520 / 530 Chain Conversion;

[Nessism]

Listen guys, a 520 is plenty strong. The question though is why use a 520 when a 530 is wider, which will increase sprocket life? Unless you need the narrow chain for clearance around a wheel mod, it seems silly to compromise durability.

[Smokinapankake]

I must admit, there is so much I don't know about chains.

[JungleJustice]

OK - thanks for all of the input!

So, who sells a complete 530 conversion kit? I prefer Regina chains...

Should I stay with steel, or go aluminium on the rear sprocket?

[Nessism]

OK - thanks for all of the input!

So, who sells a complete 530 conversion kit? I prefer Regina chains...

Should I stay with steel, or go aluminium on the rear sprocket?

Steel sprockets are most durable.

As already mentioned twice in this thread, Z1 Enterprises is a good place to get sprockets and chains.

[JungleJustice]

So, one vendor tells me that the tooth-counts / gearing will change - and I mean DRASTICALLY - with the 530 conversion!?

Something like - up (to an 18) on the front and - down (to a 40 or a 42) on the rear to keep the same gearing....!

The other vendor says NO WAY - gearing stays the same!!!

[Nessism]

Stock gearing for the '80 GS1100E is 15/42 (630 chain), which is a 2.8 ratio.

Because the pitch (distance between pins) is longer on the 630 chain, you will need more teeth on the 530 sprockets, other wise the front sprocket will be too small and the chain can hit the swingarm.

For 530 I suggest either
17/47 (2.76)
17/48 (2.82)

As for that idiot vendor you reference, several of us have tried to direct you to Z1 Enterprises already. You are not listening to us and just getting more confused because of it.

[JungleJustice]

Stock gearing for the '80 GS1100E is 15/42 (630 chain), which is a 2.8 ratio.

Because the pitch (distance between pins) is longer on the 630 chain, you will need more teeth on the 530 sprockets, other wise the front sprocket will be too small and the chain can hit the swingarm.

For 530 I suggest either
17/47 (2.76)
17/48 (2.82)

As for that idiot vendor you reference, several of us have tried to direct you to Z1 Enterprises already. You are not listening to us and just getting more confused because of it.

It was a guy at Z1 Enterprises that told me the gearing / ratios / tooth-counts don't change when converting to a 530 chain...

[JungleJustice]

I finally got around to doing this conversion this past week! WOW! What an absolute PLEASURE!

My bike was starting to run a bit crappy (engine / gears / suspension / brakes - all fine however, the drive-gear was rolling like crap!) Noisy and I was getting this revolving "hesitation" or "smooth-jerk" as the chain was passing its badly kinked links around the sprockets! Under acceleration and on the freeway it was fine, but I could feel and hear it at slow speeds, as well as coming around corners!

Anyway - brand new 530 conversion RK XSOZ1 chain, and two new sprockets and she is smooth as silk! The standard gearing what it is, the closest comparable final drive ratio would have been an 18/50 (same diameter sprockets in the 530 chain as the standard 15/42 in a stock 630 setup.) But, I also wanted to drop the Rrs down a bit for higher top-end and better fuel consumption as a part of all of this!

So I dropped the rear down to a 45! MAN! It is PERFECT now! These bikes have SO much low-end torque anyway, that it really doesn't even matter. I've gained a much more usable, longer accelerating 1st gear now (but it is still VERY fast off of the line!) It pulls like a freight-train - long pull in 1st / 2nd / 3rd, but now on the freeway she does 72/73mph at 4000rpm (previously closer to 4500) and 82/83 mph at 4500 rpm in 5th (previously closer to 5000+)!

The jerky roll is gone, it's quiet and I swear it feels like I've added 20 horsepower to the bike! I'm sure that some of that is attributable to a new chain that will simply roll smoother with lower lower rolling resistance if you will (regardless of the 530/630 design - just the age versus new and the more modern design of that X/S link design perhaps?) But, much of it has to be the lower rotating mass / overall weight of the entire 530 setup versus the rotating mass of the 630 setup!

That old chain looks like something that ran on our baler on the farm, or some side-drive chain for a harvester's paddles!

The weather is holding up nicely here in Seattle, so I am going for a LONG ride today!