Honda Motorcycles - FireBlades.org banner

1 - 20 of 45 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I thought about getting a 520 chain conversion kit for my 954. Anyone have one for this bike or know if a 520 chain is worth it? I can use my 530 chain with the sprocket I want, so is it worth paying extra for the 520 chain? Also, I am -1 on front right now and am thinking of putting it back to normal 16 teeth on front and going +3 in rear...better for the tranny I hear? Will the power be the same? More or less?

Thanks, appreciate the info!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
117 Posts
What's the deal with 'hellfire666'?

How many miles do you have on your 530 chain? If more than 15k, I'd go with the 520...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
705 Posts
Yeah, if you need to replace the chain, I'd get the 520. Regearing won't change the 'power', it just moves the rpm (or mph) where you reach it. I went up 2 in the back and it just barely fits with the stock (108 links) lenght chain. If you go up 3, I garantee you'll have to add a few links. BTW, up 3 in the back is almost identical to -1 in the front. It depends on what you're looking for. :idunno:
Edit: I'm pretty sure there's no way you can do 16 frt. and 46 rear with the stock chain, it's too short. You might be able to if you put the 15 frt. back on, but then you better put a wheely bar on it too. :eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,524 Posts
FYI All a 520 chain is compared to a 530 chain is narrower. So, it will wear the chain and sprockets out faster because there is the same amount of power placed on a smaller area. If you are primarily on the track with the bike, go for the 520. There are usually more 520 parts available. If you primarily ride street, stay with the 530. The pound that you may save won't be noticeable unless your name is Hayden or Rossi.
The -1f is about the same as +3 rear. On a 954 I wouldn't go any more then either one of them as the bike will never wear the front tire out. +2r is a good change. The whole deal with doing these changes is best left when you NEED a chain. The -1 f is cool to do stock, nothing else needs to be done. If you go -2f you wear the chain out FAST because it has to make a sharper turn.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Is the -1 on the front bad on the tranny or anythgin else? Basically the only reason I want to switch to +3 on rear is so it's about same as -1 on front, but better on bike. If it isn't acctually bad on anything then I will just leave it. Can someone clear this up for me?

Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
705 Posts
I've read conflicting opinions on that one :idunno: , that's why I went up 2 when I needed a new chain. I thought -1 was a little 'buzzy' for street riding, too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,098 Posts
Hellfire666 said:
Is the -1 on the front bad on the tranny or anythgin else? Basically the only reason I want to switch to +3 on rear is so it's about same as -1 on front, but better on bike. If it isn't acctually bad on anything then I will just leave it. Can someone clear this up for me?

Thanks
16/46 won't work with a stock 108 link chain.... :idunno:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,524 Posts
slowpoke said:
I've read conflicting opinions on that one :idunno: , that's why I went up 2 when I needed a new chain. I thought -1 was a little 'buzzy' for street riding, too.
Right! -1f = +3r, and either one of those is a bit much for a big bike. 600s do well with that change. +2r is more than enough change if you even want to do that. Hell, when I put chain/sprockets on my XX I didn't change the gearing and stayed with a steel rear sprocket. On the 929 I always ran +2r and just tried +3 rear. Well it whellies a whole lot more with the +3 now!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,098 Posts
CBRBob said:
I always ran +2r and just tried +3 rear. Well it whellies a whole lot more with the +3 now!
I couldn't get a 16/46 on my 929 with a 108 link chain.... :idunno:

Edit:
Are you running a longer chain....and/or a shorter tire?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,524 Posts
Baketech said:
I couldn't get a 16/46 on my 929 with a 108 link chain.... :idunno: Are you running a longer chain....and/or a shorter tire?
180/55 tire. No idea on the chain legnth, whatever fit and cut off the excess :idunno: sorry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,657 Posts
I did a 520 conversion on my 2000 929 and went plus two on the back, it worked well but some of the things that I noticed were, the chain wore much more quickly, you are in the power more, so you use it more, at least I did. I found that at 70mph(ish) the 929 was revving pretty good, not a huge amount but bit(1000 rpm?) more than stock.
I just did the minus one on the front of my new 1000RR in the summer and was VERY happy with it, it was much more noticeable than the plus two on the 929(I know its not apples to apples either, but...) when I go to change my chain and sprockets on the RR this time I will be going +3 on the rear, just 'cause I dont know if I like the tighter radius (chain wear) at the front? I only added to the front because the chain had less than 3000 kms on it and I did not think that I could go plus three with a stock chain.

