subject:"\[RBW\] big big chain sizing method dilemma"

Re: [RBW] big big chain sizing method dilemma

2024-01-20 Thread Richard Rose

Novice mechanic here but I thought you did the big/big thing with chain mounted through the rear derailleur?Sent from my iPhoneOn Jan 20, 2024, at 3:28 PM, Brenton Eastman wrote:Hi all,Rear: 11-36, front: 46-34-22I'm using the big-big chain sizing method recommended by many. Of course though when pulling most of the slack, my master link lines up with an outer link. So instead of adding one link [outer+inner] from the match point to get my cut point, It's suggested to add [inner+outer+inner] and the chain is looking droopy as hell. Rest assured I will never be in a big-big situation, ever. My rear derailleur is mid-cage so I'm worried it won't pick up all the slack I'm affording the chain in scenario 1. I mocked up a 34F to 11R situation, which I do end up in on mellow downhills, and it looked crazy loose.I cut the chain leaving myself the option to cut again, and took photos. First pic is as recommended by park tool youtube, pull to nearest inner link, add one extra. Super droopy.Second pic is mock up of what chain slack would look like if I cut one more [inner+outer] link out. Still has slack, feels like it wouldn't be a problem in any normal gearing. RD arrives in the mail today. If this exercise is foolish until I have the RD installed, I can be patient. Just curious if anyone has made the judgement call to only add .5 links instead of 1 full link.

Re: [RBW] big big chain sizing method dilemma

2024-01-20 Thread Brenton Eastman

According to this video https://youtu.be/O0YibMDWBAw and most mechanics I’ve learned from it’s less complicated and yields the same resulting length to bypass the rear derailleur. I think if you do the same exercise with the RD installed, you end up with the same chain length. On Jan 20, 2024, at 1:38 PM, Richard Rose wrote:Novice mechanic here but I thought you did the big/big thing with chain mounted through the rear derailleur?Sent from my iPhoneOn Jan 20, 2024, at 3:28 PM, Brenton Eastman wrote:Hi all,Rear: 11-36, front: 46-34-22I'm using the big-big chain sizing method recommended by many. Of course though when pulling most of the slack, my master link lines up with an outer link. So instead of adding one link [outer+inner] from the match point to get my cut point, It's suggested to add [inner+outer+inner] and the chain is looking droopy as hell. Rest assured I will never be in a big-big situation, ever. My rear derailleur is mid-cage so I'm worried it won't pick up all the slack I'm affording the chain in scenario 1. I mocked up a 34F to 11R situation, which I do end up in on mellow downhills, and it looked crazy loose.I cut the chain leaving myself the option to cut again, and took photos. First pic is as recommended by park tool youtube, pull to nearest inner link, add one extra. Super droopy.Second pic is mock up of what chain slack would look like if I cut one more [inner+outer] link out. Still has slack, feels like it wouldn't be a problem in any normal gearing. RD arrives in the mail today. If this exercise is foolish until I have the RD installed, I can be patient. Just curious if anyone has made the judgement call to only add .5 links instead of 1 full link.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/np9pYIDoja8/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/8B70A529-0FA4-4E13-9FBC-F78B77B12FDE%40gmail.com.

