Singlespeed chain tension...
- Thread starter jam1e
- Start date
icantthinkofausername
Senior Retro Guru
- Feedback
- View
Should have 1/2-1" of movement vertically when you push it with your finger. Come on then, post up some pics! 
thecannibal
Retro Guru
I've always felt that guidelines on chain tension based on measured amount of play are a little wrong-headed. I believe Sheldon Brown was the main proponent of this approach. Also, 1" is really quite a lot; too much, I would say.
I would simply suggest the correct tension is the tightest possible, while still leaving the drivetrain free-running at the chain's tightest point. If the chain is very tightloosetightloose as you rotate the cranks, Sheldon does have great advice for this.
Sheldon Brown will be sorely missed.
I would simply suggest the correct tension is the tightest possible, while still leaving the drivetrain free-running at the chain's tightest point. If the chain is very tightloosetightloose as you rotate the cranks, Sheldon does have great advice for this.
Sheldon Brown will be sorely missed.
one-eyed_jim
Old School Grand Master
In fact, Sheldon says simply:thecannibal":5arr4uro said:
http://sheldonbrown.com/singlespeed.html#tension
I would also like to add to this conversation the issues brought about by different rear cog/drive setups.
IF a geared body with a converter is used. then the tension should be less than if a dedicated SS driver is used.
is a freebody and SSkit then for max body life the chain should not put any undue tension on the body bearings.
IF a geared body with a converter is used. then the tension should be less than if a dedicated SS driver is used.
is a freebody and SSkit then for max body life the chain should not put any undue tension on the body bearings.
one-eyed_jim
Old School Grand Master
Can you explain briefly what the difference is?nicklouse":jaxwmui9 said:
If I set up a "dedicated SS driver" as described above ("tight as it can be without binding") what's the advantage of using any more slack with a converted geared freehub? That won't decrease the loads on the freehub body, and only increases the risk of dropping the chain.
one-eyed_jim
Old School Grand Master
Morning thoughts. We tend to use the word "tension" (noun) sloppily to mean the reverse of "slack". When we talking about tensioning the chain, we really mean removing slack from it. The ideal we're aiming for is zero slack and zero* tension when the chain is at its tightest.
nicklouse":2yx8wok4 said:
i think he means freehub/SS cog vs. thread-on freewheel. either way, too much tension will prematurely wear everything! chain, chainring, cog/freewheel, rear bearings, BB bearings.
be sure to use SS specific cog/freewheel/rings (ie: not ramped/pinned to encourage derailment during shifting) and keep a good chainline, and you can run a fairly loose chain without worry.
dookie":22n9lnfy said:
On nice smooth terrain maybe you can, but on rocky, rooty trails I'm not so confident, as the chain can slop about sideways, as well as vertically, and this is what leads to it derailing.
Yes, the proper sprockets and rings and a good chainline are all important, but so is a correctly adjusted chain.
I set the tension so that if I quickly spin the cranks backwards I can get a couple of revolutions of the cranks - any less and it probably is too tight.
I try never to have any actual "slack" in the chain, and certainly not even half an inch - I'm pretty fussy about this.
