# New cranks



## Demo-9 (Mar 24, 2006)

Put on a pair of MacNeil Conjoined cranks to replace my Shadows. Overall the cranks are the same weight but fit tighter/closer to the BB with a lower profile. Results in less spacers and more spindle/crank interface...

Now I can get a 5.75" Ti spindle (non-Profile - see other thread) and drop the 1/4lb I wanted to originally.

Pics:

(Epic BMX pic)









On the bike:


----------



## sittingduck (Apr 26, 2005)

Nice pedals.


----------



## Demo-9 (Mar 24, 2006)

I LOVE my Wellgos.


----------



## XSL_WiLL (Nov 2, 2004)

Nice. MG1s are the shiz.


----------



## chicohigh5 (Mar 15, 2007)

your chain is on backwards buddy


----------



## Demo-9 (Mar 24, 2006)

How is it on backwards?? It does not matter if the large end or the small end of the links go forward.


----------



## combatkimura (Jul 17, 2007)

That ended up being an expensive 1/4 pound! They look great, light and burly.


----------



## climbingbubba (Jan 10, 2007)

sick looking man, i only run wellgo pedals on my bikes now.
did you get the tires yet? that should drop atleast a pound off your bike. now if i could only get my 24" tabletops


----------



## Demo-9 (Mar 24, 2006)

Hey climbingbubba - Yeah I got the tires. To be honest I could not ride my bike with them on - they were too light!! Almost a pound less weight indeed but at the park I could not ride it. Every time I hit the quarter pipe, the bike felt like it had no control. I need the gyroscpoic feel of the heavier tire in order to point the bike. Can't explain it but it felt like I had no control.

I will use them for the DJ though as I am going straight. I think it is the upward motion and the turn in mid air that you do in the park needs a heavier wheel.


----------



## aggiebiker (Apr 18, 2006)

Im jealous. 

And the chain is not backwards.


----------



## climbingbubba (Jan 10, 2007)

thats weird.. I loved mine in the park. i thought they did great in the bowls. can't say that im airing any quarterpipes but for 180's and manualing and hoping they are amazing. hope they work out for you. if not there are plenty of others who were interested. just mention it in a thread and you will get countless PM's.


----------



## chicohigh5 (Mar 15, 2007)

yes the chain is on back wards its meant to be pulled on from small link to big link like o O and on the bottom the chain is meant to be like O o and that way it is more resistent to being grinded on if you run it backwards it stretches significantly and becomes weaker resulting in it breaking faster and then you must shell out money to get it fixed i was just trying to save you some money down the road bro here are some examples of it being on right


----------



## aggiebiker (Apr 18, 2006)

The chains in those pics are going the same way as his...


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

no they're not.


----------



## BikeSATORI (Mar 20, 2004)

I've been rocking the same cranks for a few weeks now as well, with an old FSA ti spindle. Cool stuff, nothing revolutionary or blowing out of the water or anything though. Heavier than Medials and oddly long hardware, but still very nice, I like'em.









That chain is on EXACTLY as TSC intended as well, wide going forward like pac-man eating. EXACTLY like ALL of those pictures you posted as well chicohigh5, I don't understand how you cannot see that for yourself. 
It does matter too, but don't worry demo-9, you're all good.


----------



## Demo-9 (Mar 24, 2006)

chicohigh5 said:


> yes the chain is on back wards its meant to be pulled on from small link to big link like o O and on the bottom the chain is meant to be like O o and that way it is more resistent to being grinded on if you run it backwards it stretches significantly and becomes weaker resulting in it breaking faster and then you must shell out money to get it fixed i was just trying to save you some money down the road bro here are some examples of it being on right


Explain to me how a chain will stretch more going in one direction over reverse. You still have the same pins and plates. It will not stretch faster or more in either direction. As long as you don't swap it out when the chainrings and chain break in together, it does not matter. No with grinding it MAY make a difference in getting plates caught - but I don't grind.

Specifically show me an article, a report, a set of manufacturer directions or something to back this up. I am more than willing to admit I may be wrong, but I seriously doubt it.

Plus looking at the TSC picture, the chain goes both directions in the pic most likely because the pic was taken with 1 chain (each color). The chain was flipped over and thus the different direction:










That said - it looks like the red and green bike have the chain set-up the same way. Hard to tell. The blue one I can't tell. In the end it does not matter.


----------



## Demo-9 (Mar 24, 2006)

MTBR is weird. I just used a quote in my last response and it got moved below the quoted reply...

In any case check this out:

https://www.theshadowconspiracy.com/instr/chain.html

Go to step 7.


















Answered...:thumbsup:


----------



## Demo-9 (Mar 24, 2006)

*1st ride..*

Got the first ride in with the new cranks. I found them noticeably stiffer than the Shadows. There was less flex forward and side -to-side. Even just coasting and bouncing on them they felt better.

Oh.. and the chain felt better knowing that it is on right.


----------



## aggiebiker (Apr 18, 2006)

timms said:


> no they're not.


You're stupid.


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

aggiebiker said:


> You're stupid.


Could you please explain to me how I'm stupid, I simply pointed out the the chain on the bike is not going the same direction as the ones in the pic. I made no inference as to which one was correct. what are you, 12 years old. "you're stupid" that's a great insult.


----------



## XSL_WiLL (Nov 2, 2004)

But they ARE going the same way...


----------



## aggiebiker (Apr 18, 2006)

timms said:


> Could you please explain to me how I'm stupid, I simply pointed out the the chain on the bike is not going the same direction as the ones in the pic. I made no inference as to which one was correct. what are you, 12 years old. "you're stupid" that's a great insult.


You are stupid because the chains are all going the same way.

