Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Bicycle Mechanics
Reload this Page >

Using chainrings designed for triple, with a double

Notices
Bicycle Mechanics Broken bottom bracket? Tacoed wheel? If you're having problems with your bicycle, or just need help fixing a flat, drop in here for the latest on bicycle mechanics & bicycle maintenance.

Using chainrings designed for triple, with a double

Old 10-20-20, 09:33 AM
  #1  
Richard1964
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Using chainrings designed for triple, with a double

Having read an earlier thread here ( 410453-double-triple-outer-chainring-differences)
I have a similar question. Taking the advice in that thread I *think* Id be OK with the following, but wanted to ask here for a consensus opinion.

i have a homemade bike (not mine) equipped with a worn 9speed Shimano Deore Double chainset (44/32j. Im not 100% sure that is the original setup, it may have one time come from a triple, or been transplanted to this bike. Whatever, it works.

When Im shopping for replacement rings, I find seemingly compatible rings (correct BCD=104mm, also 44/32 teeth, even also Deore (or Alivio) ) but they explicitly say This Outer Chainring can only be used with Shimano Deore FC-M591 9spd Triple Chainsets with a 44-32-22T set up. I enquired why that constraint is given, and the retailer responded "Because it's a specific offset fitting for use with the FC-M591 crankset. Hence it will not fit anything else other than this

Can anyone offer their expert view on this. My own view is that Im not changing the bottom bracket, the cranks or the 4arm spider mount. Assuming all 9speed chainrings are the same width, these should mount correctly on the existing BCD mountings, and therefore why wouldnt these fit and work in practice.

FYI Im in the UK. Im too new to post URLs yet, but am considering Deore M530 or M510 rings. there are also cheaper Alivio ones in the same category which seem as though theyd work.

thanks in advance, Richard
Richard1964 is offline  
Old 10-20-20, 07:04 PM
  #2  
Andrew R Stewart 
Senior Member
 
Andrew R Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 15,410

Bikes: Stewart S&S coupled sport tourer, Stewart Sunday light, Stewart Commuting, Stewart Touring, Co Motion Tandem, Stewart 3-Spd, Stewart Track, Fuji Finest, Raleigh Pro, Trek Cycle Cross, Mongoose tomac ATB, GT Bravado ATB, JCP Folder

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3084 Post(s)
Liked 1,508 Times in 1,027 Posts
Originally Posted by Richard1964 View Post
Having read an earlier thread here ( 410453-double-triple-outer-chainring-differences)
I have a similar question. Taking the advice in that thread I *think* Id be OK with the following, but wanted to ask here for a consensus opinion.

i have a homemade bike (not mine) equipped with a worn 9speed Shimano Deore Double chainset (44/32j. Im not 100% sure that is the original setup, it may have one time come from a triple, or been transplanted to this bike. Whatever, it works.

When Im shopping for replacement rings, I find seemingly compatible rings (correct BCD=104mm, also 44/32 teeth, even also Deore (or Alivio) ) but they explicitly say This Outer Chainring can only be used with Shimano Deore FC-M591 9spd Triple Chainsets with a 44-32-22T set up. I enquired why that constraint is given, and the retailer responded "Because it's a specific offset fitting for use with the FC-M591 crankset. Hence it will not fit anything else other than this

Can anyone offer their expert view on this. My own view is that Im not changing the bottom bracket, the cranks or the 4arm spider mount. Assuming all 9speed chainrings are the same width, these should mount correctly on the existing BCD mountings, and therefore why wouldnt these fit and work in practice.

FYI Im in the UK. Im too new to post URLs yet, but am considering Deore M530 or M510 rings. there are also cheaper Alivio ones in the same category which seem as though theyd work.

thanks in advance, Richard
This is a big assumption. More to the point the face of the ring, that mates to the crank arm's tab face, dimension from the teeth's center plane can be different from brand or model to brand or model. This is one of the draw backs to an indexed front system. The, often, overlooked dimensional relationships can have an impact of shifting and chain rub. Andy
__________________
AndrewRStewart
Andrew R Stewart is offline  
Old 10-21-20, 10:06 AM
  #3  
Iride01
Hits [ENTER] b4 thinking
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 8,839

Bikes: '20 Tarmac Disc Comp '91, '78 Raleigh Competition GS

Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3516 Post(s)
Liked 2,078 Times in 1,467 Posts
If you mix and match parts then I'd say you are taking more of the assumption of risk on yourself for how well it performs, is safe and lasts. If you need to save that many pennies, I'm completely okay with it. Just consider if buying a complete crankset (chainset) and maybe even a new BB is out of the question for your budget.
Iride01 is offline  
Likes For Iride01:
Old 10-21-20, 11:14 AM
  #4  
79pmooney
A Roadie Forever
 
79pmooney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,798

Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder

Mentioned: 104 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3067 Post(s)
Liked 1,698 Times in 1,120 Posts
I mix and match rings all the time. Now, I do not run indexed shifting and I find different rings might mean slightly different feel to the shifts but they all work - that is if they are the correct width for the chain you are using. I might set the FR inside limit screw a little closer for a triple middle ring used as a double inner to prevent the chain falling off the ring as it attempts to shift to the inner ring that is not there. (A chain watcher could also be used to do the same thing.)
79pmooney is online now  
Likes For 79pmooney:
Old 10-21-20, 01:50 PM
  #5  
Eggman84
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: SoCal
Posts: 487

Bikes: 2014 Bruce Gordon Rock&Road, 1995 Santana Visa Tandem, 1990 Trek 520, 2012 Surly LHT

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 210 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 42 Times in 35 Posts
This crankset (FC-M591) came in 2 versions; 22/32/44 tooth combination and 26/36/48 tooth combination. Shimano spent lots of time and money (marketing $?) designing chainrings to optimize front shifting, However, you can mix and match the chainrings but the shifting wont be as crisp as using the matching set. I do and my bike has not exploded and I have not died, but others would have you believe otherwise. If the BCD and number of arms are the same, then there is little risk that the ring wont fit just fine on the spider. And in my opinion (partially thru experience) the talk of ring thickness and offset being different within a single manufacturers lineup and same BCD/# of arms is insignificant (if it even is different to begin) and just to get you to buy parts you don't need,
Eggman84 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.