[CBR900 RIDER]

hi everyone, it`s nearly time to change, chain and sprockets, on my 95 fireblade 900RR, any advice on a new set?
i`ve read about a small front sprocket that would give you more speed. but it would put up ghost miles, any suggestions? or will i stick with standard?
and by the way....
what are about K&n air filters, are they worth it? apart of no need to replace them?

thanks to everyone

[Diablo Runner]

I am about to change the sprocket/chain set-up on my 954. I am replaceing the 16/43 stock with a new Vortex 16/45 and a RK GB520GWX chain. Increasing teeth on the rear and taking teeth off the front sprockets will give the bike greater acceleration but less top speed.

Decreasing teeth in the rear and adding teeth in the front will increase top speed but will take away from the bikes acceleration.

I am uping my teeth in the rear because I take off in a hurry more often than I ride around at 200mph. In my opinion, Vortex is the best sprocket you can buy and RK is the best chain.

[bighicks2980]

Vortex is some of the best sprockets , RK is a good chain and EK is also a good chain. Just going -1 in the front is the same as +3 in the rear. I'm -1 in the front and stock in the back. Thats acceleration and top end. I've lost bout 5-10mph off top speed.

[curt248]

Diablo. What are you basing the idea that vortex are the best sprockets?

Have you used others and found them to last longer?

Most people seem to say vortex wear out much quicker than anodized afam.

[lickshot]

I have a 98 blade and have gone down 1 on the front and up 1 on the rear and it has made a huge difference!!!!
I use renthal sprokets and have had no probs at all with them... plus they are alot ligher than standard 1's....
I also run a BMC race air filter and the engine defo breathes more easily and again it does make a difference especially if accompanied with an exhaust....

[Diablo Runner]

Originally Posted by curt248

Diablo. What are you basing the idea that vortex are the best sprockets?

Have you used others and found them to last longer?

Most people seem to say vortex wear out much quicker than anodized afam.

I changed my stock sprock on my 600 F4 to a 48T Vortex and it was still like new when I sold the bike. I wasn't just impressed that the teeth stayed in good condition but the finish never tarnished. AND I KEPT IT OUTSIDE!

I'm no expert but Vortex and RK are all we run around here.

[ozerionblade]

Follow this link.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWAX%3AI T&viewitem=&item=330242218291

I had the stage 1 kit on my 929 for 25000 kms before it got nicked and only had to start adjusting the chain regularly around the 22k mark. I really couldn't fault it.

[curt248]

wow that link to the ebay auction has tons of info on sprockets, chain sizes and gearing.

I wonder where he got the information saying that a typical bike with a 530 chain will net a 5% increase in HP by changing to a 520 setup?

If that were the case, a 130hp stock 929 would get a 6.5 increase in HP (it would have to be rear wheel). I wonder if he also meant with a gearing change too (then for sure increase rwhp). If not, more people should be raving about the 520 setup. 6.5 HP is a pretty big increase. Especially if you consider that a full exhaust generally gives about 10HP.

[rokitt51]

Originally Posted by bighicks2980

Vortex is some of the best sprockets , RK is a good chain and EK is also a good chain. Just going -1 in the front is the same as +3 in the rear. I'm -1 in the front and stock in the back. Thats acceleration and top end. I've lost bout 5-10mph off top speed.

I just saw a vortex sprocket that i put on less than a year ago on a gixxer6, and that thing was missin more than half the teeth. I cant say that it was taken care of, but it was ridden by a female friend of mine and i know that she was not a biggie on maint. But still, ive seen dogged bikes that had worn sprockets with not one missing tooth. Cant say that i recommend Vortex. I like AFAM, and Stealth sprockets.

[ozerionblade]

Originally Posted by curt248

wow that link to the ebay auction has tons of info on sprockets, chain sizes and gearing.

I wonder where he got the information saying that a typical bike with a 530 chain will net a 5% increase in HP by changing to a 520 setup?

If that were the case, a 130hp stock 929 would get a 6.5 increase in HP (it would have to be rear wheel). I wonder if he also meant with a gearing change too (then for sure increase rwhp). If not, more people should be raving about the 520 setup. 6.5 HP is a pretty big increase. Especially if you consider that a full exhaust generally gives about 10HP.

Weight loss, gearing change, tuning etc it all adds up. Just be sure to notice the bit about the stronger chain for 1000cc bikes as you don't want to pay the money and have it stretch straight away.

I'll be getting another stage 1 kit for the new 954 come changeover time.

[curt248]

I know it all adds up. My bike is nothing like it was before I started modding. The full exhaust, pcIII, accelerator pump mod, gutted airbox, 520 setup, +2 rear make it a completely different and way better bike.

With the exhaust, pcIII and accelerator pump my bike pulled on my friends bike like it was standing still. Before those mods, we were dead even.

