What brand Sprocket and chain??


22 replies to this topic
  • snow

Posted June 27, 2005 - 03:03 PM

#1

Well the rear sprocket is about gone only got 6-8 full rides out of that one. I was thinking about going stainless (to last longer) what do you guys think?? Also what brand is the best?? I’m still running the stock chain it stretched a little but not bad so how do I tell if it’s still good. I have herd that if you change them both at the same time they will last longer but I will soon have my rim from Garry or I hope and I will be changing from paddle to a regular tire often so I don’t know if it will make a big difference.

  • 02YZ426

Posted June 27, 2005 - 03:22 PM

#2

Its a good idea to keep the chain with the sprockets it runs with, but you dont necessarly have to. I switch from dirt to street setup from time to time and I keep two sets of chains and sprockets for each switch. I use steel sprockets form JT Racing and they last forever, I find that the steels last much longer and the weight savings compared to aluminum arnt worth it to me, and they are half the price.

  • Dolce_Grappa

Posted June 27, 2005 - 04:00 PM

#3

I really liked Titax tool steel sprockets, to bad Rocky Mountain discontinued the line. Chains RK XW-ring their rated at 8800PSI. I've got 4 race weekends and numerous practices, without adjustment so far.

  • grayracer513

Posted June 27, 2005 - 04:19 PM

#4

Your manual shows how to measure your chain for "stretch". It's actually more often cumulative wear at the pins and bushings, but it still makes it longer. Never run a used chain with 1% stretch or more on a new sprocket. The procedure in the manual calls for measuring a ten pin section, and give 6" as the service limit, but that is 2.5%, and you would want to replace the sprockets with it, under most circumstances. Use 5.9" in this situation. A chain with more wear than that will eat into your new sprockets quite quickly.

I recommend Regina O-ring, or their top of the line Z-ring chains. The ORN is a bargain, and is extremely durable.

  • sirthumpalot

Posted June 27, 2005 - 05:56 PM

#5

I put my vote for the Ironman. Use them myself, they wear exceptionally well and are replaced free if you manage to wear them out within a year:

http://www.qualitysm...man/ironman.htm

  • snow

Posted June 27, 2005 - 06:47 PM

#6

I like the Ironman but thats a little pricy do they last longer than regular steel??

  • rmracer27

Posted June 28, 2005 - 03:24 AM

#7

Here is another vote for the ironman sprockets.

  • Flash319

Posted June 28, 2005 - 03:34 AM

#8

I would go with Sidwinder sprockets and DID o-ring chain. I bought my 426 new and took the stock stuff off before I rode it and but this stuff on. This was in 2002. I am still on the same stuff with next to no adjustment. Raced in intermediate class for a year and then have just been riding trails for 2 years. Still no problem. O-ring chains rule!!!!

  • sirthumpalot

Posted June 28, 2005 - 03:37 AM

#9

I like the Ironman but thats a little pricy do they last longer than regular steel??


The Ironman sprockets are nickle plated chromolly steel, which is very good for wear. Will they last longer than other "steel" sprockets? Honestly I think the wear might be similar, however the Ironman is going to weigh a LOT less. It's a little heavier than an aluminum sprocket, but a lot lighter than a standard steel sprocket. To see a weight comparison, click here and scroll down just a bit. You'll see an Ironman compared to a JT brand steel sprocket and a Sunstar aluminum sprocket using a scale.

  • Fly-nBri

Posted June 28, 2005 - 12:10 PM

#10

Ironman hands down. :)
DID o-ring chain works great!! :)

Visit the ThumperTalk Store for the lowest prices on motorcycle / ATV parts and accessories - Guaranteed
  • TexN343

Posted June 28, 2005 - 10:19 PM

#11

x-ring chains last 3 time longer than o-ring chains...I'm not brand loyal so the cheapest x-ring chain and I think I have Talon steel sprocket...whatever it is it black and each tooth is off centered plus it's butt ugly

  • Cisco5311

Posted June 29, 2005 - 02:05 PM

#12

I have a jt sprocket on the front(just because they are cheap), ironman sprocket on the back, and use a x-ring chain. Definetly get a o-ring or a x-ring chain.

  • snow

Posted June 29, 2005 - 02:27 PM

#13

Were is the best place to get the Ironman and an x-ring chain??

  • grayracer513

Posted June 29, 2005 - 04:16 PM

#14

x-ring chains last 3 time longer than o-ring chains...

You're saying you can make an X-ring chain last 7.5 years?

  • sirthumpalot

Posted June 29, 2005 - 04:20 PM

#15

Were is the best place to get the Ironman and an x-ring chain??



Here of course!

Ironman Sprockets

  • David37

Posted June 30, 2005 - 08:36 PM

#16

You may spend a little more money upfront but either a Sidewinder or Ironman steel sprockets and a good O or X ring chain will last you 3-4 riding seasons.

  • DigilubeJay

Posted July 03, 2005 - 04:11 AM

#17

The procedure in the manual calls for measuring a ten pin section, and give 6" as the service limit, but that is 2.5%, and you would want to replace the sprockets with it, under most circumstances. Use 5.9" in this situation.

When the manual states use a ten pin section, it is reffering to a nine space typical section. A nine space typical measures 5.625" (9 x .625" = 5.625"). [a 520 chain has a pitch space of .625"]

You can run your chain until it reaches approx. 1.5% over new until deformation of the sprockets is visible. This is not mfg. data, this is comman textbook engineering data.
(5.625 x 1.015[1.5%] = 5.7")

Running the chain to the service extents the manual states would be a dangerous situation, IMO. (5.625 x 1.067 = 6") Folks, that's 6.7% elongation over new. Your sprockets will be toast (or your chain will snap) long before that.