Re: [RBW] big big chain sizing method dilemma

2024-01-20 Thread Brenton Eastman

Rear Derailleur = Yes. Mid-cage as stated in original post. My fear is that I’m offering too-much slack. I only have one quick link. I’ll probably mock it up with RD at current length before snapping the quick link in place. On Jan 20, 2024, at 2:21 PM, Patrick Moore wrote:Forgot to add: the big/big method is a way of getting the chain length correct for a given derailleur. For a derailleurless drivetrain you want all but very minimum slack removed.On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 3:19 PM Patrick Moore wrote:You want to use the big/big method with derailleur attached, leaving the derailleur stretched but not to near seizing or breaking. A half-link's leeway is no big deal since you'll have a derailleur.Or are you planning a derailleurless multicog bike? (I doubt it but serious question.)On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 1:28 PM Brenton Eastman wrote:Hi all,Rear: 11-36, front: 46-34-22I'm using the big-big chain sizing method recommended by many. Of course though when pulling most of the slack, my master link lines up with an outer link. So instead of adding one link [outer+inner] from the match point to get my cut point, It's suggested to add [inner+outer+inner] and the chain is looking droopy as hell. Rest assured I will never be in a big-big situation, ever. My rear derailleur is mid-cage so I'm worried it won't pick up all the slack I'm affording the chain in scenario 1. I mocked up a 34F to 11R situation, which I do end up in on mellow downhills, and it looked crazy loose.I cut the chain leaving myself the option to cut again, and took photos. First pic is as recommended by park tool youtube, pull to nearest inner link, add one extra. Super droopy.Second pic is mock up of what chain slack would look like if I cut one more [inner+outer] link out. Still has slack, feels like it wouldn't be a problem in any normal gearing. RD arrives in the mail today. If this exercise is foolish until I have the RD installed, I can be patient. Just curious if anyone has made the judgement call to only add .5 links instead of 1 full link.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/8b7aeb92-e95a-4933-a057-18a0ab1c01fan%40googlegroups.com.
-- Patrick MooreAlburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum---Executive resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, letters, and other writing services---When thou didst not, savage, know thine own meaning,But wouldst gabble like a thing most brutish,I endowed thy purposes with words that made them known.
-- Patrick MooreAlburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum---Executive resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, letters, and other writing services---When thou didst not, savage, know thine own meaning,But wouldst gabble like a thing most brutish,I endowed thy purposes with words that made them known.

Re: [RBW] big big chain sizing method dilemma

2024-01-20 Thread Garth

You need the rear derailleur mounted Brenton to test the length. The Park 
video is greek to me. The RD should look something like this :

 https://www.parktool.com/assets/img/repairhelp/size_002.jpg

These always work for me :

https://www.omnicalculator.com/sports/chain-length

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

I can think of much better combos than running the middle ring and the 
smallest cog, and yes, that's just me. 


On Saturday, January 20, 2024 at 4:38:03 PM UTC-5 rmro...@gmail.com wrote:

> Novice mechanic here but I thought you did the big/big thing with chain 
> mounted through the rear derailleur?
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 20, 2024, at 3:28 PM, Brenton Eastman  wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
>
> Rear: 11-36, front: 46-34-22
>
> I'm using the big-big chain sizing method recommended by many. Of course 
> though when pulling most of the slack, my master link lines up with an 
> outer link. So instead of adding one link [outer+inner] from the match 
> point to get my cut point, It's *suggested* to add [inner+outer+inner] 
> and the chain is looking droopy as hell. Rest assured I will never be in a 
> big-big situation, ever. My rear derailleur is mid-cage so I'm worried it 
> won't pick up all the slack I'm affording the chain in scenario 1. I mocked 
> up a 34F to 11R situation, which I do end up in on mellow downhills, and it 
> looked crazy loose.
>
> I cut the chain leaving myself the option to cut again, and took photos. 
> First pic is as recommended by park tool youtube, pull to nearest *inner* 
> link, add one extra. Super droopy.
>
> 
>
>
> Second pic is mock up of what chain slack would look like if I cut one 
> more [inner+outer] link out. Still has slack, feels like it wouldn't be a 
> problem in any normal gearing. 
>
> 
>
>
> RD arrives in the mail today. If this exercise is foolish until I have the 
> RD installed, I can be patient. Just curious if anyone has made the 
> judgement call to only add .5 links instead of 1 full link.
>
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/8b7aeb92-e95a-4933-a057-18a0ab1c01fan%40googlegroups.com
>  
> 
> .
> 
> 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/42c9cbdf-fc32-4b6b-8f68-165c37308f41n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] big big chain sizing method dilemma

2024-01-20 Thread Patrick Moore

The method works only with chain laced through the rear derailleur. A
half-link's difference won't make any difference as to too short or too
long.

Install the RD, loop chain around big ring, through derailleur, and around
big cog; the rd should be stretched but not to point of binding -- ie, a
tiny bit of for/aft movement still left.

