I really am up in the air on chain wear and the Catrike. I normally
around here on my road bike would get easily 6000 miles on a chain. I
could probably even push that 1000 miles further but never did.
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
measuring it and it is hard but some stretch not more than 1/16 over 12 pins. Currently the chain has 4000 miles on it and it shifts and spins great. If fact due to the Teflon lube and no rain riding the chain looks really clean. Much better than any road bike chain I ever had by far.
Would you pull it an measure now or wait a bit. I don't want to take the thing off it is too long. Then there is the issue of tires. Clearly to
me the tires are going to last way longer. The 700 rear Schwalb is fine
no flat spot in the middle that is way flat. To me with 3 points of
contact and the rear no having the weight of a road bike rear on top of
it I should get maybe 7000 miles on the rear. The 2 front look great too
and I would think they should see some serious wear.
I really am up in the air on chain wear and the Catrike. I normally
around here on my road bike would get easily 6000 miles on a chain. I
could probably even push that 1000 miles further but never did.
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
measuring it and it is hard but some stretch not more than 1/16 over 12 >pins. Currently the chain has 4000 miles on it and it shifts and spins >great. If fact due to the Teflon lube and no rain riding the chain looks >really clean. Much better than any road bike chain I ever had by far.
Would you pull it an measure now or wait a bit. I don't want to take the >thing off it is too long. Then there is the issue of tires. Clearly to
me the tires are going to last way longer. The 700 rear Schwalb is fine
no flat spot in the middle that is way flat. To me with 3 points of
contact and the rear no having the weight of a road bike rear on top of
it I should get maybe 7000 miles on the rear. The 2 front look great too
and I would think they should see some serious wear.
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
The longer the chain span the higher the static tension in the chain,
so in principle a long chain should wear faster than a short one.
Support idlers would help, direction changes would hurt, but it's
hard to believe it'd matter much, especially if the idlers divide
the chain into a series of nearly-straight sections.
Rider strength would probably have more effect.
Thanks for reading,
bob prohaska
On 8/23/2026 5:39 PM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
The longer the chain span the higher the static tension in the chain,
so in principle a long chain should wear faster than a short one.
Support idlers would help, direction changes would hurt, but it's
hard to believe it'd matter much, especially if the idlers divide
the chain into a series of nearly-straight sections.
Rider strength would probably have more effect.
Thanks for reading,
bob prohaska
I'm curious about that statement, 'The longer the chain span the higher
the static tension in the chain"
OK, but how significant is static tension in this system?
Since we understand that chain wear is inside the link, between rivet
and sleeve, a longer chain doing roughly the same work under roughly the same gearing will spread that wear over more links. That should mean
longer useful life mileage, albeit with a more expensive chain.
On 8/23/2026 5:39 PM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
The longer the chain span the higher the static tension in the chain,
so in principle a long chain should wear faster than a short one.
Support idlers would help, direction changes would hurt, but it's
hard to believe it'd matter much, especially if the idlers divide
the chain into a series of nearly-straight sections.
Rider strength would probably have more effect.
Thanks for reading,
bob prohaska
I'm curious about that statement, 'The longer the chain span
the higher the static tension in the chain"
OK, but how significant is static tension in this system?
Since we understand that chain wear is inside the link,
between rivet and sleeve, a longer chain doing roughly the
same work under roughly the same gearing will spread that
wear over more links. That should mean longer useful life
mileage, albeit with a more expensive chain.
I ask google AI and got
the opposite answer as ChatGPT.
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
I really am up in the air on chain wear and the Catrike. I normally
around here on my road bike would get easily 6000 miles on a chain. I
could probably even push that 1000 miles further but never did.
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
measuring it and it is hard but some stretch not more than 1/16 over 12
pins. Currently the chain has 4000 miles on it and it shifts and spins
great. If fact due to the Teflon lube and no rain riding the chain looks
really clean. Much better than any road bike chain I ever had by far.
I would expect the chain to last broadly similar to a road bike, which you seem to be using the trike for. I guess those with a E assist would expect
a shorter lifespan, but itrCOs probably less pronounced on the trike compared to MTBing ie not in high torque loads frequently.
Am 23.08.2026 um 18:23 schrieb Roger Merriman:
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
I really am up in the air on chain wear and the Catrike. I normally
around here on my road bike would get easily 6000 miles on a chain. I
could probably even push that 1000 miles further but never did.
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
measuring it and it is hard but some stretch not more than 1/16 over 12
pins. Currently the chain has 4000 miles on it and it shifts and spins
great. If fact due to the Teflon lube and no rain riding the chain looks >>> really clean. Much better than any road bike chain I ever had by far.
I would expect the chain to last broadly similar to a road bike, which you >> seem to be using the trike for. I guess those with a E assist would expect >> a shorter lifespan, but itrCOs probably less pronounced on the trike compared
to MTBing ie not in high torque loads frequently.
actually, I would expect a significantly longer chain life:
a) 216 links instead of 110 immediately doubles the life span becuae the chain goes round half as often.
b) the majority of the wear is dirt-induced. On a road bike you have
spray from the front wheel directly onto the chain; on the trike you
don't, leaving the spray from the rear wheel sideways onto the chain as
the only source of dirt.
On 8/23/2026 5:39 PM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
The longer the chain span the higher the static tension in the chain,
so in principle a long chain should wear faster than a short one.
Support idlers would help, direction changes would hurt, but it's
hard to believe it'd matter much, especially if the idlers divide
the chain into a series of nearly-straight sections.
Rider strength would probably have more effect.
Thanks for reading,
bob prohaska
I'm curious about that statement, 'The longer the chain span
the higher the static tension in the chain"
OK, but how significant is static tension in this system?
Since we understand that chain wear is inside the link,
between rivet and sleeve, a longer chain doing roughly the
same work under roughly the same gearing will spread that
wear over more links. That should mean longer useful life
mileage, albeit with a more expensive chain.
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 10:36:33 -0500, Mark J clearyI get around that for Schwalbe Big Apples which are broadly similar tyres
<mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
I really am up in the air on chain wear and the Catrike. I normally
around here on my road bike would get easily 6000 miles on a chain. I
could probably even push that 1000 miles further but never did.
