VF500F CBR600F Wheel Conversion

Good luck with the 520 conversion and post up if you find the correct front sprocket for a 520 conversion. I was trying a 520 conversion before my sons track day July 10-11 and have been shut down at everyt turn.

Sebspeed referred to JT sprockets and after an initial email was returned as no 520 conversion is available, I called and they are looking a little further into the front sprocket.

The rear is easy according to the reverse parts look up on Ron Ayers, the same rear sprocket from VF500F fits the CBR600F....

 

Thanks for the intel.

As you note, the rear 520 sprockets are available for the CBR600F (or for VF500F as the same sprocket is used on both models). I hadn't contacted JT as of yet but I did read the same post that you mention - perhaps another option is to mill down a 530 front sprocket...

 

What are the benefits of going to a 520?

 

Just noticed the thread.
Your bike is a jewel IC! I wish mine will be restored to 50% of your neat bike.

What really impresses me is the presentation you did. Nothing less than excellent!
Thanks for sharing all these info with us. Gives me courage to go on with my bike and try keeping it alive.

 

Have you considered machining down a 530 part? That's what I do in these situations. The only difference between a 520 and 530 is the thickness of the teeth. I've even done this with rear sprockets too... but that gets me a little sketched out. All of those teeth spinning in the lathe makes me think of a bad horror movie scene.

 

Aren't these bias-ply tires? One of the biggest reasons (if not the biggest reason) to change wheels is to get radial tires. Just changing to Ø17" wheels doesn't really make much of a difference, I've found that it's the width and tire construction that matters most.

 

Stupid question alert!

I see quite a few of wheel conversion threads and I'm just wondering why people decide to do this wheel conversion? What are the benefits, etc?

By the way, awesome sauce bike, IC.

 

Nah, that's not a stupid question. The stock wheels are a size that isn't standard anymore. Because of that manufacturers aren't making modern rubber in sizes that fit those wheels. As mentioned, the only tires that you can get are bias-ply construction. There was a reason cars went away from that kind of construction several decades ago! Radial tires preform better in every way than bias-ply.

The whole subject revolves around getting more performance from the early VF's. I did my first F2 wheel conversion on a VF500F about 12 years ago. Now, every 500 I buy gets F2 wheels installed and the stock wheels go on eBay. The difference in handling with a 120 front radial and 160 rear radial is like night and day. The 500 becomes a truly amazing handling bike with F2 wheels.

I can't really speak to what the bias Avons and the Hurricane wheels will do. Hopefully IC will get the bike on the road soon so that we can get a report on the difference.

 

Thanks for the quick reply and good info!

Maybe I'll look into doing this when I've decided on whether or not I'll keep my VF500F =)

 

Where the hell have I been to miss those pics. That looks great. I must say I prefer them to the CBR wheels for the 500. They look like stock but with a much more aggressive feel. Great color as well. Love the renderings too as well as the caliper/bracket!! That is one of the cleanest looking 500's I've seen in recent memory.

An engineer's eye, quality work and a keen vision for the upgrades. Hat's off to you!!!!

 

Thank you for the post.

The Avon Roadrider tires that I have mounted are indeed bias-ply - but this is not to say that you don't have radial options for Hurricane rims.

Both Bridgestone (BT-003's) and Avon (Azaro ST's) manufacture radial tires in 110 front and 140 rear sizes:

BT-003
glamourindex

Azaro ST
Azaro-ST | Avon Tyres

After looking at all three tire models - I selected the Roadriders as they received high marks in their online reviews and the 110/70-17F and 140/80-17R was the best combo when crunching the rake and trail numbers on my bike.

The Azaro St's are offered in a 110/80-17F and 140/80-17R combination and the BT-003's are offered in a 110/70-17F & 140/70-17R combination. I believe these could also be good choices but the fork tubes would most likely need to be adjusted to dial in the geometry. Based on the tight clearance with the radiator and fender, on the VF500F, I decided not to go this route.

In part this is one reason I am interested in the recent post on having a custom radiator fabricated to allow for more clearance - as you will have the option of tweaking the forks to help dial in the rake and trail.

 

Here is a bit more info on the option of going with a 520 chain conversion:

http://vfrworld.com/forums/1st-2nd-generation-1983-1989/30074-84-vf500f-17-wheel-conversion-sprocket-gearing-520-chain-s.html

 

Many thanks Monsieur Hopit, I greatly appreciate the compliment!

 

Beautiful result! Amazing, clean bike! Great project presentation! Awesome post! Wow...

 

Good job! This is brillant!

 

Many thanks compliment! I'm glad that you enjoyed the post. Also, wanted to send a shout out to you for your help with the head gasket patterns and coolant passage designs. I really appreciate your taking the time to add to the intel on this topic.

 

Thank you for the post. It is always great to get feedback like this.

Keep those First Gen's flying!

 

My advice is the same as about a year when we talked about your application - you should ride the bike to see what is doing first. The 110f/140r is a combination that has not worked very well, in my experiences. That's not to say that you can't make it work. It seems like you chose those sizes in an effort to achieve a certain set of chassis geometry numbers. Personally I've found it much more productive to start with a decent set of tires (for example, 120f/160r are known to work very well) and dial in the chassis around them. You aren't shooting for "numbers" but rather you need to adjust the bike to correct for any problem areas you discover. The only way to discover those things are to ride the bike. My guess is that once you ride it you'll find that you need to deviate from the rake/trail/wheelbase/etc that you have calculated to make it work best. That always happens!

 

What about the combination had not worked well?

 

The skinny and fairly low profile front tire didn't offer much in the way of front end confidence. Turn in was ok but it just wasn't "there" when I needed it. The rear tire is big on the OD and doesn't really give much of a contact patch. The 500 is by no means a tire spinner, but having a good patch with some offset from the centerline provides good confidence and holds a line really well mid corner, which the 140/80 does not give you. The 140 seemed to have trouble keeping itself composed. Overall I just didn't like it. Going to a 120f/160r combination was like riding a completely different bike, in a good way of course.