Primary Drive (RockyMtnATV's brand) Chain Opinions?

[joeym4130]

Shopping around for a new chain, x-ring or o-ring.
Muscled through the archives here and saw more then a few displeased with the sprockets that Primary Drive makes.

What about their chains? I was checking out how cheap their prices are for their x-ring chains. Wondering if their chains are worth going for.

 

[RADRick]

Shopping around for a new chain, x-ring or o-ring.
Muscled through the archives here and saw more then a few displeased with the sprockets that Primary Drive makes.

What about their chains? I was checking out how cheap their prices are for their x-ring chains. Wondering if their chains are worth going for.

I just finished an article on chains and sprockets for an upcoming DR and used a number of Primary Drive products. I still have their gold o-ring chain on my bike and am very satisfied with it. It appears to be at least as good as the stocker, which lasted almost 2000 miles.

 

[slowone]

I agree with RadRick. I am using the gold x-ring with very good results, low stretch, minimal side plate wear, etc...I wouldn't be scared to try one!

 

[AndyO]

Put one on last Friday. Rode three hours Saturday and adjusted slack. Rode all day Sunday and noticed no more stretch. Seems good to me-- so far.

 

[KX02]

I had a PD X ring on my last bike. It was OK for being the cheapest X ring around, but needed twice as much adjusting as the Regina ORN I've got on my current bike.

 

[Rcannon]

I agree...good stuff. At least as high quality as a did chain.

Rocky Mountain pulls these chains off of huge rolls. I coudl tell you the name listed on the side of the rolls of chain, but I woudl have to kill you.

Suffice to say it rhymes with "did"

 

[slowone]

Would it be D.I.D. spelled backwards?

 

[Shawn007]

I'm in same boat as u Joey. I just got their huge catalog in mail. I looked at all the specs of all the brands they sell. Their primo chains list that their tensile strength is higher than any other brand they sell including the DID ERT2 which I've been told is one of the best. I wonder if high tensile strength equates to high anti-stretch? For the price, I too am willing to try them. Anyone others opinions, please?

 

[Jaybird]

Tensile strength rating of a chain really isn't an important factor. The mfg's use it as a marketing tool.

All it really tells you is the ultimate pull force it takes to cause the sideplates to fail and break. The most powerful dirtbike on the planet can only create about half of the force needed to break the cheapest of cheapo chains.

You can throw the tensile strength numbers out the widow as far as it being anything of real value. A chain with a higher rating could have thicker plates and pins, yet use inferior metals. Another chain with high quality metal, but a lower tensile rating, will far outperform and outlast the higher rated chain.

If you are going to use a ring chain, keep in mind that it has a finite lifespan. In other words, the mfg knows just about how many revolutions you are going to see from that chain, because the lubricant is metered and kept in place. Providing you take good care of the rings and keep them from wearing or tearing.

A standard non ring chain requires your care to stay alive. And keeping the chain properly cleaned, lubricated, and adjusted are the keys.
Users of cheaper standard chains can easily keep their chains in service longer than that of the high dollar, finite lifespan, ring chain users.

 

[joeym4130]

Hm. Very informative post JayBird.

Being a relatively new bike owner, I never really delt with all the chain situations dealing with types.

The chain that has been on my bike is a non-o ring racing chain. No problems with it, and had a long life. I adjust it before every outing, and lube it before a ride, and during if extended periods of riding. If i'm riding in mud i take the chain off and clean it before the next time.

I just went for an o-ring because thats what all the other riders i go with told me to get, something about it saving money in the long run.

After Jaybirds post, now i'm thinking, maybe its better for me and my wallet to get a decent quality name racing chain made of good materials and continue to maintain it well.

 

[RADRick]

There really are only two considerations when it comes to chains. Application and price. As stated earlier, the tensile strength of even a cheap chain is higher than the output of a modern dirt bike so it's a usueless factor for comparison. Most any name brand chain on the market today is as good or better than the stocker.

When deciding between standard and o-ring (or its many variants) chains, the main considerations should be application and your own tendencies towards maintenance. O-ring chains are typically a better choice if you ride in muddy or sandy situations. Their sealed design is better at keeping the crud out while you're riding. If you primarily ride groomed tracks or established dry trails then a standard chain is probably a good bet. The caveat with both is that they require proper maintenance. Both need regular cleaning and lubing; the o-ring needs less lubing, less often. If you are the type to neglect it, go with the o-ring chain. If you aren't, then a standard chain will probably be cheaper in the long run. A properly maintained o-ring chain will outlast a standard chain, but at a higher initial cost. O-ring chain lube is also slightly more expensive and must be used to protect the rubber components. A standard chain can be lubed with almost anything in a pinch.

