520 conversion conversation

Alright, here's my conundrum:

I already took a grinder to my old chain, and the sprockets are off my bike right now.

There is a 520 conversion kit on eBay curently which includes Vortex Sprockets and an RK 520 XSO chain for $129.95. The description and the company seem pretty legit, as does the feedback that they have for their products. Seems good, right?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=150210143434

So I am going back and forth with one of the guys down there (very nice and knowledgable, BTW), and he happens to mention that the master link is the clip style. I thought that this was a big no-no when it came to bikes of 500 cc or larger. I am having him verify this by checking one of his "kits". If this is a clipped master link, should I avoid this kit all together???

Are there any major probelms with going to a 520 chain? It's narrower, right? Are the sprockets 520 specific?

Stock 4G VFR chain is 530, with 112 links, correct?

Let get some opinions going on this. Fire away!

 

You know I thought hard and long on this myself, thing was I didn't care for the sprocket build quality, so went 530 and used the OEM sprockets and a gold R&K taking advantage of what one is suppose to gain out of the down sizing is minimal at best.

 

But what about the clip-style master link???

I'm just about ready to bite the bullet on this setup, but am wary of this clip thing. I mean, I have had clipped chains on my bikes before, but is a clipped link OK on a VFR???

 

Sheesh it's been what 30 years since I used one. I do know clip master link chains get a bad name do in part to ones not knowing the correct way of doing em up. Never seen one on a VFR but that doesn't mean it hasn't been done. Since they are used in on bikes mostly dirt, but even some of them see harder abuse than what we'd do, so a part of me says I'd give it a try. only cuz getting a chain rivet press ain't all that easy to get your hands on, unless you have a Ben Franklin hanging around. but I'm not sure anyone makes a chain that is a clip masterlink for the VFR. yep 112 links is right

 

520s are done all the time and can handle more HP than your VFR will ever put out.
The 530 and 520 vary only by width. The 530 size is also an ANSI standard for roller chain. The "3" in 530 is for 3/8" plate width and the "2" in 520 is 2/8 or 1/4" width. The tensile strength is therefore the same because plate and roller size are identical. The difference is the contact area the rollers will have with the sprocket. Distributing the load your bike puts out across 33% more roller width will make your set last longer.
I don't mean to be confrontational, but I disagree with clip chains getting more abuse in the dirt than on your VFR. More grime and slap...true. More torque? No way!!!! Even if a dirt bike hooked up on a race slick on pavement, it will never produce the tension your VFR will give on a full goose take off. Forget the hype about sprung weight and driven mass. You will never notice the difference. IMHO go for reliability. The high end chains for your bike are all rivet set (RK, EK, Tsubaki, DID). Why accept the liability these companies are not willing to?

 

Just realized that kit has Al sprockets. You'll tear them up long before the chain. You'll likely get 1/2 the life on that kit of what you'll get out of the 530 kit I gave you the #s for in the other thread.

BTW. My new chain is on, just waiting for the rental rivet tool. I'm looking forward to 30,000+ more hard miles for the quality of what I got for under $150.

 

After reading throught this entire thread I decided to do a little chain research (Yes, it's wintertime and I am bored :biggrin: ) I went to the RK website and came across some info that I thought was very interesting. If anybody is as bored as I am you can check this out:

http://www.rk-excel.co.jp/english/tech1.htm

http://www.rk-excel.co.jp/english/tech6.htm

http://www.rk-excel.co.jp/english/tech5.htm

As we all seem to be on an eternal quest for more HP, I thought the graph comparing the XW to the W type chains was pretty interesting....

 

What? confrontational, Na you're just stating your thoughts. I was revering to what the suspension does to a chain with all the pounding stretching and flipping off again and on again, not the actual ripping strength, thou your point is a good one, most of the race bikes run 520s, though I'm willing to bet they are changed out every race.

Hey NorCa, those links are working, or I'm I suppose to cut and paste?

 

You can always get that kit and then pick up a peened link for it. We run 520 on 1000cc racebikes. Not an issue.

 

Ah Crap, LOL! :redface:

Try 'em now RVFR, the info is actually interesting, at least as interesting as any more chain info could possibly be.......:biggrin:

 

Thanks for all the help.

The 520 vs. 530 post (thanks again, Vlad) was the most eye opening. I was unaware that the number referred to the plate thickness... The 520 chain should be slightly lighter (112 links x 2 x (weight difference between 530 and 520)), and this should have a similar effect that a lightened flywheel has in a car, correct? If that's the case, I'm game to try it.

I think that another e-mail to this company is in order. The Aluminum sprockets also were of concern to me, as I KNOW Aluminum is softer than steel. I had doubts about the claims of "extended wear" on the eBay page for these sprockets. And FWIW, the front sprocket pictured is steel, as it is zinc-cadmium plated, something I think that you can't do to Aluminum (which you can only anodize, a pointless exercise on a "hidden" sprocket).

If this company can do a rear steel sprocket (with the 15/45 ratios, vs. OEM 16/43), and a peened link (as opposed to the clip) for about the same amount of money, should I bite the bullet?

 

Take a look here:

http://www.ekchain.com/zzz.htm

http://sidewindersprockets.com/titanium_sprockets.html

This is a pretty good combination of strength and longevity vs. weight.

 

VT, For clarity - Not the plate thickness, but the distance between the plates. The roller and pin size is different.
BTW I noticed the aftermarket sprockets were wider than stock, with the rear having a ring machined out to make-up for the increased offset where the six bolt hub joins it. Therefore, even more roller contact area than the stocker. Also, the stock drive sprocket has a bonded rubber ring to both sides between the teeth and spline bore. I suspect that's for noise dampening and am curious if I'll notice much difference with the new one.

One more note...of caution... I ordered a set of rear sprocket bolts from Honda at $4.04 each because when tightening them to 33 ft-lb (my standard reference says an M8-1 in grade 10.9 should take 33 ft-lb for assembly) I snapped one of them then backed off to wrist tight on the rest. I figure it was stressed (or they are 8.8 or a special grade) to let go before my wrench clicked off.

The only torque specification I have is for the drive sprocket at approx 38 ft-lb.
Anyone have a torque spec for the driven bolts??????? Maybe one will be included when my bolts deliver to the shop in a couple days.

 

I've never had a problem with clip style master links. The key is to be sure and clip it so that the open end is facing the rear of the bike or opposite of the direction of forward rotation.

 

Yep, and to make sure it does clip as in "snap" in place. I too have never had a master link come apart.

 

Will a 520 chain have more links than a 530 chain, then?

 

No, the links are the same length, just narrower. You could run a 530 chain on a 520 sprocket and it would just have extra play side to side. And the front sprocket is always steel, the rears I use are aluminum. Get a good quality gear, take care of the chain and it will last a good long time.