Yeah that's the old 71-72" gear. Great for training and jammin' around. All of you have covered the difference quite well between 1" - 1/2" and roller and block chains. The immediate difference was the direct "feel" that the hard block had on the steel chainwheel. It was like you were really connected to the bike, and nothing can duplicate that. But, things change and with the advent of specialization and closer competition the versatility of 1/2" won out. When one changed a front sprocket with 1", it usually changed the gear roll out by about 4". With 1/2" the change was only about 2". That gear selection fine tuning was a major factor in going to 1/2" pitch for racing. One could get 2" with 1" but had to change both chainwheel and cog along with the cahin. Too much work. The 1/2" was muc h more practical for fine tuning ratios. It also was much smoother rolling, and the riders got to liking it more. One could even feel the difference in the legs when one used an aluminum chainring instead of steel with 1" pitch. There is a difference in the ride, to which Pete Rutledge will attest. These young punk wannabee poseur flowerchild riders and their 1/2" pitch just don't have it anymore. When we used to ride we were so tough we ate rock candy and brick ice cream. Ted Ernst Palos Verdes Estates, CA
>
> Joe Bender-Zanoni wrote:
>
> ....."Block chains were and are expensive. They feel very rigid and
> were much preferred by old trackies..."
>
>
> Yes, my 35 some odd miles yesterday on my 1960ish chrome Cinelli
> track bike with a 24x9, (Ted, are you read'n?) makes me attest to the
> fact that it's STIFF!
> And certainly preferred for old track iron.
> When I started racing on the track in 1976, I had NO money and
> used used stuff across the board ( no pun intended), inch pitch was the
> old stuff the other guys wanted to get rid of.
> Works good.
>
> John T.Pergolizzi
> Brooklyn, New York
>
> 165's
> The older I get, the faster I was.