Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New bike chain claims to be faster, more durable

cyclingtips.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 226 posts

Re: New bike chain claims to be faster, more durable

#211

Post by rorykoehler »

Kliment wrote: post #193
rorykoehler wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is becoming more conservative by the day. Shouldn’t companies/people be applauded for thinking outside of the box and trying to innovate?

Innovation can be good, scamming other people into spending money on things that don't work, not so much. There's a whole lot of the latter masquerading as the former. There's also a whole lot of user/customer/community hostile innovation, like the entire advertising industry.

That’s not the case here though. The design I linked is a legitimate attempt at solving a real problem. Whether it works as well as intended or not is a separate issue.

Re: New bike chain claims to be faster, more durable

#212

Post by collyw »

to11mtm wrote: post #121
rdiddly wrote: post #66

I'll tell ya what I see: no rollers. Pins rubbing (wearing) both sides of the tooth. Including the back side, which will never exert any forward longitudinal force on a chain unless it's made of magnets. I also see a highly suspect FEA diagram on the right, where teeth not even engaged still show non-zero stresses (lighter blue, not the darkest blue), indicating that the color/stress scale has been changed compared t…

If this chain is truly more efficient and/or durable, I would expect them to be selling to two specific markets: - BMX: This market would be all over anything that would be an improvement in durability, and frankly a percentage would just do it for the different tooth design. - Auto: Admittedly, the site for the company that is making this new chain mentions automotive in a blog post, but I don't see anything specifi…

BMX? Most BMXers I see use pretty minimal setups, only one brake if at all. Durability is more relevant to a fall than for actual power transmission, they only have one gear.

Re: New bike chain claims to be faster, more durable

#213

Post by brudgers »

jacquesm wrote: post #203
brudgers wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My previous bike had a Shimano Nexus 8 speed. It would shift just fine under load. My current bike has a Sturmy Archer 3 speed and doesn't. Geared hubs are great for riding in traffic because you can shift while stopped. Pulling harder with traffic up to a light and braking aggressively, and switching to the right gear while waiting for the light to change. Like everything it's a tradeoff. For me, geared hubs make a…

8 speed is a bit delicate to shift under load, if you plan on doing that a lot a 5 speed would be a better choice (also better for e-bikes, it will deal much better with the torque).

The older I get, the more willing I am to use tools and accept that it will eventually wear it out. I put about a thousand miles around town in a year on it. The whole bike was $500 new with shipping. Never destined an heirloom.

The Nexus eight speed is the seven speed with a “granny” gear. The seven high gears have small steps relative to a five or three speed. I suspect this might make shifting under load less stressful on the components...note that under load shifts are always just one gear at a time unlike a derailer.

The Nexus 8 is a great piece of kit. Robust, inexpensive and stupid easy to tune.

Re: New bike chain claims to be faster, more durable

#214

Post by HelloMcFly »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #126
switch007 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I (a Brit) was confused by the apparent use to mean "unimpressed" but I stumbled upon this: > Note: The use of nonplussed to mean "unimpressed" is an Americanism that has become increasingly common in recent decades and now appears frequently in published writing. It apparently arose from confusion over the meaning of nonplussed in ambiguous contexts, and it continues to be widely regarded as an error. https://www.me…

Well I (a Brit) have only ever understood it to mean 'not sufficiently impressed to know what to say'; in a sort of bemusement or indecision as to one's reaction. A sort of confusion as to how unimpressed one is. The Collins dictionary I have to hand doesn't capture that nuance though. I actively try to avoid USAmericanisms, except for "y'all". Go figure ;o) [That last phrase is a USAmericanism, used for amusing inte…

Y'all fills a hole in the English language that is not suitably filled by any other single word! It's a great word!

Re: New bike chain claims to be faster, more durable

#215

Post by zrobotics »

xorcist wrote: post #207
teva wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know you don't have to remove the wheel to repair a puncture ? Remove one side of the tire from the rim and pull the inner tube, then patch it.

