Kettenblätter Kurbelgarnitur – Anzahl Zähne egal?
Meine bisherige Kurbelgarnitur hat 48-38-28 Zähne. Bei meinem Dealer bekomme ich aber eine neue Garnitur nur in 48-36-26. Ist das trotzdem kompatibel? Oder ist lediglich das Übersetzungs-Verhalten dann etwas anders?
It’s a good thing for my experience. Maybe you have to put the thrower back a millimeter or so deeper or shorten the chain by two links or play around the B screw on the gear, so do a bit of fine tuning if you have some more play. It may not be necessary.
More problems make the chain line. The new chainrings must have the same distance from the middle of the wheel as before, i.e. the new trim must fit to the length of the pedal bearing or you need the new one. There’s nothing to do with Feintuning.
48-38-28 grades are still offered.
The switching behavior of the front thrower is actually sensitive to changes in the number of teeth of the crank gantry because the thrower parallelogram kinematics switches obliquely upwards/bottom at a rigidly predetermined angle, unlike a rear gear which can adapt.
But according to my experience it works anyway
What makes me more than stubborn is:
Why choose a 9-fold crank set if your drive is only 7/8-fold??
Just because your dealer doesn’t have the required 7/8-fold compatible clothing??? This is a total 7/8-fold mix of components with 9-fold technology, the 7/8-speed chain does not fit the climbing aids of the sprockets.
So why take the risk of a potentially inadequate function if there are still massive 7/8-fold cranks with 48-38-28 teeth on the market??
https://www.rosebikes.de/shimano-acera-fc-m361-483828-zahne-kurbel-667944
https://www.rosebikes.de/shimano-tourney-fc-ty501-kurbel-3-x-6-7-8-fach-48-38-28-zaehne-2706606?article_size=8000&product_shape=46
https://www.rosebikes.de/shimano-tourney-fc-ty501-kurbel-3-x-6-7-8-fach-48-38-28-zaehne-2706606?product_shape=schwarz&article_size=170mm
Other
Other
Thank you!
Yeah, that was it. Had mistakenly chosen a 9-fold
The translation ratio changes a small little (7% and 5% smaller gears on small or medium chain).
If necessary, small readjustments can be necessary on the reproacher. This should be the one who mounted the crank, actually from the Effeff.
It’s compatible. However, if you change the spread (Oben out you do not change anything, both 48 teeth), but at the bottom out very well (2 teeth less = smaller diameter = chain becomes “longer” which the switching mechanism must “hidden”) your thrower must not be on the “Limit” with respect to path. Otherwise, your chain will jump. This depends on how close it was before and what combinations you have with regard to cassette/chain sheets. If you have a “Rettungsanker” with 27 teeth or something as the largest sprocket at the back, such a smaller gradation can already end up in a fiasco, because the thrower can no longer “compensate” the combination of the smallest sprocket and the smallest sprocket – the difference between the required chain lengths becomes too big – then the path of the thrower is no longer sufficient and the chain is only
Uff, in which bike genre is a 27 pinion in 2022? Where even pure racing bike cassettes have of course 30s and 32s sprockets?
Today the trend goes more towards 2 chainrings – there is probably something different. On the racing bike I have from 11 to 21 at the back and on the trekking and MTB I have only 16 at the back – so I haven’t followed this in recent years how big the rear can still be…
Well. I’ve got Rohloff on the race bike 2*10 and on the trekking and MTB with 16s. If I don’t really succeed what they mean to have to do – always comes something else to awaken new “eages”… I am happy and happy – trekking and MTB every 5 years new sprocket and after 2.5 years turn the sprocket once a year, change oil and otherwise drive carelessly / crawling – uncannyly relaxing – stays more time for training and other things like family etc.
Och, for a number of years the trend has even been to only use a single chainring;) In the MTB sector, the majority appears in the cyclocross and engraving range.
Compatible may be. But the translation ratio is of course different.
Couldn’t make a big difference, huh? What would change?
You can drive steeper climbs in the middle and small chain leaves.
This works if the gear still has enough reserve to keep the chain tight when running on the smallest sheet
Compatible but other translation. A little faster.
Conversely: fewer teeth and thus less laid distance with a crank rotation in the two smaller chain blades
Completely wrong thought! Cassette with smaller sprockets means faster – if you have the power to still kick it. Therefore, there is something like 53 and more teeth on the bike – on the MTB, apart from the fact that one would probably “seat” in the terrain, you would get your eyes out at every pitch – problem is that the large chainring is the measure of things for the other chainrings, as the gradations result in a variation of the chain length – I need another chain length, because of the circumference the circle of the leaves and sprockets. In order to compensate for this, it is necessary to have a rear-end thrower which is responsible not only for the switching of the graduations for the respective chain blade, but also for the compensation of the different chain lengths. If he can’t do this anymore, “spring” the chain because too long, or don’t go because too short. That is why there are also, especially at the race wheel, rear derailleurs with long levers (for those who still need a large transmission band width on the mountain) and short (if I have flat taps or enough reserves, for the profile, this would be just unnecessary weight sometimes…)
The above example will be exactly the same fast out, with the same tread frequency, but will show some more reserves (at the mountain or hilly) in the middle and small chain…
I don’t understand. When the front pinion becomes bigger, the moment is bigger and the distance is smaller. So a smaller sprocket makes more distance, so it’s faster.
Some people understand it as the “fast” gear when they have to crank quickly…
Just the front, like the old chainring – so the parts are called at the front – at the back you speak of pinions – at 48 teeth – this allows in principle also the quickest translations – if you can kick it in the respective situation… Medium and, above all, small chainring will be less than 2 teeth – i.e. smaller – and they are more for hilly or mountainous – if the chainring is smaller, the speed must be higher if the same pinion is at the back, or even, at the same speed, the speed is reduced, but force. Back means smaller = faster, forward means smaller = more force/slower or more speed required for the same speed!
Look at the top and look at all 3 at BEIDEN Chain Blade Combine, then you’ll probably be more clear…
if it fits to the group
the translation ratio changes naturally
and the dealer must be able to calibrate the overhead accordingly
What, you have to calibrate the overhead? It’s about the crank set in front.