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
measuring it and it is hard but some stretch not more than 1/16 over 12
pins. Currently the chain has 4000 miles on it and it shifts and spins
great. If fact due to the Teflon lube and no rain riding the chain looks
really clean. Much better than any road bike chain I ever had by far.
Would you pull it an measure now or wait a bit. I don't want to take the
thing off it is too long. Then there is the issue of tires. Clearly to
me the tires are going to last way longer. The 700 rear Schwalb is fine
no flat spot in the middle that is way flat. To me with 3 points of
contact and the rear no having the weight of a road bike rear on top of
it I should get maybe 7000 miles on the rear. The 2 front look great too
and I would think they should see some serious wear.
I routinely get 6000 miles on a chain. The additional length, mine is
about 13 feet, means that each link goes through each cog fewer times
for each miles ridden.
I easily get 7 or 8 thousand miles on the Schwalbe Green Guard
Marathons. FWIW, I just bought a set of the newest version of these
and the 20 inch versions were extremely hard to get on and off.
I don't remember the mileage I got on the Schwalbe "Race Guard" tires,
but it wasn't as much and I didn't get as much of a warning as I do
with the Greer Guards. The quite a few more miles left on them after
the first green strips show through.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 10:36:33 -0500, Mark J clearyI get around that for Schwalbe Big Apples which are broadly similar tyres >with similar tread construction but lighter weight sidewalls. Like the >Marathon pluses which I have also used, I replace when they get too cut up, >and or start picking up punctures which is a sign that they are old.
<mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
I really am up in the air on chain wear and the Catrike. I normally
around here on my road bike would get easily 6000 miles on a chain. I
could probably even push that 1000 miles further but never did.
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
measuring it and it is hard but some stretch not more than 1/16 over 12 >>> pins. Currently the chain has 4000 miles on it and it shifts and spins
great. If fact due to the Teflon lube and no rain riding the chain looks >>> really clean. Much better than any road bike chain I ever had by far.
Would you pull it an measure now or wait a bit. I don't want to take the >>> thing off it is too long. Then there is the issue of tires. Clearly to
me the tires are going to last way longer. The 700 rear Schwalb is fine >>> no flat spot in the middle that is way flat. To me with 3 points of
contact and the rear no having the weight of a road bike rear on top of >>> it I should get maybe 7000 miles on the rear. The 2 front look great too >>> and I would think they should see some serious wear.
I routinely get 6000 miles on a chain. The additional length, mine is
about 13 feet, means that each link goes through each cog fewer times
for each miles ridden.
I easily get 7 or 8 thousand miles on the Schwalbe Green Guard
Marathons. FWIW, I just bought a set of the newest version of these
and the 20 inch versions were extremely hard to get on and off.
I have replaced the front Big Apples with a Big Ben plus so slightly more >tread plus a more substantial protection layer unlikely even so that IAd
get to the see the plus wear though. Others I know do but my commute is and >has always been a bit more off road.
The rear last 3k ish but then on that bike that gets most of the weight,
and itAs a heavy bike being 20KG/44lb before IAve added change of clothes
and laptop bag etc.
The roadie no,idea the One Plus tyres have a easier life on the roadie, the >compound is apparently designed with long life, though didnAt feel for >example anywhere as skittish as say Gatorskins on wet roads, i suspect they >will outlast general road tyres but will not last as long as the >BigApple/BigBen or Marathon family, in general though I suspect the rear
will as the roadie is more balanced weight wise and itAs a lighter setup
and I carry less.
I don't remember the mileage I got on the Schwalbe "Race Guard" tires,
but it wasn't as much and I didn't get as much of a warning as I do
with the Greer Guards. The quite a few more miles left on them after
the first green strips show through.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
Roger Merriman
On 24 Aug 2026 12:19:31 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 10:36:33 -0500, Mark J clearyI get around that for Schwalbe Big Apples which are broadly similar tyres
<mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
I really am up in the air on chain wear and the Catrike. I normally
around here on my road bike would get easily 6000 miles on a chain. I >>>> could probably even push that 1000 miles further but never did.
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
measuring it and it is hard but some stretch not more than 1/16 over 12 >>>> pins. Currently the chain has 4000 miles on it and it shifts and spins >>>> great. If fact due to the Teflon lube and no rain riding the chain looks >>>> really clean. Much better than any road bike chain I ever had by far.
Would you pull it an measure now or wait a bit. I don't want to take the >>>> thing off it is too long. Then there is the issue of tires. Clearly to >>>> me the tires are going to last way longer. The 700 rear Schwalb is fine >>>> no flat spot in the middle that is way flat. To me with 3 points of
contact and the rear no having the weight of a road bike rear on top of >>>> it I should get maybe 7000 miles on the rear. The 2 front look great too >>>> and I would think they should see some serious wear.
I routinely get 6000 miles on a chain. The additional length, mine is
about 13 feet, means that each link goes through each cog fewer times
for each miles ridden.
I easily get 7 or 8 thousand miles on the Schwalbe Green Guard
Marathons. FWIW, I just bought a set of the newest version of these
and the 20 inch versions were extremely hard to get on and off.
with similar tread construction but lighter weight sidewalls. Like the
Marathon pluses which I have also used, I replace when they get too cut up, >> and or start picking up punctures which is a sign that they are old.
I have replaced the front Big Apples with a Big Ben plus so slightly more
tread plus a more substantial protection layer unlikely even so that I-Ad
get to the see the plus wear though. Others I know do but my commute is and >> has always been a bit more off road.
The rear last 3k ish but then on that bike that gets most of the weight,
and it-As a heavy bike being 20KG/44lb before I-Ave added change of clothes >> and laptop bag etc.
The roadie no,idea the One Plus tyres have a easier life on the roadie, the >> compound is apparently designed with long life, though didn-At feel for
example anywhere as skittish as say Gatorskins on wet roads, i suspect they >> will outlast general road tyres but will not last as long as the
BigApple/BigBen or Marathon family, in general though I suspect the rear
will as the roadie is more balanced weight wise and it-As a lighter setup
and I carry less.
