Not personally, but have seen pictures (plural) of folded chainrings in a thread here on SSFG. They were folded allright.

That's exactly my experience. I think the reason is that 3/32" chainrings have teeth that taper down much more quickly than 1/8" chainrings' theeth. I am furious that the Alu chainring on my light SS commuter already shows signs of notching, after only 1300 Km!!!! **** that ****. My 1/8" chainring (fast road SS (which I also use for commuting)) has now 6000 Km, and absolutely no sign of notching. The anodizing has suffered a bit here and there, but the shape of the teeth is perfect.

A chainring that doesn't even last a thousand miles is an indication of something severely wrong, regardless of its width.

I expected this comment. No, the chainring is still very much usable, but there are signs of notching. I'll post a picture, wait a second.

This 3/32" chainring WILL be used for about 10.000 Km total, but at the end it will be all a big collection of dolphin fins. The 1/8" will be like the 3/32" is now. The 1/8" chainring that outlasted the 3 3/32" chainrings is another one - it has 12.000 Km on, and it's in such a good shape, I took it off the bike and put it back in the storage, as an almost new chainring. That's the chainring where the anodizing is a bit worn off here and there.

EDIT: pics of the 3/32" Vuelta chainring that shows signs of notching after only 1300 Km, are now attached below:

It's not that I don't believe it's happening, it's that I don't accept any argument that 3/32" chainrings have to be replaced at 6,000 miles. This would require top riders to replace their rings every three months, which isn't happening. Therefore, there must be something to your situation which is relatively unique.

What top riders? Trackies generally use 1/8th and roadies don't really mash much.

It isn't? Ok. I wouldn't know, I know nothing about top athletes, seriously.

I do mash quite often, as here it's hilly, and running on a SS requires it. Other than that, I don't have a clue. I might dig up one of the 3/32" chainrings I proclaimed dead, and try to post a pic. And then the 1/8" chainring I put into storage.

EDIT: could only find the one I put away in storage. And you can see why I stored it away: it's almost like new, after 12.000 Km.

My reasoning for 1/8 was that it would take longer for them to notch out. Just seems reasonable that the greater contact surface between chain and ring would wear less. Maybe that's just me.

In my experience, most trackies now use 3/32". Regardless, wroomwroom isn't a trackie. He's using road stuff on the road and finding that his chainrings are completely done after 6,000 miles of use. Most roadies will tell you that this is unacceptable. Moreover, in my time as mechanic for a fleet of velodrome rental bikes, I never saw a worn out chainring, and these bikes were often 15 years old and running 1/8" chains on 3/32" rings and cogs.

Regardless, I'm simply trying to make one point: 3/32" chainrings should last quite a bit more than 6,000 miles, and if they do not, something is wrong.

You're not reading very carefully, I'm afraid. I run a singlespeed, and hence am condemned (blessed with?) to mash uphills. And another reason you can't quite compare a singlespeed usage with a geared road bike is, they usually have two or three chainrings, so the wear is more distributed.

Hey, I do have a bike with a 3/32" chainring that has lasted quite long without any signs of notching: it's a bike with a steel chainring and a Nexus 8 geared hub. Obviously, no need to mash with this bike, and the steel-ness of the chainring has something to do with this, too.

Any chance in your time, the chainrings were mostly steel and not aluminum? That might explain your happy memories.

I understand that you are riding singlespeed, and that you're riding 3/32" (which is road stuff) on it. The question then becomes "Why are top road racers riders not having to replace their chainrings every few months?" The argument that top road racers don't "mash" is, as a rule, incorrect, so there must be something else going on. Again, it's not that I disbelieve you, it's just that our experiences are so wildly different that I wonder what's going on.

I'm not that old, mate!

When I went to the shop to buy a cog, they only had the size I wanted in 1/8", so I had the choice of either running a 1/8 chain/cog on a 3/32 chainring or waiting 3 days to ride my bike... you can all guess what I chose.

Just a little clarification: both chainrings are from singlespeeds, but they are geared slighrly differently. The 1/8" sees more mashing, because it's harder to climb uphill with a 43 (was 42 (now stored away)) x 19 than with a 38 (was 34) x 20. In spite of this, the 42T chainring that I mashed uphill an enormous number of times, shows no notching, as you could see yourself.

I wonder, too, why I seem to notch up the chainrings on the light commuter, and I am now going to appeal to your experience, much larger than mine. I'm serious, if you can think of anything, by summoning your vast knowledge, I'd be extremely interested. Or else I'm really disappointed with alu 3/32" chainrings.

Eh.. I'm starting my masters in electronics end of August, at the ripe-old age of 39. These "olden days" discussions make me very self-conscious

"Vast knowledge" he says.

I do wonder what brand of ring you are using. Perhaps some low-end rings are made with poor metal?

i have a 3/32 chainring that's totally done for - lots of bent/worn/misshapen teeth and really noisy at about 1,500 -2,000 miles. i should note, however, that it's a $15 rocket ring and i like a lot (more than recommended) of chain tension. i've learned my lesson on that one - too much chain tension can really mangle your chainrings.

Most of mine were Rocket Rings', too. The one you can see in the pics (with notches visible) is a Vuelta. So far, seems to fare worse than the RRs.

Thanks, by the way, for helping me in not feeling like the weird guy in the thread, and that there are others who can notch an alloy chainring in less than a thousand miles.