i love you gary, and your tiny arms.
tl;dr, people like things. some other people don't. gary is a t-rex.
tl;dr, people like things. some other people don't. gary is a t-rex.
Oval chainrings.
- Thread starter rideit
- Start date
@Gary before mounting the oval ring I had a straitline silent guide as chain device in order not to loose the chain. A silent guide is a proper DH chain device if I recall correctly, isn't it?
But hey, we don't need to go into "my dad is stronger than your dad" territory. If you don't want go oval, just don't. I am fine with it!
Cheers
But hey, we don't need to go into "my dad is stronger than your dad" territory. If you don't want go oval, just don't. I am fine with it!
Cheers
New science suggests evolution of small arms in late Cretaceous era dinosaurs was a common theme, not limited to trex and its closest cousins. See below. Sandwich may have discovered a new species. Gualicho Gary.
"Paleontologists working in Argentina uncovered the remains of a Cretaceous-era dinosaur that featured the same kind of miniaturized arms found on the T. rex. These ancient creatures weren’t closely related, so scientists now suspect that tiny arms evolved independently.
Introducing Gualicho shinyae, a 1,000-pound, bipedal theropod that featured a pair of short arms with two fingered claws on each. This fearsome, polar bear-sized creature is similar to the T. rex in this regard, but it sits on a separate branch of the family tree, which means this creature’s unusual limbs evolved independently (i.e. parallel evolution), and was not a trait that was handed down from a common ancestor. Small arms, it appears, was a thing among certain bipedal carnivores during the Late Cretaceous, and for reasons that aren’t entirely clear."
"Paleontologists working in Argentina uncovered the remains of a Cretaceous-era dinosaur that featured the same kind of miniaturized arms found on the T. rex. These ancient creatures weren’t closely related, so scientists now suspect that tiny arms evolved independently.
Introducing Gualicho shinyae, a 1,000-pound, bipedal theropod that featured a pair of short arms with two fingered claws on each. This fearsome, polar bear-sized creature is similar to the T. rex in this regard, but it sits on a separate branch of the family tree, which means this creature’s unusual limbs evolved independently (i.e. parallel evolution), and was not a trait that was handed down from a common ancestor. Small arms, it appears, was a thing among certain bipedal carnivores during the Late Cretaceous, and for reasons that aren’t entirely clear."
No top guide is able do it's job as well with an oval chainring as it can with a round ring. FACT!
With a n oval ring the top guide needs to be fitted higher to allow clearance so that POINTLESS widest point of the ring can pass under it. This means there will be a larger gap above the chain as the POINTLESS narrowest part of the ring passes through.
If you ride in mud a lot. You do all ride in mud don't you? One problem you may incur with chain devices is that the mud can accumulate under the chain physically raising it off the chainring. Resulting in the chain eventually either jamming or coming off. even more common if you're (like me) a half crank back pedaller. (taking a foot off can also result in quarter back pedal). that back pedal, combined with the mud and the resulting release of chain tension (from the back pedal and suspension compression) can and will jam a proper chain device. Fuck adding to the chance of it happening by adding a STUPID oval chainring.
Just me? No. but I am probably one of the very few to bother taking the time to work out how and why a chain device when set up properly can still jam/derail your chain.
Yes. @Happymtb.fr . I too am absolutelyfine with people fitting pointless shit flawed fashionable parts to their beloved mountain chariots.
With a n oval ring the top guide needs to be fitted higher to allow clearance so that POINTLESS widest point of the ring can pass under it. This means there will be a larger gap above the chain as the POINTLESS narrowest part of the ring passes through.
If you ride in mud a lot. You do all ride in mud don't you? One problem you may incur with chain devices is that the mud can accumulate under the chain physically raising it off the chainring. Resulting in the chain eventually either jamming or coming off. even more common if you're (like me) a half crank back pedaller. (taking a foot off can also result in quarter back pedal). that back pedal, combined with the mud and the resulting release of chain tension (from the back pedal and suspension compression) can and will jam a proper chain device. Fuck adding to the chance of it happening by adding a STUPID oval chainring.
Just me? No. but I am probably one of the very few to bother taking the time to work out how and why a chain device when set up properly can still jam/derail your chain.
Yes. @Happymtb.fr . I too am absolutelyfine with people fitting pointless shit flawed fashionable parts to their beloved mountain chariots.
Gary, I just read your post with the voice of Groundskeeper Willie 
By the way, there is barely no mud to speak off here. It's mostly roots and rocks...
Where I grew up in France we had mud that could completely cover your drivetrain almost beyond recognition but I haven't being riding there since V brakes went out of fashion...
But I agree with you that a chain guide on an oval ring is going to suck!
By the way, there is barely no mud to speak off here. It's mostly roots and rocks...
Where I grew up in France we had mud that could completely cover your drivetrain almost beyond recognition but I haven't being riding there since V brakes went out of fashion...
But I agree with you that a chain guide on an oval ring is going to suck!
My two devaluated cents of a peso: gualicho means "charm" or "enchantment" in one of the many local aborigin languages down here. Gary might be doing some sorcerer thing and talking us into something of his own agenda here.
Now on oval rings: they get the teeth in the apex worn prematurely and stretch chain moar unevenly than the round ones. I tried one a couple of months ago and since It didn't have several mounting holes as the rotor ones (I'm a luddite still on 104 bcd cranks) I couldn't time it properly, and no amount of fiddling with saddle and cleat position could fix It, so I gave It back. But then again I'm old and fat.
Last edited:
I was with you on the "Oval rings are SHITE" bit
But "timing"?
WTAF dude?
been drinking too much Castrol?
WTF would you fiddle with saddle height/position and cleat position after changing a CHAINRING?