 

[RM_guy]

...A properly maintained o-ring chain will outlast a standard chain, but at a higher initial cost. O-ring chain lube is also slightly more expensive and must be used to protect the rubber components. A standard chain can be lubed with almost anything in a pinch.

Good advice until you said this. As Jay pointed out, the lube in an O-ring chain can not be replaced so once it be used up the chain will wear and there is nothing you can do to stop it. While with a properly maintained non-oring chain you can continue to lube it and have it last a long long time.

Another thing against o-ring chains is that it can be tricky to "properly maintain" it if you use a pressure washer. It is way too easy to get water in past the o-rings and once that happens it's a matter of time before it seizes up and becomes junk.

It's definitely a matter of preference but what I’m spending my own money I’ll buy a non-oring chain.

 

[RADRick]

Good advice until you said this. As Jay pointed out, the lube in an O-ring chain can not be replaced so once it be used up the chain will wear and there is nothing you can do to stop it.

A properly maintained o-ring chain does not "use up" its lube. The problem happens when the lube gets contaminated or flushed out, which is a result of damaged o-rings. That being the case, the chain is no longer serviceable as is. Despite common belief, an o-ring chain does need to be lubed regularly. The sealed lube is only for the pins. The side plates and rollers still need a spritz now and then to prevent rust and reduce wear, and any chain should always be kept clean. An undamaged, properly maintained o-ring chain will reach the limits of chain stretch before the lubricant fails. A standard chain carries less of the lubricant within the pin area, it is exposed to more grit while in operation, and it operates at a higher temperature. That's the main reason they don't last as long. Less lube means more friction, which means more heat, which means the chain will stretch sooner, which means it will reach its service limit faster. The superiority of an o-ring chain and the environments it is designed for is why most manufacturers spec them on their off-road models. Weight and cost are the main reasons MX models come with standard chains. Another consideration in favor of a standard chain is whether or not you do a lot of regearing. O-ring chains can be twice as much as a standard chain and you wouldn't want to mess one up by having it be too short for your latest choice in gearing.

While with a properly maintained non-oring chain you can continue to lube it and have it last a long long time.

You still have the problem of the internal lube getting contaminated while you're riding. On a bike that gets operated in sandy or muddy conditions, this is a real concern. Once dirt gets into the lube and into the pin cavities it's like having a grinding wheel inside your chain. The o-ring chain eliminates this problem, at least as far as the pins are concerned. How much of the lube you spray on a standard chain do you think actually works its way into the pin cavities?

Another thing against o-ring chains is that it can be tricky to "properly maintain" it if you use a pressure washer. It is way too easy to get water in past the o-rings and once that happens it's a matter of time before it seizes up and becomes junk.

It's not that easy, but certainly a concern if you use a pressure washer regularly. For the same reason as wheel bearings, you shouldn't aim the pressure washer directly at the chain. It doesn't need it to be cleaned. Regular water pressure should be sufficient.

It's definitely a matter of preference but what I’m spending my own money I’ll buy a non-oring chain.

The average life expectancy of an o-ring chain vs standard chain is about 3 to 1, assuming proper maintenance and care including the sprockets (worn sprockets and improper adjustment account for much of the chain's wear). Like I said, use what you like, but no type of chain will be satisfactory if you don't care for it properly. If you're the type that puts your bike away dirty until the next ride, an o-ring chain is probably a better choice. :cool:

 

[RM_guy]

Used up was a bad choice of words, break down would have been better. Lube doesn't last forever.

 

[RADRick]

Used up was a bad choice of words, break down would have been better. Lube doesn't last forever.

The main enemies of any lube are contamination and heat. In a sealed environment like an o-ring chain, heat is the only real concern. If by break down, you are referring to a chemical change taking place, you wouldn't live long enough to see that happen. Most common petroleum-based and synthetic-based lubricants are very stable molecularly and have a long shelf-life. Any lubricant in an o-ring chain will easily outlive the chain's service life relative to stretch. :cool:

 

[Okiewan]

(RM-guy ... BAIL MISTER!! BAIL!!! )

 

[RADRick]

(RM-guy ... BAIL MISTER!! BAIL!!! )

Pretty funny considering you have a pitbull in here with the initials RR who jumps on anyone that dares give tech info that is the slightest bit inaccurate in his opinion. What exactly do you want in here? I can't win for trying.


