Re: [CR]Why block chain?

(Example: Events:Eroica)

From: "ternst" <ternst1@cox.net>
To: "ternst" <ternst1@cox.net>, <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>, "John Betmanis" <johnb@oxford.net>
References: <3.0.6.32.20071212094932.015981a0@mailhost.oxford.net> <006301c83cf7$a3a04f00$0300a8c0@D8XCLL51>
Subject: Re: [CR]Why block chain?
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:13:42 -0800
reply-type=response

I knew something eluded me. The metallic direct response feel was steel chain on steel chainring. With the increasing usage of aluminum chainrings, that feel was about half diminished so that also aided the changeover to 1/2" pitch.
Ted Ernst
Palos Verdes Estates
CA USA


----- Original Message -----
From: ternst
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 11:46 AM
Subject: Re: [CR]Why block chain?



> One thing the guys didn't do was call you a blockhead if you rode a block
> chain.
> If you did you ended up in the ditch!
> Like mentioned both chain types were available as well as 1/2" for 100
> years or more.
> !/2 " did not come in block variety. Thats's why many people called the
> 1", skip tooth, or double link chains, because every other tooth was out,
> and the roller chains had two rollers close together.
> And the block was a block, but two rivets were close together and then the
> longer plate.
> Once you have ridden a block chain you will be a convert, if you are
> sensitive enough and appreciative of bike response and the difference in
> the direct feel to your legs.
> You get that direct metallic click in/to your legs, it's a feel like no
> other.( On the bike that is).
> That's why the track bike and it's response when you get off the seat,
> step on it, and whip the bike around either on the road or track is such a
> thrill, if your're into that kind of stuff.
> Age is no excuse, it's attitude that counts. YIPPIE, here I go!!
> If this is of no interest then shine on it, and go for the historic value
> only.
> The block chain was preferred by sprinters mostly thru the years because
> when you rode it, it had that "crisp", "snappy" feel especially when you
> jumped and accelerated quickly.
> True, you had less gear finesse selection, but the difference to sprinters
> and track riders was from 23-24-25 usually in one tooth jumps for gear
> selection and the half gear didn't seem to make enuf difference.
> As time and mettalurgy progressed, the roller chains got better and as
> riding got more detailed, the 1/2" prevailed and started to replace the 1"
> beginning in the later '50's in Europe and making it's way over here.
> The roller chain rolls much smoother and the added friction of the rollers
> didn't seem to matter as much in these newer years, so it was a
> combination of these factors that changed the equipment.
> Maybe I 'll think of more, if not, you can jump in the paceline and do
> your pull to help out with commentary.
> I rode my bike yesterday, going for a little run with Mary now, and
> tomorrow is a rest day, (Yard Work).
> Ted Ernst
> Palos Verdes Estates
> CA USA
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Betmanis" <johnb@oxford.net>
> To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 6:49 AM
> Subject: [CR]Why block chain?
>
>
>> I've been around vintage bikes for decades before they were ever vintage,
>> but I still don't know why block chains were used on old track bikes.
>> They
>> can't be stronger unless the side plates have more cross-section area and
>> I
>> can't see how they could be smoother. The gear ratios available are just
>> half as many as with regular roller chains. So what's the reason? Could
>> it
>> just be tradition, or that's how all chains were before the roller chain
>> was invented?
>>
>> John Betmanis
>> Woodstock, Ontario
>> Canada