Chain ring alloy

[bgnukem]

Changing the chain at 0.5% wear might help, seems to have been recommended on here in the past by Brucey as a way to minimise chainring wear.

The worn chain can be kept and re-used later when a new chain will no longer run on the part-worn chainrings without skipping.

I get the impression that chainrings have become thinner to fit narrower chains as more speeds have been squeezed into transmissions, so that won't help current chainring wear vs. previous experience. My bikes are running either 8- or 9-speeds at the rear but I've no choice but to buy 10- or 11-speed compatible chainrings and they certainly seem thinner than the 7/8-speed compatible TA and Stronglight 'rings I've bought in the past.

[gbnz]

Changing the chain at 0.5% wear might help, seems to have been recommended on here in the past by Brucey as a way to minimise chainring wear.

The worn chain can be kept and re-used later when a new chain will no longer run on the part-worn chainrings without skipping.

I get the impression that chainrings have become thinner to fit narrower chains as more speeds have been squeezed into transmissions, so that won't help current chainring wear vs. previous experience

True. Though both my long lasting Giant & Specialized chainsets were 9spd, whilst I run the on 8spd

I wasn't having a go at ...., the zicra chainrings look fantastic and are cheap. But I seriously need to review the lifespan, as I'm on the third set in 6-7 years. And seem's incredible that a Giant (Campag) chainset could do a minimum of 150 miles a week, for five yr's, prior to having to think about replacement. Whilst the Specialized did an initial 15 months on tour, 4 No. panniers, high mileage, will have felt the need to change it a year or two after returning.

Whilst I'm noticing serious wear within 9 months of fitting the zicral chainrings, whilst doing a fraction of that mileage. Will definitely have to record mileage, to verify how many miles the zicral rings last, prior to serious wear.

[531colin]

............ But the chainring is just about worn out, badly hooked.

Picture?

Sorry, no camera. Was going to edit the post as I suspect any replacement alloy chainring would wear in the same manner. The Spa zicral chainrings look very impressive/high quality when new, but possibly they and others don't last as long as Shimano/Campag originals?

I know the Campag originals on my road bike will easily have done 3-4 times the mileage of the replacement chainrings, with no where near the hooking signs of wear (Nb. Though could it be due to elevation causing excess wear? A quick check shows my 22 mile quick evening spin on the Campags had a 200' climb, whilst my 22 mile quick evening spin on the Spa's has a 1350' climb. Now in a much hiller part of the country )

So, maybe 6 times the climbing on the Spa rings? per ride?
I wouldn't be at all surprised if it was high load which wears out teeth, rather than high mileage at low load.
For example, now that I'm old and weak, it looks like cycle parts will last for ever.
...and with a worn chain, the wear on the teeth is noticeably fast....I understand this is because the rollers on a worn chain are further apart so the load is taken by a reduced number of teeth; ie a higher load per tooth.

Without knowing what the tooth wear looks like I think its pointless trying to make comparisons.
This is what chainring wear looks like if you replace chains before they have worn so that they no longer fit the tooth profile. ........

IMG_5475 by 531colin, on Flickr

The worn chainring is at the top, and you can see the wear occurs part-way up the tooth, there is a dent worn in the loaded face of the tooth and I can feel a "hook" with my finger. These chainrings are recoverable (so far!) by filing the teeth to remove the "hook". viewtopic.php?p=1616352&hilit=reverse+w ... e#p1616352

However, if you wear a chain so that the rollers are significantly further apart, then the chain no longer fits the tooth profile and the chain sits higher up the teeth so the teeth wear to a point at the tip. In such cases I suspect the speed or degree of tooth wear is governed by the degree of chain wear rather than mileage.
The cassette which features in the thread I linked did at least 10 winters, due to replacing the chain before the worn chain damaged the cassette. The chainrings could well be older, but I don't keep records.

[gbnz]

I've absolutely no doubt that each and every ride on the Zicral chainrings, will have involved significant climbs. Easy enough to work out the climb on the Giant, as I was very much into set routes at the time and it was in a FLAT part of the country. The Giant had a Campag Mirage chainset, not sure if it was some hardened steel, or whatever.

The chains won't have been remotely worn, as I'm a pedantic........thus checking to see the extent of chain wear, date the chain was replaced, lubricant used on any month between July 2018 and July 2021 is straightforward enough. Likewise the chain make, connecting link used, cleaning regime etc, etc, etc! Notable that there's still no appreciable wear on the cassette, fitted back at the start of July '18 (Nb. Though obviously on fitting a new chainset, new cassette, chain etc is routine; will keep usable parts of the the older gearset for further use elsewhere)

[gbnz]

the zicra chainrings look fantastic and are cheap. But I seriously need to review the lifespan,

Whilst I'm noticing serious wear within 9 months of fitting the zicral chainrings........Will definitely have to record mileage, to verify how many miles the zicral rings last, prior to serious wear.

And now have that chance, gearset due for renewal.

On reviewing the bike on Saturday, interesting that the £2.49 steel outer chainring, still has 2-3 yr's of life left on it (Nb. Perhaps 10-15% wear of the tooth material). While the £25+ (Nb. Inc. delivery) zicral middle chainring, supposedly a specially "hard wearing" alloy, is absolutely knackered, with perhaps 30-35% of the tooth material left.

Never had a chainring in such a worn out state, despite only having done a fraction of my normal mileage on it , over a 3.5 yr period since fitting. And only 5 days carrying a touring load, not a single day carrying a commuting load, during that period.

Clearly I'll have done a much higher mileage on the middle chainring, than the outer. That said, I've had bottom of the range, steel Shimano / Campag middle chainrings, which will have done ten times the mileage of the Zicral chainring, without a fraction of the wear.

