Just went browsing for some spare chains and it looks like SRAM has changed their numbering system.
Why dey do dat? Too many customers and they want to reduce the demand? If I had been able to recognize the chain I needed I might have bought a half-dozen... but I was lost with the new numbers.
Anyhow, two questions:
1) What has the PC48 become? PC850?
2) What was the diff between PC48 and PC58 and, if significant, what has the PC58 become? -- PeteCresswell
On Nov 4, 2:36 pm, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote:
> Just went browsing for some spare chains and it looks like SRAM > has changed their numbering system.
> Why dey do dat? Too many customers and they want to reduce the > demand? If I had been able to recognize the chain I needed I > might have bought a half-dozen... but I was lost with the new > numbers.
> Anyhow, two questions:
> 1) What has the PC48 become? PC850?
AFAIK. Got one running on the ute bike. Shifts and runs as well as I'd ever need a chain to.
> 2) What was the diff between PC48 and PC58 and, if > significant, what has the PC58 become? > --
In article <b706640b-106f-46df-b47a-015a15298...@s21g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Nov 4, 2:36 pm, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote: > > Just went browsing for some spare chains and it looks like SRAM has > > changed their numbering system.
> > Why dey do dat?
Bigger numbers means that the chain is more technologically advanced.
> Too many customers and they want to reduce the > > demand? If I had been able to recognize the chain I needed I > > might have bought a half-dozen... but I was lost with the new > > numbers.
> > Anyhow, two questions:
> > 1) What has the PC48 become? PC850?
> AFAIK. Got one running on the ute bike. Shifts and runs as well as > I'd ever need a chain to.
Next year it'll be the PC1068. It'll be the same actual chain, but will be more advanced due to the bigger model number.
> > 2) What was the diff between PC48 and PC58 and, if significant, > > what has the PC58 become? --
> PC870. You pay double for shine.
Bike component companies have figured out that we, the customers, are bloody stupid and will pay far above the actual value of a product. This is especially true of consumable products like chains, cassettes and tires. $60 for a bike tire? My car tires didn't cost that much.
> Bike component companies have figured out that we, the customers, are > bloody stupid and will pay far above the actual value of a product. > This is especially true of consumable products like chains, cassettes > and tires. $60 for a bike tire? My car tires didn't cost that much.
Your car tire retailer is able to keep the doors open while marking things up a lot less than 100%. In terms of cost to produce versus cost to purchase, your LBS is paying more wholesale to get your bike tire than you are paying retail from Pep Boys, Walmart, etc.
tires are hand made not stamped out endlessly. anyway, Jenson for example is selling uh wahtstherename ? chains for $8 - 12. Shimano does nomenclature. Unnngh Shim could pub a list of deray numbers. Why ? caws I don't know what I buying. Others suffer the same anxiety appearing in RBT to ask 'NOW WHAT' ? I can't get any nomore.... gnaw. its just evolution.
Tim McNamara wrote: > In article > <b706640b-106f-46df-b47a-015a15298...@s21g2000prm.googlegroups.com>, > landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 4, 2:36 pm, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote: >>> Just went browsing for some spare chains and it looks like SRAM has >>> changed their numbering system.
>>> Why dey do dat?
> Bigger numbers means that the chain is more technologically advanced.
>> Too many customers and they want to reduce the >>> demand? If I had been able to recognize the chain I needed I >>> might have bought a half-dozen... but I was lost with the new >>> numbers.
>>> Anyhow, two questions:
>>> 1) What has the PC48 become? PC850? >> AFAIK. Got one running on the ute bike. Shifts and runs as well as >> I'd ever need a chain to.
> Next year it'll be the PC1068. It'll be the same actual chain, but will > be more advanced due to the bigger model number.
>>> 2) What was the diff between PC48 and PC58 and, if significant, >>> what has the PC58 become? -- >> PC870. You pay double for shine.