Anytime you want to pull my plug, just yank my account, Okie. I promise I'll get over it.

 

[Okiewan]

Nah, too entertaining.

 

[RADRick]

Nah, too entertaining.

Well then, glad to be of service. :laugh:

 

[Jaybird]

Rick,
Surely you don't think Rich is going to waste.... wait...I'll hold that thought for awhile...

From having experience in debating some of these issues with you in the past, I am pretty sure this will be a pissing match.
But, I am going to give you the real scoop.
It more than likely will not match some of the information you have posted, nor will it match up to the information you provided in your recent article...but misinformation and half of the facts are fairly common in many moto articles anywho.



Chains do undergo a slight bit of elastic "stretch" when they are first put into service. It's mostly due to a "tightening" of the molecular structure of the side plates. This phenomenon happens with all new metal chains.

This elastic stretching causes a brand new chain to require an adjustment only a short period after mounting it up.
Many mfg's today are "proof stretching" brand new chains during the mfg process which places up to 60% of the total tensile yield load on a section of the chain. This straight pull force actually tightens up the molecular structure of the side plates, and virtually eliminates the need for the initial adjustment required by all chains that are not proof stretched at manufacturing.

Many times you will hear of a rider pitting on a new chain, and stating they had to almost immediately adjust it, but that it settled down and didn't grow near as fast after the first adjustment...the initial elongation of the metals described above is why this happens.

But, once the metal has had it's initial stretch period seen, it will not stretch further due to the side plates elongating, as long as the tensile yield force is not seen again...and it won't be.

If by break down, you are referring to a chemical change taking place, you wouldn't live long enough to see that happen. Most common petroleum-based and synthetic-based lubricants are very stable molecularly and have a long shelf-life. Any lubricant in an o-ring chain will easily outlive the chain's service life relative to stretch.

This sounds good, albeit not factual. But it is close to what many folks would think.
The fact is, the chain will not see an elongation as long as the lubricant inside of the sealed pin/bushing area remains intact. And the lubricant in there will not remain viable forever, as you are eluding to. Shelf life of the hydrocarbons is one thing, but in-service chains are seeing work load.

Actually, there is a change in the chemistry of the lubricant taking place in a working chain. Oxygen is present with the lubricant, and with work, so is heat. These factors work to break the lubricant down through chemical and mechanical process'.
Even in a perfect world, the lubricant will see a time when it's ability to keep the metal surfaces from wearing is gone. Once the integrity of the lubricant is gone, or it has been "consumed" by workload, then the metal surfaces will start to wear against one another, and the resulting loss of metal at these friction points is what causes the chain to "stretch" or elongate past it's original pitch length.
And with a ring chain that has seen lots of hours, and has started to see a depletion in lubricant, there will be some metal particulate that is present after it has been worn off. There is no place for the particulate to go, and as a result it comingles in the lubricant...thickening the viscosity of the lube, and contributing to the degradation of the surfaces.
This particulate is also in the form of pure Fe, and as such will oxidize very quickly. The resulting Iron Oxide is a fantastic abrasive.
Knowing these things, we can see why a ring chain will last and last, but when it does start to need adjustments, it needs them often and early, as it is on a quick road to killing your sprocket teeth from there.

The only way to stop this elongation from wear it to replentish the lubricant. And obviously we can't do that easily with a ring chain.


As far as keeping a standard chain alive...well, I agree that conventional wisdom, as well as slick marketing schemes, state that a ring chain will outlive a standard chain by more than 3 times. But it is simply not true. Well, not true if you maintain the chain properly.

Wear ratings you see from the mfg's are just as useless as tensile strength ratings. They mean absolutely nothing for comparisons, other than possibly comparing two similar sealed chains.
The ratings you see is bench testing data that is biased.
First of all, the chain materials of any given mfg will be very similar within their product lines. So you are essentially seeing the same animals when they compare their ring chain to their standard chain. Now, if a standard chain of the exact same materials of a ring chain were placed on test machines at the same time, only the chain that was deprived of lubricant would theoretically start to wear first.

