calamarichris

I've used these Wipperman 10S links before with zero problems in the past on Dura Ace 7801 & 7900 chains, but I just installed a new Wipperman chain with this link, and after less than 500 miles, the Connex links looked like this.




Anyone else run into this? I'm dumbfounded even dumber than usual.

The rest of the chain still looks fine. Zero of these miles were done in the rain, but I did a fair amount of rollers-sweating, and many of those miles were done near the coast where I live.
This is my first Wipperman complete chain, and I'm also experimenting with this chain-thong to keep it cleaner, to see if it lasts longer.




Maybe using the chain thong is blocking the normal flow of drying air and will actually reduce my chain life???

cny-bikeman

If the link is not stainless, is not lubricated sufficiently, and is exposed to salt in air or sweat it is going to rust. You need to use more tenacious lubrication, at least on the link.

fietsbob

Are you running a dry chain? Justify.

Metacortex

So they sell a stainless steel chain without a stainless link?

Secret Squirrel

I have this chain and it came with a stainless link

calamarichris

Thanks for the responses and sorry I neglected to mention this up front.
Took the links straight out of the box, coated the pins and the filled the holes in the chain with the nuclear-waste-green Shimano "Special" Dura Ace grease. When I pushed the pins into the chain, naturally there was some excess, which I smeared around on the plates and rollers, Q-tipped off the excess, and left it with a little too much grease on it.
Same method I've used with the Connex link in conjunction with my Dura Ace 7900 chains for several years now.

FBinNY 

It's possible that the link isn't stainless, which is something you can confirm with an email to Cantitoe Road who is owned by their USA agent.

Otherwise it may be a manufacturing defect, where the material wasn't passivated. Stainless steel isn't magically rust proof, and depends on the formation of a specific oxide layer to seal the surface in a way analogous to what protects aluminum. Passivation ensures the formation of that oxide layer. If stainless isn't passivated, it can and does rust when conditions are right.

BTW- even non stainless chain plates rarely rust like this if lubricated, so I wnder if something else is going on.

jowilson

How long has the link been installed?

calamarichris

Thanks FBinNY. I haven't been sweating profusely on it, nor riding in some crazy fog. The rest of the chain still looks great! Fortunately, I had a spare link, which I Q-tipped with Honda motorcycle spray-polish before doing my usual grease treatment, previously mentioned.

And now that you ask, Jowilson, it hasn't been on for 500 miles. I just remembered that I mistakenly put the link on backwards (or upside-down) at first, and the link separated while returning from a lively ride. I couldn't find one of links at the side of the road, walked home, and I replaced the Connex link. So this rusty one actually has less than 200 miles on it.

HillRider

Any chance that the replacement link was not from a stainless chain?

FBinNY 

They might have changed recently, but in the past all Connex links were stainless steel. I assume this was easier for Wippermann than maintaining two inventories, one for stainless chains and one for others.

From appearances, this link wasn't stainless, but even that wouldn't explain selective rust on only one link of a chain.

calamarichris

I was under the impression that all of the Connex links were stainless.
I ordered several of them from Excelsports in Colorado, and there is only one kind available. Been ordering these same links for my Dura Ace chains for years and never had them rust up like this so fast.

Waxbytes

Is it a genuine wipperman connex link? Bogus 'brand name' parts are a problem in many industries.

AnkleWork

An excellent question. It looks like ordinary unplated steel, not stainless.

cyccommute 

Sorry FB but you are way off base. The point of stainless steel is that is doesn't corrode in water nor when exposed to oxygen. The chromium in the steel forms a chromium oxide layer naturally without any need for passivation. In effect, stainless is magically rust proof. There may be some mill scale on stainless following forging but that is removed by pickling the steel and would have been noticed during installation if they failed to remove it. But it wouldn't have continued corroding with use. I use lots of stainless in my work...usually 316... that is exposed to substances that you won't experience during bicycling and none of it rusts like that.

I suspect that either the link isn't stainless and/or that it has been exposed to salt. Even a little bit of salt can corrode carbon steel quite easily. Even stainless doesn't do will in the presence of chloride ions. Looking at the link, the rust appears to be more consistent with a carbon steel that has been exposed to salt then stainless.Even in the presence of chloride, stainless doesn't turn red. It tends to turn green (chromium salts) and darkens.

The Shimano chain is plated so that it resists the salt exposure differently from the link. If the link was sold as a stainless link, then it was a stocking issue rather than a manufacturing issue.

Mark Kelly 

It's a non-stainless link in a stainless chain. You can tell by the acceleration of the corrosion - this is commonplace when stainless and non-stainless parts are mixed.

BTW cycccom - comparing the grades of stainless used for bike parts to 316 is unfair - 316 is specifically used for its exceptional corrosion resistance but it's amongst the weakest forms of steel around. Bike parts are normally made from higher strength grades and the trade off is lower corrosion resistance.

HillRider

This is correct except for stainless steel spokes which are almost all 304 SS, an alloy in the same generic family as 316. It's not very strong and can't be heat treated to improve it's strength. However it is very corrosion resistant and ductile enough to be drawn and swaged into spokes with excellent fatigue life and plenty strong enough for that use.

One characteristic of the 300-series stainless steels is they are non-magnetic or, at best, weakly magnetic so that's one way to be sure your spokes are truly a proper stainless steel. The 400-series (aka tool stainless steels and stainless cutlery steels) are much stronger, can be heat treated to greatly improve their strength and hardness and are magnetic. As Mark noted they do sacrifice some corrosion resistance for their much improved strength properties. Any stainless steel chain will be one of the 400-series.

ultraman6970

Wipperman sucks

HillRider

You are wrong.

FBinNY 

Mark Kelly 

Yeah I was aware of that but didn't want to complicate the explanation too much. 300 series (austenitic) steels can be made harder and stronger by cold working, which is what is happening with spokes. This includes 316 but cold working is somewhat less effective with this grade and also reduces the corrosion resistance, so you don't see too much cold worked 316 around.


Perhaps I should have said "Bike parts (except spokes and lugs) are normally made from higher strength grades"

cyccommute 

No stainless is going to rust like the link show. That's what stainless does. The chromium in all of them is going to prevent the formation of red iron oxide. I've seen what corrosion does to 316 and 304. It doesn't look anything like the quick link above. That was the point of using 316 as an example. I wasn't trying to compare other stainless properties other than corrosion.

Mark Kelly 

Were I not at work (surrounded by tens of thousands of square metres of 3xx grade stainless steel) I would post some pics of red oxide forming on stainless steel bike parts, specifically heat treated 4xx grade tubing. It's not as severe as that shown by the OP (see the first sentence in my first post) but it's definitely red.

Burton

FB is quite correct in the requirement to passivate stainless steel.
https://www.mmsonline.com/articles/ho...ss-steel-parts

Stainless steel grades are based on the percentages of chromium and other non-ferrous ingredients. Unfortunately thats not any guarantee of quality. Like a good cement, the mixture needs to be homogeneous and particle size needs to be carefully controlled to avoid pitting and other issues. Not all stainless of the same grade is the same quality. The source does count.

However in the case of the chain in question it looks like the quick link is simply NOT stainless steel and oxidation has been accelerated by being in contact with the rest of the chain - which is. Thats commonly referred to as galvanic corrosion.
https://www.estainlesssteel.com/corrosion.shtml

You want to make VERY sure there's a good film of oil on the chain, chainrings and cassette to avoid having the same issues with other non-stainless components.

SharpCarp

That's a defective link, return it for replacement.

All stainless steel corrodes, how much, how easily, and what color varies by the type and grade.

If it were normal to rust like that link, then the whole chain should have rusted the same.