I don't remember the mileage I got on the Schwalbe "Race Guard" tires,
but it wasn't as much and I didn't get as much of a warning as I do
with the Greer Guards. The quite a few more miles left on them after
the first green strips show through.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
Roger Merriman
44 lbs is a heavy two wheeler. My Expedition weighs 35 lbs with
nothing else on it.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 18:55:01 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 8/23/2026 5:39 PM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
The longer the chain span the higher the static tension in the chain,
so in principle a long chain should wear faster than a short one.
Support idlers would help, direction changes would hurt, but it's
hard to believe it'd matter much, especially if the idlers divide
the chain into a series of nearly-straight sections.
Rider strength would probably have more effect.
Thanks for reading,
bob prohaska
I'm curious about that statement, 'The longer the chain span
the higher the static tension in the chain"
OK, but how significant is static tension in this system?
Since we understand that chain wear is inside the link,
between rivet and sleeve, a longer chain doing roughly the
same work under roughly the same gearing will spread that
wear over more links. That should mean longer useful life
mileage, albeit with a more expensive chain.
I beg to differ. Most of the chain stretch (wear) happens between the
pin and the roller only when the pin and roller rotate relatively to
each other:
<https://www.sheldonbrown.com/chain-life.html> <https://www.sheldonbrown.com/chain-wear.html>
If you want to reduce chain stretch, find a gearing combination where
the pin rotates through a smaller angle. Ideally, that would be a
large diameter chainring and freewheel.
The rear derailleur and lower part of the chain are NOT involved. The
lower part of the chain is slack and under little tension. Therefore,
the lower part of the chain causes less abrasive wear to the pins.
Only the upper part of the chain is under tension. Therefore, you can
take a conventional bicycle, put it on an elevated test stand, install
a long chain loop, stabilize with idlers, and the wear and drag will
be unchanged (or slightly higher due to the weight of the chain
tugging on the upper part of the chain).
If you assume that ALL the pin wear (chain stretch) occurs where the
pin and roller rotate, where the chain is in tension, then you can do anything you want to the rest of the chain without affecting the
amount of wear.
Note that I didn't mention plate wear, mangled gear teeth, chain line problems, lubrication, cleaning, etc, all of which can have an effect
on pin and roller wear.
Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
Am 23.08.2026 um 18:23 schrieb Roger Merriman:IrCOm not convinced that the cadence or the entire chain is relevant, more the cleanness of the chain coupled with the load the chain is under, Mark seems to be in the upper end for chain life, my MTB which by far has the wettest and highest loads ie climbs that need one to torque your way up,
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
I really am up in the air on chain wear and the Catrike. I normally
around here on my road bike would get easily 6000 miles on a chain. I
could probably even push that 1000 miles further but never did.
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
measuring it and it is hard but some stretch not more than 1/16 over 12 >>>> pins. Currently the chain has 4000 miles on it and it shifts and spins >>>> great. If fact due to the Teflon lube and no rain riding the chain looks >>>> really clean. Much better than any road bike chain I ever had by far.
I would expect the chain to last broadly similar to a road bike, which you >>> seem to be using the trike for. I guess those with a E assist would expect >>> a shorter lifespan, but itrCOs probably less pronounced on the trike compared
to MTBing ie not in high torque loads frequently.
actually, I would expect a significantly longer chain life:
a) 216 links instead of 110 immediately doubles the life span becuae the
chain goes round half as often.
b) the majority of the wear is dirt-induced. On a road bike you have
spray from the front wheel directly onto the chain; on the trike you
don't, leaving the spray from the rear wheel sideways onto the chain as
the only source of dirt.
has quite low chain life vs the others that have a generally cleaner
gentler life, though still half the wear life that, Mark gets 3k for the Gravel and commuters 1.5 K for the MTB.
Roger Merriman
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 18:55:01 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 8/23/2026 5:39 PM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
The longer the chain span the higher the static tension in the chain,
so in principle a long chain should wear faster than a short one.
Support idlers would help, direction changes would hurt, but it's
hard to believe it'd matter much, especially if the idlers divide
the chain into a series of nearly-straight sections.
Rider strength would probably have more effect.
Thanks for reading,
bob prohaska
I'm curious about that statement, 'The longer the chain span
the higher the static tension in the chain"
OK, but how significant is static tension in this system?
Since we understand that chain wear is inside the link,
between rivet and sleeve, a longer chain doing roughly the
same work under roughly the same gearing will spread that
wear over more links. That should mean longer useful life
mileage, albeit with a more expensive chain.
Assuming most of the wear occurs as the parts rotate against each
other when the chain is wraps around cogs.
Assuming my chain is roughly three times as long the chain on a
diamond frame bike.
Assuming the gearing is the same, the diamond frame's chain will make
three complete rotations for each one of mine for the same distance
ridden. Three times more wrapping around the chain ring and three
times more wrapping around the cassette.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
On 24 Aug 2026 12:19:31 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:
Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 10:36:33 -0500, Mark J clearyI get around that for Schwalbe Big Apples which are broadly similar tyres
<mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
I really am up in the air on chain wear and the Catrike. I normally
around here on my road bike would get easily 6000 miles on a chain. I
could probably even push that 1000 miles further but never did.
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
measuring it and it is hard but some stretch not more than 1/16 over 12 >>>> pins. Currently the chain has 4000 miles on it and it shifts and spins >>>> great. If fact due to the Teflon lube and no rain riding the chain looks >>>> really clean. Much better than any road bike chain I ever had by far.
Would you pull it an measure now or wait a bit. I don't want to take the >>>> thing off it is too long. Then there is the issue of tires. Clearly to >>>> me the tires are going to last way longer. The 700 rear Schwalb is fine >>>> no flat spot in the middle that is way flat. To me with 3 points of
contact and the rear no having the weight of a road bike rear on top of >>>> it I should get maybe 7000 miles on the rear. The 2 front look great too >>>> and I would think they should see some serious wear.
I routinely get 6000 miles on a chain. The additional length, mine is
about 13 feet, means that each link goes through each cog fewer times
for each miles ridden.
I easily get 7 or 8 thousand miles on the Schwalbe Green Guard
Marathons. FWIW, I just bought a set of the newest version of these
and the 20 inch versions were extremely hard to get on and off.
with similar tread construction but lighter weight sidewalls. Like the
Marathon pluses which I have also used, I replace when they get too cut up, >> and or start picking up punctures which is a sign that they are old.