Isn't hard to find small punctures with the tube still stuck around the wheel?

Partially inflate the tube after the tire is pulled aside, then run a mixture of soapy water over the tube. Sure, the tire is a bit in the way, but that is still less hassle than removing the wheel. The only real danger is that the tube needs to be treated carefully to keep it from snagging on things and causing more damage.

Re: New bike chain claims to be faster, more durable

#216

Post by alistairSH »

frabbit wrote: post #90
alistairSH wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. On a mountain bike, replace the chain every 50 hours of use, or annually and the rest of the drivetrain will last for years. Or, if you're dumb and lazy (me!), ride the whole lot into the ground and replace the whole bike every few years because #shinynewtoy!

50 hours of use I assume this is a typo for 500?

No, not a typo. 50 hours for expendables and suspension service on a mountain bike (I'm assuming it's actually used as a mountain bike).

For, me that works out to 2x season. The cassettes are $300 and the chains are $40. So, the chains are treated as 100% consumable/disposable.

Re: New bike chain claims to be faster, more durable

#217

Post by alistairSH »

emcq wrote: post #178
frabbit wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

50 hours of use I assume this is a typo for 500?

A better rule of thumb is miles because hours don't reflect the amount of energy put into your drive train. Typical recommendations are every 500-750miles for a mountain bike. For the average mountain biker I think that would be more like every 125 hours at 6 mph. Mountain bike chains see much more abuse than road, and you can go further too. You can be more scientific by using a chain ware tool to measure how much s…

Either way, 50 hours = 500-600 miles for me, so we're using a similar interval.

Suspension service intervals are specified in hours, so I use the same for the rest of the bike.

Re: New bike chain claims to be faster, more durable

#218

Post by alistairSH »

wishinghand wrote: post #38
alistairSH wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you handle gears with the belt? Most of the bike I've seen in the US that use the system are single-speeds. I suppose you could use a internally-geared hub, but a Rohloff is mega-expensive and the Shimano offerings leave a lot to be desired.

I bought a Spot Ajax with an Alfine 11 speed hub. Shifts well and has a good spread. I’m a recreational bicyclist though, I have no idea how it “performs”.

For recreation/commuting/city use, the Alfine is fine. Unless Shimano has revamped it in the last few years, it isn't particularly robust and doesn't work well for high-power use (mountain biking, in particular).

Re: New bike chain claims to be faster, more durable

#219

Post by alistairSH »

ip26 wrote: post #86
alistairSH wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure that's true. SRAM already went with their own non-compatible design with their latest road groups (AXS road). Bottom bracket "standards" have proliferated over the last 20 years (all 8 of the bikes in my garage use a different system). Hub spacing is non-standard too (100mm/130mm QR, 100/135 QR, 100/135 TA, 100/142 TA, 110/148 TA, Superboost, DH, and a few other niche standards). Even within a brand, the…

It's true that bikes are a pretty sad story when it comes to standards. I think axles is going to settle down soon though. QR seems to be on the way out and standard TA for road with boost TA for mountain seems like the direction we are headed... (Disc brakes in particular are not a good match for QR)

Trek is already moving to SuperBoost on their trail bikes. This appears to be DH width, but retaining the 12mm/15mm axles (vs thicker used in DH).

It's a mess. And really annoying for anybody who breaks parts a lot - while almost everything is still available in some form, the newest best stuff is often only available in the latest standards.

Re: New bike chain claims to be faster, more durable

#220

Post by FpUser »

rorykoehler wrote: post #211
Kliment wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Innovation can be good, scamming other people into spending money on things that don't work, not so much. There's a whole lot of the latter masquerading as the former. There's also a whole lot of user/customer/community hostile innovation, like the entire advertising industry.

That’s not the case here though. The design I linked is a legitimate attempt at solving a real problem. Whether it works as well as intended or not is a separate issue.

The design as plain obviously wrong. The only "legitimate" part there is trying to part people with their money for zero benefits.
Post reply on HN