Modifications - Performance Discuss aftermarket and DIY performance modifications

520 vs. 530

Old 09-05-2006, 12:28 AM
  #1  
Senior Member
Back Marker
Thread Starter
 
SillyHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Playa Del Rey ,CA
Posts: 222
SillyHawk is an unknown quantity at this point
520 vs. 530

I am thinking of upgrading my chain and sprocket set up. but i have no idea what the difference between a stock set up which i have now and the 520 option is. both sprockets sizes are stock as well but i am going to drop one tooth in the front (15) and keep the same rear.

I have seen a Vortex kit on ebay but it looks cheep. can i just buy a 15 tooth AFAM and get a 520 chain? or do i have to find a complete kit somewhere...i need some guidence.

where do they sell setups like this that are either AFAM or something other than Aluminium. do i need to know the amount of links as well or am i overthinking all this?


I am a 70% commute and 30% canyon rider

after all that being said maybe i should just throw a 15 tooth on there and be done with it...the added spunk will keep me happy for a while i bet!! plus i can do that mod at home with limited tools. what do you think?
SillyHawk is offline  
Old 09-05-2006, 02:42 AM
  #2  
Administrator
MotoGP
 
E.Marquez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Kempner, TX
Posts: 4,402
E.Marquez is on a distinguished road
Originally Posted by SillyHawk
I am thinking of upgrading my chain and sprocket set up. but i have no idea what the difference between a stock set up which i have now and the 520 option is. both sprockets sizes are stock as well but i am going to drop one tooth in the front (15) and keep the same rear.

I have seen a Vortex kit on ebay but it looks cheep. can i just buy a 15 tooth AFAM and get a 520 chain? or do i have to find a complete kit somewhere...i need some guidence.

where do they sell setups like this that are either AFAM or something other than Aluminium. do i need to know the amount of links as well or am i overthinking all this?


I am a 70% commute and 30% canyon rider

after all that being said maybe i should just throw a 15 tooth on there and be done with it...the added spunk will keep me happy for a while i bet!! plus i can do that mod at home with limited tools. what do you think?
520 is a different size chain, and so if going that route you would need both sprockets. The idea behind using a 520 pitch chain is less weight.. both over all and how that less rotating mass effects acceration, and suspension.. There is nothing wrong with the Vortex sprockets Sum Of All Parts sells in the 520 Kit. Keep in mind, those pre packaged kits from Sum of All arts,, are a lower gearing. So more acceration, less top end. You could call and get what evey ratios you want I'me sure.
E.Marquez is offline  
Old 09-05-2006, 08:16 AM
  #3  
Senior Member
MotoGP
 
superhawk22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Gainesville FLA.
Posts: 3,844
superhawk22 is an unknown quantity at this point
With the sum of all parts kits the chain is not cut to length so you'd need the tool to break the chain and to put the link together. I have the set up from them and while I was happy with the results the rear sprocket only lasted a little over a year. With that said it was also abused, I did about 12 track days with it as well as many street miles. The front sprocket they give you is steel and you can get any ratio you want but if you do a lot of miles I would ask if they'd supply a steel sprocket for a little more money. The kits they sell aren't prepackaged so I would think they could do it. If you search the various parts suppliers I'm sure you could find others but not at that price.
superhawk22 is offline  
Old 09-05-2006, 09:06 AM
  #4  
Administrator
World Champion
 
Hawkrider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Fulton, MO
Posts: 105,287
Hawkrider will become famous soon enoughHawkrider will become famous soon enough
Vortex suck. Spend the extra $$ and get Afam sprockets. Chain doesn't matter. They're all pretty good. I like stock gearing, but that's me.
Hawkrider is offline  
Old 09-05-2006, 01:52 PM
  #5  
Junior Member
Squid
 
Jaedcem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 16
Jaedcem is on a distinguished road
Originally Posted by Hawkrider
Vortex suck. Spend the extra $$ and get Afam sprockets. Chain doesn't matter. They're all pretty good. I like stock gearing, but that's me.
So how can I buy 520 pitch sprockets and ensure that they will fit the Super Hawk. All the web vendors seem to default to the 530 sizes.
Jaedcem is offline  
Old 09-05-2006, 04:51 PM
  #6  
Senior Member
SuperBike
 
killer5280's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,802
killer5280 is on a distinguished road
Originally Posted by Jaedcem
So how can I buy 520 pitch sprockets and ensure that they will fit the Super Hawk. All the web vendors seem to default to the 530 sizes.