> Bike component companies have figured out that we, the customers, are > bloody stupid and will pay far above the actual value of a product. > This is especially true of consumable products like chains, cassettes > and tires. $60 for a bike tire? My car tires didn't cost that much.
On Nov 4, 6:44 pm, Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
> In article > <b706640b-106f-46df-b47a-015a15298...@s21g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
> landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Nov 4, 2:36 pm, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote: > > > Just went browsing for some spare chains and it looks like SRAM has > > > changed their numbering system.
> > > Why dey do dat?
> Bigger numbers means that the chain is more technologically advanced.
At least they still make the PC-1. Or, I guess next year's PC-1x10^0.
> On Nov 4, 6:44 pm, Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
> > In article > > <b706640b-106f-46df-b47a-015a15298...@s21g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
> > landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Nov 4, 2:36 pm, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote: > > > > Just went browsing for some spare chains and it looks like SRAM has > > > > changed their numbering system.
> > > > Why dey do dat?
> > Bigger numbers means that the chain is more technologically advanced.
> At least they still make the PC-1. Or, I guess next year's > PC-1x10^0.
Ugh. That chain's a noisy POS. Anything from Xmart or Dick's is better.
In article <5a9a5fd0-734d-47a2-9459-1091fc5b8...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com> wrote: > Tim McNamara wrote:
> > Bike component companies have figured out that we, the customers, > > are bloody stupid and will pay far above the actual value of a > > product. This is especially true of consumable products like > > chains, cassettes and tires. $60 for a bike tire? My car tires > > didn't cost that much.
> Your car tire retailer is able to keep the doors open while marking > things up a lot less than 100%. In terms of cost to produce versus > cost to purchase, your LBS is paying more wholesale to get your bike > tire than you are paying retail from Pep Boys, Walmart, etc.
The problem is not in the bike shop, the problem is with the manufacturers and middlemen. Having worked in a couple shops and knowing a few shop owners, I know this is rarely a high-profit business at the retail end of things.
<topic drift>
I buy my (car) tires from a locally owned business (which is generally true of most things I buy, when I can manage it), so I pay probably a bit more than I might pay at a big box store.
Owned by someone else now, named Steve, who is just a stand-up guy and treated my Dad (and then my Mom, after my Dad died) scrupulously well in buying the business. Wow, there's a (bad) photo of the newspaper article about my Dad's retirement. Sorry, need a moment, talk among yourselves.
I'm always happy to know that there honest, high quality people out there owning businesses, and I try to track them down when I want to buy something. I might pay a few dollars more but I have a much more satisfactory experience with them.
>Just went browsing for some spare chains and it looks like SRAM >has changed their numbering system.
>Why dey do dat? Too many customers and they want to reduce the >demand? If I had been able to recognize the chain I needed I >might have bought a half-dozen... but I was lost with the new >numbers.
>Anyhow, two questions:
>1) What has the PC48 become? PC850?
>2) What was the diff between PC48 and PC58 and, if > significant, what has the PC58 become? >-- >PeteCresswell
With SRAM: Low price = chain that works. Pay more = chain that works but looks shinier. Pay much more = chain that works but looks really shiny.
>> AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote: >>> You do not have to knuckle under to the 'capitalist roaders >>> and running dogs'[1] at SRAM: >>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=140351429580 > Tom Ace <tom...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Gotta love a brand name like Velocipednaya. >> I'd buy one if it came in red. b...@mambo.ucolick.org wrote: > Brand name? I think it just says "bicycle chain" > in Russian. I don't speak Russian and had to use > Google to translate "chain."
My Russian expert Alexei says that's right. No brand name because it is The Bicycle Chain on offer. Why would you want a choice?
What has 200 legs and eats cabbage? The line at a Soviet butcher.
> >> AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote: > >>> You do not have to knuckle under to the 'capitalist roaders > >>> and running dogs'[1] at SRAM: > >>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=140351429580 > > Tom Ace <tom...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Gotta love a brand name like Velocipednaya. > >> I'd buy one if it came in red. > b...@mambo.ucolick.org wrote: > > Brand name? I think it just says "bicycle chain" > > in Russian. I don't speak Russian and had to use > > Google to translate "chain."