If the standard chain is given equal amounts of lubricant as the ring chain...why would it not live as long as the ring chain did? It would. They would live the exact same amount of hours.
The thing is, the lubricant that is in the ring chain will become useless at some point. And there is no way to replentish it.
The standard chain, on the other hand, can continue to be lubed and cared for. It can, and will, outlive the finite lifespan sealed ring chain.

The issue most folks contend with is the "proper" care thing.
If you have trouble seeing your lube getting to where it's supposed to be going, you probably are using the wrong lubricant.
If your lubricant collects grime and creates a grinding paste mess, you also have a lubricant problem.
Many of the moto-specific types are the wrong products to be using in this application. No matter what the slick marketing campagin trys to get you to buy off on, their products are outdated and obsolete for dirt bike applications.

In Rick's attempt at explaining why a standard chain wears, the conditions he describes is that of a chain that is being cared for improperly. The wrong products and methods often times will bring folks to conclusions that are not really correct.

The fact is you can keep enough lube on the friction surfaces to protect them from wear, and for lengthy periods of time.
And when you use a chain lube that is suited for our application, you will find that it collects no dirt or grit.
And with a regular cleaning/lube/adjustment schedule, you can keep your chain in top notch condition.

 

[RADRick]

Gee, and some say I'm wordy! :laugh:

It more than likely will not match some of the information you have posted, nor will it match up to the information you provided in your recent article...but misinformation and half of the facts are fairly common in many moto articles anywho.

Ooh, a veiled slap at my profession. Good start. Feel better?

Chains do undergo a slight bit of elastic "stretch" when they are first put into service. It's mostly due to...

Snipped the rest since the debate really had little to do with chain stretch. I only mentioned it because it is the likeliest indicator of the need for replacement of a chain that has been properly cared for.

This sounds good, albeit not factual. But it is close to what many folks would think.
The fact is, the chain will not see an elongation as long as the lubricant inside of the sealed pin/bushing area remains intact. And the lubricant in there will not remain viable forever, as you are eluding to. Shelf life of the hydrocarbons is one thing, but in-service chains are seeing work load.

Like I said, unless something has happened to the o-ring chain to cause the lube to seep out or become contaminated, the lube will last longer than the chain's serviceable life. Of course, this refers to bikes that are actually ridden and not stored for years. I never said the lube remains viable forever, just that a chemical breakdown of it in one's lifetime is unlikely.

Actually, there is a change in the chemistry of the lubricant taking place in a working chain. Oxygen is present with the lubricant, and with work, so is heat. These factors work to break the lubricant down through chemical and mechanical process'.

Again, aren't we talking about regularly ridden dirt bikes here? Most chains will reach their service limit in stretch long before any chemical breakdown of the lube occurs. Your making it out to be a real concern is not factual. Mechanical breakdown of the lube is genuine, but also of little import on a properly maintained, quality o-ring chain.

Even in a perfect world, the lubricant will see a time when it's ability to keep the metal surfaces from wearing is gone. Once the integrity of the lubricant is gone, or it has been "consumed" by workload, then the metal surfaces will start to wear against one another, and the resulting loss of metal at these friction points is what causes the chain to "stretch" or elongate past it's original pitch length.
And with a ring chain that has seen lots of hours, and has started to see a depletion in lubricant, there will be some metal particulate that is present after it has been worn off. There is no place for the particulate to go, and as a result it comingles in the lubricant...thickening the viscosity of the lube, and contributing to the degradation of the surfaces.
This particulate is also in the form of pure Fe, and as such will oxidize very quickly. The resulting Iron Oxide is a fantastic abrasive.

I hate to keep beating this horse, but little of what you said is going to occur in the usable life of an average chain. I get about 2000 miles out of an o-ring chain. That's about a year of riding. I consider myself an average rider. I use that for the basis of my comments as well as my observations during the course of my work.

Knowing these things, we can see why a ring chain will last and last, but when it does start to need adjustments, it needs them often and early, as it is on a quick road to killing your sprocket teeth from there.

An o-ring chain can stretch more because of its design, not because of any breakdown in the lube. The pins are longer on an o-ring chain and the gap between the side plates is larger to accommodate the o-rings. This allows more lateral loading of the pins and side flexing of the chain which accelerates stretch. That's why manufacturers have gone to different types of rings: to provide more sealing contact surfaces to prevent loss or contamination of the lubricant. This side loading is the reason that a straight chain path and straight sprockets are critical to the life of an o-ring chain.

