 hours after cleaning until chains show a 1% change (or 8mm increase from DIN specified length of 800.10 mm). This change happens due to wear of pins against the roller. Wait a minute - did it say something about left and right? Apparently your Alzheimer's is getting worse. Strange, isn't it that you posted a reference to the wippermann-connex test: https://bikerumor-wpengine.netdna-ss...st-results.jpg Which doesn't mention anything about the equipment used or how the test was accomplished. I searched for some details of that test and I found https://www.connexchain.com/en/tests...ance-test.html Which contains a reference to the pretty picture that you referenced and includes the details: drive train front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links reference chain: 63 links Now you come up with all kind of details that aren't mentioned by the "connexchain site". Is this another Tommy moment? Where you don't remember and just make it up? -- cheers, John B. Wipperman has completely addressed their tests and how they are performed. All of the methods and equipment they use is. That they use cogs and chainwheels and that they are replaced with NEW ones before every test. If you're too stupid to find the information don't expect others to hold you cold wet clammy hands. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
9/10/11/12 Speed Gruppo
On Friday, February 21, 2020 at 4:47:48 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 11:17:22 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Wednesday, February 19, 2020 at 10:11:22 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote: On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 08:49:44 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Monday, February 17, 2020 at 5:04:39 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote: On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:14:43 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 9:30:11 AM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote: "Effects of Lateral Chain Misalignment (Cross-Chaining) on Drivetrain Efficiency & Effects of Chainring Size on Drivetrain Efficiency" at https://www.ceramicspeed.com/media/3...ize-report.pdf has persuaded me that I will not be buying a 12- or 11-speed group! Nor 10-speed, nor even 9-speed. Andre Jute My Rohloff Speed 14 chainline is straight I can't find the testing now but Connex did some tests of their 11 speed chains and had almost no losses from full cross chained to straight chains. Over the years they have developed the science of chains so well that they are so flexible that you simply don't get much in the way of loses. This is proven by their wear tests as well since the wear test includes pushing the chains all of the way from one extreme to the other. https://bikerumor-wpengine.netdna-ss...st-results.jpg You didn't read the test. It did not include cross chaining as you say. See: https://www.connexchain.com/en/tests...ance-test.html If you had read the frigging test you would have (if you can comprehend what you read) seen that the test used: drive train front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links reference chain: 63 links Or in simple terms, that you might understand, one sprocket in the front and one in the back. No cross chaining whatsoever. -- cheers, John B. That must be why the magazine description of the testing said that the chains were moved from 3" in one direction and then 3" in the other. Funny thing how actually watching the tests done seems to show things that might not otherwise be mentioned. But I'm sure that you know much more than the people who actually attended the testing. Just like Frank knows a great deal more about the height of tree limbs above the bike lane than someone that was actually struck by the limb. Between the two of you, you lick the platter clean don't you? Nope: You said "Wippermann-connex-chain-11-speed-wear-test-results.jpg" which shows the results of a test using only a drive and driven sprocket. As I pointed out in my reference (above) the test consisted of: front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links The test with several driven sprockets and the resulting loss in power from cross chaining was a totally different test and conducted by CeramicSpeed. Not Whippermann. see: https://www.velonews.com/2019/05/gea...etrains_493185 I believe that the original testing was done by Jason Smith at his company "FrictionFacts", which he sold to CeramicSpeed in 2014. In short Tom, just as I've been saying all these years, "You simply do not know what you are talking about". I might add that there was a long discussion of the cross chaining test right here in RBT. -- cheers, John B. the tests at Wiperman we - An in-line 5 hour run with original lubrication. - A offset test to both left and right side for 5 min at 50 Hz and then 10 hours at 100 Hz after independent applications of water, oil and sand to the chain. - An inline 15 hour test at 100 Hz with above mentioned pollutants, which is then repeated every 15 hours after cleaning until chains show a 1% change (or 8mm increase from DIN specified length of 800.10 mm). This change happens due to wear of pins against the roller. Wait a minute - did it say something about left and right? Apparently your Alzheimer's is getting worse. Strange, isn't it that you posted a reference to the wippermann-connex test: https://bikerumor-wpengine.netdna-ss...st-results.jpg Which doesn't mention anything about the equipment used or how the test was accomplished. I searched for some details of that test and I found https://www.connexchain.com/en/tests...ance-test.html Which contains a reference to the pretty picture that you referenced and includes the details: drive train front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links reference chain: 63 links Now you come up with all kind of details that aren't mentioned by the "connexchain site". Is this another Tommy moment? Where you don't remember and just make it up? -- cheers, John B. Wipperman has completely addressed their tests and how they are performed. All of the methods and equipment they use is covered. That they use steel and chainwheels so that the subject of wear is solely the chains and not the gears. If you're too stupid to find the information don't expect others to hold you cold wet clammy hands. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