You know that's a particularly poor Scots accent, aye? Which of course is a huge part of what makes Groundskeeper Willie so great in the first place.
I would barely understand him if he had a proper Scott accent... 
GXP cranks, but good point about cinch
The guy who lent me that thing suggested changing several parameters. I gave It one week before thinking about sending it back in pieces.I was with you on the "Oval rings are SHITE" bit
But "timing"?
WTAF dude?
been drinking too much Castrol?
WTF would you fiddle with saddle height/position and cleat position after changing a CHAINRING?
Plus Castrol is not even my thing. I know you must love It since It makes about 67% of that Guinness crap, but please stop projecting your issues into other people.
I know you aren't Irish, I was just pulling your chain. They can't bitch about everything as bad as you redheads-in-flannel-skirts do.
Plus,
Last edited:
I used to love Beamish (although it is low alcohol, it was a highly hopped Stout)
No kippers for breakfast no care.
FWIW I have an oval ring on my everything bike. When I put it on it felt a bit odd for the first 200 meters of pedalling or so, bow I can't tell the difference. Road bike has round rings, wife's bike has round ring etc. I'll probably buy another as they seem to be cheaper than round rings.
Also run a guide, and drop the chain about as much as before (i.e. very rarely). Spends most of it's life riding in the UK mud, gets raced for enduro & DH too (my only MTB).
And it's a 29", so will probably give Gary and aneurysm.
Also run a guide, and drop the chain about as much as before (i.e. very rarely). Spends most of it's life riding in the UK mud, gets raced for enduro & DH too (my only MTB).
And it's a 29", so will probably give Gary and aneurysm.
BioDome
Two years later, and I bought an Absolute Black oval for the new XTR. Any thoughts from the monkeys now that such time has passed? Is woo using an oval belt buckle?
In my humble opinion, the oval rings still suck.
I put one on my Spartan last year. I personally don't notice anything different really. The one exception is (possibly) when I'm going up a rock step-up, the rear tire doesn't slip. But that might be cause I'm on a different bike too.
I like mine, I run no bash ring and it improves clearance.
Haven't done a back to back with a circle ring and an oval ring, I think it feels better coz I believe in good marketing.
I run a 34t oval with 165mm cranks and first gear is 1/1, it's fine for what I do but I have no climbs local longer than a few minutes.
Haven't done a back to back with a circle ring and an oval ring, I think it feels better coz I believe in good marketing.
I run a 34t oval with 165mm cranks and first gear is 1/1, it's fine for what I do but I have no climbs local longer than a few minutes.
Down here they're consistently associated with the "comefideos" (noodle-eater) crowd, i.e. the XC/Roadies.
Watch where you buy your AbsoluteBlack chainring from.
Apparently Chain Reaction Cycles have a custom version that they sell cheaper.
According to this thread on NSMB It is not as advanced as their normal offerings.
It is also stated their regular rings are different with regards to ovality and clocking depending upon size.
Wondering if the CRC offering is a fixed ovality and clocking across ring sizes...
Apparently Chain Reaction Cycles have a custom version that they sell cheaper.
According to this thread on NSMB It is not as advanced as their normal offerings.
It is also stated their regular rings are different with regards to ovality and clocking depending upon size.
Wondering if the CRC offering is a fixed ovality and clocking across ring sizes...
It's direct from A.B.
My single speed has an oval ring, running 30x20. The stand and mash definitely feels different on the oval vs round. I think it feels smoother but maybe I am just used to it now.
I ran an AB one for 12 months or so, simply out of curiosity. It was a 32t one bought directly from their website. I was coming from a 30t round ring. It took me 5 minutes to get used to it. At first I thought all the promises are true, you can turn a bigger ring. This year in May or June I had to take it off my cranks and unfortunately one of the KCNC screws decided to become best friends with the threads in the ring - the whole threaded part sheared off the ring. Ring to trash.
I'm on a round 32t since then and guess what, no difference at all. Even my right knee that I successfully wrecked last September didn't complain.
Placebo.
I'm on a round 32t since then and guess what, no difference at all. Even my right knee that I successfully wrecked last September didn't complain.
Placebo.
Well, it is a strange coincidence that today I decided to do some bike maintenance and I realized that my ring was ass aboot. I bought a cheap one and it doesn't have recesses for the barrel nuts and it is also assymetric so I was probably doing myself a disservice and not getting the full benefit of the ovality.
I will be unstoppable on the climbs now, I'll be laughing at all the circletards as I pass them.
I will be unstoppable on the climbs now, I'll be laughing at all the circletards as I pass them.
Last edited:
Mine helps with knee pain, wouldn't bother with ovals if they didn't help with that. They help more for standing and peddling IMHO. I don't have them on the road bike and notice little pain but hagent switched since i dont stand much on the road bike. The only performance I notice is less slip of the wheel on slick loose climbs. But verying power is easily learned on a round ring. And its easier to loose the chain as mentioned.
I ran a 30/34T oval ring for about a year. Didn't notice any drawbacks as far as dropping chains, uneven wear, etc. However, I went back to a 32T round ring recently and was immediately faster on the climbs (verified by GPS). It felt like I had an easier time maintaining cadence compared to the oval ring, and overall 'seemed' like less effort. But now my climbing times have gone back to normal, so it could have been due to the sudden change. Just one man's (totally anecdotal and not scientific) experience.
Also, it seems like the oval ring would have an effect on your anti-squat values at certain rotation points. I guess it would depend on how sensitive your bike is to changes in chainring diameter, but might be worth thinking about.
Also, it seems like the oval ring would have an effect on your anti-squat values at certain rotation points. I guess it would depend on how sensitive your bike is to changes in chainring diameter, but might be worth thinking about.