On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 3:25 PM Brenton Eastman 
wrote:

> Rear Derailleur = Yes.  Mid-cage as stated in original post.
>
> My fear is that I’m offering too-much slack. I only have one quick link.
> I’ll probably mock it up with RD at current length before snapping the
> quick link in place.
>
> On Jan 20, 2024, at 2:21 PM, Patrick Moore  wrote:
>
> 
> Forgot to add: the big/big method is a way of *getting the chain length
> correct for a given derailleur.* For a derailleurless drivetrain you want
> all but very minimum slack removed.
>
> On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 3:19 PM Patrick Moore  wrote:
>
>> You want to use the big/big method with derailleur attached, leaving the
>> derailleur stretched but not to near seizing or breaking. A half-link's
>> leeway is no big deal since you'll have a derailleur.
>>
>> Or are you planning a derailleurless multicog bike? (I doubt it but
>> serious question.)
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 1:28 PM Brenton Eastman <
>> brenton.east...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Rear: 11-36, front: 46-34-22
>>>
>>> I'm using the big-big chain sizing method recommended by many. Of course
>>> though when pulling most of the slack, my master link lines up with an
>>> outer link. So instead of adding one link [outer+inner] from the match
>>> point to get my cut point, It's *suggested* to add [inner+outer+inner]
>>> and the chain is looking droopy as hell. Rest assured I will never be in a
>>> big-big situation, ever. My rear derailleur is mid-cage so I'm worried it
>>> won't pick up all the slack I'm affording the chain in scenario 1. I mocked
>>> up a 34F to 11R situation, which I do end up in on mellow downhills, and it
>>> looked crazy loose.
>>>
>>> I cut the chain leaving myself the option to cut again, and took photos.
>>> First pic is as recommended by park tool youtube, pull to nearest
>>> *inner* link, add one extra. Super droopy.
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>> Second pic is mock up of what chain slack would look like if I cut one
>>> more [inner+outer] link out. Still has slack, feels like it wouldn't be a
>>> problem in any normal gearing.
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>> RD arrives in the mail today. If this exercise is foolish until I have
>>> the RD installed, I can be patient. Just curious if anyone has made the
>>> judgement call to only add .5 links instead of 1 full link.
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/8b7aeb92-e95a-4933-a057-18a0ab1c01fan%40googlegroups.com
>>> 
>>> .
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Patrick Moore
>> Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Executive resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, letters, and other writing
>> services
>>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> *When thou didst not, savage, k**now thine own meaning,*
>>
>> *But wouldst gabble like a** thing most brutish,*
>>
>> *I endowed thy purposes w**ith words that made them known.*
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Patrick Moore
> Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum
>
> ---
>
> Executive resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, letters, and other writing
> services
>
>
> ---
>
> *When thou didst not, savage, k**now thine own meaning,*
>
> *But wouldst gabble like a** thing most brutish,*
>
> *I endowed thy purposes w**ith words that made them known.*
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/np9pYIDoja8/unsubscribe
> .
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CALuTfgs1_iPFpVuAhLhBMvubhk2DzoWF1nDFB%2BK3_25QJToaMA%40mail.gmail.com
>

Re: [RBW] big big chain sizing method dilemma

2024-01-20 Thread Patrick Moore

Exactly.

On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 3:32 PM Garth  wrote:

> You need the rear derailleur mounted Brenton to test the length. The Park
> video is greek to me. The RD should look something like this :
>
>  https://www.parktool.com/assets/img/repairhelp/size_002.jpg
>
> These always work for me :
>
> https://www.omnicalculator.com/sports/chain-length
>
>
> http://www.machinehead-software.co.uk/bike/chain_length/chainlengthcalc.html
>
> I can think of much better combos than running the middle ring and the
> smallest cog, and yes, that's just me.
>
>
> On Saturday, January 20, 2024 at 4:38:03 PM UTC-5 rmro...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Novice mechanic here but I thought you did the big/big thing with chain
>> mounted through the rear derailleur?
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Jan 20, 2024, at 3:28 PM, Brenton Eastman 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>> Rear: 11-36, front: 46-34-22
>>
>> I'm using the big-big chain sizing method recommended by many. Of course
>> though when pulling most of the slack, my master link lines up with an
>> outer link. So instead of adding one link [outer+inner] from the match
>> point to get my cut point, It's *suggested* to add [inner+outer+inner]
>> and the chain is looking droopy as hell. Rest assured I will never be in a
>> big-big situation, ever. My rear derailleur is mid-cage so I'm worried it
>> won't pick up all the slack I'm affording the chain in scenario 1. I mocked
>> up a 34F to 11R situation, which I do end up in on mellow downhills, and it
>> looked crazy loose.
>>
>> I cut the chain leaving myself the option to cut again, and took photos.
>> First pic is as recommended by park tool youtube, pull to nearest *inner*
>> link, add one extra. Super droopy.
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>> Second pic is mock up of what chain slack would look like if I cut one
>> more [inner+outer] link out. Still has slack, feels like it wouldn't be a
>> problem in any normal gearing.
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>> RD arrives in the mail today. If this exercise is foolish until I have
>> the RD installed, I can be patient. Just curious if anyone has made the
>> judgement call to only add .5 links instead of 1 full link.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/8b7aeb92-e95a-4933-a057-18a0ab1c01fan%40googlegroups.com
>> 
>> .
>> 
>> 
>>
>> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/42c9cbdf-fc32-4b6b-8f68-165c37308f41n%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>