I have replaced the front Big Apples with a Big Ben plus so slightly more
tread plus a more substantial protection layer unlikely even so that IrCOd >> get to the see the plus wear though. Others I know do but my commute is and >> has always been a bit more off road.
The rear last 3k ish but then on that bike that gets most of the weight,
and itrCOs a heavy bike being 20KG/44lb before IrCOve added change of clothes
and laptop bag etc.
The roadie no,idea the One Plus tyres have a easier life on the roadie, the >> compound is apparently designed with long life, though didnrCOt feel for
example anywhere as skittish as say Gatorskins on wet roads, i suspect they >> will outlast general road tyres but will not last as long as the
BigApple/BigBen or Marathon family, in general though I suspect the rear
will as the roadie is more balanced weight wise and itrCOs a lighter setup >> and I carry less.
I don't remember the mileage I got on the Schwalbe "Race Guard" tires,
but it wasn't as much and I didn't get as much of a warning as I do
with the Greer Guards. The quite a few more miles left on them after
the first green strips show through.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
Roger Merriman
44 lbs is a heavy two wheeler. My Expedition weighs 35 lbs with
nothing else on it.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
Am 23.08.2026 um 18:23 schrieb Roger Merriman:
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
I really am up in the air on chain wear and the Catrike. I normally
around here on my road bike would get easily 6000 miles on a chain. I
could probably even push that 1000 miles further but never did.
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
measuring it and it is hard but some stretch not more than 1/16 over 12
pins. Currently the chain has 4000 miles on it and it shifts and spins
great. If fact due to the Teflon lube and no rain riding the chain looks >>> really clean. Much better than any road bike chain I ever had by far.
I would expect the chain to last broadly similar to a road bike, which you >> seem to be using the trike for. I guess those with a E assist would expect >> a shorter lifespan, but itAs probably less pronounced on the trike compared >> to MTBing ie not in high torque loads frequently.
actually, I would expect a significantly longer chain life:
a) 216 links instead of 110 immediately doubles the life span becuae the >chain goes round half as often.
b) the majority of the wear is dirt-induced. On a road bike you have
spray from the front wheel directly onto the chain; on the trike you
don't, leaving the spray from the rear wheel sideways onto the chain as
the only source of dirt.
On 8/24/2026 6:46 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
Am 23.08.2026 um 18:23 schrieb Roger Merriman:IrCOm not convinced that the cadence or the entire chain is relevant, more >> the cleanness of the chain coupled with the load the chain is under, Mark
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
I really am up in the air on chain wear and the Catrike. I normallyI would expect the chain to last broadly similar to a road bike, which you >>>> seem to be using the trike for. I guess those with a E assist would expect >>>> a shorter lifespan, but itrCOs probably less pronounced on the trike compared
around here on my road bike would get easily 6000 miles on a chain. I >>>>> could probably even push that 1000 miles further but never did.
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
measuring it and it is hard but some stretch not more than 1/16 over 12 >>>>> pins. Currently the chain has 4000 miles on it and it shifts and spins >>>>> great. If fact due to the Teflon lube and no rain riding the chain looks >>>>> really clean. Much better than any road bike chain I ever had by far. >>>>
to MTBing ie not in high torque loads frequently.
actually, I would expect a significantly longer chain life:
a) 216 links instead of 110 immediately doubles the life span becuae the >>> chain goes round half as often.
b) the majority of the wear is dirt-induced. On a road bike you have
spray from the front wheel directly onto the chain; on the trike you
don't, leaving the spray from the rear wheel sideways onto the chain as
the only source of dirt.
seems to be in the upper end for chain life, my MTB which by far has the
wettest and highest loads ie climbs that need one to torque your way up,
has quite low chain life vs the others that have a generally cleaner
gentler life, though still half the wear life that, Mark gets 3k for the
Gravel and commuters 1.5 K for the MTB.
Roger Merriman
That's not right.
The abrasion within the chain is primarily, as Mr Mantel
noted, when driving the smaller rear sprocket. Total work is
similar and top gear is similar so that wear is merely
distributed over more links.
Yes grit is a significant factor, but Mr Cleary is riding
the same paved prairie roads as before at similar speeds.
Should he switch to dirt roads (or lack thereof), wear per
mile would increase greatly.
On 8/23/2026 8:59 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 18:55:01 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 8/23/2026 5:39 PM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
The longer the chain span the higher the static tension in the chain,
so in principle a long chain should wear faster than a short one.
Support idlers would help, direction changes would hurt, but it's
hard to believe it'd matter much, especially if the idlers divide
the chain into a series of nearly-straight sections.
Rider strength would probably have more effect.
Thanks for reading,
bob prohaska
I'm curious about that statement, 'The longer the chain span
the higher the static tension in the chain"
OK, but how significant is static tension in this system?
Since we understand that chain wear is inside the link,
between rivet and sleeve, a longer chain doing roughly the
same work under roughly the same gearing will spread that
wear over more links. That should mean longer useful life
mileage, albeit with a more expensive chain.
I beg to differ.-a Most of the chain stretch (wear) happens between the
pin and the roller only when the pin and roller rotate relatively to
each other:
<https://www.sheldonbrown.com/chain-life.html>
<https://www.sheldonbrown.com/chain-wear.html>
If you want to reduce chain stretch, find a gearing combination where
the pin rotates through a smaller angle.-a Ideally, that would be a
large diameter chainring and freewheel.
The rear derailleur and lower part of the chain are NOT involved.-a The
lower part of the chain is slack and under little tension.-a Therefore,
the lower part of the chain causes less abrasive wear to the pins.
Only the upper part of the chain is under tension.-a Therefore, you can
take a conventional bicycle, put it on an elevated test stand, install
a long chain loop, stabilize with idlers, and the wear and drag will
be unchanged (or slightly higher due to the weight of the chain
tugging on the upper part of the chain).
If you assume that ALL the pin wear (chain stretch) occurs where the
pin and roller rotate, where the chain is in tension, then you can do
anything you want to the rest of the chain without affecting the
amount of wear.
Note that I didn't mention plate wear, mangled gear teeth, chain line
problems, lubrication, cleaning, etc, all of which can have an effect
on pin and roller wear.
Yes, that's right.
But Mr Cleary's vehicle has similar gearing to his road bike with a 11t
high gear. Certainly extreme designs (there are 9t high gear systems) accentuate chain wear but this is not that.
