When to replace your chain

I've heard people say they've had the same chain on their bike for years and don't see any reason to change it.

I agree, if a chain isn't significantly worn, keep riding it.  There's an argument for continuing to ride a chain that is worn but isn't skipping yet; if it ain't broke, don't fix it.  I don't agree with that argument when it comes to chains.

You have to eventually replace the wearing parts of a drive-train anyway, so why not ride stuff until it dies, then replace it all, every few years?

You could do that, but like riding tires until bald, which can be done, the performance will gradually deteriorate as the practical service life of the component is surpassed.

The risk of mechanical failure increases, and it's no fun to be stuck in the woods with a mechanical failure that could have been prevented.

If you change your chain early you retain performance and spend less money.  Buying more chains is cheaper than not buying more chains?  Usually.  If your chain wears past a certain point it accelerates wear on chainrings and cogs.  Buying a high quality chain that lasts a long time and changing it out at the right time costs less in the long run in my experience.  Cogs and chainrings last longer.

So how do you know when your chain is worn enough that it will start causing premature wear on the rest of your drivetrain?

When chain wear is at 1%.  This refers to the increased length in the distance between link pins due to wear.  Replace your chain when it is at .75% wear, before it reaches the 1% mark.

The old school method is to measure the distance over 6 complete links, which should be exactly 12 inches on the chains we put on our mountain bikes, which is usually a chain with a 1/2 inch pitch (distance between link pins).  A set of inner and outer links = one complete link.  If chain is 1/16 of an inch past 12 inches, it's time to replace.

Never mind figuring that out though.. just buy a chain wear tool.  I like the go - no go type for ease of use.

This Park tool works well.

Resting the tool on my current chain, it slides about halfway down the .75 side of the tool.  When the chain is new there is pretty much no travel down the tool.

Pressing down with a bit of force caused the tool to go all the way down into the .75 wear indicator level. Most people will wait until the tool easily slips down instead of needing coaxing, but I'm measuring a Shimano chain here, and I don't like Shimano chains so this gives me a good excuse to get rid of the chain a little early.  Besides, race season starts in a couple weeks and if a new chain is going to skip I want to find out now so I can start the season with all the new parts I need.

If you let the chain wear to the 1% mark there is a greater chance of chainring and cog wear which will cause a new chain to skip on old cogs and increase risk of chain suck.

Shimano chains work, like all chains do. It's just that with my past life as a shop mechanic for 10 years and all the years I've been riding I've personally had more trouble with Shimano chains than any other chain, either braking or short life span.  Chains are a lot stronger now than in the 80's and 90's and Shimano chains have improved a great deal, but in my experience Shimano still wears or breaks before a Sram or Wipperman.

So why do I have a Shimano chain on my bike?  It came stock with the Giant Anthem X 29'er I bought last fall.  I thought I would ride it out to see how long new Shimano 10 speed chains last.  This is the HG74 chain, from Shimano's middle of the trail but well performing SLX group.  A lighter rider riding in dry conditions not doing any sprints or hard riding, a casual rider, could get years of trouble free service from this chain.  I got three months.

The new HGX chains from Shimano, which this is one, are specially designed with specific inner and outer plates designed for purposefully climbing or descending gears.  It shifted well until the last few weeks when I started to get some chain suck.  The chain suck could be coming from a dirty chain or wear on chainrings, so I can't really place the blame fully on the chain.

The chain did shift well, but I would expect nothing less on a 100% new bike.

My favorite chain is Connex stainless steel, made by Wipperman, and is tested as the strongest, longest lasting chain you can buy, double and triple the life of Shimano and Sram chains.  I've never broken a Connex myself and have rarely heard of them breaking from others.

I like the Connex quick connect link, although the Sram link is easier to use.

Shiny new chain in the box.

No quick link on the Shimano chain so out comes the chain tool from the bottom of the tool box to remove the old stock chain.

Connex Quick Link - no tools needed.

Must instal the right way or the link will skip on small cogs (11T) and may fail.  No worries when put on the right way though.. like anything mechanical..

I haven't ridden this 10 speed Connex yet (rode the 8 and 9sp versions before).  I'll add to this blog entry in a few days after my first ride and let you all know if I found a difference in shifting between Shimano's special HGX design and the Connex design. 

I've put about 15 hours on this chain now.. raced it twice.   Shifting under load up hills with the Connex is slightly less smooth than with Shimano's HGX chain, but it works just fine.  I'd say it's the same as Shimano's non-HGX chains or any other good top end chain.  This is for sure a nit-picky difference..   Nobody is going to lose time on any hill climbs.  Shifting seems just as fast.  It has that familiar HyperGlide click/ mild clunk feel.

I think it's worth it for the extra strength and durability.

Update August 27 2012:  Connex chain has just started to show very slight wear after 5 months.  Not yet at 0.75 wear. Not yet as much wear as the Shimano chain had at 3 months.  I'm ahead of the game chain wear wise, but the Connex was about $100.00 and the Shimano about $30.00. I need four more months of use from the Connex for wear life/ cost ratio to be equal between the two chains.  I am ahead on another front though.. My last Shimano chain on my old bike broke twice within a couple months.  Why did I buy a Shimano chain for the old bike if I don't like Shimano chains?  I went cheap because I was getting a new bike so I bought a $30.00 Shimano chain.. Wasn't so cheap as I needed to replace it early.  I threw it in the garbage and bought a Sram chain for $50.00.  Had not problems with that one.

Cut 'Yer Bar's- How to cut carbon mountain bike bars

I hate bar strikes.  No, not the local establishment closing it's doors due to employee negotiation challenges, but the kind that can send you careening off the trail when you try to ride through the space between trees that is more narrow than the width of your bars.  