Hope that helps a bit? all of my riding so far has been done on the street and I am pretty tame but, I liked the gearing change A LOT :thumb:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,098 Posts
CBRBob said:
180/55 tire. No idea on the chain legnth, whatever fit and cut off the excess :idunno: sorry.
Rock on....did your adjuster end up toward the front or back after you set the slack?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,524 Posts
+2 on the back will be maybe 3-400 rpm, not 1k. When you use a small front, the axle goes to the back. Larger front, it moves forward.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,657 Posts
I was not sure how much it added, I thought that it was around 800-1000 for the +2 on the rear? It was over two years ago so I am probably off by a bit, sorry to mis-lead, I just remembered that it jumped a bit more than I thought it would.
A little off topic, anyone know how much my speedo wil be off on my 1000RR now that I have taken one off the front(I know, I know I should get a recalibrator, it's on the list honest)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Hellfire666 said:
I thought about getting a 520 chain conversion kit for my 954. Anyone have one for this bike or know if a 520 chain is worth it? I can use my 530 chain with the sprocket I want, so is it worth paying extra for the 520 chain? Also, I am -1 on front right now and am thinking of putting it back to normal 16 teeth on front and going +3 in rear...better for the tranny I hear? Will the power be the same? More or less?

Thanks, appreciate the info!
Hellfire666, I went with +2 rear and stock front sprocket with 520 chain on my '03 954. I'm quite happy with this setup.
Think the total mass saved was over 1 lb mentioned - in any event, it's much less mass to accelerate. Chain stretched after the first hard runs, but hasn't changed over the past 4,000 or so miles. Sprockets are still in great shape. I recall that I did add two links for the conversion - easy enough work. Recalibrated with SpeedoHealer - I was about 10% out...
Bill C.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,524 Posts
Northern RR said:
anyone know how much my speedo wil be off on my 1000RR now that I have taken one off the front(I know, I know I should get a recalibrator, it's on the list honest)
Assuming the stock chain/sprockets woule be correct(I know it's not), whatever the percentage of change is what it would be off.
Lets say stock is 15/43. That would be 43/15=2.86
You go +2 rear. 15/45. That's 45/15=3.00
3.00/2.86=1.05. or 5%. 65mph indicated would actually be 62mph.
:thumb:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,224 Posts
I think the reason that someone says it is easier on the tranny is the force is applied further out from the transmission shaft. I cannot think of any reason this would matter when you do the math :idunno:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,657 Posts
CBRBob said:
Assuming the stock chain/sprockets woule be correct(I know it's not), whatever the percentage of change is what it would be off.
Lets say stock is 15/43. That would be 43/15=2.86
You go +2 rear. 15/45. That's 45/15=3.00
3.00/2.86=1.05. or 5%. 65mph indicated would actually be 62mph.
:thumb:

Thanks for the help, now that I think of it, I really dont mind having my dial out a bit on the high side...keeps me close(r) to the speed limit then if it was right on...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
302 Posts
sheepofblue said:
I think the reason that someone says it is easier on the tranny is the force is applied further out from the transmission shaft. I cannot think of any reason this would matter when you do the math :idunno:
Sprocket size will have no effect on forces on the transmission. Theoretically the chain's life may be (slightly) shorter with a smaller sprocket due to the fact that it has to make a tighter turn.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,098 Posts
ndj said:
Sprocket size will have no effect on forces on the transmission. Theoretically the chain's life may be (slightly) shorter with a smaller sprocket due to the fact that it has to make a tighter turn.
Relatively speaking, a smaller sprocket will generate more overhung load in the transmission output shaft/bearings and higher tension in the chain....

But yes, the front sprocket (and chain) will wear faster due to increased chordal action of a smaller sprocket as well...
 
1 - 20 of 45 Posts
Top