Now I did the 520, gutted airbox, stock airfilter (from k and n) and +2 and it feels so much faster and pulls much harder than before. The last 4 mods made a more noticeable difference than the first 3.

[flea954rr]

i did the 520 conv. at 8,000 miles, -1 on the front and love the acceleration, definitly worth the slight loss in top end. as for vortex sprockets, i ran that set to 25,000 miles, or 17,000 miles total. just changed to a new set, -1/+1, and the wear on the sprockets was due to the chain stretch. i'm not saying they are the best, but i have no problem with them. as for the miles i got out of the chain, i personally will always run an RK GB520GXW. it has the highest tensile strength of all the top of the line chains, but i'm basing it off my personal experience.

[bladeracer]

The RK is less than 2% stronger than the DID ERV3 because it's 12% heavier - which is a lot since the whole point of changing to 520 is the weight advantage. RK's 520 is even 4% heavier than DID's wider 525 ERV.
I'd guess I've probably used at least five or six ERV's now and they certainly aren't lacking in any way I've found.
I'd even be wondering if that extra weight doesn't put more stress on the chain itself to begin with - perhaps even more than the 2% extra strength covers?

[Diablo Runner]

Originally Posted by bladeracer

The RK is less than 2% stronger than the DID ERV3 because it's 12% heavier - which is a lot since the whole point of changing to 520 is the weight advantage. RK's 520 is even 4% heavier than DID's wider 525 ERV.
I'd guess I've probably used at least five or six ERV's now and they certainly aren't lacking in any way I've found.
I'd even be wondering if that extra weight doesn't put more stress on the chain itself to begin with - perhaps even more than the 2% extra strength covers?

Point taken and I see your logic. However, the 520 conversion is about more than a weight difference. It's reduced heat, reduced friction, and reduced resistance in the drive system. This, in turn, creates greater torque and increased horsepower.

The RK is ideal for this because it offers all the above but still delivers the strength of a heavier chain (extra weight = extra strength).

If the extra weight bothers you that much then don't super size that next value meal and you'll make up for it . . . haha

[CBR900 RIDER]

thank you very much for your replys, really made me make up my mind, definatly going -1 +1.

but what about this ghost miles, isn`t the speed measured in the front sprocket?
thanks for the replys

[bladeracer]

Originally Posted by Diablo Runner

Point taken and I see your logic. However, the 520 conversion is about more than a weight difference. It's reduced heat, reduced friction, and reduced resistance in the drive system. This, in turn, creates greater torque and increased horsepower.

The RK is ideal for this because it offers all the above but still delivers the strength of a heavier chain (extra weight = extra strength).

If the extra weight bothers you that much then don't super size that next value meal and you'll make up for it . . . haha

Extra weight does not equal extra strength.
The RK is rated to 8800lbs and the DID is rated to 8650lbs.
Considering it's only 2% weaker but 12% lighter clearly weight is just weight.
A lighter chain will reduce all the things you listed.

[bladeracer]

Yes, lowering the gearing will make your odo and speedo read higher.
You can either spend more money on a speedohealer or accept that more mileage is meaningless. I've seen some very low mileage bikes that were very poorly maintained and I've seen a lot of very high mileage bikes that are almost like new.

[Diablo Runner]

Originally Posted by bladeracer

Extra weight does not equal extra strength.
The RK is rated to 8800lbs and the DID is rated to 8650lbs.
Considering it's only 2% weaker but 12% lighter clearly weight is just weight.
A lighter chain will reduce all the things you listed.

RK weighs more, it's stronger. DID weighs less, not as strong. I don't know how else to explain it.

I'll send you post of somewhere you can buy a physics book.

[bladeracer]

If you have a physics book then it'll have a page somewhere that will explain that a lead chain will not be a strong as an alumninium one...
The strength comes from both the quality of the metal, the treatments it has had and its design - not the amount of metal used.

[Diablo Runner]

Originally Posted by bladeracer

If you have a physics book then it'll have a page somewhere that will explain that a lead chain will not be a strong as an alumninium one...
The strength comes from both the quality of the metal, the treatments it has had and its design - not the amount of metal used.

That's great.

Now, if CBR900 Rider wants to make his own chain, he knows how. However, if he wants to buy the strongest 520 chain on the market, he'll just have to go buy the RK set-up.

Blade, I really do understand what you are saying, and your right. The 'strength per weight ratio' favors the DID set-up because it is in-fact lighter but almost as strong. However, the RK is still the strongest 520 chain regardless of weight according to the numbers we have previously discussed. I think that either way CBR900 Rider decides to go he will be satisfied with both brands.

That's it for me.