Front sprockets are the same as for CBR 900, 929, 954, 1000RR, RC51.
Rear sprockets (bolt pattern, center hole, etc.) are the same as CBR 600's 91-98. Other models will probably fit as well. I got this information from JT Sprockets website. Using this information, you can put together a 520 conversion kit for yourself for about $120.00, but you may have to go with an aluminum sprocket unless you want other-than-stock gearing.
killer5280 is offline  
Old 09-05-2006, 11:03 PM
  #7  
Administrator
World Champion
 
Hawkrider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Fulton, MO
Posts: 105,287
Hawkrider will become famous soon enoughHawkrider will become famous soon enough
The part number for the hardened rear Al sprocket with stock gearing is 11509-41. I ordered mine from kneedraggers.com and it took a while to get. It's not very common and I think AFAM had to make a batch.
Hawkrider is offline  
Old 09-12-2006, 09:52 PM
  #8  
Senior Member
Back Marker
 
RonVTR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Olympia, WA
Posts: 225
RonVTR
I'm also in the process of going to a 520 chain with the 15/43 sprocket combo. The Sum of All Parts [http://www.sumofallparts.net/product_detail.aspx?item_guid=deb82064-e7b9-4592-9f7e-0caed8b5eca1] seems to be the best price for their RK & Vortex package. Though, I did find this place [http://www.hardracing.com/Sprockets/Sprockets.htm] that sez they will beat other legitimate offers (as in published websites, no e-mail quotes, no E-bay, etc). They also say "We can also substitute with AFAM or Renthal for a small additional charge."

My problem is the Dymag wheels. Beleive it or not they are not as common as the VTR wheels... Didn't think about that when I purchased them. The Talon sprocket that came with them has worn well. My problem is that it's not cheap to get a replacement here in the US as directly from Talon just the shipping is $45.

So far I've struck out with Vortex (they don't have them for the old Dymag bolt pattern), Sidewinder Sprockets (Costly - $120 for hard anodized), Talon (High shipping costs). One place looks promising... Sprocket Specialists. They have the hard anodized for $75, are made here and the local honda dealer says they wear well.

Ok... enough of my story... Here is the real reason for my post. After doing the research, I thought I'd share what I've discovered regarding the conversion from a 530 to a 520 chain. Now keep in mind that this is not absolute... It just the info I've found so far.

- The RK GB520GXW chain seams to be the only 520 chain I've found recommended for a 1000cc application. (8800 tensile strength)

- The weight savings between a 530 and a 520 chain is ~1.5 lbs.

- 520 chains and sprockets are cheaper than the 530 parts.

- 520 sprockets wear faster than the 530 parts.

- Hard anodizing is recommended to extend the service life of aluminum sprockets.
RonVTR is offline  
Old 09-13-2006, 12:09 PM
  #9  
Senior Member
SuperBike
 
killer5280's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,802
killer5280 is on a distinguished road
I just bought a 520 chain and sprockets for mine from Bike Bandit.
The chain is an EKSport Quadra SRX X-ring (8400 lbs. tensile strength) $63.00
JT 43T 520 steel rear sprocket $27.03
JT 15T 520 countershaft sprocket $19.17

I have seen much more powerful bikes (including full-on superbikes) than the Hawk with 520 chains, so I don't think chain strength is an issue. They probably do wear out faster, though.
killer5280 is offline  
Old 09-13-2006, 04:52 PM
  #10  
Senior Member
MotoGP
 
superhawk22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Gainesville FLA.
Posts: 3,844
superhawk22 is an unknown quantity at this point
Good deal! The steel weighs more but will last a LOT longer.
superhawk22 is offline  
Old 09-13-2006, 10:48 PM
  #11  
Member
Squid
 
zimm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Kaneohe HI
Posts: 55
zimm is on a distinguished road
I think I'm running 16/43 with my 520 conversion. I went to a local high performance bike shop and they ordered up the right stuff.