[let's check our math :) ]


Running a super hard sprocket only masks an elongation problem. It will not allow you to visibly see any wear on the teeth, which gives you a false sense of security that things are fine, when in fact the chain may well be far past safe limits.

Also, manuals suck for providing such incorrect information.

If you want to see some textbook information that is proper...and not take the advise of misprinted manuals or misguided mechanics, give this link a try.
http://chain-guide.com/
Go to "Chain Dynamics" and then to "Wear of Working Parts".

I hate arguing about these issues with some folks, so I will provide backup for my assertions from here on out. Some just can't grasp the situation it seems. :)

  • grayracer513

Posted July 03, 2005 - 12:13 PM

#18

When the manual states use a ten pin section, it is reffering to a nine space typical section. A nine space typical measures 5.625" (9 x .625" = 5.625"). [a 520 chain has a pitch space of .625"]

I hate arguing about these issues with some folks, so I will provide backup for my assertions from here on out. Some just can't grasp the situation it seems. :)

Please actually review the manual, and you will see that the method shown involves the use of a vernier caliper, and measuring from the inside of the first roller to the inside of the eleventh roller. (please refer to page 3-32 of most recent YZF manuals) This measures the chain across ten full links, which would indeed be 6.25" (10 x .625") on a 520, 525, 530, or #50 roller chain, except for the fact that the measurement, because of where it is taken, includes the .400" diameter of a roller (the .200" radius of a roller is measured at each end of the subject section), reducing the measured dimension to 5.85" on a new chain (which is what I said). Simply measuring center to center would have provided the less confusing 6.25" reading, but there is no way to make that measurement with common tools and not have to "eyeball" the pin centers.

Compared to 5.85", the 6.0" service limit is in fact 2.5% (6/5.85=1.02564) increase in chain length, not the totally incredible 6.7% you suggested.

Your contention that sprocket wear caused directly by an overlong chain will become visible at around 1.5% is about right, and that is the reason I said that a chain stretched beyond 1% should not be reinstalled over a new sprocket. To do so would introduce an immediate source of extraordinary wear to the sprocket. The 2.5% service limit given in the manual is given with the assumption that the sprockets and chain would be replaced as a set in the event that limit was reached, since the sprockets would certainly have been damaged by a chain that long.

  • DigilubeJay

Posted July 03, 2005 - 01:00 PM

#19

Even if you eyeball the center of the pin, it is close enough.
We are dealing with fractions of inches here, not thousanths.
But, since we are using a vernier capliper, then simply go edge to edge for a more precise measurement. (you will be on one, and have to eyeball the other) (yikes)

OR...

Measure (with the vernier) from the outside of the 1st and 11th rollers (ten typical spacings), then from the inside of the 1st and the 11th. Add the two together and then divide by two.
Viola! A perfect measurment from center to center, and with a comman tool.

I need to read the assumption chapter closer I think. :)
Could you point me to that one, please?

  • grayracer513

Posted July 03, 2005 - 03:01 PM

#20

Even if you eyeball the center of the pin, it is close enough.
We are dealing with fractions of inches here, not thousanths.

...an astounding statement, given your oft-stated predilection for precision. One percent of 5.85 is .050" (1.01x5.85=5.901), which I suppose is a fraction (13/256), but it's smaller than 1/16", and bigger than 3/64", making decimals somewhat more convenient.

But, since we are using a vernier capliper, then simply go edge to edge for a more precise measurement. (you will be on one, and have to eyeball the other) (yikes)

This depends on uniform staking of the pins being measured, but that really is splitting hairs, so forget I said anything.

OR...

Measure (with the vernier) from the outside of the 1st and 11th rollers (ten typical spacings), then from the inside of the 1st and the 11th. Add the two together and then divide by two.
Viola! A perfect measurment from center to center, and with a comman tool.

The measurement from outside to outside would compress the wear out of the pin/bushing unions so that the difference in the two would be the .400" roller diameter plus the wear at the pins. The arithmetic is more complicated, and the method only provides accurate information when measuring a new chain, or one in which the plates have stretched, but in which there is no pin wear, a very unlikely scenario.

Apart from that, I think that by far most common vernier calipers are capable of a 6" maximum reach, and cannot measure the 6.25" pin-to-pin length of a 5/8 chain, nevermind the 6.74" outside roller measurement that would be required to know that a chain had reached even your 1.5% wear limit using that method (6.25+.094(1.5%)+.400).

The method shown in the manual has merit because it uses common tools, is accurate, is difficult for the marginally competent to screw up, and involves no math, unless you need to understand where they got their numbers from.





Related Content

Forums
Photo

Is it worth it? (Cam and High compression piston) by macgi77


Dirt Bike   Make / Model Specific   Honda   CRF 150/230 F/L
  • Hot  36 replies
Forums
Photo

2016 YZ450 by CaptainKnobby


Dirt Bike   Dirt Bike Technical Forums   Suspension
  • Hot  59 replies
Forums
Photo

Michigan Motocross Tires by 288yz450


Dirt Bike   Dirt Bike Regional Discussion   North
  • 1 reply
Forums
Photo

YZ450F 03 Sparks driving me crazy by SirAttard


Dirt Bike   Make / Model Specific   Yamaha   YZ 400/426/450
  • 5 replies
Forums
Photo

yz250x vs 450 4t comparisons (preferably desert riding) needed by JakeNorthrupYZ450F


Dirt Bike   Make / Model Specific   Yamaha   Yamaha 2-Stroke
  • 9 replies
 
x

Join Our Community!

Even if you don't want to post, registered members get access to tools that make finding & following the good stuff easier.

If you enjoyed reading about "" here in the ThumperTalk archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join ThumperTalk today!

The views and opinions expressed on this page are strictly those of the author, and have not been reviewed or approved by ThumperTalk.