VERY HANDY 530 conversion info

[Joe Nardy]

Just an update and further kudos to Z1 Enterprises. I ordered Monday afternoon, everything showed up today (Wednesday). I couldn't be happier! :-D.......................Plus I might be famous!

Joe

[Nerobro]

I just had this strange impulse to switch my 80 from 530 to 210 chain. *grins* Thanks joe.

[jonr]

When the basic data is input the Sprocket Optimizer calculates chain links required and maximum speeds in all gears due to chain, sprocket and tire changes. It works for all bikes.

Boondocks,

Your link doesn't work. Here is the correct one:

http://www.sprocketspecialists.com/SprocketOptimizer2.aspx

There was an extra "2" in the web address. :-D

j

[jonr]

Hey Joe,

Now that you've done the conversion and put thousands of miles on that baby, what's your verdict?

J

[Joe Nardy]

Hey Joe,

Now that you've done the conversion and put thousands of miles on that baby, what's your verdict?

J

No complaints. I changed my gearing slightly so I have a bit more punch now. The trade-off is slightly higher RPM's at a given speed. The RK X-Ring chain seems to be holding up very well. It stretched a bit over the first couple hundred miles but hasn't stretched since. Since the 630 stuff is getting harder to find I think doing the conversion is a good idea.

Thanks,
Joe

[Boondocks]

Boondocks,

Your link doesn't work. Here is the correct one:

http://www.sprocketspecialists.com/SprocketOptimizer2.aspx

There was an extra "2" in the web address. :-D

j

Thanks, jonr.

It used to work. When I tried it the following information appeared:
Notice: This domain name expired on 06/15/06 and is pending renewal or deletion

Thanks for posting the working link.

[jeff.saunders]

Joe, I have seen that information posted on the ZI website, and I would make these observations:

I can buy a new 96 link 630 RK O ring chain with 11,100 lbs. tensile strength and a 20,000 mile guarantee for about $85. I picked up new Sunstar 42T rear and 15T Parts Unlimited front steel sprockets on eBay for $28 (both) including shipping.
The weight saving is minimal since the chains are the same width and length. The 530 has more links and weighs slightly less because it is of less robust construction. It is not reciprocating weight, this is just plain wrong. Reciprocating weight is the effect when the mass of an object such as a piston or valve has to accelerate, come to a full stop, and accelerate in the opposite direction. Under these circumstances, keeping weight to a minimum is important, much more so than the rotating weight of a chain. Although the motion of a chain has other vectors and it is not a simple rotating weight, it fits this model for practical purposes.

Aluminum sprockets do reduce rotating weight a little bit, but unless you are racing and weight is critical it wouldn't make sense to use for a street bike. Aluminum sprockets will wear out much faster than a steel one, and I wouldn't use one on a GS.

chain weight difference is 1 full pound between a 110 link 530 chain and a 92 link 630 chain - 7lb versus 6lb. This weight difference DOES impact horsepower at the rear wheel - this is mass the engine needs to rotate - the lighter the better. The term reciprocating weight in the page is wrong - it should be driven mass.

Is there a tensile strength difference - yes - clearly. Do you need 630 chain on our old bikes - No. If a 1300 'busa can run 530 chain, your old GS or GSX can too - and get very good mileage out of it. Once you get beyond the acceptable strength range for the bike, it's largely overkill. What's far better on the 530 chain is the variety of O rings to protect the rollers from premature wear - from X ring to W rings and some newer super thin W rings (which will be much lighter than the regular 530 X ring chain.

I do agree about the aluminum sprockets - given the choice of steel versus aluminum, I'd pick steel everyday - but in some cases there are not any choices.

Price - in all of our supplier catalogs 530 X ring chain is cheaper than 630 O ring chain for the equivilent length. You can argue whether it's a $5, $10 or $20 saving - but the saving is there regardless. Additionally, 530 chain is stocked more frequently in m/c shops - and in many more varieties and colors - want green, or red or gold - you can get it.

Sprocket prices are basically a wash - whether JT sprockets or Sprocket Specialists, the price of most equivilent 530 and 630 sprockets don't differ too much.

[Boondocks]

chain weight difference is 1 full pound between a 110 link 530 chain and a 92 link 630 chain - 7lb versus 6lb. This weight difference DOES impact horsepower at the rear wheel - this is mass the engine needs to rotate - the lighter the better. The term reciprocating weight in the page is wrong - it should be driven mass....

Hi, Jeff. While the lower strength 530 chains weigh significantly less due to their construction, there may be less than one pound weight difference between a 630 O ring and a high strength 530 X ring chain of equivalent length. For example in the D.I.D. Chain Specifications, the calculated weight of a 630 O ring chain with 92 links is 6 lbs. A top of the line DID 530ZVM 110 link 530 X ring chain weighs 5 1/3 lbs, or 10.6 oz less than a more robust, higher tensile strength 630 chain. There is no free lunch.

A DID 530ZVM X-Ring Chain with 116 Links for my bike would be about $136.00. I can get a stronger 96 link RK 630 O ring chain with a 20,000 mile guarantee for $85.00. I like overkill.

Thanks for your contributions to this site and the good service provided by Z1 Enterprises.