I think the 16/43 is right between stock ratio and that of "dropping a tooth" on the front which was a 15t. Nice compromise with a good cruise rpm on the highway and the highest top speed I've seen so far. -1 on the front made first gear very low, easy to wheelie, high rpm on highway, and a lower top speed because I ran out of revs.
zimm is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 07:43 AM
  #12  
Senior Member
Superstock
 
Radiaoktiv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dallas,TX
Posts: 333
Radiaoktiv is on a distinguished road
sum of all parts offers a hard anodize and teflon coating now also

just put on the 520 kit from them last week and im very satisfied
Radiaoktiv is offline  
Old 09-14-2006, 08:10 AM
  #13  
Junior Member
Squid
 
itsjason13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NC
Posts: 19
itsjason13 is on a distinguished road
I installed a 15t front sprocket on my 03 hawk, (with the stock sprocket on the rear) and I think it provides nearly perfect gearing...a little more pull from the bottom and I still have some top end. The gear was about $35 on ebay.

I just used my stock chain, it just moves the rear tire further back a smidge...makes it look like you need a chain replacement sooner that you really do.

However, I haven't tried the 43t rear to compare.
itsjason13 is offline  
Old 09-16-2006, 05:18 AM
  #14  
Senior Member
Back Marker
 
3D02's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Cypress, TX
Posts: 218
3D02 is on a distinguished road
I'm reading the responses on this subject and wondering why bother. Is the difference that great to justify a conversion? Slightly cheaper. Weight savings. Wouldn't it be easier, cheaper, and better for someone to lose 1.5 pounds of body weight?:-?
3D02 is offline  
Old 09-16-2006, 05:26 AM
  #15  
Member
Squid
 
zimm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Kaneohe HI
Posts: 55
zimm is on a distinguished road
Not worth it unless you are replacing a worn out set in the first place.
zimm is offline  
Old 09-16-2006, 06:09 AM
  #16  
Administrator
MotoGP
 
E.Marquez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Kempner, TX
Posts: 4,402
E.Marquez is on a distinguished road
Originally Posted by zimm
Not worth it unless you are replacing a worn out set in the first place.
OR, wanting to change the gearing. Swapping a good 530, for 520 setup in the same ratio, is NOT worth it IMHO
E.Marquez is offline  
Old 09-16-2006, 07:04 AM
  #17  
Senior Member
MotoGP
 
superhawk22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Gainesville FLA.
Posts: 3,844
superhawk22 is an unknown quantity at this point
Originally Posted by 3D02
I'm reading the responses on this subject and wondering why bother. Is the difference that great to justify a conversion? Slightly cheaper. Weight savings. Wouldn't it be easier, cheaper, and better for someone to lose 1.5 pounds of body weight?:-?
No, It does help to lose weight but this is receprocating weight, not the same. This not only saves weght but effects the way the bike accelerates and turns. Just like if you have a heavy wheel compared to a lighter one. It's not all about total weight loss but how easily the engine can spin the weight. As long as you get good quality sprockets there's no reason NOT to do this mod. But I agree, I waited until I need a new chain first.
superhawk22 is offline  
Old 09-16-2006, 06:07 PM
  #18  
Senior Member
Back Marker
 
