Light weight, quality drive chains?

[Frankenstein]

If bike R with RHD 40:10 sprockets is accelerating at the same rate as bike L with LHD 10:40 sprockets, which bike's chain is carrying the greatest load?
I have tried to find the answer, and failed. I think it's equal.

If it is equal, then a chain
that is strong enough for a RHD shifter bike should be just as good on a LHD single speed.
What do you think?

If bike A with 22:11 sprockets is accelerating at the same rate as bike B with 44:22 sprockets which chain is carrying the greatest load?

These questions perplex me.

As long as neither engine puts more load on either chain than they can handle then what's there to perplex over? Ride the motorbike!

 

[FurryOnTheInside]

As long as neither engine puts more load on either chain than they can handle then what's there to perplex over? Ride the motorbike!

I think perhaps the total number of teeth in the drivetrain is directly proportional to the load being carried. That's relevant to the thread, the OP's question, and your question about the suitability of ordinary bicycle chains. The lighter chains should behave better, so it would be nice to determine the minimum you need and actually understand WHY and HOW.

And I can't, I'm not finished building it yet! For one thing I'm waiting on the Russian sprocket guy to make my adapters that mount one or two standard (3/32") bicycle sprockets on the left side of the rear wheel. He's late, I should message him.

 

[gary55]

I think perhaps the total number of teeth in the drivetrain is directly proportional to the load being carried. That's relevant to the thread, the OP's question, and your question about the suitability of ordinary bicycle chains. The lighter chains should behave better, so it would be nice to determine the minimum you need and actually understand WHY and HOW.

And I can't, I'm not finished building it yet! For one thing I'm waiting on the Russian sprocket guy to make my adapters that mount one or two standard (3/32") bicycle sprockets on the left side of the rear wheel. He's late, I should message him.

I think the total # of the teeth would concern more the load being greater or lesser on the gear it's self being as the load is either more or less distributed. The load on the chain is more in question where it is not being distributed over varying amounts of bearing surfaces, and at any rate is greatly regulated by the torque provided by the engine more so than weight or gearing. It's my opinion that the KMC K410 or the KMC 415 or 415h are all more than capable of handling what ever these little things can dish out. Still a double chain would be super strong and cool looking as all hell.

 

[Frankenstein]

The greatest force is at the weakest link between the two points where chain meets the sprockets, load is spread out across half the drive sprocket and linked to the other by the unsupported individual links between the two.

The size of the sprocket doesn't matter much, even spreading the force across 2 links halves the force which is still better than 100% of the force on the chain links which is seen on the links between sprockets.

Side loading is bad, if it twists or shifts around on the pull side or gets tight and then loose you make things worse by prying the chains further than normal, it would be the equivalent of something like a stick being jammed into the chain at the sprocket and the chain is pulled further than it can actually reach causing it to break or snap.

If the chain is going to break it will probably be the weakest link, a good example are master links, even sick bike parts tell you not to use the master in the chain they provide, simply because it's just the weakest link and you don't want it with the raw power you get from these motors plain and simple.

Other than that what else could I say. Think like breaking a piece of string, if you have a bunch of it on a roll it takes the same effort to tear a short piece as a long piece as long as its long enough for you to grip in some fashion.

Tensile strength is tensile strength, if you pull any part harder than it's rated ability to hold and it will be liable to snap, usually at the weakest of the bunch aka: the one of the links that just passed the requirements to meet the standard.

Now quality control isn't great in certain places, so more mistake are made, could even be a hunk of sludge from the cooking pot when the steel was being made, if it formed a bad piece of steel that was later pressed out into a million individual links and those links get turned into 10,000 individual chains what are the chances that you'll get a chain with a large proportion of oxidized metals, some not even being ingredients of good steel, as part of your links?

Even a lack of proper cleaning of ingredients before feeding them into a furnace to make steel will make bad batches of metal. If the quality is as good as chinesium engine factory number 4 just down the road from the chinesium steel factory then your going to end up with a huge imported boat load of crap.

If you get chains from reputable companies then you get good quality control from mineshaft to bicycle chain, you get the knock offs and you get the universal law of you get what you agreed to pay for.

Tl:dl most stress on a chain is always the weakest link under load, regardless of length or size of sprocket.

 

[Steve Best]

So far from what I've seen and worked thru the specs BMX, single speed, 410 chain can handle whatever these motors can dish out if the alignment is right. Nothing else is going to give strength for value for weight.

 

[FurryOnTheInside]

KMC Z510HX was my choice, at under £10 and nickel plated.
I can't help wondering about that X9e chain though. If derailleur shifters use it and they are by definition not aligned..

 

[gary55]

The greatest force is at the weakest link

The greatest force is not at the weakest link. The force at the strongest link is the same as the force at the weakest link. It just becomes more evident at the weakest link because, well you know why, IT'S WEAKER.

 

[Frankenstein]

KMC Z510HX was my choice, at under £10 and nickel plated.
I can't help wondering about that X9e chain though. If derailleur shifters use it and they are by definition not aligned..

definitely a nice chain, and they have the protective coating that should protect from salt water for up to 650 hours. That's pretty impressive alone, you don't have to get super crazy with grease to protect it from rust. I would bet the wax solution I use on chains would make for a very long long lasting chain.
Strongest I've seen for a 9 speed chain too.

The master link they use is called a "missing link" and something I realized recently is that kmc has non-reusable and reusable versions of that link. Now I know we took that chain apart a couple of times before the link totally failed. I'm not completely sure if that was a reusable or non-reusable link. I would have to find out if the stock link that comes in the package is one or the other.

I can't actually blame the link as being bad, it's very possible that it just wasn't intended to come apart more than once, which also explains why it started getting so loose and easy to pull apart.

Live and learn.

 

[Frankenstein]

The greatest force is not at the weakest link. The force at the strongest link is the same as the force at the weakest link. It just becomes more evident at the weakest link because, well you know why, IT'S WEAKER.

Sure it is, if a link is failing and warping to a different shape than the other links as soon as it gets ripped down onto those sprockets which are nothing more than mini wedges and it doesn't fit right it automatically starts getting put under more strain than the rest of the links. Then pops off a sprocket with a click or snap every time is goes around hitting the full pull of the motor or cranks and guess what, it's like those dogs getting their necks broken by Mexican handkerchief trucks.

That little link gets one hell of a beating once it falls out of line of the others, not to mention its also destroying the sprockets in the process by making the teeth have longer pitches, and so the process repeats a few thousand times before your chain goes flying off the bike while you're riding over a grate bridge, never to be retrieved from the river below. You walk home that night.

 

[gary55]

Sure it is, if a link is failing and warping to a different shape than the other links as soon as it gets ripped down onto those sprockets which are nothing more than mini wedges and it doesn't fit right it automatically starts getting put under more strain than the rest of the links. Then pops off a sprocket with a click or snap every time is goes around hitting the full pull of the motor or cranks and guess what, it's like those dogs getting their necks broken by Mexican handkerchief trucks.

That little link gets one hell of a beating once it falls out of line of the others, not to mention its also destroying the sprockets in the process by making the teeth have longer pitches, and so the process repeats a few thousand times before your chain goes flying off the bike while you're riding over a grate bridge, never to be retrieved from the river below. You walk home that night.

None of that has anything to do with the strongest force being at the weakest link between where it meets the two sprockets. The forces are the same as those on all the other links. It fails because it's weaker and once it fails it gets put through a whole bunch more s**t, but it wasn't because the force was concentrated on it more than the other stronger links. That would be weird.