I seem to remember reading on this site somewhere that stainless steel chains were more likely to break since stainless steel is more rigid/less flexible than nickel chains. Stainless steel chains are more expensive. Obviously they resist rust better, but I have never had a problem with chain rust.
So which should I buy?
Stainless steel chains are more expensive. Obviously they resist rust better, but I have never had a problem with chain rust.
What is this, a lesson in home economics? Stainless steel chains are more expensive, and you have no need of the benefit they’re supposed to offer. Hmmmm . . . what to do, what to do?
Very funny, vitus. I might be misinformed and there might be wear advantages or other advantages to stainless steel.
Justing asking the collective database for opinions.
Generally speaking, I think stainless steels are at a disadvantage in the wear department. Their only big advantage is rust.
are you sure it’s solid nickel, or a nickel plated steel (not stainless) chain?
anywyas, I’ve always been happy w/ the second from the top SRAM chains, for road and mt bikes and Shimano hardware. hope this helps.
I am talking about the stainless steel vs nickel Wippermann chains in particular.
I have used the PC-99 and other SRAM chains with very good results. I don’t have a problem with rust because I clean my bikes after riding, and ride often enough that I go through 2-3 chains per year on each bike(road and mtb).
I’ve only ever had one chain break, and it was because it was well past needing replacement. Even so, the link came apart at the rivet, so I am not sure that was a function of material or manufacturing process.
Oh, that was an HG-53 chain that broke.
I am talking about the stainless steel vs nickel Wippermann chains in particular.
I broke a stainless steel Wipperman about a month ago.