The only way to stop this elongation from wear it to replentish the lubricant. And obviously we can't do that easily with a ring chain.

Obviously, which is why it is important when buying a ring chain to go with a quality brand and avoid cheap alternatives.

As far as keeping a standard chain alive...well, I agree that conventional wisdom, as well as slick marketing schemes, state that a ring chain will outlive a standard chain by more than 3 times. But it is simply not true. Well, not true if you maintain the chain properly.

Again, this has been my own experience and that of others. If I based everything I wrote solely upon the available marketing copy, I wouldn't last long in this business. As it is, I've been doing this for quite some time.

Wear ratings you see from the mfg's are just as useless as tensile strength ratings. They mean absolutely nothing for comparisons, other than possibly comparing two similar sealed chains.
The ratings you see is bench testing data that is biased.
First of all, the chain materials of any given mfg will be very similar within their product lines. So you are essentially seeing the same animals when they compare their ring chain to their standard chain.

Well, since I never mentioned anything about manufacturer's wear ratings, I'm at a loss to rebutt this statement.

Now, if a standard chain of the exact same materials of a ring chain were placed on test machines at the same time, only the chain that was deprived of lubricant would theoretically start to wear first.

Well, if you want to discuss laboratory analyses, I defer. But since we were talking about a real-world situation that involves many variables--not the least of which is most riders lack of diligent care for their chains--I have to stand by my statements.

If the standard chain is given equal amounts of lubricant as the ring chain...why would it not live as long as the ring chain did? It would. They would live the exact same amount of hours.

On a test bench, maybe. In the real world, not likely. There is no way to get an equal amount of lube into each pin on a standard chain simply by spraying it with an aerosol lubricant. An undamaged o-ring chain will always begin each ride with the same amount of lube in each pin cavity.

The thing is, the lubricant that is in the ring chain will become useless at some point. And there is no way to replentish it.
The standard chain, on the other hand, can continue to be lubed and cared for. It can, and will, outlive the finite lifespan sealed ring chain.

Did you type that with a straight face? Like I said and say again, the ring chain will more likely than not reach its service limit for length long before any lube problem causes damage that renders it unserviceable.

The issue most folks contend with is the "proper" care thing.
If you have trouble seeing your lube getting to where it's supposed to be going, you probably are using the wrong lubricant.

Really? And how do you verify the amount of lube getting into each pin cavity on your standard chain? Is there a way to visually verify that each pin is properly lubricated? Puhleeze.

If your lubricant collects grime and creates a grinding paste mess, you also have a lubricant problem.
Many of the moto-specific types are the wrong products to be using in this application. No matter what the slick marketing campagin trys to get you to buy off on, their products are outdated and obsolete for dirt bike applications.

What? No recommendation? Any lube can collect dirt. Some are better than others at shedding it or keeping it in suspension, but no externally-applied lube will stay on the chain through all riding situations.

In Rick's attempt at explaining why a standard chain wears, the conditions he describes is that of a chain that is being cared for improperly. The wrong products and methods often times will bring folks to conclusions that are not really correct.

Nice of you to discount the fact that I also see the results from proper care, as well.

The fact is you can keep enough lube on the friction surfaces to protect them from wear, and for lengthy periods of time.

No argument there.

And when you use a chain lube that is suited for our application, you will find that it collects no dirt or grit.

Mr. Rohrich, you want to field this one?

And with a regular cleaning/lube/adjustment schedule, you can keep your chain in top notch condition.

And that's the bottom line, regardless of the type of chain. :cool:

 

[Okiewan]

I hate to keep beating this horse

Really? LOL, you wrote a book after that statement. :p

 

[RM_guy]

(RM-guy ... BAIL MISTER!! BAIL!!! )

LOL, I should have never started. I was never good at debate and it hard to argue with someone that can't admit any wrong. I'll let the facts (and the experts--Jay, thanks) speak for themselves.

 

[Rich Rohrich]

Rick,
Surely you don't think Rich is going to waste.... wait...I'll hold that thought for awhile...

I'm smart enough to know when I am out of my depth. ;)

I'll leave this in your more than capable hands Jay. :cool:

 

[RADRick]

Oh, come on guys. Nothing but cheap shots and not a single incontrovertible argument against anything I said. Don't discount the quality of the information just because you don't like the messenger. :nener: