The best bicycle chain

[Elefantino]

CyclingTips' Dave Rome takes a deep dive into chain efficiency and wear.

It's an interesting read.

[biker72]

It is very interesting. Thanks for posting.

[Spinner]

Are Campy 9-speed chains compatible with Shimano 9-speed drive trains?

Thanks for your input.

[weiwentg]

It's a very interesting read indeed. One thing that caught my attention was their test of 8s through 12s Shimano chains. They found that basically, Shimano improved their chains' durability across generations.

In the early 2000s, I think I recall generally hearing that Campy chains generally outlasted Shimano. I think some people may have said that Shimano's metallurgy wasn't quite up to the same level as Campagnolo. If you believe Zero Friction's test, it looks like in terms of raw durability, Shimano 11s chains almost equal Campagnolo 11s, and 12s Shimano chains eclipse Campagnolo.

9s Shimano chains may really have been behind their Campy 9s and 10s contemporaries. But clearly, they've caught up. I do wonder how Campy's chain durability has evolved over Campy's own generations of components. I also wonder how Campy's 10s and 11s chains stacked up from the bottom to the top of the line. The article does make it seem like the additional coatings on Shimano chains made a small difference that was measurable in the lab (if not perceivable outside the lab). I'd guess the same might be true for Campy.

[ultraman6970]

It is interesting...If i read some of the pictures right, they tested kmc like for 2000 miles only, and the shimano ones for 8000 miles... how you can tell which is better then?

[Dave]

I'd need to know a little more about how the elongation was measured. There was mention of some wear on a brand new chain. That makes me think that whatever tool was used, was measuring between rollers, in which case, the reported wear was not really there.

A proper measurement of elongation is done from pin centerline to pin centerline. Wipperman does this by measuring chains over their entire length.

If you look into the specifications for a #40 drive chain, you will find that only the maximum roller diameter is defined and it's .306 inch. Campy rollers are typically .305 inch. You may find other brands with .303 inch. That would incorrectly indicate some "wear" on a brand new chain. The hole in the roller can also differ in size between brands, to add even more confusion.

I did some chain wear testing on Campy 10 chains years ago and found that my chain with 6,000 miles on it had far less than .5% elongation, as properly measured over the entire chain length, but the roller and side clearance wear were extreme. The hole in the roller had increased a lot more than the OD of the roller decreased. I purposely used only this one chain on one cassette and that cassette had new-chain skip on two of the most worn sprockets when the chain was replaced. That result contradicts Jobst Brandt's contention that only a chain that has excessive elongation will cause the type of sprocket wear that creates new-chain skip. From then on, I started alternating the use of several chains on each cassette. Slightly used chains did not skip on that cassette that previously suffered from new-chain skip.

[weiwentg]

Originally Posted by Dave

I'd need to know a little more about how the elongation was measured. There was mention of some wear on a brand new chain. That makes me think that whatever tool was used, was measuring between rollers, in which case, the reported wear was not really there.

A proper measurement of elongation is done from pin centerline to pin centerline. Wipperman does this by measuring chains over their entire length.

...

They actually covered this. They tested chains on roller to roller wear using a KMC chain checker, and on chain elongation (measure length of 53 links of chain under load, device not stated in the CT article but may be on Friction Facts site).

And oddly enough, some chains wore out much faster on roller-roller distance than on elongation wear. Notably, 11s Dura Ace chains, Wipperman chains, and YBN E-bike chains had this property.

So, if you think elongation is the best metric of chain wear, than DA and Campy Record are comparable. If you think roller-roller distance is the gold standard, then DA substantially underperforms Record, but Ultegra is pretty close to Record. It's not really clear why this would be, and maybe he had a bad batch of DA chains. The article does mention that he had a much larger sample of Ultegra chains.

The article did say that in practical terms, roller-roller distance is a better and more repeatable measure of wear than chain elongation for the average user. I certainly never did that accurately when I was just starting out. Naturally, you might be much more meticulous than average, so you should make your own determination.

[rain dogs]

Originally Posted by weiwentg

it looks like in terms of raw durability, Shimano 11s chains almost equal Campagnolo 11s, and 12s Shimano chains eclipse Campagnolo.

Remember that in 12s Shimano and SRAM are making MTB chains, whereas Campagnolo's is road. This shows with SRAM's high durability but lower absolute performance.