On 8/24/2026 7:53 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/23/2026 8:59 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:Mine has a 52/39/30 with an 11-36 on the rear. Pretty similar to a road >bike. As the Rules suggest I am against Triples unless they are the kink
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 18:55:01 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 8/23/2026 5:39 PM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I >>>>>> wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
The longer the chain span the higher the static tension in the chain, >>>>> so in principle a long chain should wear faster than a short one.
Support idlers would help, direction changes would hurt, but it's
hard to believe it'd matter much, especially if the idlers divide
the chain into a series of nearly-straight sections.
Rider strength would probably have more effect.
Thanks for reading,
bob prohaska
I'm curious about that statement, 'The longer the chain span
the higher the static tension in the chain"
OK, but how significant is static tension in this system?
Since we understand that chain wear is inside the link,
between rivet and sleeve, a longer chain doing roughly the
same work under roughly the same gearing will spread that
wear over more links. That should mean longer useful life
mileage, albeit with a more expensive chain.
I beg to differ.a Most of the chain stretch (wear) happens between the
pin and the roller only when the pin and roller rotate relatively to
each other:
<https://www.sheldonbrown.com/chain-life.html>
<https://www.sheldonbrown.com/chain-wear.html>
If you want to reduce chain stretch, find a gearing combination where
the pin rotates through a smaller angle.a Ideally, that would be a
large diameter chainring and freewheel.
The rear derailleur and lower part of the chain are NOT involved.a The
lower part of the chain is slack and under little tension.a Therefore,
the lower part of the chain causes less abrasive wear to the pins.
Only the upper part of the chain is under tension.a Therefore, you can
take a conventional bicycle, put it on an elevated test stand, install
a long chain loop, stabilize with idlers, and the wear and drag will
be unchanged (or slightly higher due to the weight of the chain
tugging on the upper part of the chain).
If you assume that ALL the pin wear (chain stretch) occurs where the
pin and roller rotate, where the chain is in tension, then you can do
anything you want to the rest of the chain without affecting the
amount of wear.
Note that I didn't mention plate wear, mangled gear teeth, chain line
problems, lubrication, cleaning, etc, all of which can have an effect
on pin and roller wear.
Yes, that's right.
But Mr Cleary's vehicle has similar gearing to his road bike with a 11t
high gear. Certainly extreme designs (there are 9t high gear systems)
accentuate chain wear but this is not that.
you drink, however on a recumbent they are not a problem. Ideally an
11/50 would be good if it could be worked out but not a real problem.
The FD is friction shifting and it works great never had even the
slightest issue.
Here is something you all might find odd. While I do live in the
flatlands with almost no such a thing as a hill, I ride 90% of the time
in the front big ring. I cannot see the rear but around cog 19-32 most
of the time. I can live without the granny ring here but in the
mountains it would be impossible. I would like to take this trike to the >mountains but I need someone to go along with me. Andrew, you want do
some climbing?
On Mon, 24 Aug 2026 11:55:27 +0200, Rolf Mantel
<news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
Am 23.08.2026 um 18:23 schrieb Roger Merriman:
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
I really am up in the air on chain wear and the Catrike. I normally
around here on my road bike would get easily 6000 miles on a chain. I
could probably even push that 1000 miles further but never did.
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
measuring it and it is hard but some stretch not more than 1/16 over 12 >>>> pins. Currently the chain has 4000 miles on it and it shifts and spins >>>> great. If fact due to the Teflon lube and no rain riding the chain looks >>>> really clean. Much better than any road bike chain I ever had by far.
I would expect the chain to last broadly similar to a road bike, which you >>> seem to be using the trike for. I guess those with a E assist would expect >>> a shorter lifespan, but itrCOs probably less pronounced on the trike compared
to MTBing ie not in high torque loads frequently.
actually, I would expect a significantly longer chain life:
a) 216 links instead of 110 immediately doubles the life span becuae the
chain goes round half as often.
b) the majority of the wear is dirt-induced. On a road bike you have
spray from the front wheel directly onto the chain; on the trike you
don't, leaving the spray from the rear wheel sideways onto the chain as
the only source of dirt.
I (again) beg to differ. Your analysis would be correct if the
tension on the chain was uniform along it's entire length. That's not
the case. The lower part of the chain is essentially slack with
almost no tension. All the tension is between leading tooth of the
chain wheel and the trailing tooth of the freewheel. There is very
little tension in the lower part of the chain, which is almost slack,
and around the freewheel.
Where there is tension, there is chain pin and sleeve wear. Where
there is no tension, there is very little wear. It's like sandpaper,
which represents the abrasive dirt between the pin and roller. Without
any downward pressure on sandpaper, there is no abrasion. To make
sandpaper work, you need to apply downward pressure. In a bicycle
chain, the downward pressure is the same as the chain tension.
Almost ALL the pin and roller is at the two points where the chain
movement changes direction and the chain is under tension. The
tension at every other location long the chain is NOT under tension.
Without this tension, there is no abrasive wear.
If you're not a believer that there is little or no tension, try this
test. You will need a 2nd person to perform the test.
1. Have someone sit on the bicycle. Put one foot on the ground.
2. With the other foot, apply forward chain tension by applying
pressure to the crank.
3. Move the cogs in the rear derailleur. Notice that the cogs flop
around even when the chain is under tension indicating that there is
no chain tension at this point.
This part is more difficult.
4. Put your fingers (or use pliers) to wiggle the roller where it
wraps around the crank.
5. Again, apply forward chain tension by applying pressure on the
crank.
6. Try to rotate the roller with your fingers or pliers. With chain
tension applied, you should see some movement with the roller. If the
roller moves, there is no chain tension at this point.
Bottom line. Equally distributing the chain wear along the chain only
works if the chain tension (on the pin and roller) is distributed
equally along the length of the chain. The tension, and therefore the
wear, is NOT equally distributed along the chain. Instead, it's
concentrated on two points (leading tooth of the chain wheel and the
trailing tooth of the freewheel).
On 8/23/2026 5:39 PM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
The longer the chain span the higher the static tension in the chain,
so in principle a long chain should wear faster than a short one.
