Extra long tourer chain

[Vetus Ossa]

Have to agree with the above. Even if you never “intentionally” select big ring, big sprocket, the chances are one day you will and as mentioned, that is not a good thing.

[Mick F]

I have 116 links on Moulton.

114 links on a Campag chain include a special outer link.
Get rid of that!
Now 113 links, with an inner link at both ends.

Take two quick links. These are outer links of course.
Take an inner link from a spare set of links. Be careful it will fall apart.
Fit one quick link at one end plus the spare inner link.
Take the other quick link and join the chain.
Hey presto, 116 link chain.

I did this to make a 118 link chain by using three spare links - one outer plus an inner at each end - and used two quick links as before with the 113 links.

[NetworkMan]

Try this, I have always found it to be "in the parish"!

http://www.machinehead-software.co.uk/b ... hcalc.html

You can do it without any of these new-fangled aids!
Take one steel rule, one pencil and the back of an envelope.
For all common varieties of bicycle in units of links:-
Half way round the largest sprocket + half way round the largest chainring + twice the chainstay length + 2 links, rounded up to an even number.
If you deliberately use big to big - not a good idea - then add 4 links not 2, to save some strain.
My tourer has 17.9 inch chainstays, 48T big ring and 34T big sprocket
so it needs 17.9*4 + 48/2 + 34/2 + 2 = 114.6 links so round up to 116 links.
I bought a KMC since it had 116 links.

[KTHSullivan]

http://www.machinehead-software.co.uk/b ... hcalc.html


QED!

[NetworkMan]

http://www.machinehead-software.co.uk/bike/chain_length/chainlengthcalc.html


QED!

Yes, I'd expect it to agree. The error in the quick and dirty method only becomes significant when the chain is running far from horizontal so that the chainstay length approximation is not near enough. For that you need a relatively tiny biggest sprocket which is unlikely. edit:- or short chainstays.

Is gaz, king of search, here? I vaguely remember on the old CTC site there was a hideous account of someone trying to select big-to-big by mistake with consequences beyond a 'simple' jam. I can't find the reference though.