chain replacement (78 550)

[AOD]

i ordered the chain from MAW. they sure do have a webpage lacking a fancy ordering system, and its not to clear what i'm gonna pay in shipping, but the chain looked good for its price.

 

[Hotblack]

I'm using a 630 RK chain now and its rated at 12,000. For a 550, 9000 will do fine. I wouldnt use that on an 1150 though.

Earl

AhhhhhhhHhHhHhhH. Most of the 530s I saw were intended for around 900cc and under. That explains it. Thanks!

 

[earlfor]

I tried one of the 9000 lb chains on the 1150 ONCE! I wacked the throttle open and pulled a pin right outta the side plate and threw the chain.
eh eh eh

Earl

AhhhhhhhHhHhHhhH. Most of the 530s I saw were intended for around 900cc and under. That explains it. Thanks!

 

[Anonymous]

AOD: I was talking to a guy I bought my 2nd RK XSO 530 off of and he says that it's good for about 1000CC, otherise fork over the cash for GXW chain as it's rated for 1400CC bikes. I'm not sure what kind of horsepower that works out to, I would imagine it's based on the more current bikes but I'm not aware of a 1400CC sport bike.

Steve

 

[earlfor]

Its a more accurate indicator to go by tensile strength. A 1400cc cruiser only puts out about 1/2 the HP of my old 1150.

Earl

AOD: I was talking to a guy I bought my 2nd RK XSO 530 off of and he says that it's good for about 1000CC, otherise fork over the cash for GXW chain as it's rated for 1400CC bikes. I'm not sure what kind of horsepower that works out to, I would imagine it's based on the more current bikes but I'm not aware of a 1400CC sport bike.

Steve

 

[AOD]

yeah Earl, but what about a new GSXR 600 that puts out as much power as your 1150 and they're only using a 525 chain.

the bike weighs under 400 pounds...but makes well over 100 HP.

 

[Billy Ricks]

Call me crazy but I'm trying 520 on my bike. It's rated for modern 600's so it should handle my old 700. The only dimension different on 520, 525, and 530 is the width of the chain. Pin diameter, plate thickness, roller diameter, and everything else is the same.

 

[earlfor]

When chains are designated #630,#530, #520, etc. , that describes the dimensions of the chain in 8ths of an inch. #630 chain measures 6/8ths of an inch pin center to pin center on the length of a link. The 3 is the width of the chain. In this case 3/8". The sideplate and pin diameter is the same.
#530 chain is just as strong as #520 chain. The only difference is the width, which does not have any effect on tensile strength. However, reducing the width requires using a thinner sprocket. You cant put a 1/4" wide chain on a 3/8" thick sprocket. This in turn reduces the load bearing area of the sprocket teeth in engagement at any one time. Consequently, sprocket wear will be increased. Worn sprockets cause premature chain wear and subsquent failure. Therefore, a #520 chain will wear out sooner than a #530 or #630, but it is not because of ultimate tensile strength, it is because of load factor. Once you have looked at a chain from a load factor standpoint, there are other considerations. A "V" twin and an inline four have very different power impulse characteristics. It is why the same chain may be recommended for a 1400cc 60 hp "V" twin and an 1150cc 125 hp inline four. The inline four has more uniform power characteristics.
Then we need to consider HP, torque and rpm, or to put it another way, acceleration. How much force is applied in what amount of time. This too has a great effect on chain wear. So, yes, you're correct, #520 chain may be used on a 400 lb, 120 hp street bike, but it will wear quicker than a larger size chain, but not because of the common assumption of reduced tensile strength. Maximum chain life will be achieved by conscientious/correct adjustment of chain tension (engagement), regular cleaning and lubrication, and smooth, progressive applications of throttle.

Earl

yeah Earl, but what about a new GSXR 600 that puts out as much power as your 1150 and they're only using a 525 chain.

the bike weighs under 400 pounds...but makes well over 100 HP.

 

[Anonymous]

i ordered the chain from MAW. they sure do have a webpage lacking a fancy ordering system, and its not to clear what i'm gonna pay in shipping, but the chain looked good for its price.

Adam, From my passed experiences with MAW, it's a good idea to call them when ordering because sometimes they don't have what you want in stock and there lacking website doesn't bother to tell you that.