The remedy? Two choices that I saw.. get better at riding with wide bars, or cut my bars. I cut my bars.

Yes you too can cut your carbon bars.  Following this straight forward guide from Easton I cut my new Easton carbon riser bars.  Actually I sort of loosely followed the instructions.. you may want to follow the official procedure to the letter and avoid the back yard hacking I do.. but you'll still get the general idea from reading this. 

These bars are really light which should cause me to double my speed while riding.  Maybe triple my speed since I cut off 3 cm or so off each end.  I thought of cutting off only one side so I could get the comfort of a wide bar, and the tree clearing and handling of a shorter bar, but it's possible this is a bad idea.

I used a zip tie as the saw guide resulting in only a slight angular cut.  I could have achieved a perfectly square cut following the vice mounting instructions in the Easton guide, but sheer laziness thwarted the effort.

 

I did follow the advice of wearing a dust mask while cutting, sanding, and clean up; breathing tiny carbon dust particles into my lungs wasn't very appealing.  Was advised to wear gloves as well.. don't want to get the carbon dust on your fingers.. could get into your eye, nose, or mouth.

I used an 800 grit fine sandpaper to smooth the cut ends and also to remove any burs on the inside of the shifters, brake levers, and stem.  I used a torque wrench to tighten all bolts to spec.. important for carbon.

I liked the 58 cm Easton carbon flat bar I had on before for stability, handling, and clearing tight trees, but the straight bar didn't agree with my elbows where I developed some pain after riding.  A 40 mm riser put my hands in the right place but I didn't like the 64 cm length, especially after clipping trees with them at Bur Oak and in Brandon (local Manitoba trails with some thread the needle tree spacing). I could have cut my alloy bars, but it made more sense to buy 69 cm carbon bars that cost 5X as much and cut those down.

If you're wondering what kind of grips those are, they are the  ESI silicone grips.  Only 60 grams for the Chunky version, thicker and more comfy than the Racers Edge thinner and lighter version (50 grams).  I contemplated the weight penalty of the extra 10 grams in the Chunky version, but then realized I was delusional with weight-weenie-itis. There's an extra chunky version out now which is probably even more comfy than the Chunky. 

These have been the best grips I've ever ridden with.  If you're looking to try out some new light weight grips that stay in place and cut vibration, give these a try.  They'll slip if not clean when mounted and can start slipping if you bail and get dirt inside them.  Keep them clean and and they stay put.. no need for lock ons.

A note on cutting carbon bars.. not all bars are made the same.  Some can't be cut at all, some can be cut but only a limited section near the ends, and most can't have bar-ends mounted once cut.  I bought the Easton EC70 riser because it came in the 40 mm riser I needed to get my position right, and they could be safely cut to any length (Easton replied to my email asking them about this).  I can't use bar ends after the cut though, but haven't used those for a few years and don't miss them.

Ride report:

I do XC riding and racing, and some mild to moderate all mountain. No black diamond trails (those are for more skilful riders than I).

I found handling to be better with the narrow cut. Steering input mistakes were less amplified which worked well on technical courses and when long ride fatigue would set in. I did sacrifice some comfort, but not a lot. It was easy to adapt to and I didn't find any comfort problems, even after 6 hours of trails. For handling I noticed I was more stable and able to hold a better line when going up onto slower speed 1-2ft square edge rock rises, as well as zigzagy rooty rocky stuff.  With wider bars I had to contend with a little more front wheel wandering. In speaking to other riders some have found the greater sensitivity to steering input on a wide bar gives them more control, but for me it lead to more overcorrections and unintended steering inputs.  This may be due to differences in riding style and ability, and my 20 years of mostly road riding before switching to dirt.  My road bars are 440mm, and that's considered wide for a pavement pedaler. 

After two years of riding the 600mm cut down bars: The Easton EC70 bars feel great.  With the front suspension doing a lot of the shock absorbing work I'm not so sure I feel a large, definitive difference in less vibration, a common benefit attributed to anything carbon. These bars will flex less than stock because I've made them shorter so maybe that has something to do with it. I'd probably have to go back to alloy bars to see if I could feel an increase in ride harshness.  I bought these bars because they are light and strong, and having a bit of carbon on your bike isn't a bad thing.  Hell, make the whole bike carbon! (There wasn't a carbon version of this bike when I bought it in 2011). Carbon has an ability to cut some vibration, but how much of that is placebo or real I don't know.  I didn't notice any shocking difference, although many swear there is.

2014 update:

I did make the whole bike carbon!  Have the Giant Anthem Advanced 29er now. Still rockin the same Easton EC70 carbon bars cut down to 600mm.  After riding Vancouver BC's famed North Shore for the past three months, I'd like to try adding another 30-60mm in bar width. 

Wider bars are more comfortable for the long climbs, but as of now I'm not entirely convinced that ultra wide bars (750, 800+mm) handle better.. It seems to me that with all the hype around ultra wide that it would be easy to be duped by the placebo effect.  The bars will certainly feel different, and one will be thinking about all those anecdotal testimonials and company marketing promises.. I think many will simply assign the perceived value of better handling to the different bar feel. 

There will be an optimal bar width range that is dependant on rider weight, size, bike set up, experience, and trail type, but I think this variability will be taken care of within 600 to 700mm for most people. Personal preference aside, I'm having a bit of trouble being convinced there is a fact backed measureable difference in lap times, DH times, and yes, Enduro split times, with ultra wide bars. Hard evidence will persuade me though.  Watch my blog for a lap time comparo with different width bars later this summer.