mrmat25

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-29-2012, 08:46 AM   #41
Je Fa Fa
koorbloh's Avatar
OP
 
Joined: Mar 2007
From: Monroe-mish, WA
Blog Entries: 5

I Ride: 07 YZ450F, 74 XL350
“ Quote:
Originally Posted by dragracer1951 View Post
Rather than dig up a 4 year old thread? Ya
And yes. I AM a dick
Ask anyone that knows me.
it is a hell of a good thread to dig up though.

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 

Old 10-29-2012, 09:52 AM   #42
mjn
Forum Admin
mjn's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2005
From: Tri-Cities
Blog Entries: 1

I Ride: '05 Busa, '81 Seca 550, '78 Hawk, '69 Z50A
While it is nice of you guys to stand up for the new guy... a couple of questions for ya;

*Do you know anyone that has paid 160$ for an aluminum sprocket? (if you do...send them my way, I've got some stuff I'll sell 'em.)

*Do you know anyone that completely wore out an anodized aluminum sprocket on the street in one summer? Unless they put 10-12K on....

I'll bet DR noticed those two items.. and that is most likely the reason for his comment.

We've been dealing with a bunch of worthless older-than-dirt thread bumps lately... it is frustrating when these come back up without any intelligent information. It merely plugs up the home page with junk.

If you have good information that adds quality content to the thread, by all means... put it in. Keep in mind, this is the Mechanical and Technical area... not a great place for BS posts.

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter

Last edited by mjn; 10-29-2012 at 10:19 AM..
 
Old 10-29-2012, 10:53 AM   #43
Moderator
PeteN95's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2008
From: Muk, WA
Blog Entries: 4

I Ride: fast, except on the road.
“ Quote:
Originally Posted by mjn View Post
*Do you know anyone that completely wore out an anodized aluminum sprocket on the street in one summer? Unless they put 10-12K on.....
I wore out two this summer before I got a steel one, although I did a few track days and using a 520 Al sprocket on an SV1000 may not be the best idea.

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 
Old 10-29-2012, 11:43 AM   #44
mjn
Forum Admin
mjn's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2005
From: Tri-Cities
Blog Entries: 1

I Ride: '05 Busa, '81 Seca 550, '78 Hawk, '69 Z50A
“ Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteN95 View Post
I wore out two this summer before I got a steel one, although I did a few track days and using a 520 Al sprocket on an SV1000 may not be the best idea.
Wow... 320.00 in sprockets in one year?

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 
Old 10-29-2012, 12:20 PM   #45
Railer
WaGigKPN's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: Gig Harbor, WA
Blog Entries: 1

I Ride: 2000 BRP (XR650R)
I replaced my sprockets this summer. I ride a VFR so it was a no brainer to go Steel. I commute with occasional joy rides and no track days.

In my searches i found a titanium set that was lifetime guarantee to never need replacement. I dont have time to look it up again. They were spendy tho.

My thought, Since sprockets are so close to the center of rotating mass i dont think they will have noticeable difference (if you stay stock 530). If you switch to 520 i hear the weight savings is in pounds which i imagine would make a difference. That being said, there is a reason they use 530 as stock...Longevity...

So if you are a racer go 520 with AL or Titanium.

If your not a racer standard 530 Steel.

If your rich, why do you care? do what you want!

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 
Old 10-29-2012, 02:28 PM   #46
Moto2 Contender
Transported's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2006
From: Portland, Oregon
Blog Entries: 1

I Ride: '06 FZ1, '99 R1, '80 Suz GS450S
Bikes are already too damn heavy. I go with aluminum and do notice a slight difference (along with the smaller-gauge chain).

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 
Old 10-29-2012, 02:33 PM   #47
Railer
WaGigKPN's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: Gig Harbor, WA
Blog Entries: 1

I Ride: 2000 BRP (XR650R)
“ Quote:
Originally Posted by Transported View Post
Bikes are already too damn heavy. I go with aluminum and do notice a slight difference (along with the smaller-gauge chain).
That would mean you are running a 520 setup? which i have heard does make a difference...

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 
Old 10-29-2012, 08:22 PM   #48
Moto2 Contender
courier11sec's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2008
From: where they don't have lawns.

I Ride: on the storm.
“ Quote:
Originally Posted by dragracer1951 View Post
So you feel the need to bump a four year old thread to tell us you wore out your alum sprocket in one summer?
Way to go.
But let's not do that stupid shit again.
K?

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 
Old 10-30-2012, 05:28 AM   #49
Superbiker
RC51's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2008
From: Everett, WA

I Ride: Motorcycle
“ Quote:
Originally Posted by Transported View Post
Bikes are already too damn heavy. I go with aluminum and do notice a slight difference (along with the smaller-gauge chain).
I'm calling bullshit on that one. I can see telling the difference between a 530 and 520 chain kit, but just changing the sprocket out for an aluminum one? I don't think so.

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 
Old 10-30-2012, 05:36 AM   #50
Moderator
RedKat600's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2011
From: LaCenter, WA

I Ride: 2003 Copper SV1K
“ Quote:
Originally Posted by WaGigKPN View Post
That would mean you are running a 520 setup? which i have heard does make a difference...
It also wears out much faster.....

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 
Old 10-30-2012, 06:27 AM   #51
Superbiker
RC51's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2008
From: Everett, WA

I Ride: Motorcycle
“ Quote:
Originally Posted by RedKat600 View Post
It also wears out much faster.....
Not always the case. Too many variables to make a blanket statement. There are quality 520 chains out there that have more tensile strength than cheap 530 chains. Then there are the different ring types, o, x, r, whatever they come up with next. I'd take a quality 520 over a cheap 530 any day of the week.