I have in the passed been hit a with hefty shipping price from them. The thing to do is when your chain comes in, take the packing slip or receipt and give them a call and depending on which one of there warehouses it came from, they can sometimes credit you for part of the shipping charge.

They have did this with me on several occaisions. But if you don't call them, you'll just get charged full tilt. Thought I would pass it on.

 

[Anonymous]

Call me crazy but I'm trying 520 on my bike. It's rated for modern 600's so it should handle my old 700.

Lot's of people do 520 conversions on current liter bikes (GSXR's, R1's, etc.) and they work fine with 140+rwhp to handle. Current superbikes and MotoGP bikes all race on 520 chain, too. I am pretty sure there is nothing you can do to your bike that is worse than what Rossi does to his.

As noted, 520 chain will wear faster than the heavier sizes, but you should still get 25,000+km out of a well maintained chain and sprocket set. The OEM 530 chain on my ZX-9 (I know, I just swore... ) has over 20,000km on it and I never even had to adjust it through almost 10,000km last summer. I would expect a premium 520 chain to do as well or better. I plan to do a 520 conversion on mine when the time comes to replace the chain set.

Excellent explanation of the chain sizing system by earlfor.

Mark

 

[Hotblack]

That sounds right that the amount of force over time applied is what you need the tensile strength for. An R6 will put out kajillions more hp than my 550, but much of that is achieved by the bike's ability to rev high. Or, if you have a 600cc bike and a 1200cc bike that both put out 100 hp, the 1200 will demand a stronger chain, as the torque it can apply at one time is considerably more than the 600. Is this correct? Be easy on me, I'm just a musician and we only have to know how to count to four. Also, isn't the Hayabusa a 1400cc sport bike?

 

[Anonymous]

Is this correct?

Nope. If you are comparing crank figures for hp and torque then it is, but we really should be talking about rear wheel figures, since that is the force seen by the chain. And 100rwhp at any given road speed requires the same amount of torque, regardless of the engine speed producing the torque. This is because hp is simply torque x RPM / 5252 and the wheel RPM is the same for both bikes (600 and 1100). The engines will be revving at very different speeds, but after things get through the gearbox, it is all the same. Oh, this also assumes that both bikes have the same final drive gearing. Different ratios will change the chain forces, too.

Be easy on me, I'm just a musician

Easy enough?

I'm just an engineer and I would be really bad at making music, so it all balances out in the end...

Mark

 

[Hotblack]

And your name isn't Choo Choo Charley? Oh forget it, I'm worse at comedy than I am at math! ](*,)

 

[Hotblack]

Anyway that more or less makes sense to me, but now I'm wondering along a slightly different line. Both engines might be capeable of putting the same amount of stress on the chain, but might the larger engine inherently put more stress on the chain in normal driving, that is, due to the large amounts of torque available at lower speeds, where the bike has less momentum going for it? I guess this is going beyond practical chain replacement lore, but I'm just curious.

 

[earlfor]

Try the idea this way. A motorcycle has a given weight, with a measurable air drag and rolling friction. If enough force is applied to accelerate the object from zero to 60 mph in 5 seconds, it does not matter whether the engine displaces 600cc or 1400cc. The required force is the same.

Increasing the acceleration will put more strain on the chain, but that could be the case with either engine.

Earl

Anyway that more or less makes sense to me, but now I'm wondering along a slightly different line. Both engines might be capeable of putting the same amount of stress on the chain, but might the larger engine inherently put more stress on the chain in normal driving, that is, due to the large amounts of torque available at lower speeds, where the bike has less momentum going for it? I guess this is going beyond practical chain replacement lore, but I'm just curious.

 

[Hotblack]

I see what you mean, but that's not really what I'm getting at. That deals with my first notion, which was all wrong. I'm now wondering about what happens in every day riding, and which bike is easier to apply that force with. Even that is really not as relevant as considering the RIDER, I guess. There are factors such as final gearing, bike weight, and wind resistance, but a wheelie happy rider is gonna be hard on his chain no matter what. Of course, lubing it with sand would be even worse! :twisted:

 

[AOD]

i think UPS has been trying to deliver the chain, but i haven't been around and my stupid office was closed or something yesterday so the package wasn't accepted.

can't wait to get it on...its the last required thing i need to ride again.

next on the list is a new headlight (H4) and some body work.

 

[AOD]

new chain arrived today. MAW gets my approval. 8)