Support idlers would help, direction changes would hurt, but it's
hard to believe it'd matter much, especially if the idlers divide
the chain into a series of nearly-straight sections.
Rider strength would probably have more effect.
Thanks for reading,
bob prohaska
I'm curious about that statement, 'The longer the chain span the higher
the static tension in the chain"
OK, but how significant is static tension in this system?
Since we understand that chain wear is inside the link, between rivet
and sleeve, a longer chain doing roughly the same work under roughly the same gearing will spread that wear over more links.
longer useful life mileage, albeit with a more expensive chain.
On 8/23/2026 6:55 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/23/2026 5:39 PM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:To me the pedaling in recumbent is more continuous than a road bike but
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
The longer the chain span the higher the static tension in the chain,
so in principle a long chain should wear faster than a short one.
Support idlers would help, direction changes would hurt, but it's
hard to believe it'd matter much, especially if the idlers divide
the chain into a series of nearly-straight sections.
Rider strength would probably have more effect.
Thanks for reading,
bob prohaska
I'm curious about that statement, 'The longer the chain span the
higher the static tension in the chain"
OK, but how significant is static tension in this system?
Since we understand that chain wear is inside the link, between rivet
and sleeve, a longer chain doing roughly the same work under roughly
the same gearing will spread that wear over more links. That should
mean longer useful life mileage, albeit with a more expensive chain.
the peak power the same. You can stand on the road bike and produce much more tension but it might be centered more around the chain ring than
the chain links individually. My pedaling scheme on the Catrike is way different. I tend to hard off and on all the time. On the upright it is
much more even and static same cadence always going. On the trike I will
on purpose really smoke and push and downhill grade because it gets up
to speed faster with more weight. Then I sit and coast for awhile. I
tend to dig in and pull back and up. On the road bike none of that
happens really. It to me is a curious question. I ask google AI and got
the opposite answer as ChatGPT.
On 8/24/2026 11:52 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 24 Aug 2026 11:55:27 +0200, Rolf Mantel
<news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
Am 23.08.2026 um 18:23 schrieb Roger Merriman:
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
I really am up in the air on chain wear and the
Catrike. I normally
around here on my road bike would get easily 6000 miles
on a chain. I
could probably even push that 1000 miles further but
never did.
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216
links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this
chain? I tried
measuring it and it is hard but some stretch not more
than 1/16 over 12
pins. Currently the chain has 4000 miles on it and it
shifts and spins
great. If fact due to the Teflon lube and no rain
riding the chain looks
really clean. Much better than any road bike chain I
ever had by far.
I would expect the chain to last broadly similar to a
road bike, which you
seem to be using the trike for. I guess those with a E
assist would expect
a shorter lifespan, but itrCOs probably less pronounced on
the trike compared
to MTBing ie not in high torque loads frequently.
actually, I would expect a significantly longer chain life:
a) 216 links instead of 110 immediately doubles the life
span becuae the
chain goes round half as often.
b) the majority of the wear is dirt-induced.-a On a road
bike you have
spray from the front wheel directly onto the chain; on
the trike you
don't, leaving the spray from the rear wheel sideways
onto the chain as
the only source of dirt.
I (again) beg to differ.-a Your analysis would be correct
if the
tension on the chain was uniform along it's entire
length.-a That's not
the case.-a The lower part of the chain is essentially
slack with
almost no tension.-a All the tension is between leading
tooth of the
chain wheel and the trailing tooth of the freewheel.
There is very
little tension in the lower part of the chain, which is
almost slack,
and around the freewheel.
Where there is tension, there is chain pin and sleeve
wear.-a Where
there is no tension, there is very little wear.-a It's like
sandpaper,
which represents the abrasive dirt between the pin and
roller. Without
any downward pressure on sandpaper, there is no abrasion.
To make
sandpaper work, you need to apply downward pressure.-a In a
bicycle
chain, the downward pressure is the same as the chain
tension.
Almost ALL the pin and roller is at the two points where
the chain
movement changes direction and the chain is under
tension.-a The
tension at every other location long the chain is NOT
under tension.
Without this tension, there is no abrasive wear.
If you're not a believer that there is little or no
tension, try this
test.-a You will need a 2nd person to perform the test.
1.-a Have someone sit on the bicycle.-a Put one foot on the
ground.
2.-a With the other foot, apply forward chain tension by
applying
pressure to the crank.
3.-a Move the cogs in the rear derailleur.-a Notice that the
cogs flop
around even when the chain is under tension indicating
that there is
no chain tension at this point.
This part is more difficult.
4.-a Put your fingers (or use pliers) to wiggle the roller
where it
wraps around the crank.
5.-a Again, apply forward chain tension by applying
pressure on the
crank.
6.-a Try to rotate the roller with your fingers or pliers.
With chain
tension applied, you should see some movement with the
roller.-a If the
roller moves, there is no chain tension at this point.
Bottom line.-a Equally distributing the chain wear along
the chain only
works if the chain tension (on the pin and roller) is
distributed
equally along the length of the chain.-a The tension, and
therefore the
wear, is NOT equally distributed along the chain.
Instead, it's
concentrated on two points (leading tooth of the chain
wheel and the
trailing tooth of the freewheel).
1) you're not wrong
b) Andrew didn't mention anything about chain tension
(unless that was your point).
Andrew is correct on both his counts. You're also correct.
You're speaking to a different issue.
On 8/23/2026 7:55 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/23/2026 5:39 PM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216
links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain?
I tried
The longer the chain span the higher the static tension
in the chain,
so in principle a long chain should wear faster than a
short one.
Support idlers would help, direction changes would hurt,
but it's
hard to believe it'd matter much, especially if the
idlers divide
the chain into a series of nearly-straight sections.
Rider strength would probably have more effect.
Thanks for reading,
bob prohaska
I'm curious about that statement, 'The longer the chain
span the higher the static tension in the chain"
OK, but how significant is static tension in this system?
He's not wrong, but the effect is probably several orders of
magnitude smaller.
Since we understand that chain wear is inside the link,
between rivet and sleeve, a longer chain doing roughly the
same work under roughly the same gearing will spread that
wear over more links.
I don't think that part is right. Since the chain is longer
and therefore only under the stress half the time is
correct, but the load is the same becasue the plane of the
force is linear. Whether the chain is 1 foot long or 100
feet long doesn't make a difference to the load applied at
each link*. Applying 1000 pounds of force at one end will
still result in the 1000 pounds to each link in the series.