[Charles486]

Originally Posted by Diablo Runner

I am about to change the sprocket/chain set-up on my 954. I am replaceing the 16/43 stock with a new Vortex 16/45 and a RK GB520GWX chain. Increasing teeth on the rear and taking teeth off the front sprockets will give the bike greater acceleration but less top speed.

Decreasing teeth in the rear and adding teeth in the front will increase top speed but will take away from the bikes acceleration.

I am uping my teeth in the rear because I take off in a hurry more often than I ride around at 200mph. In my opinion, Vortex is the best sprocket you can buy and RK is the best chain.

Originally Posted by bighicks2980

Vortex is some of the best sprockets , RK is a good chain and EK is also a good chain. Just going -1 in the front is the same as +3 in the rear. I'm -1 in the front and stock in the back. Thats acceleration and top end. I've lost bout 5-10mph off top speed.

DONT DO IT! Vortex aluminum sprockets are absolute crap, ive seen several that literally lost half the teeth in 15000 miles under normal riding.

I replaced my stock set up with an rk x-ring chain, afam rear(stock size) and a tooth down front. With about 5000 miles im extremely happy.

[Charles486]

Originally Posted by CBR900 RIDER

hi everyone, it`s nearly time to change, chain and sprockets, on my 95 fireblade 900RR, any advice on a new set?
i`ve read about a small front sprocket that would give you more speed. but it would put up ghost miles, any suggestions? or will i stick with standard?
and by the way....
what are about K&n air filters, are they worth it? apart of no need to replace them?

thanks to everyone

ghost miles arent a huge deal, your odo will be adding about 10 percent(i.e. 100 miles becomes 110) you can live with it, which i did, or if youre worried about it you can by a speedo healer and itll be more accurate than from the factory

as far as the k&n i bought one, havent noticed much difference to be honest but i put it on a long time ago.

[CBR900 RIDER]

thanks guys, that was a really good thread.

thank you for all your advice

[rjarrowman]

Originally Posted by curt248

I wonder where he got the information saying that a typical bike with a 530 chain will net a 5% increase in HP by changing to a 520 setup?

.

Its called unsprung weight. A 520 conversion is certainly the way to go. The quality of the chain will greatly inpact the life of the sprockets. You do not atually gan engine horsepower. You simply transfer more to the rear wheel do to less unsprung weight. Try using magnesium wheels and you will see even more of a difference.

Figure out your bikes stock gearing and what the redline top gear speed would be. Generally not a realistic number. So if you want to get say a 1k blade to go a max of 180 or 175 mph than gear it properly. Generally 1 down on the front and up 3 on the rear gives you a 175 mph top speed.

PS: Hang the F*** on if you do that. Any 600,750 will wheely after this mod without dumping the clutch. 1k's will wheely 1,2,3 ad over a rise 4th.

[bladeracer]

With lighter chain and sprockets, wheel, tyre and such you are using less of the power generated at the crank to spin those components up and thus should see a measured increase at the wheel on a dyno.
It's why crank dyno numbes are higher than wheel numbers. The difference between the two is how much horsepower is lost in spinning up the clutch, transmission, chain, sprockets, wheel, disc and tyre. The lighter you make these parts the less horsepower you're wasting.

Unsprung weight is entirely to do with suspension and is all of the weight not supported by the springs - including the springs themselves. For maximum suspension performance you want the largest difference possible between the sprung and unsprung mass. On modern sportsbikes it's generally about 25-30% of dry weight or about 15% of total weight when you're riding. You will see more improvement in reducing unsprung mass before you begin lightening the rest of the bike. As you then lighten the sprung mass the improvement reduces until you get back down to the original sprung-to-unsprung ratio you had when you started (which is almost impossible without a carbon frame and everything hanging off it) - but you have a much lighter bike :-)

[flea954rr]

Originally Posted by Charles486

DONT DO IT! Vortex aluminum sprockets are absolute crap, ive seen several that literally lost half the teeth in 15000 miles under normal riding.

I replaced my stock set up with an rk x-ring chain, afam rear(stock size) and a tooth down front. With about 5000 miles im extremely happy.

from my own personal experience, i think this statement is absolute b.s. i had 16,000 miles, and the only wear on the sprocket was from the chain stretch. i would love to see what it takes to tear the teeth off like that. what kind of maintenence was done like cleaning, lube, and adjustment? i'll bet if i try, i can mess up any sprocket. for 2 years i have read what crap Vortex sprockets are, and i'll go by my personal experience and keep running Vortex and RK 520GXW chains, and if i keep getting 16,000 hassle free miles, i'm happy.

[curt248]

Maybe you are a special case. If other's have had problems with them and not with others, then maybe the others last longer. If you wear out a vortex in 5000 miles you may wear out other brands in 10,000. This seems to be the most reasonable answer to why so many people do not like vortex.

Most people do not give maliciously incorrect information on here.