You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Looked at the connex quick link is it any good ?
Or look elsewhere ? -would like it to be toolfree and reusable....
Thanks
What chain? For Shimano use a Shimano one, they're easy to use and re-useable.
It is for a shimano chain...
-but would be nice if it fits other chains!
Which tool do i need?
erm, a Quicklink remover
Connex is genuinely tool free, some of the others not so much, Clarks are a good alternative though there is a knack to them.
Good luck finding a 12sp connex link, I'm after one to use with my shimano 12sp chain, I've used them for years in 10 and 11sp and starting to miss the simplicity of them, the price of the 11sp link doubled from the 10sp link so the 12sp price might be even more ridiculous.
I might just buy the full chain and loose the HG+ chains benefit of shifting under load.
Thread resurrection...I've finally got a bike with Shimano 12 speed and I've always appreciated having reusable quick links on my previous bikes.
I know Shimano do their own 12sp links but described as single use, as are the sram 12sp quick links.
Appreciate you could potentially reuse the single use ones but are there any reusable 12sp quick links that folk would recommend? Connex as mentioned previously?
I know Shimano do their own 12sp links but described as single use, as are the sram 12sp quick links.
Don't worry about that shit, for Shimano 12spd use Shimano quicklinks as the inside of the plates are profiled differently to suit the hyperglide + shifting ramps, likewise SRAM 12spd links on SRAM 12spd chains.
I re-use my Shimano quick link every week when I re-wax the chain. It's got easier to mate as a result of being removed so often, but still works fine (so far)...
I know Shimano do their own 12sp links but described as single use, as are the sram 12sp quick links.
I read an article somewhere saying that the main reason that Shimano and SRAM (and others) are described as single use is to do with liability in certain markets.
i.e. they can be reused, but only x number of times. Trusting people to keep count is apparently beyond the wit of (certain) parts of mankind.
So, easier to say single use.
I reckon those who market multi use quicklinks are either a) taking a massive risk or b) don't sell chains with the reuseable links on new bikes, so are covered that way. i.e. someone elses problem or c) don't sell in "certain" markets.
Anyway, as long as they still snap closed with a modicum of force, they'll be reet.
Thanks all. So are the Shimano/sram quick links tool free for removal? Never had an issue with my 9sp sram quick links but i don't get the impression they are as easy with 12sp
So are the Shimano/sram quick links tool free for removal?
No, not unless you've re-used them a few times
I read an article somewhere saying that the main reason that Shimano and SRAM (and others) are described as single use is to do with liability in certain markets.
Someone holds the patent for reusable links, so everyone else called theirs single use to get round it.
Someone holds the patent for reusable links, so everyone else called theirs single use to get round it.
Doesn't sound very plausible as the design differences between the two use cases are non existent.
Quite an old idea, some of the original patents have expired eg https://patents.google.com/patent/US5362282A/en
I’ve always re used single use links with no issue.
i just assumed it was a way to get more money out of us?
i just assumed it was a way to get more money out of us?
They get slacker each time you re-use them. Do it enough times and they come apart when you pedal backwards.
I’ve re-used my 12 speed Shimano quick link for about 3 years now, can’t remember how many times but I hot wax the chain from time to time.
The link is still too stiff to remove or put back without a tool and that is after removing it at least 10 times.
Someone holds the patent for reusable links, so everyone else called theirs single use to get round it.
Yeah, i've seen that too, i'm guessing it was written by someone who doesn't quite understand how patents work.