Originally Posted by
T-Mar
Chain wear occurs between the rollers and the bushes (or the formed flanges of the inner plates on bushless chains). Chain wear took a significant leap with the introduction of bushless chains, which do not provide as much of a bearing surface with the roller as bush style chains. The first bushless chains appeared circa 1981, shortly after the move to 6 speed. Bushless chains were less expensive to manufacture than bush style, so the increased wear was not a concern for most cyclists, especially when you took into consideration that they ran notably quieter and shifted better due to the increased lateral flex provided by the design. Of course, the increased flexibility led to a proliferation of cogs, which led to even narrower chains, increasing the loads and wear rates. Designers tried to mitigate the wear and maximize roller width by decreasing pin protrusion and using thinner plates but this was offset by consumer preference for chains with bulged plates that provided better shifting. If you have wear concerns, the only solutions are to be more diligent with lubrication or buy higher grade chains with more durable materials but I don't consider chain wear rates to be an issue. When I consider performance and inflation, moderately priced modern chains are a much better value than their C&V forerunners.
T-mar, any information you post is for me as good as gospel. I will say, that given a choice, I would rather have a longer lasting chain that maybe gives up a little shifting robustness. My horded stock of used but usable old school 5-6 speed chains is gradually getting depleted through use, but these are my first choice for my bikes with conventional sprocket spacing. For that matter, I don't perceive any adverse shifting or noise aspects compared to my narrow spaced rides with corresponding narrower chains. I am not one to cross chain, except by accident, I hasten to add.