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 
Old 10-30-2012, 07:41 AM   #52
Moto2 Contender
Transported's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2006
From: Portland, Oregon
Blog Entries: 1

I Ride: '06 FZ1, '99 R1, '80 Suz GS450S
“ Quote:
Originally Posted by RC51 View Post
I'm calling bullshit on that one. I can see telling the difference between a 530 and 520 chain kit, but just changing the sprocket out for an aluminum one? I don't think so.
I changed from steel to aluminum and 530 to 520. Made a noticeable difference.

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 
Old 10-30-2012, 07:55 AM   #53
Superbiker
RC51's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2008
From: Everett, WA

I Ride: Motorcycle
“ Quote:
Originally Posted by Transported View Post
I changed from steel to aluminum and 530 to 520. Made a noticeable difference.
Exactly, you changed both at the same time.

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 
Old 10-30-2012, 08:38 AM   #54
MotoGP Contender
fastfoodfred's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2006
From: spokane, wa

I Ride: 2013 Gasgas 300xc w/lic plate + 1985 RZ350 + 2010 YZ250F +
I remember an article from an old magazine that weighed the OEM set and a 520 aluminum rear/steel counter shaft sprocket set that seemed like it saved 3.5 lbs or so. That's not insignificant by any means, and will have an effect on rotating mass and unsprung weight.

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 
Old 10-30-2012, 09:39 AM   #55
Shredical
jnicola's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2009
From: Mt Hood OR
Blog Entries: 1

I Ride: 98 VFR800FI | 09 CRF250R
On sports bikes I won't bother with aluminum sprockets. I've had them wear out in under 3k miles. There's more than enough power there to compensate for the tiny bit of weight difference you get from steel.

In the dirt, I've run both steel and aluminum without noticing much of a difference. I've run both steel and aluminum on my trail and MX bikes without noticing a difference in weight, power or wear... so I just go for whatever is cheapest.

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 
Old 10-30-2012, 10:11 AM   #56
Superbiker
RC51's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2008
From: Everett, WA

I Ride: Motorcycle
“ Quote:
Originally Posted by fastfoodfred View Post
I remember an article from an old magazine that weighed the OEM set and a 520 aluminum rear/steel counter shaft sprocket set that seemed like it saved 3.5 lbs or so. That's not insignificant by any means, and will have an effect on rotating mass and unsprung weight.
And how much was the chain vs. the sprocket?

Comparing aftermarket 520 aluminum sprockets to OEM 530 sprockets isn't going to be a good comparison. It's apples and oranges.

Start by comparing a set of 520 sprockets in different metals. Or the same with 530.

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 
Old 10-30-2012, 11:57 AM   #57
Moderator
RedKat600's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2011
From: LaCenter, WA

I Ride: 2003 Copper SV1K
“ Quote:
Originally Posted by RC51 View Post
Not always the case. Too many variables to make a blanket statement. There are quality 520 chains out there that have more tensile strength than cheap 530 chains. Then there are the different ring types, o, x, r, whatever they come up with next. I'd take a quality 520 over a cheap 530 any day of the week.
Tensile strength has absolutely nothing to do with wear. That is the breaking point of the chain.

The issue with the 520 set is that the tooth area is significantly smaller as is the roller itself. This leads to more pressure on the roller and tooth surface area which leads to more wear. Add aluminum sprockets into the mix and you get even less mileage out of them.

I agree, don't compare different ring chains against others. If you compare apples to apples, the 530 will have a longer wear cycle.

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 
Old 10-30-2012, 01:26 PM   #58
Railer
WaGigKPN's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: Gig Harbor, WA
Blog Entries: 1

I Ride: 2000 BRP (XR650R)
I feel like we are all arguing about agreeing about the same thing.

Rainy day in the PNW!

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 
Old 10-30-2012, 01:46 PM   #59
Superbiker
RC51's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2008
From: Everett, WA

I Ride: Motorcycle
“ Quote:
Originally Posted by RedKat600 View Post
Tensile strength has absolutely nothing to do with wear. That is the breaking point of the chain.

The issue with the 520 set is that the tooth area is significantly smaller as is the roller itself. This leads to more pressure on the roller and tooth surface area which leads to more wear. Add aluminum sprockets into the mix and you get even less mileage out of them.

I agree, don't compare different ring chains against others. If you compare apples to apples, the 530 will have a longer wear cycle.
Yes, tensile strength is the ultimate strength of the chain, when it will break, not how quickly it will wear. It is also indicative of the quality of the materials used to make the chain. Material quality will dictate wear characteristics. Again, that is why you will see cheap 530 chains with lower tensile strengths than quality 520 chains.

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter

Last edited by RC51; 10-30-2012 at 01:49 PM..
 
Old 10-30-2012, 01:59 PM   #60
Moderator
dragracer1951's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2005
From: Bremerton

I Ride: 05 KTM 625smc, 03 Are See fiddy one, 05 DRZ470SM, 95 FZR1040, 69 Combat Commando Roadster, 73 Commando Interstate, 67 BSA B44, 71 BSA B50
Tinsile strength is a function of hardness. As measured on a Tinious Olson machine. It measures ultimate strength and elongation as a eprcentage of sample cross sectional area. Wear is somewhat related to hardness but is really more a function of a materials toughness.

__________________
Follow PNW Riders on Facebook and Twitter
 
Reply

  PNW Riders > PNW Riders > Mechanical & Technical


Thread Tools
Display Modes



/pnwriders @pnwriders PNW Riders RSS Feed