If you had two chains in parallel it would distribute the load.
* If the chain were vertical you would see extra stress at
the top link which would decrease as you went lower due to
the weight of the chain. As with Bobs posit, this would add
more stress to that part of the system, not a factor in this
case, however.
That should mean
longer useful life mileage, albeit with a more expensive-aStill correct.
chain.
On 8/23/2026 5:39 PM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
The longer the chain span the higher the static tension in the chain,
so in principle a long chain should wear faster than a short one.
Support idlers would help, direction changes would hurt, but it's
hard to believe it'd matter much, especially if the idlers divide
the chain into a series of nearly-straight sections.
Rider strength would probably have more effect.
Thanks for reading,
bob prohaska
I'm curious about that statement, 'The longer the chain span
the higher the static tension in the chain"
OK, but how significant is static tension in this system?
Since we understand that chain wear is inside the link,
between rivet and sleeve, a longer chain doing roughly the
same work under roughly the same gearing will spread that
wear over more links. That should mean longer useful life
mileage, albeit with a more expensive chain.
AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 8/23/2026 5:39 PM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:
Mark J cleary <mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
The Catrike has this long drivetrain I think around 216 links and I
wonder what any think as to the longevity of this chain? I tried
The longer the chain span the higher the static tension in the chain,
so in principle a long chain should wear faster than a short one.
Support idlers would help, direction changes would hurt, but it's
hard to believe it'd matter much, especially if the idlers divide
the chain into a series of nearly-straight sections.
Rider strength would probably have more effect.
Thanks for reading,
bob prohaska
I'm curious about that statement, 'The longer the chain span
the higher the static tension in the chain"
OK, but how significant is static tension in this system?
After thinking about it, probably not very.... At least by
itself.
Since we understand that chain wear is inside the link,
between rivet and sleeve, a longer chain doing roughly the
same work under roughly the same gearing will spread that
wear over more links. That should mean longer useful life
mileage, albeit with a more expensive chain.
If I remember my trigonometry correctly, tension is proportional
to chain span divided by chain sag. For a fixed sag distance, at
some length the tension will grow faster than the span. On a real
chain and sprocket, all the tension falls on the first and last
links of the span.
The work the rider does on the chain is the sum of the work
done within the chain plus the work delivered to the driven
cog. At some length, the internal losses become significant.
That length depends on the perfection of the chain and its
lubrication.
The page at
https://handcalcs.app/help/chain-sag-allowance
posits a 2% sag ratio, presumably in a clean environment with
good lubrication, albeit allowing more in "slow, lightly-loaded"
chains. The sag ratio on my derailer bike appears to be considerably
less. And, the lubrication is neither perfect nor the environment
clean 8-)
That suggests bikes with derailers run chains on the tight side,
perhaps to the point that it makes a difference for 'bents. In
particular, it's hard to keep a chain that long really clean.
Thanks for writing,
bob prohaska
That's not right.
The abrasion within the chain is primarily, as Mr Mantel
noted, when driving the smaller rear sprocket. Total work is
similar and top gear is similar so that wear is merely
distributed over more links.
Yes grit is a significant factor, but Mr Cleary is riding
the same paved prairie roads as before at similar speeds.
Should he switch to dirt roads (or lack thereof), wear per
mile would increase greatly.
On Mon, 24 Aug 2026 07:59:24 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
(...)
That's not right.
The abrasion within the chain is primarily, as Mr Mantel
noted, when driving the smaller rear sprocket. Total work is
similar and top gear is similar so that wear is merely
distributed over more links.
At the risk of being repetitive, I'll try again. I agree with
everything above except for the word "primarily". In order to produce
chain stretch, two conditions must be met.
(A) Relative motion (rotation) between the chain pin and roller.
(B) The chain pin and roller must be under tension at the points
where the above relative motion occurs.
The points and areas of the chain, where the chain is slack (not under tension) qualify for (A) but not (B). The pin and roller can spin
merrily, but without pressure applied between the pin and roller, but
there isn't going to be any abrasive wear without chain tension.
There is also the lower part of the chain, the chain wrap around the freewheel and chain ring, and the rear derailleur pulleys. These
areas experience considerable relative motion between the pin and
roller (A), but without tension, there isn't going to be any abrasion. Sandpaper is a good analogy. Without downward pressure, sandpaper
doesn't work.
The rear derailleur pulleys are under some tension, but not enough to
be considered a primary cause of chain wear.
The top of the chain qualifies for (B) but not (A). There is plenty
of chain tension, because that part of the chain is what causes the
bicycle to move. However, there no relative motion between the pins
and rollers in the upper part of the chain to cause abrasion. It's
like pushing down on the sandpaper. Without having any relative
motion between the sandpaper and the object being sanded, there will
be no abrasion.
Therefore, I do NOT consider abrasion as the primary cause of chain
stretch (wear). I consider the relative motion of the pin and roller,
while under tension, to be the primary cause. If you don't believe
me, clean a chain, remove all the oil and wax, and try riding. Without abrasive grit, the chain will soon be destroyed by metal to metal
friction.
Yes grit is a significant factor, but Mr Cleary is riding
the same paved prairie roads as before at similar speeds.
Should he switch to dirt roads (or lack thereof), wear per
mile would increase greatly.
While I'm being repetitive, I should mumble something about the effect
of a long chain, as in the Catrike. If I compare a common diamond
frame bicycle chain, with the chain on a Catrike, and ride for a fixed distance, and mark one link on the two chains, the shorter chain mark
will pass by a fixed point on the frame, many more times with the
short chain, then with the longer Catrike chain. Because the chain
wear only occurs when the ping and roller rotate relative to each
other, the long chain will show fewer pin/roller rotations than the
longer Catrike chain. With fewer rotations per mile for the longer
chain, there will be less chain wear. If the chain loop length was
twice as long for the Catrike chain, then under ideal circumstances
and all other things being equal (frame geometry, gearing, chain lube,
etc), the longer chain should last twice as long.
On 8/25/2026 3:00 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 24 Aug 2026 07:59:24 -0500, AMuziThis makes sense to me and the issue of grit and grime for
<am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
(...)
