Compact Drive Confusion
08-17-10, 08:18 PM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Compact Drive Confusion
Hi Everyone,
I'm in need of help. My chainrings are worn out on my Mountain Bike. According to my measurements and what I've learned on Sheldon Brown's Website. I have a Compact Drive (MTB Triple) chainring combination. Before I go any further, I have a pair of Sugino square taper cranks with a 5 bolt pattern and 42/32/22t chainrings. The BCD is 94mm for the outer and middle ring while the inner chainring is 54 mm.
While reading Sheldon's website about Compact Drives, he says, "The downside of compact drive is significantly reduced chain life, and decreased interchangeability of parts. I consider compact drive to be a very bad idea for mountain bike use, but it seems to have become ubiquitous."
This has thrown me off a bit because I was going to match up my current ratios of 42/32/22, but the comment on the reduced chain life has me wondering if it is best to make a move to a more interchangeable ratio that provides longer chain life. I just bought a 7 speed HG cassette and a HG 6/7/8 speed chain with 116 links.
Is there a better ratio that I can use with my current Sugino Cranks that will work with my 7 speed cassette and chain that would give longer chain life? Or, would it be best to invest in a crankset other than a Compact Drive with different chainring combinations that could work with my current cassette and chain? I would greatly appreciate any help. Thank you in advance!
Confused,
Mountainwave
I'm in need of help. My chainrings are worn out on my Mountain Bike. According to my measurements and what I've learned on Sheldon Brown's Website. I have a Compact Drive (MTB Triple) chainring combination. Before I go any further, I have a pair of Sugino square taper cranks with a 5 bolt pattern and 42/32/22t chainrings. The BCD is 94mm for the outer and middle ring while the inner chainring is 54 mm.
While reading Sheldon's website about Compact Drives, he says, "The downside of compact drive is significantly reduced chain life, and decreased interchangeability of parts. I consider compact drive to be a very bad idea for mountain bike use, but it seems to have become ubiquitous."
This has thrown me off a bit because I was going to match up my current ratios of 42/32/22, but the comment on the reduced chain life has me wondering if it is best to make a move to a more interchangeable ratio that provides longer chain life. I just bought a 7 speed HG cassette and a HG 6/7/8 speed chain with 116 links.
Is there a better ratio that I can use with my current Sugino Cranks that will work with my 7 speed cassette and chain that would give longer chain life? Or, would it be best to invest in a crankset other than a Compact Drive with different chainring combinations that could work with my current cassette and chain? I would greatly appreciate any help. Thank you in advance!
Confused,
Mountainwave
08-18-10, 07:39 AM
#2
Senior Member
Sheldon's writing is way out of date. Nearly every MTB uses smaller chainrings than a road bike - it's the acepted norm. The only fact about smaller chainrings that you can't avoid is more chain tension.
I've owned road bikes with a 28T little ring on the triple crank and spent about one of every three hours riding up mountains in that small ring. I still managed to get up 6,000 miles from a Campy chain. The chain tension may also be harder on the cogs.
I've owned road bikes with a 28T little ring on the triple crank and spent about one of every three hours riding up mountains in that small ring. I still managed to get up 6,000 miles from a Campy chain. The chain tension may also be harder on the cogs.
08-18-10, 08:03 AM
#3
Mad bike riding scientist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 25,861
Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones
Mentioned: 138 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5254 Post(s)
Liked 2,823 Times
in
1,666 Posts
Originally Posted by mountainwave
Hi Everyone,
I'm in need of help. My chainrings are worn out on my Mountain Bike. According to my measurements and what I've learned on Sheldon Brown's Website. I have a Compact Drive (MTB Triple) chainring combination. Before I go any further, I have a pair of Sugino square taper cranks with a 5 bolt pattern and 42/32/22t chainrings. The BCD is 94mm for the outer and middle ring while the inner chainring is 54 mm.
While reading Sheldon's website about Compact Drives, he says, "The downside of compact drive is significantly reduced chain life, and decreased interchangeability of parts. I consider compact drive to be a very bad idea for mountain bike use, but it seems to have become ubiquitous."
This has thrown me off a bit because I was going to match up my current ratios of 42/32/22, but the comment on the reduced chain life has me wondering if it is best to make a move to a more interchangeable ratio that provides longer chain life. I just bought a 7 speed HG cassette and a HG 6/7/8 speed chain with 116 links.
Is there a better ratio that I can use with my current Sugino Cranks that will work with my 7 speed cassette and chain that would give longer chain life? Or, would it be best to invest in a crankset other than a Compact Drive with different chainring combinations that could work with my current cassette and chain? I would greatly appreciate any help. Thank you in advance!
Confused,
Mountainwave
I'm in need of help. My chainrings are worn out on my Mountain Bike. According to my measurements and what I've learned on Sheldon Brown's Website. I have a Compact Drive (MTB Triple) chainring combination. Before I go any further, I have a pair of Sugino square taper cranks with a 5 bolt pattern and 42/32/22t chainrings. The BCD is 94mm for the outer and middle ring while the inner chainring is 54 mm.
While reading Sheldon's website about Compact Drives, he says, "The downside of compact drive is significantly reduced chain life, and decreased interchangeability of parts. I consider compact drive to be a very bad idea for mountain bike use, but it seems to have become ubiquitous."
This has thrown me off a bit because I was going to match up my current ratios of 42/32/22, but the comment on the reduced chain life has me wondering if it is best to make a move to a more interchangeable ratio that provides longer chain life. I just bought a 7 speed HG cassette and a HG 6/7/8 speed chain with 116 links.
Is there a better ratio that I can use with my current Sugino Cranks that will work with my 7 speed cassette and chain that would give longer chain life? Or, would it be best to invest in a crankset other than a Compact Drive with different chainring combinations that could work with my current cassette and chain? I would greatly appreciate any help. Thank you in advance!
Confused,
Mountainwave
I bet this bike is from the mid to late 90s so you've been using it for a while. That, on its own, says that the rings last long enough. Just get new rings and ride. You can find rings here for $20 each.
__________________
Stuart Black
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
Days of Wineless Roads. Bed and Breakfasting along the KATY
Twisting Down the Alley. Misadventures in tornado alley.
Stuart Black
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
Days of Wineless Roads. Bed and Breakfasting along the KATY
Twisting Down the Alley. Misadventures in tornado alley.