9/10/11/12 Speed Gruppo
On Sun, 23 Feb 2020 14:25:48 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
wrote: On Friday, February 21, 2020 at 4:47:48 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote: On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 11:17:22 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Wednesday, February 19, 2020 at 10:11:22 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote: On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 08:49:44 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Monday, February 17, 2020 at 5:04:39 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote: On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:14:43 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 9:30:11 AM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote: "Effects of Lateral Chain Misalignment (Cross-Chaining) on Drivetrain Efficiency & Effects of Chainring Size on Drivetrain Efficiency" at https://www.ceramicspeed.com/media/3...ize-report.pdf has persuaded me that I will not be buying a 12- or 11-speed group! Nor 10-speed, nor even 9-speed. Andre Jute My Rohloff Speed 14 chainline is straight I can't find the testing now but Connex did some tests of their 11 speed chains and had almost no losses from full cross chained to straight chains. Over the years they have developed the science of chains so well that they are so flexible that you simply don't get much in the way of loses. This is proven by their wear tests as well since the wear test includes pushing the chains all of the way from one extreme to the other. https://bikerumor-wpengine.netdna-ss...st-results.jpg You didn't read the test. It did not include cross chaining as you say. See: https://www.connexchain.com/en/tests...ance-test.html If you had read the frigging test you would have (if you can comprehend what you read) seen that the test used: drive train front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links reference chain: 63 links Or in simple terms, that you might understand, one sprocket in the front and one in the back. No cross chaining whatsoever. -- cheers, John B. That must be why the magazine description of the testing said that the chains were moved from 3" in one direction and then 3" in the other. Funny thing how actually watching the tests done seems to show things that might not otherwise be mentioned. But I'm sure that you know much more than the people who actually attended the testing. Just like Frank knows a great deal more about the height of tree limbs above the bike lane than someone that was actually struck by the limb. Between the two of you, you lick the platter clean don't you? Nope: You said "Wippermann-connex-chain-11-speed-wear-test-results.jpg" which shows the results of a test using only a drive and driven sprocket. As I pointed out in my reference (above) the test consisted of: front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links The test with several driven sprockets and the resulting loss in power from cross chaining was a totally different test and conducted by CeramicSpeed. Not Whippermann. see: https://www.velonews.com/2019/05/gea...etrains_493185 I believe that the original testing was done by Jason Smith at his company "FrictionFacts", which he sold to CeramicSpeed in 2014. In short Tom, just as I've been saying all these years, "You simply do not know what you are talking about". I might add that there was a long discussion of the cross chaining test right here in RBT. -- cheers, John B. the tests at Wiperman we - An in-line 5 hour run with original lubrication. - A offset test to both left and right side for 5 min at 50 Hz and then 10 hours at 100 Hz after independent applications of water, oil and sand to the chain. - An inline 15 hour test at 100 Hz with above mentioned pollutants, which is then repeated every 15 hours after cleaning until chains show a 1% change (or 8mm increase from DIN specified length of 800.10 mm). This change happens due to wear of pins against the roller. Wait a minute - did it say something about left and right? Apparently your Alzheimer's is getting worse. Strange, isn't it that you posted a reference to the wippermann-connex test: https://bikerumor-wpengine.netdna-ss...st-results.jpg Which doesn't mention anything about the equipment used or how the test was accomplished. I searched for some details of that test and I found https://www.connexchain.com/en/tests...ance-test.html Which contains a reference to the pretty picture that you referenced and includes the details: drive train front chain ring: 52 teeth back sprocket: 17 teeth test chain: 63 links reference chain: 63 links Now you come up with all kind of details that aren't mentioned by the "connexchain site". Is this another Tommy moment? Where you don't remember and just make it up? -- cheers, John B. Wipperman has completely addressed their tests and how they are performed. All of the methods and equipment they use is covered. That they use steel and chainwheels so that the subject of wear is solely the chains and not the gears. If you're too stupid to find the information don't expect others to hold you cold wet clammy hands. Nice try Tommy, but I was the one that found the evidence and corrected your false claims... which is, of course, why you are ranting and raving and making the same claims over and over. It is called a "cover up" in the trade. You seem to have the childish notion that repeating a falsehood over and over and over makes it true. But perhaps it does. Wasn't that the good Dr. Joseph Goebbels' theory? Repeat a lie enough times and eventually it becomes the truth. -- cheers, John B. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
can I use a 9 speed chain on a 10 speed campagnolo gruppo? | chris bono | Racing | 3 | May 6th 07 06:44 PM |
WTB: Dura Ace 9 speed Triple gruppo | mitchel | Marketplace | 1 | August 14th 04 02:02 AM |
WTB: Dura Ace 9 speed Triple gruppo | mitchel | Marketplace | 1 | August 13th 04 06:55 PM |
Gruppo | Garry Jones | General | 8 | March 12th 04 05:17 AM |
2001 shimano Dura ace 9 speed gruppo | steve | Marketplace | 1 | December 16th 03 04:56 PM |