That's not right.
The abrasion within the chain is primarily, as Mr Mantel
noted, when driving the smaller rear sprocket. Total work is
similar and top gear is similar so that wear is merely
distributed over more links.
At the risk of being repetitive, I'll try again.-a I agree
with
everything above except for the word "primarily".-a In
order to produce
chain stretch, two conditions must be met.
(A)-a Relative motion (rotation) between the chain pin and
roller.
(B)-a The chain pin and roller must be under tension at the
points
where the above relative motion occurs.
The points and areas of the chain, where the chain is
slack (not under
tension) qualify for (A) but not (B).-a The pin and roller
can spin
merrily, but without pressure applied between the pin and
roller, but
there isn't going to be any abrasive wear without chain
tension.
There is also the lower part of the chain, the chain wrap
around the
freewheel and chain ring, and the rear derailleur
pulleys.-a These
areas experience considerable relative motion between the
pin and
roller (A), but without tension, there isn't going to be
any abrasion.
Sandpaper is a good analogy.-a Without downward pressure,
sandpaper
doesn't work.
The rear derailleur pulleys are under some tension, but
not enough to
be considered a primary cause of chain wear.
The top of the chain qualifies for (B) but not (A).-a There
is plenty
of chain tension, because that part of the chain is what
causes the
bicycle to move.-a However, there no relative motion
between the pins
and rollers in the upper part of the chain to cause
abrasion.-a It's
like pushing down on the sandpaper.-a Without having any
relative
motion between the sandpaper and the object being sanded,
there will
be no abrasion.
Therefore, I do NOT consider abrasion as the primary cause
of chain
stretch (wear).-a I consider the relative motion of the pin
and roller,
while under tension, to be the primary cause.-a If you
don't believe
me, clean a chain, remove all the oil and wax, and try
riding. Without
abrasive grit, the chain will soon be destroyed by metal
to metal
friction.
Yes grit is a significant factor, but Mr Cleary is riding
the same paved prairie roads as before at similar speeds.
Should he switch to dirt roads (or lack thereof), wear per
mile would increase greatly.
While I'm being repetitive, I should mumble something
about the effect
of a long chain, as in the Catrike.-a If I compare a common
diamond
frame bicycle chain, with the chain on a Catrike, and ride
for a fixed
distance, and mark one link on the two chains, the shorter
chain mark
will pass by a fixed point on the frame, many more times
with the
short chain, then with the longer Catrike chain.-a Because
the chain
wear only occurs when the ping and roller rotate relative
to each
other, the long chain will show fewer pin/roller rotations
than the
longer Catrike chain.-a With fewer rotations per mile for
the longer
chain, there will be less chain wear.-a If the chain loop
length was
twice as long for the Catrike chain, then under ideal
circumstances
and all other things being equal (frame geometry, gearing,
chain lube,
etc), the longer chain should last twice as long.
me is not present. I don't ride near the sand or sea or even
go out when it rains. I have gotten caught in some rain but
not often. It can be a wet pavement but not very much so I
think non existent wear.
My thought about the wear is that given dry roads, good dry
lube, and nothing approaching even a mild grade, I should
get a lot of miles on the chain.
In my case when I first got the Catrike for the first 2000
miles I did not lube it much to me it looked very clean.
Well it is metal on metal so an issue. Lubing the chain is a
royal pain in the ass. The Finish Line Teflon lube I use
drips very easy and seems a lot of waste in excess lube as I
drip it on the links. I think I counted about eleven pedal
rotations to get back to the starting link.
Finally , the steepest grade you will find here in the
world's number on corn growing county is about 2.5%. That
might last for 1/2 mile. Now that I am use to the pedal
stroke even though there is no saddle under my butt and can
mimic a point in the crotch that almost acts as a saddle
point. I have to do more pulling up and back and now with
the season of riding I am way better at it than I ever was
and ever thought I would get.
Since I have taken a good drivetrain tune up and clean about
1000 miles ago I have not had any shifting issues or chain
problems. I did buy an aluminum foil baking pan so I can
pull the chain and soak it in paint thinner for the next
clean. When I do this I can get a better idea of the chain
stretch. Since I can get an 11-36 sram or shimano cassette
for about $35 no need to worry about the cassette wear. I
seriously doubt any real weat but who knows.
Also any difference in running a SHimano Cassette vs a Scram
with KLM chain?
This makes sense to me and the issue of grit and grime for me is not >present.
Finally , the steepest grade you will find here in the world's number on >corn growing county is about 2.5%. That might last for 1/2 mile.
Also any difference in running a SHimano Cassette vs a Scram with KLM
chain?
On Tue, 25 Aug 2026 15:47:46 -0500, Mark J cleary
<mcleary08@comcast.net> wrote:
This makes sense to me and the issue of grit and grime for me is not
present.
Oh-oh. Nobody agrees with me that easily. I must have done something
wrong.
"We Lab Tested A Dirty Chain, How Much Slower Was It?" <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFwkW0CY7qA> (18:35)
"We put a very dirty chain head-to-head against a best-case scenario
waxed chain at Ceramic Speed HQ to measure the real-world difference
in drivetrain efficiency. The results will blow your mind, as the
biggest factor for watt loss wasn't dirt or a lack of wax, but
something all cyclists do every time they ride: changing gear and
sprocket size. See the full experiment and learn the surprising truth
about how to save a huge amount of power on your bike!"
Finally , the steepest grade you will find here in the world's number on
corn growing county is about 2.5%. That might last for 1/2 mile.
Thank you for demonstrating that the earth is flat (at least in some
places).
I live in Santa Cruz county, which has a topography resembling a
crumpled sheet of paper:
<https://maps.app.goo.gl/NAt5LYXCMR8jFjGw5>
It's much the same along the central California coast line. A common complaint is that there are few places in Santa Cruz county where one
can accurately checked their vehicle oil level. Enjoy your flat earth
and yes, I'm jealous.
Also any difference in running a SHimano Cassette vs a Scram with KLM
chain?
Sorry, I don't know. I don't have any practical experience with those components.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 74 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 09:42:38 |
| Calls: | 1,194 |
| Files: | 1,353 |
| D/L today: |
2 files (1,590K bytes) |
| Messages: | 292,239 |