Mark Olson <ols...@tiny.invalid> wrote:
>
> My position has always been that you always want to maintain a non-zero
> amount of slack at whatever swingarm position results in the rear
> axle being the furthest away from the countershaft, with the chain
> in its tightest position.
Agreed entirely. I thought that's what I was doing by setting the
slack (tight but not too tight) with the swingarm raised to what
seemed like the tightest elevation.
> Since chains wear unevenly, this can mean
> that at its loosest point, a worn chain may result in too much slack
> when the swingarm is at a low point.
>
> My guess is that your chain is unevenly worn.
This is a novel proposition to me. There's a definite variation is
chain slack as the wheel rotates, but I always attributed it to
eccentricity of the sprocket, not the state of the chain.
> I tend to replace chains
> when they are still technically servicable but vibrate from uneven
> wear. I'm also a big believer in replacing chain and sprockets as
> a set.
Agreed on the replacement as a set policy. The present chain is original,
with less than 30k very easygoing miles on it. By "lift off the sprocket"
testing the chain is essentially unworn, revealing no more than a tenth
of a tooth on the rear sprocket.
Being an o-ring chain it hasn't been lubricated very systematically.
Perhaps I should start there, then check whether the chain slack cycles
with wheel rotation or chain rotation.
Thanks for writing!
bob prohaska