So just stop talking about it, we all know you're wrong.


----------



## timms (Feb 15, 2007)

https://forums.mtbr.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=332508&stc=1&d=1202185881

Does Not Coincide with this picture:

https://img233.imageshack.us/img233/8813/dcp2282ip6.jpg

That's all I said.


----------



## XSL_WiLL (Nov 2, 2004)

The picture from the shadow website is facing the wrong direction when looking from the top. Notice the direction of the plates from the side-view. Also notice that their instructions show the orientation of the chain to be the same as Demo-9.


----------



## quickfeet18 (Feb 13, 2007)

why is this still getting argued about, the chain is on right. Timms was incorrect, simple mistake everyone makes them


----------



## Demo-9 (Mar 24, 2006)

quickfeet18 said:


> why is this still getting argued about, the chain is on right. Timms was incorrect, simple mistake everyone makes them


This is still being argued (admittedly by me as well) because people spout off about sh!t that they have no clue on, don't know about or have no reasoning behind their statement.

There is no way first of all that a chain put on in either direction will stretch faster/slower than reversed. It is just not going to happen. Second the f-in instructions from the manufacturer show which direction to put it on.

Timms - Look at my chain and look at the pic from the Shadow Instruction website. Ignore the photo that you refer to that shows the chains together. That has no bearing on install of the chain, just a photo of the black and silver chains. Plus the top black and silver chain on that photo goes one way and the lower ones go in reverse.



























Now are you still going to say that I have my chain on backwards? I mean WTF?? I try to take a picture of my new cranks and I have to defend a chain install to someone who has no clue??

Thanks to the other folks who actually have some god damn knowledge.


----------



## snaky69 (Mar 8, 2005)

timms said:


> https://forums.mtbr.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=332508&stc=1&d=1202185881
> 
> Does Not Coincide with this picture:
> 
> ...


Just admit it, you've just had your ass handed to you on a silver plate, everyone says the same thing, shadow, demo-9 etc etc.

In fact, all the pics you posted show the exact same direction as demo-9, you must be blind. Look closer, the big part of the half link is towards the front on the top of the chain, on ALL those pics, strangely demo-9 has his facing the same way.

Get a clue.


----------



## BikeSATORI (Mar 20, 2004)

Demo-9 said:


> There is no way first of all that a chain put on in either direction will stretch faster/slower than reversed. It is just not going to happen. Second the f-in instructions from the manufacturer show which direction to put it on.


not to add any fuel to the fire here... to our "discussion", haha...  
but I've put on a half-link the wrong way before, facing forward like an arrow (not like pac-man eating), and it had a tendency to try and pull the angled plates straight, and when wanting to straighten out like that it would make the skinny part wider inside the next link, and as a result creating a ridiculously tight link in the chain. Haven't had any problems like that now that I'm running it pac-man style. Now I'm no specialist in structural integrity or stress analysis, but I would assume this is probably one of the reasons behind shadow (and kmc, and khe, and ybn, etc.) writing their directions the way they have. But hell, there are probably plenty of riders out there who have accidently mounted their chain wrong and had no problems whatsoever... so either way, no big deal to me, I'll just remember to mount mine facing the right way though.


----------



## Demo-9 (Mar 24, 2006)

Well now I can really put this argument to rest, at least as far as I am concerned. Just installed a Superlite K710-SL. Dropped a 1/4lb and only cost ~$22.

Like this:









And I put the master-link going in the right direction...


----------



## DJskeet (Oct 19, 2007)

I didn't know you could loose that much weight from changing a chain. Your cranks look sick though, love the set up.


----------



## Demo-9 (Mar 24, 2006)

After I cut the new chain to the final length, I weighed both. 3.5oz difference. The Shadow chain is really heavy. 

With all of the leftover parts, I could almost build another bike...


----------



## BikeSATORI (Mar 20, 2004)

Nice, 710SL's are sweet chains, proven, light, looks pretty trick... but they are pretty big too, surprisingly. And the shadow is probably the heaviest of half-links out there.

Are you running a half-link on your 710sl?


----------



## Demo-9 (Mar 24, 2006)

Nope. I was able to get the same location pretty much without it. It looks better on the bike as it is silver as opposed to the Shadow which had a goldish color. I was surprised by the size-to-weight ratio as well. Bike is now dead on 29lbs.


----------



## DJskeet (Oct 19, 2007)

Hey, about the Wellgo Mg-1s, do you ever get a ton of nicks and chips in the paint? I have only had mine for a little over a month they aready look like they have been through hell.

Not that it really matters though, just wondering if they all did that.


----------



## Demo-9 (Mar 24, 2006)

No mine are fine. I don't grind at all so they are pretty clean.


----------



## BikeSATORI (Mar 20, 2004)

DJskeet said:


> Hey, about the Wellgo Mg-1s, do you ever get a ton of nicks and chips in the paint? I have only had mine for a little over a month they aready look like they have been through hell.
> 
> Not that it really matters though, just wondering if they all did that.


mag pedals are not grind friendly... If you hit them on rocks or ledges they will start to chip pretty bad.
Almost ANY pedal is going to get scratched up paint though, that's just how it goes.


----------



## gwillywish (Jul 1, 2005)

Demo-9 said:


> Well now I can really put this argument to rest, at least as far as I am concerned. Just installed a Superlite K710-SL. Dropped a 1/4lb and only cost ~$22.
> 
> Like this:
> 
> ...


i run nothing but 710 on my ss bikes, with exception to my road bike


----------



## DJskeet (Oct 19, 2007)

Demo-9 said:


> No mine are fine. I don't grind at all so they are pretty clean.


I don't grind either (at least on on my mtb) I guess I just hit them a lot.


----------