3D02's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Cypress, TX
Posts: 218
3D02 is on a distinguished road
No, It does help to lose weight but this is receprocating weight, not the same. This not only saves weght but effects the way the bike accelerates and turns. Just like if you have a heavy wheel compared to a lighter one. It's not all about total weight loss but how easily the engine can spin the weight. As long as you get good quality sprockets there's no reason NOT to do this mod. But I agree, I waited until I need a new chain first.
I understand what you are stating. I guess my point is that a lot of money is spent on modding a bike when the first thing that should be considered is the weight of the rider and how that weight effects the bikes performance as well as the ability of the rider to wring as much as he/she can out of the bike. Just my 2 pesos.
3D02 is offline  
Old 09-18-2006, 12:43 AM
  #19  
Senior Member
Back Marker
 
RonVTR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Olympia, WA
Posts: 225
RonVTR
Your right... to extent you are talking about sprung weight (the mass above the springs). However, keep in mind that not all "weight" is created equal. I equate the reduced chain weight to lighting the flywheel. With less weight to spin-up, the engine accelerates faster. This has been a popular racer mod for more that 50 years. The other type of weight is unsprung weight (the mass below the springs). This includes wheels, tires, front fenders, brakes and yes sprockets. With less weight to move the suspension is better able to follow road irregularities and allow faster turning transsitions (The left-right-left kind of thing) due to reduced gyroscopic effect. I have read articles that claim that saving one lb of unsprung weight equals 10 lbs of sprung weight. Reducing this weight is so important to racers that they will purchase titanium pinch bolts, rotor bolts and axel bolts for big $, just to reduce the unsprung weight.
RonVTR is offline  
Old 09-19-2006, 07:06 PM
  #20  
Administrator
World Champion
 
Hawkrider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Fulton, MO
Posts: 105,287
Hawkrider will become famous soon enoughHawkrider will become famous soon enough
The big thing about unsprung weight is the fact that the suspension doesn't have to deal with the momentum during suspension movement.

The rotating (not reciprocating) weight of the wheels, sprocket, and chain do make some difference, both in quicker steering of the front, and *slight* decrease in rotating mass in the rear, which is measureable on a dyno. The big thing with the 520 chain is that it is not only weight, but is rotating, AND has less parasitic losses due to friction between side plates and o-rings. It's actually possible to get 2-3hp from a new chain. I've seen it with my own eyes.

As far as rotating weight on the wheels, the closer the weight loss is to the circumference of the wheel, the more the effect is felt. The best way to do this is to buy a lighter tire. No use spending thou$and$ on aftermarket wheels to lose a pound or two when a little research can tell you that the Pilot Power is about a lb lighter than the rest.
Hawkrider is offline  
Old 09-19-2006, 07:58 PM
  #21  
Senior Member
MotoGP
 
superhawk22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Gainesville FLA.
Posts: 3,844
superhawk22 is an unknown quantity at this point
Did I say that.....Sorry wrong R word.
superhawk22 is offline  
Old 09-20-2006, 07:34 AM
  #22  
Senior Member
MotoGP
 
mikstr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Montreal
Posts: 5,631
mikstr is on a distinguished road
I don't mean to denigrate anyone as I have heard the old "1 lb of rotating weight is equal to 6, 7, 10 lbs....." and have to chuckle every time. There is no such rule for, as Greg said, the distribution of the weight in relation to the center of rotation is as or even more important tahn teh actual amount of the mass itself. I recall reading of instances where manufacturers have actually INCREASED the inertia effect of the flywheel while at the same time reducing the overall weight by simply altering the weight distribution (removing weight close to the center of rotation while increasing it closer to the extremities).

cheers
Mikstr
mikstr is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
whatthefnck
Modifications - Performance
34
08-20-2013 07:00 AM
Rollin20z
Classifieds
15
01-28-2013 02:42 PM
rrich49132
General Discussion
6
09-01-2008 06:44 AM
davidhartley
Classifieds
5
06-24-2007 03:16 PM
EngineNoO9
General Discussion
33
01-23-2007 09:21 PM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: 520 vs. 530



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:04 AM.


Top

© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands



When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.