> My Russian expert Alexei says that's right. No brand name > because it is The Bicycle Chain on offer. Why would you want > a choice?
> What has 200 legs and eats cabbage? The line at a Soviet > butcher.
I was thinking the same thing about the lack of need for brand names, but I have or have seen a few other Soviet-era products and they did have brand or factory names. The most notable being some of their cameras - FED, Zorki and so on. These were partly on the export market, but the names existed before they were exported.
Soviet-era joke (I have a good book of these collected in the USSR, plus got some from emigres back in the 80s):
A national radio talk show is being run out of the Moscow studio. A call comes in from Armenia, and the host asks for the local update: "How is it now with meat in Armenia?" The caller answers: "With meat everything is fine, without meat it's terrible!"
(PeteCresswell) wrote: > Just went browsing for some spare chains and it looks like SRAM > has changed their numbering system.
> Why dey do dat? Too many customers and they want to reduce the > demand? If I had been able to recognize the chain I needed I > might have bought a half-dozen... but I was lost with the new > numbers.
> Anyhow, two questions:
> 1) What has the PC48 become? PC850?
> 2) What was the diff between PC48 and PC58 and, if > significant, what has the PC58 become?
You might want to look at similar quality but cheaper KMC chains, including similar powerlink.
I switched from the SRAM PC 48 to the KMC Z82 a few years ago without problems.
I think the direct comparison to PC48 is the KMC Z51 but I've not tried that.
> (PeteCresswell) wrote: > > Just went browsing for some spare chains and it looks like SRAM > > has changed their numbering system.
> > Why dey do dat? Too many customers and they want to reduce the > > demand? If I had been able to recognize the chain I needed I > > might have bought a half-dozen... but I was lost with the new > > numbers.
> > Anyhow, two questions:
> > 1) What has the PC48 become? PC850?
> > 2) What was the diff between PC48 and PC58 and, if > > significant, what has the PC58 become?
> You might want to look at similar quality but cheaper KMC chains, > including similar powerlink.
> I switched from the SRAM PC 48 to the KMC Z82 a few years ago without > problems.
> I think the direct comparison to PC48 is the KMC Z51 but I've not tried > that.
I agree. I was a Sram user since it was called sedis sport. Man! I am getting old. I switched to KMC a few years ago. Nashbar sometimes has KMC tandem chains for $14.00. You get two chains out of one.
> On Nov 4, 7:20 pm, Norman <invasivenor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 4, 6:44 pm, Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
> > > In article > > > <b706640b-106f-46df-b47a-015a15298...@s21g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
> > > landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Nov 4, 2:36 pm, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote: > > > > > Just went browsing for some spare chains and it looks like SRAM has > > > > > changed their numbering system.
> > > > > Why dey do dat?
> > > Bigger numbers means that the chain is more technologically advanced.
> > At least they still make the PC-1. Or, I guess next year's > > PC-1x10^0.
> Ugh. That chain's a noisy POS. Anything from Xmart or Dick's is better.
The noise just means there is plenty of clearance so as to get a good grease store in there..
> > (PeteCresswell) wrote: > > > Just went browsing for some spare chains and it looks like SRAM > > > has changed their numbering system.
> > > Why dey do dat? Too many customers and they want to reduce the > > > demand? If I had been able to recognize the chain I needed I > > > might have bought a half-dozen... but I was lost with the new > > > numbers.
> > > Anyhow, two questions:
> > > 1) What has the PC48 become? PC850?
> > > 2) What was the diff between PC48 and PC58 and, if > > > significant, what has the PC58 become?
> > You might want to look at similar quality but cheaper KMC chains, > > including similar powerlink.
> > I switched from the SRAM PC 48 to the KMC Z82 a few years ago without > > problems.
> > I think the direct comparison to PC48 is the KMC Z51 but I've not tried > > that.
