 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
The One-Up idea of using prime numbers of teeth to reduce wear has set me thinking. It's cassettes that are expensive to replace so just changing the chainring doesn't help much. However, using prime numbers in the chain will help both front and rear. It just happens that 109 and 113 are prime numbers, XT 10 speed chains come in 116 links, XX1 11 speed chains come in 118 links. I usually remove several links so depending upon the size of chainring, bike geometry and rear derailleur size it should be possible to get one of these prime numbers of links.
This evening I'm mostly going to be counting chain links on my bikes.
Nearly caught me!
I have my cassette set up in a Fibonacci sequence, for same reasons.
Doh!
But isn't there a grain of truth in it? Please.
To a very small extent and not really applicable to bikes but it is a thing on unicycles. Traditionally chain driven "giraffe" unicycles have a 1:1 ratio, when combined with a fixed gear You end up with the pedals always in sync with the tyre. That means the power part of the stroke is always at the same point resulting in uneven tyre wear, emphasised by the way you turn. Swapping to a slightly different ratio e.g. 19:20 fixes this. I do wonder if there is a similar effect on a fixie with a 3:1 ratioBut isn't there a grain of truth in it? Please.
😆
Fixies do use odd gears avoid tyre wear from braking (so use 3.1 or 2.9 rather than 3), but it's the same principal, work out how many skid points there are on the tyre, pick an odd enough combination of gears and you spread the wear around the tyre.
It's one reason (of many) that road doubles switched from 42/52 to 39/53.
Must be some call for 10 and 11 speed compatible half links by now.
If you spaced them correctly on your chain, and got the right length chain, you could probably do an odd sized NW chainring.......
If you spaced them correctly on your chain, and got the right length chain, you could probably do an odd sized NW chainring.......
It don't think there is a meme for "not sure if stupid, or april 1st.
Although I suppose a chain length divisible by the chainring could actually work? (37t chainring, 111 link chain with 3 half links).
But would it make an appreciable difference? Cassettes and chains still wear faster than chain rings which is all this would really save.
There's some truth to it.
here's a google search on prime numbered ring teeth..
It's been talked about for years. I first came accross it about a decade ago in a discussion over the best gearing choice for singlespeeds. The theory is sound, in theory 🙂
31x17 would be my SS gearing choice for around these parts
It's the Thick/Thin part that's the ultimate challenge 😉
Which is exactly what i was suggesting (somewhat tongue in cheek).Although I suppose a chain length divisible by the chainring could actually work? (37t chainring, 111 link chain with 3 half links).
Not really. It's just chipping away at the edges of the issue, you could go odd/prime sized everywhere, but the ratios would be all over the place. And you'd add about an hour to the life of your chain.But would it make an appreciable difference?