Will definitely be looking out for some cheap, bottom of the range, steel chainset on sale over the next 3 years. It'd make more sense to buy, dismantle and scrap half a chainset, to get hold of steel chainrings. Rather than Zicral rings, which wear like butter!

[Jules59]

When I got back into road cycling at the age of 50 in 2009, having not ridden since a teenager, I was surprised at how fast the chains and gears wore. I guess its because I'm a lot heavier, do a more miles, the gears have changed from steel to aluminium alloy and the chains are much lighter.
From my experience Shimano gears seem to wear much more quickly than Stronglight and TA, and trying to get information about Shimano's alloy proved very difficult/impossible.

[bgnukem]

Another factor might be thinner chainring teeth. It seems to be, from comparing older rings designed for use with 6-8 speed chains and those for 9-speed upwards, that the older rings have wider teeth, which I guess might jam inside the narrower chains.

Assuming the same chainring alloys, the thinner teeth might be expected to wear faster?

Am trying replacing my chains at 0.5% wear now, rather than at 1k mile intervals as I used to, sto see if it works. I expect to be buying a lot of chains though and finding it harder to keep abreast of chain changes on four different bikes!

[gbnz]

Another factor might be thinner chainring teeth.

+ 1. Whilst I unfortunately scrapped my last 12 spd bike years ago, there's no doubt the chainrings on 6spd systems were thicker.

But to be fair, without access to high tolerance measuring equipment, visually there'd appear to be little difference in thickness between my 8 spd steel & zicral rings. Having been able to source a couple of super cheap outer steel rings for stock, merely need to find a cheap steel middle ring (Nb. Whilst making do with an incredibly expensive, new zicral middle ring. But the maintenance spreadsheet shows that the last zicral middle, was heavily worn within 9 months)

So £26 zicral, heavily worn after 9 months, absolutely unusable after 3.5 yr's
And £2.49 steel, 2+ years of wear left after 3.5 years use

Definitely worth scouring for a cheap, "scrap" steel chainset over the next three years

[cyclop]

Use a steel middle,the wt. difference is minimal.

[bgnukem]

I guess there's steel and steel. Used to be possible to buy decent quality steel 'rings but now they are budget only.

I find the cheap Stronglight granny 'rings I've used are quite thick but the steel seems very soft and large burrs of displaced/deformed material form at the edges of the teeth quite quickly in use which lead to chain suck and need grinding off. I'm guessing the steel used isn't particularly hard, and/or the surfaces of the teeth are perhaps not very smooth/flat.

[cycle tramp]

I might have written this before, but just in case I haven't, provided the chainring is mounted using symmetrical bolt circle and the chainring is flat without ramps, then the chainring's life can be extended by;

a) advancing the chain ring by one mounting hole at regular intervals (most chainring wear occurs at a point 90 degrees to the cranks - by taking off the chainring and the advancing it by one mounting hole, the chainring wear is spread over the whole chainring)

b) flipping the chainring over once wear begins to show, so that the chain is picked up by the unworn surface of the teeth.

[Slowtwitch]

I've been using Zircal rings for about ten years, I always replace oem rings with usually Stronglight and I've noticed a significant difference in longevity. Campagnolo rings I find very soft, especially anything since ten speed. The older 8 speed Chorus and Record were very long wearing.

[Jules59]

I might have written this before, but just in case I haven't, provided the chainring is mounted using symmetrical bolt circle and the chainring is flat without ramps, then the chainring's life can be extended by;

a) advancing the chain ring by one mounting hole at regular intervals (most chainring wear occurs at a point 90 degrees to the cranks - by taking off the chainring and the advancing it by one mounting hole, the chainring wear is spread over the whole chainring)

b) flipping the chainring over once wear begins to show, so that the chain is picked up by the unworn surface of the teeth.

A lot of outer chain rings have a pin designed to stop an off chain jamming between the crank and chain ring and therefore if has to be aligned with the the crank for it to work.

[cycle tramp]

I might have written this before, but just in case I haven't, provided the chainring is mounted using symmetrical bolt circle and the chainring is flat without ramps, then the chainring's life can be extended by;

a) advancing the chain ring by one mounting hole at regular intervals (most chainring wear occurs at a point 90 degrees to the cranks - by taking off the chainring and the advancing it by one mounting hole, the chainring wear is spread over the whole chainring)

b) flipping the chainring over once wear begins to show, so that the chain is picked up by the unworn surface of the teeth.

A lot of outer chain rings have a pin designed to stop an off chain jamming between the crank and chain ring and therefore if has to be aligned with the the crank for it to work.

That's very true - outer chainrings may have pins, which is a good thing.
However outer chainrings tend to wear slower (more teeth/less use) and sometimes the pins are screwed in, meaning when you flip the chainring over you can screw the pin out and then back in from the other side. It's like the manufacturer has thought about their products and how their customers can get the best service life from it.
And in some cases the pin is fixed. And again that's no biggie. It's a bicycle not a rocket ship. Just drill a hole in the chainring where the pin should be and bolt through a m3 bolt to use as the new pin. Simples.

[alexnharvey]

I guess there's steel and steel. Used to be possible to buy decent quality steel 'rings but now they are budget only.

I find the cheap Stronglight granny 'rings I've used are quite thick but the steel seems very soft and large burrs of displaced/deformed material form at the edges of the teeth quite quickly in use which lead to chain suck and need grinding off. I'm guessing the steel used isn't particularly hard, and/or the surfaces of the teeth are perhaps not very smooth/flat.

That's not correct. There are a few companies making CNC stainless steel chainrings. Not budget, which tend to be pressed steel, but not prohibitively expensive either. Also seeing increased popularity for e-bikes.