Originally Posted by
HillRider
A broken chain in less than 1100 miles is almost always a symptom of improper installation unless the chain was subjected to dreadfully abusive riding or a serious mishap like running a piece of wire through it like a friend once did.
The "some people" getting less than 1000 miles on a chain might have been retiring their chains voluntarily to avoid cassette cog wear. If they were all reporting broken chains, they were doing something terribly wrong.
I've ridden for 157,000 miles, mostly on Shimano 8 and 9-speed chains and a few Wippermann 9 and 10-speed chains. I change the chains and cassettes together at 6000 - 75000 mile intervals and have NEVER broken a chain. And my riding conditions are not flat, as my forum name would indicate, so these chains aren't babied.
That is a pretty wide range. Miracyuloius at the top end, in fact.
Remember, there was a batch of Ultegra chains that were breaking at the plates through a manufacturing defect.
There are also, I believe, issues with chain checkers that people use for convenience, rather than measuring with a ruler. Hence, chains might be retired because the chain checker says so, but might still have plenty of life left in them.
As to the original post, I take on board what cyccommute says, but would the chemical reaction have been localised at one location on all link plates rather than "globally" if that was the case?
Who knows? I will just stick with diesel as my cleaner of choice.