Lower derailure going 2 X 10 (bashguard)?

Lower derailure going 2 X 10 (bashguard) and remove links??

1. Do I lower the front deraileur if I go to 2 X10 with a bash guard? It seems to work fine at the same height, but is it "better" to lower it in relation to the 2nd chain ring now?

2. How many chain link(s) am I supposed to remove now..it is now 22-32

 

#1 I would run as low as possible.
,
#2 Chain on the biggest ring up front/biggest cog in the back , add two links to this measurement, and make sure you can get full travel in the rear. ( cycle the suspension)

 

Add 2 links? I would assume since I am losing the biggest chain ring that I would need to remove links?

 

Sorry, hope its more clear......add two links to the measured length when going big ring to big cog. Bypassing the rear der.

 

Means if you run the chain on the biggest ring in the front, biggest cog in the back, through the rear derailleur, pull the chain tight. From that point, you add two links so it shifts clean. It would also be a good idea to cycle the suspension to be sure while the bike is fully compressed the chain doesn't pull completely tight, but if you added two links this is not likely.

 

OK..yes, got it..thank you.

 

What's the consensus on what exactly 2 links is? A set of inner and outer plates/links = 1 link or 2? A quick link is 1 link or 1/2 or does it not count? A half-link is 1 or 1/2, or do single-speeders and whoever else uses these not matter?







From context, it looks like a link spans the space around 1 cog tooth, so I'd interpret SRAM's pictures as recommending 3 links, if you count the quick link. Is this accurate or did I make things even more confusing? Kind of odd that SRAM recommends 2 links for XX (2x10) and 4 for XX1 (1x11), yet pictures 2+quick link for both.

 

What the meant to say is;

veraxis: Do not try and bend the spoon. That's impossible. Instead... only try to realize the truth.
taprackbang: What truth?
veraxis: There is no spoon.
taprackbang: There is no spoon?
veraxis: Then you'll see, that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.

 

If you read the documentation instead of just looking at pictures, most will say add 2 links or 1 inch. The quick link counts as 1 link. You will run into situations where you can't do two links and you have to choose between breaking the chain at 1 link or 3 links. I could tell you what to do, but that's no fun. Also, two links are not enough to compensate for chain growth on many full suspension designs. Do not assume your suspension is special and has no chain growth just because someone in the marketing department said so. Also, I would add cassettes smaller than 28t for road bikes are sized differently.

 

Yep, thanks..done!

 

almost all bikes have maximum change growth at full compression. You have to do the "wrap chain araound big ring and big cog and add 2 links" thing with teh suspension compressed. Im guessing you had a 3 ring setup before, with the same derailler? theres no real reason to lower the derailleur.

 

Are you sure about this? Did this info come from someone credible? I thought chain growth was related to rearward axle movement, and on designs like FSR and many single pivots, there's more forward movement starting at about halfway through. Perhaps you are talking about a bike like this one?



I'd generalize that on a single pivot that the point of max chain growth is about when the rear axle is level with the pivot point. Hard to generalize with the others, but safe to say that max chain growth at full extension is more of the exception, than the rule. Trying to size a chain at full compression could be worse, depending on the design, such as on Spec's FSR, in which the point of max chain growth is could possibly be around full extension or sag.

 

Wow.

Totally depends on the location of the main pivot. For single pivots, max distance between BB and rear axle may very well be at full compression. Bikes with unusual chain paths like the one you showed are, well, unusual. Unless there's movement I don't recognize, even that one will have more chain growth with more compression.

Why would you generalize that?

Assuming you meant full suspension compression...This is based on what?

 

No. If it works, leave it alone. You gain nothing by lowering it.

 

Well, thinking about it again, it's not exactly tied to rearward axle movement like I thought previously. A single pivot with main pivot concentric can have both rearward and forward axle movement with zero chain growth. Though, there is a pattern of there being more chain growth the higher the pivot is. Even if the axle path is completely vertical, there's still chain growth. I see now that chainstay length plays more of a direct role in the amount of chain growth (measured from center of BB to axle, not horizontally). Interestingly, it seems a shorter chainstay results in even more chain growth than if the bike design had longer chainstays... guess I got something to look into later.

Taking what I said back. It seems like bikes with an axle path that curves forward greatly are the only exceptions regarding max chain growth and full compression, and there's very few, with the Spec Demo being one example. Thanks for getting me to verify my info.

 

Perhaps my inquiry has caused more debate than necessary..I should've prefaced that my bike is a hardtail btw..sorry..thanks Herz..but I already lowered it..no difference..the front deraileur cable toward the anchor bolt is getting all frayed now..so I'll just leave it..

 

Anything that gets the 27 remaining people here lively is good. Even if it's about where to place the front derailleur. LOL.

 

^^^ This. Debate is always good. So is info, observation, anecdote, story, tall tale, fable, epic, legend, and complete BS. :beer:

 

Always follow my advice! You'll save time and money, get stronger and look better every time!

(j/k)

 

Why would you lower your front derailleur? what is there to gain? If you removed your big ring, you need to leave the derailleur where it was, because you're still shifting using the two lower stops.