Even Shimano vs Shimano... I would expect an XTR chain to be more durable than an Ultegra or Dura-ace, just as I would expect the latter to be more efficient.

[Dave]

After I figured out that my campy 10 chain would never reach .5% elongation, I came up with a gage to measure the maximum space between two rollers, that I would allow. I used a 6mm hex wrench and ground the end down so it was thin enough to fit between the plates with two parallel flats left. If that gage ever slipped through the rollers, the chain was trashed. You wouldn't want to use only one chain for that long before trashing it, or it might cause new-chain chain skip.

Campy has their own suggestion for a length between rollers that can be measured with calipers. That measurement would be mostly roller wear and a little elongation.

[robertbb]

So basically Campagnolo Record 11 chains last about the longest, wear about the most evenly, and perform about the best.

"perfezione!"

[jemdet]

Originally Posted by robertbb

So basically Campagnolo Record 11 chains last about the longest, wear about the most evenly, and perform about the best.

"perfezione!"

Chef’s kiss!

(I’ll skip the data and continue to stubbornly believe that Campy 9V chains are the best ever made)

[93KgBike]

It's nice having someone else give me a reason to run Campy.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by weiwentg

It's a very interesting read indeed. One thing that caught my attention was their test of 8s through 12s Shimano chains. They found that basically, Shimano improved their chains' durability across generations.

In the early 2000s, I think I recall generally hearing that Campy chains generally outlasted Shimano. I think some people may have said that Shimano's metallurgy wasn't quite up to the same level as Campagnolo. If you believe Zero Friction's test, it looks like in terms of raw durability, Shimano 11s chains almost equal Campagnolo 11s, and 12s Shimano chains eclipse Campagnolo.

9s Shimano chains may really have been behind their Campy 9s and 10s contemporaries. But clearly, they've caught up. I do wonder how Campy's chain durability has evolved over Campy's own generations of components. I also wonder how Campy's 10s and 11s chains stacked up from the bottom to the top of the line. The article does make it seem like the additional coatings on Shimano chains made a small difference that was measurable in the lab (if not perceivable outside the lab). I'd guess the same might be true for Campy.

in 1997, when Campag went to 9s, it was somewhat of a surprise to shimano and they toot sweet produced a 9s group to compete..Pretty sure their chains were never made by 'shimano' but KMC(maybe an urban legend)..not sure now but Campag always made their chains in Vicenza..

I think in general, modern bike chains are all pretty close in terms of performance and longevity with teeny differences discovered in a lab test but in actual riding/cleaning, etc...it's kinda a wash. Noise, durability(they don't break), shifting performance-wise.

Are Campy 9-speed chains compatible with Shimano 9-speed drive trains?

Yes, if you can find one.

I would expect an XTR chain to be more durable than an Ultegra or Dura-ace, just as I would expect the latter to be more efficient.

'Once upon a time..XTR and DA were the same chains(9s? 10s?)..I doubt XTR is 'more durable' than DA nor XT 'more durable' than Ultegra, and DA isn't 'more durable' than ultegra or even 105....mostly weight(holes in side plates) and finish, more shiney-more $$....

"Least expensive compatible", still applies to chains, cogsets, other 'consumables..IMHO...

[soulspinner]

Wipperman may have tested well here, but the last one broke and left me on the pavement. No it was installed correctly. All Ive ridden after that has been Campy. NO ISSUES. I clean relube evey 100 miles. YMMV.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by soulspinner

Wipperman may have tested well here, but the last one broke and left me on the pavement. No it was installed correctly. All Ive ridden after that has been Campy. NO ISSUES. I clean relube evey 100 miles. YMMV.

In the trenches, anecdotally, a bike that came in with a Wipperman almost always needed a new cogset if ya changed the chain(measured with Rohloff tool)..I think Wipperman wear well but also wear cogsets quickly, because they 'wear well'...

Sold wipperman/connex quick links but shimano, Campagnolo and KMC chains..

inventory got kinda nutz...one speed(1/8 inch), 8s, 9s, 10, 11s and now 12s...plus the various price levels(some INSIST on a DA chain!!)...with any useable inventory..needed 50-60 chains...consumables, doesn't work to 'run out'...samo for cogsets...