-- 

Patrick Moore
Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum
---

Executive resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, letters, and other writing
services

---

*When thou didst not, savage, k**now thine own meaning,*

*But wouldst gabble like a** thing most brutish,*

*I endowed thy purposes w**ith words that made them known.*

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CALuTfgsibgRo0wkL989SyGtrr3pD1bZduHXxYuZL5JZ89TwVvg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [RBW] big big chain sizing method dilemma

2024-01-20 Thread Patrick Moore

Generally and to all: I've very often decided to use a rd that is far out
of spec in chain takeup for a given chainring + cassette combination, for
all sorts of reasons. Instances: well, first, the DA 7401 (I think it's the
...01) on my present Matthews for an admittedly close ratio 13-25 10-sp
cassette but OTOH paired with a 44/28 wide range "1x + granny." But back in
the day a 8 sp Ultegra rd with a 48/38/26 crank and a 14-32 7 sp cassette,
just because. With the long hanger on the Spec SJ Team frame it worked well
enough: I could shift all 7 in the 36; but -- and this is point -- there
was severe chain sag in the grannies and all except the 3 or so biggest
cogs (perhaps 5 biggest with the Matthews). But then you don't use the
granny with the small cogs.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CALuTfguWFm35gMCZF%3Do8ttTKv91rTOTu1KHredGqtf_ATrSzkg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [RBW] big big chain sizing method dilemma

2024-01-20 Thread iamkeith

I agree with others, that it'll look better when threaded through a mounted 
derailleur.  Definitely do NOT remove another link until you try that 
though.Even so, I have definitely had cases where I still felt like 
there was too much slack, and ended up replacing the B-screw with a longer 
one.  In fact, I was doing that so often that I just bought some in bulk.  
(I think my issue is that Im usually trying to maximize gear range, rather 
than achieve tiny, incremental steps for maintaining cadence.)  In a pinch, 
you can also turn the B-screw around and thread it from the opposite side.  
In that case, UN-screwing it increases the tension.

On Saturday, January 20, 2024 at 3:40:17 PM UTC-7 Patrick Moore wrote:

> Generally and to all: I've very often decided to use a rd that is far out 
> of spec in chain takeup for a given chainring + cassette combination, for 
> all sorts of reasons. Instances: well, first, the DA 7401 (I think it's the 
> ...01) on my present Matthews for an admittedly close ratio 13-25 10-sp 
> cassette but OTOH paired with a 44/28 wide range "1x + granny." But back in 
> the day a 8 sp Ultegra rd with a 48/38/26 crank and a 14-32 7 sp cassette, 
> just because. With the long hanger on the Spec SJ Team frame it worked well 
> enough: I could shift all 7 in the 36; but -- and this is point -- there 
> was severe chain sag in the grannies and all except the 3 or so biggest 
> cogs (perhaps 5 biggest with the Matthews). But then you don't use the 
> granny with the small cogs.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/f509323e-87fa-486d-911a-529eae3ab630n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] big big chain sizing method dilemma

Re: [RBW] big big chain sizing method dilemma

Re: [RBW] big big chain sizing method dilemma

Re: [RBW] big big chain sizing method dilemma

Re: [RBW] big big chain sizing method dilemma

Re: [RBW] big big chain sizing method dilemma

Re: [RBW] big big chain sizing method dilemma

Re: [RBW] big big chain sizing method dilemma

8 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information