Eric_The_Jew Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 I was wanting to go with a smaller, lighter chain when the stocker finally shits the bed. My zx10r had a 525 size DID that held up just fine to 160 hp, so i'm sure a 525 should work well on the Bird. I'm sure finding a 525 rear sprocket will be no problem, but will I be able to find a front for the Bird in a 525 size? Has anyone gone this route with their chain? I'm' thinking 525 would be the perfect size. Many of the literbike guys go with 520s, but I feel that is just TOO small for a bike with this much torque. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Byrdman Posted September 17, 2006 Share Posted September 17, 2006 I understand your reasoning and if you are going to buy a new chain and sprockets anyhow, why not right? But.....the weight savings are actualy very small, almost nothing. I guess I just don't see the point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iceman_40 Posted September 17, 2006 Share Posted September 17, 2006 I haven't heard of anyone going to a 525 I think a few have tried the 520. I can't see the differance in weight being that much. If your really want to give it a try, let us know how it goes. Just remember if your going to be making road trips chances are it's unlikely any garage or shop would have chains that size. If you do road trips I'd invest in a few clip on master links just incase... but that's just me and I live in the sticks :icon_wall: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SBBXX Posted September 17, 2006 Share Posted September 17, 2006 I would think Torque rather than HP would be more of a determining factor for chain size, but what do I know? lol Keep us all posted for sure. I'm very interested in how it turns out. Me? I wouldn't fuck with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OZDave Posted September 17, 2006 Share Posted September 17, 2006 I would think Torque rather than HP would be more of a determining factor for chain size, but what do I know? lol Keep us all posted for sure. I'm very interested in how it turns out. Me? I wouldn't fuck with it. I agree!....and weight too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GriffXX Posted September 17, 2006 Share Posted September 17, 2006 I'm reading that a lot of guys are doing that with the 954s and 929s, but then again, those bikes are a sold 125lbs lighter than the Bird. A few guys asked me about it as I'm replacing nearly everyhting on the 954. For me, a bigger, stronger chain is more important than saving a little weight. And I'm not good enough to appreciate any difference thay may result. If I'm after quicker launches, I'd rather just change out the sproclets, like go -1/+1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomek Posted September 17, 2006 Share Posted September 17, 2006 I would think Torque rather than HP would be more of a determining factor for chain size, but what do I know? lol Keep us all posted for sure. I'm very interested in how it turns out. Me? I wouldn't fuck with it. Chain pulls rear sprocket,so it is a force, basically it all comes down to horsepower. Anyway,chain and sprockets are rotating mass,so weight savings are "doubled". Nothing tragic will happen if you use a lighter chain,but durability will be drastically reduced,so if you don`t ride too much,,,,,way not. People use lighter chains on race ,track bikes all the time,liter bikes, etc. As a matter of fact if you wanna use 190/70 Dunlop slick on R1 ( really 'fat " tire) stock chain will rub the edge of the tire,smaller chain is the only way to go. I`ve been using stock like ZVM/ZVM2 chains,all those weight savings,etc, IMHO are PITA of you consider short durability,and much more frequent chain changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.