Re: [CR]Why block chain?

(Example: Production Builders:Cinelli)

From: "Ken Sanford" <kanford@comcast.net>
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>, "John Betmanis" <johnb@oxford.net>
References: <3.0.6.32.20071212094932.015981a0@mailhost.oxford.net> <3.0.6.32.20071212102743.015981a0@mailhost.oxford.net>
Subject: Re: [CR]Why block chain?
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 10:44:21 -0500
reply-type=original

John

It is lighter because it is thinner - top of chain to bottom, not side to side. This was verified by an actual weighing process done circa a year ago by listmember Harvey Sachs. This was a weighing of the two common types of 1 x 3/16 chains. Not sure how it would come out if you used modern 1/2 inch pitch x 1/8 track chain vs inch pitch.

Yep, you do get fewer gear possibilities, but you just live with it.

And it is of course fitting and proper for a pre-65 or so track bike!

Ken Sanford
now only two inch pitch track bikes....
Kensington, MD


----- Original Message -----
From: John Betmanis
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: [CR]Why block chain?



> At 09:58 AM 12/12/2007 -0500, Ken Sanford wrote:
>
>>Inch pitch chains were available in either block or roller.
>>
>>Block is actually circa 25% lighter than roller.
>
> I meant to include inch pitch in my question also. And how could block be
> lighter than roller, or are the blocks hollow?
>
> John Betmanis
> Woodstock, Ontario
> Canada