Chain length again!

For discussions about bikes and equipment.
Brucey
Posts: 46822
Joined: 4 Jan 2012, 6:25pm

Re: Chain length again!

Post by Brucey »

FWIW I basically agree with slowster, however I would also note that any direct measurement of chainstay length will also be subject to unwanted parallax errors which could easily make the chainstays seem 5mm longer than the actual c-to-c distance.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Cyclothesist
Posts: 1023
Joined: 7 Oct 2023, 11:34am
Location: Scotland

Re: Chain length again!

Post by Cyclothesist »

deliquium wrote: 23 Nov 2023, 7:07pm
slowster wrote: 23 Nov 2023, 6:27pm
deliquium wrote: 23 Nov 2023, 6:11pm Chainstays are 470mm (18½")
I don't think that can be right. If they are 470mm, you would need a 122 link chain for the 38 x 51 gear.

Is the bike your Boardman? If so, the current model's chainstays are 425mm, and I doubt that the chainstay length has changed significantly from your model.

https://www.boardmanbikes.com/gb_en/pro ... #technical
I do appreciate your patience and my drib dribble of relevant info slowster -

No, this bike is a Cube Reaction Hybrid Pro, 11 speed with 470mm chainstays

And I was therefore further confused (perfectly normal and default for me) at entering the relevant details into the link you posted

It has to be me, not seeing the wood for the trees :(

Added to which the as delivered Cube 470mm chainstay/38 chainring/11-51 cassette/120 link chain -

- does indeed have 122 links if one includes the 'magic' joining link!

Any road up, the 'cheap' KMC E11 116 link chain has been ordered - and all will be revealed/obvious soon
122 links on the original alters my previous calculation by 2 - so 118 links to be safe. If you're lucky and the original chain is generously sized 116 might just do it but I wouldn't fit it without measuring round big sprocket and chainring plus 4 links.
slowster
Moderator
Posts: 5674
Joined: 7 Jul 2017, 10:37am

Re: Chain length again!

Post by slowster »

deliquium wrote: 23 Nov 2023, 7:07pm Here's the result of that, see screengrab = 59 links?
Image
59 x 2 = 118!

I think a 116 link chain will only work if the chainstays are 467mm or less, which is possible depending upon the manufacturing tolerances, but I would not be too hopeful of that.
Steve O'C
Posts: 187
Joined: 3 Mar 2013, 1:32pm

Re: Chain length again!

Post by Steve O'C »

Short Answer;
Yes it will be fine to use a 116 link chain on the new setup.
Reasoning:
OP has stated that 120 link chain works fine on current setup. The only change being made is reducing the largest rear sprocket from 51 to 42 so down by 9 teeth. Each reduction in tooth number allows for a chain that is half a link shorter, so in this case a chain that is 4 links shorter (116 links) should be slightly slacker than the current 120 link chain on the existing setup.
Steve
Last edited by Steve O'C on 23 Nov 2023, 10:28pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
andrew_s
Posts: 5869
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 9:29pm
Location: Gloucestershire

Re: Chain length again!

Post by andrew_s »

roubaixtuesday wrote: 23 Nov 2023, 3:59pmRoughly speaking, I think you can cope with N/4 less links for a reduction of N teeth in the big cog: the chain wraps round half of the teeth, and you get two teeth per link?
It depends what you call a link. A chain sold as 116 links has 115 pins, or maybe 117 if you count the quicklink.
Therefore both inner and outer links count 1, and the difference between 51T and 42T is 9, half of which is 4.5.
You can only change chain length in increments of 2, so a 120 link chain can be reduced to 116 links, but a 114 link chain would (probably) be too short unless the current chain is over-long.
Cyclothesist
Posts: 1023
Joined: 7 Oct 2023, 11:34am
Location: Scotland

Re: Chain length again!

Post by Cyclothesist »

Steve O'C wrote: 23 Nov 2023, 8:32pm Short Answer;
Yes it will be fine to use a 116 link chain on the new setup.
Reasoning:
OP has stated that 120 link chain works fine on current setup. The only change being made is reducing the largest rear sprocket from 51 to 42 so down by 9 teeth. Each reduction in tooth number allows for a chain that is half a link shorter, so in this case a chain that is 4 links shorter (116 links) should be slightly slacker than the current 120 link chain on the existing setup.
Steve
Except he later corrected that to 122 links for the original chain. That adds another 2 links to the new set up too (=118 links). It's only going to fit if the 122 links is a tad long.
Last edited by Cyclothesist on 24 Nov 2023, 10:07am, edited 1 time in total.
Steve O'C
Posts: 187
Joined: 3 Mar 2013, 1:32pm

Re: Chain length again!

Post by Steve O'C »

Thanks cyclothesist, I had missed the updated chain length measurement :oops:
Steve
User avatar
Chris Jeggo
Posts: 670
Joined: 3 Jul 2010, 9:44am
Location: Surrey

Re: Chain length again!

Post by Chris Jeggo »

deliquium wrote: 23 Nov 2023, 7:07pm
- does indeed have 122 links if one includes the 'magic' joining link!

Any road up, the 'cheap' KMC E11 116 link chain has been ordered - and all will be revealed/obvious soon
If 116 links turns out to be too short you can still use your KMC E11 chain using two quicklinks joined together with a single inner link between them.
User avatar
deliquium
Posts: 2498
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 3:40pm
Location: Eryri

Re: Chain length again!

Post by deliquium »

And the answer is . . .

. . . no.

116 links are 2 too short for 38/42 with ~470mm chainstays and a 1X system (according Park Tool method)
Some recent pedalable joys

"you would be surprised at the number of people in these parts who nearly are half people and half bicycles"
Post Reply