GuruUno
Well-Known Member
OK, so I removed the new chainring again to verify, validate it was identical to the one I took off.
It is.
So, because of the replies, discussions, photos related to this original posting/inquiry, and MY confusion, I found the simple, elegant answer.
Within this discussion thread, it was commented that my chainring looked worn, problematic, and there was the opinion that something was incorrect.
Possibly.
So, I put it on in reverse of the way it was taken off.
That is to say, the chainring is now mounted BEHIND the spider arm next to the frame and not OUTSIDE the spider arm.
Surprisingly, it fit (with the recessed holes, etc., which were not and cannot be viewed without mirrors, etc, or removal).
Bottom line, we shall see now that it is supposedly "correct".
My only issue is that the logo stencil on the chainring showing the link and chain still shows an outside link on a tooth that is not truly representative of what it actually is.
Thank you all for your patience and contributions to my dilemma.
It is.
So, because of the replies, discussions, photos related to this original posting/inquiry, and MY confusion, I found the simple, elegant answer.
Within this discussion thread, it was commented that my chainring looked worn, problematic, and there was the opinion that something was incorrect.
Possibly.
So, I put it on in reverse of the way it was taken off.
That is to say, the chainring is now mounted BEHIND the spider arm next to the frame and not OUTSIDE the spider arm.
Surprisingly, it fit (with the recessed holes, etc., which were not and cannot be viewed without mirrors, etc, or removal).
Bottom line, we shall see now that it is supposedly "correct".
My only issue is that the logo stencil on the chainring showing the link and chain still shows an outside link on a tooth that is not truly representative of what it actually is.
Thank you all for your patience and contributions to my dilemma.