Named and shamed

[vickster]

I wish the OP luck if he wishes to take Shimano for example, to court over a broken chain...in Japan

 

[paul fellows]

I accept the point that naming and shaming would be wrong for the reasons given.

BUT

I would assert that most bike riders, as apposed to the Lycra clad cyclists, wont a bike that they can get out and ride. A lot of pleasure, minimum maintenance, and no grief.

I understand that there are tradeoffs to be made between strength and weight, but it as not been set at the right point for most bike riders.

As to the assertion that riding conditions has something to do with it, I say No no no and a thousand times NO. If a bike is not good enough to be ridden in the way it is through the condition it meets, the it is by definition it is not fit for the per pus for which it was bought.

 

[Citius]

Don't forget to include tyre and inner tube manufacturers.

 

[Tanis8472]

All i wish to say is cobblers

 

[Tanis8472]

btw motorbike chains last longer because they have o-rings in the links and they do not get cross-chained on sprockets.

 

[I like Skol]

Come on Paul, out with it. Tell your friends on Cyclechat what you have broken.......

 

[Milkfloat]

I had a chain failure on a brand new bike 10 miles into its maiden voyage. I did not cross chain and was not putting huge amounts of power through it. I did not threaten to sue SRAM or the bike store, I simply walked to the nearest bike shop, borrowed a chain extractor, purchased a powerlink (emergency £20 came in handy) and got on my way. I contacted the bike store, just to let them know in case it was a common occurrence and was pleased to receive a new chain a couple of days later through the post with a little note attached.

To this day 6 years later I still carry around a chain extractor tool and powerlinks but never needed them since. In fact I will take them out of my kit tonight. if my chain fails, I am blaming you lot

 

[BigCoops]

You can say no a million times, it doesn't change the facts, anything with moving parts in contact with each other is subject to wear, poor lubrication, insufficient maintenance, user error and environmental conditions can all amplify the rate of that wear and potentially lead to unexpected failure.

To provide maintenance free (or minimal) amounts of maintenance to an open chain system, there is pretty much only two ways to do it, make the chain so over engineered and bulky as to be next to useless to a person powered device (in which case it'll still wear and potentially fail, just possibly take longer) or don't use an open chain system.

There are bikes out there which don't use chains, fitted with belt drive systems etc and guess what, belts still wear and break.

Whatever the system, there is simply no way to ensure complete failure proofing. It's always been a case of "deal with via relatively cheap and available user replacable parts".

To go this way in regards to chains specifically, given my limited engine knowledge isn't there a system of chains in a closed oil filled system, not open to the elements, running in a 'perfect' environment, I'm thinking about the cam chains, they still fail, normally due to wear or other unforeseen incidents, in fact, don't a lot of car manufacturers specify a service interval for them.

IMHO It's a trade off between durability and usability, moving parts wear, there is no practical way round it.

 

[Markymark]

if my chain fails, I am blaming you lot

Oh please don't let this start the ch**n fail fairy.

It's bad enough with these other wusses.

PUNCTURE PUNCTURE PUNCTURE.

 

[I like Skol]

Oh please don't let this start the ch**n fail fairy.

It's bad enough with these other wusses.

PUNCTURE PUNCTURE PUNCTURE.

Steady on there Marky. I was like you and thought I was big'n'brave at the start of the recent M/cr - Llandudno ride as I proudly told anyone that would listen that I don't get many punctures, haven't had one for ages and I'm not afraid to say it! All my fellow riders looked away and tried to ignore me but do you know what? I was fine. I rode most of the day through the pleasant Cheshire lanes in the sunshine and loved my ride. She waited until it was dark, cold and wet on the seafront at Rhyl before she taught me a lesson

 

[Rob3rt]

I accept the point that naming and shaming would be wrong for the reasons given.

BUT

I would assert that most bike riders, as apposed to the Lycra clad cyclists, wont a bike that they can get out and ride. A lot of pleasure, minimum maintenance, and no grief.

I understand that there are tradeoffs to be made between strength and weight, but it as not been set at the right point for most bike riders.

As to the assertion that riding conditions has something to do with it, I say No no no and a thousand times NO. If a bike is not good enough to be ridden in the way it is through the condition it meets, the it is by definition it is not fit for the per pus for which it was bought.

What kind of wood are you made from?

 

[BigCoops]

Arghhhhhhhhhhhhh! Don't pee off the fairy....or else,

 

[Yellow Saddle]

To go this way in regards to chains specifically, given my limited engine knowledge isn't there a system of chains in a closed oil filled system, not open to the elements, running in a 'perfect' environment, I'm thinking about the cam chains, they still fail, normally due to wear or other unforeseen incidents, in fact, don't a lot of car manufacturers specify a service interval for them.
.

Yes, you are right. On a motorcycle, there are two roller chains. The one drives the rear wheel. It is relatively long and beefy and the one end wraps around a large sprocket (large sprockets are kinder on chains). It is exposed to the elements and lasts about 3500km t0 5 000 kms depending on the conditions. Inside that same bike's engine, is a short chain, wrapped around two sprockets. This chain lasts the lifetime of the engine. All because it runs in filtered oil.

 

[shouldbeinbed]

http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=12692260&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Be careful of naming and shaming in case you get called out on your part in things.

If I've got a problem I'll go the proper route I think.

 

[Globalti]

To the OP: if you want to know what a really useless bike with cheap rubbish components looks like, go and buy yourself something like this:

http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Product/partNumber/3323306.htm

I guarantee it will re-adjust your ideas on what's good quality and what's not.