> I agree. I was a Sram user since it was called sedis sport. Man! I am > getting old. I switched to KMC a few years ago. Nashbar sometimes has > KMC tandem chains for $14.00. You get two chains out of one.
Good tip. How many links do you get with a tandem chain?
> (PeteCresswell) wrote: > > Just went browsing for some spare chains and it looks like SRAM > > has changed their numbering system.
> > Why dey do dat? Too many customers and they want to reduce the > > demand? If I had been able to recognize the chain I needed I > > might have bought a half-dozen... but I was lost with the new > > numbers.
> > Anyhow, two questions:
> > 1) What has the PC48 become? PC850?
> > 2) What was the diff between PC48 and PC58 and, if > > significant, what has the PC58 become?
> You might want to look at similar quality but cheaper KMC chains, > including similar powerlink.
> I switched from the SRAM PC 48 to the KMC Z82 a few years ago without > problems.
> I think the direct comparison to PC48 is the KMC Z51 but I've not tried > that.
I think single-gear/fixie/hub gear/7-8speed allweather riders and commuters need KMC's X8. It's the default chain on my Utopia with Rohloff geartrain; Utopia, who don't count cost, after conducting independent tests chose the X8 as their recommended chain over Rohloff's own chain, and after all these years still consider it the best chain for the high-mileage all-condition bikes that should also be low-maintenance.
KMC have a KMC Chain Selector PDF on their site which includes these significant elements before the arrow pointing to the X8: "Do you ride more than 1000km in one year and/or do you use your bike in rough conditions (rain, mud, etc)?" It is clear from the channeling of questions and the arrangement of the chain sets that KMC, who should surely know, consider the X8 more capable and longer-wearing for distance riders and/or harsh conditions than their more expensive chains.
The X8 is a 3/32in wide 7-8 speed chain and comes in two versions named 99 and and 93 with the 99 having more silvering for better rustproofing.
As I say, I have a KMC X8 99, but mine has only 2000km on it and runs inside an enclosed chaincase so it should be near-new. All I can tell you is that it feels solid, appears to be stiffer in the sense of having has less sideplay than my other chains (SRAM, Connex, etc), and is quiet and smooth-running. It looks to be a fit and forget chain; I give it a couple of drops of lubricant (Oil of Rohloff) every 500km, possibly superfluously.
The KMC X8 comes with a quick-release power link which I haven't tried yet.
From my fave mailorder discounter, Chainreaction Cycles in Belfast, the X8 costs about the same 16-17 Euro as a rustproofed Connex, so it isn't as cheap as some KMC chains; it's about the middle of the range. Not that I'll be buying it from CRC -- my bike has such a long wheelbase that I need 126 links and am thus better off buying the OEM KMC X8 99 straight from the manufacturers of my bike.
> On 7 Nov, 16:35, "andresm...@aol.com" <andresm...@aol.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 7, 6:31 am, Nick <N...@spam.com> wrote:
> > > (PeteCresswell) wrote: > > > > Just went browsing for some spare chains and it looks like SRAM > > > > has changed their numbering system.
> > > > Why dey do dat? Too many customers and they want to reduce the > > > > demand? If I had been able to recognize the chain I needed I > > > > might have bought a half-dozen... but I was lost with the new > > > > numbers.
> > > > Anyhow, two questions:
> > > > 1) What has the PC48 become? PC850?
> > > > 2) What was the diff between PC48 and PC58 and, if > > > > significant, what has the PC58 become?
> > > You might want to look at similar quality but cheaper KMC chains, > > > including similar powerlink.
> > > I switched from the SRAM PC 48 to the KMC Z82 a few years ago without > > > problems.
> > > I think the direct comparison to PC48 is the KMC Z51 but I've not tried > > > that.
> > I agree. I was a Sram user since it was called sedis sport. Man! I am > > getting old. I switched to KMC a few years ago. Nashbar sometimes has > > KMC tandem chains for $14.00. You get two chains out of one.
> Good tip. How many links do you get with a tandem chain?
|
