Which three of these chains is the best for the money

Have you changed sprockets under that same chain or are you still running the same sprockets too?

Original sprockets still in place..

But they have never had the stretchy chain run on them. I changed the chain before riding it at all..

>Can you explain what you mean by "more maintenance"?

> Do you have any data to support your contention that any sgnificant horsepower is lost in an O-ring chain?

> Do you honestly think that the 2mm (.080") extra width causes any problems?

Yes - to keep your chain clean - no pressure washer period. This means manual removal and sometime removal of orings and reassembly

No data to proof loss of HP other than I can feel the difference when letting off gas and the drag felt on rotation of the rear wheel -

Grey I see many threads on frame wear, chain buffer wear etc....I never have any of these issues with a normal non oring chain.

Granted most of this is my personal opinon, not based on too much scientific fact but , I have tried both and prefer non oring for MX and oring for Woods/trail. I know you and others are true supporter of oring chains on MX bikes...and you are entitled to use them....I also believe that replacement of chain and both sprockets all at the same time....oring chains last so long that many times the sprockets wear faster than the chain and many will use tyhe same chain with new sprockets....this is counter active to me...again my personal opinion. :thumbsup:

Everyone i know who has RK brand X-ring chains changes them after a couple of years of hard riding just because they think they should not because it's needed. They last forever! I think the one i have is a RK xos or something like that

Yes - to keep your chain clean - no pressure washer period. This means manual removal and sometime removal of orings and reassembly
I use a pressure washer on mine when it's called for. There's no problem if you observe two points of caution. One is to back up from the chain about 18". The other is to spray only from the sides, with the water directed parallel to the rollers. That lets the outer plates act as shields for the seals. The only way to remove an O-ring from a chain anywhere other than the master link is to cut the chain and add another master link to close it back up. I have never once had to do that.
No data to proof loss of HP other than I can feel the difference when letting off gas and the drag felt on rotation of the rear wheel
Well, there's the dyno test I linked to, but think about what really goes on in a sealed chain that would make it drag more than a non-sealed one. The only difference is the friction of the O-rings as the chain pivots rolling onto or off of a sprocket, right? At any one moment, only 8 of these rings are actually moving, because the chain only pivots at 4 pins at any time. Additionally, at the front sprocket, the chain pivots only 27 degrees on a 13 tooth. It's less than 8 degrees at the rear.
Grey I see many threads on frame wear, chain buffer wear etc....I never have any of these issues with a normal non oring chain.
It hasn't happened to me, either, and I'm convinced that except for the very widest chains, most of this kind of trouble comes from alignment problems.
I also believe that replacement of chain and both sprockets all at the same time....oring chains last so long that many times the sprockets wear faster than the chain and many will use tyhe same chain with new sprockets....this is counter active to me...again my personal opinion. :thumbsup:
The standard admonition to replace the chain and sprockets all at once is based on the fact that the chain always wore the fastest of the the three components, and actually caused most of the damage to the sprockets because the pitch (distance between pin centers) was too long on the worn chain. These days, with high quality chains (both sealed and non-sealed) lasting much longer than they used to, it isn't at all unusual to find sprockets worn significantly from running in dirt when the chain is still well within wear limits. This is especially true of softer aluminum rear sprockets like JT, Sunstar, or Renthal. The wear condition of a chain can be measured and evaluated objectively, and if it's just not worn, there is no sense in replacing it.

Everyone is entitled to their own preferences, of course. All I'm saying is that the decision should be based on reality, and not on things that used to be true, or on myths.

Everyone is entitled to their own preferences, of course. All I'm saying is that the decision should be based on reality, and not on things that used to be true, or on myths.

Gray you have known me a long time and I respect your opinions. I ask your advice many times on things that I am not all that sure about at times. I don't always totally agree 100% with you, but your knowledge of these bikes usually is much deeper and scientific than mine...but my statements on chain and sprocket science is based solely on my factual reality of use and more use on MX only and Woods bikes that I have owned over the years. I agree that what stuff we use today is tons better than the old days from past.....a long time ago 70s, 80s and 90s......but please do not think my statements are written based on myths.........that is for mythbusters :thumbsup:

peace my friend :)

That's about the same weight as the Regina ORN6, only about 2 ounces heavier than the "Super NZ" non O-ring chain listed. Feel it? OK, but I don't think so?

Yeah, I don't think I would notice 2oz, but the difference between the DID ATV chain and normal 520VM X-ring chain is about 162g or 5.7oz!

It's definately noticable.

Yeah, I don't think I would notice 2oz, but the difference between the DID ATV chain and normal 520VM X-ring chain is about 162g or 5.7oz!

It's definately noticable.

Well, I thought we were discussing the up or downside of sealed vs. non-sealed chains. The two you listed are both sealed, so I'm not sure how that ties into the debate exactly. Either way, 6oz is about the weight of a frozen hamburger patty, and less than an empty 12oz glass bottle, so I am going to respectfully say that there's no way you can feel that weight difference out of 3 1/2 pounds.
Gray you have known me a long time and I respect your opinions. ...please do not think my statements are written based on myths.
And I respect yours, too Dave. OK, maybe myth has a bad connotation. Maybe I should have said "popular misbelief", or something like that. So far, a lot of people seem to think there's a performance hit with a sealed chain, but the available evidence suggests that if there is, it isn't much at all.

But your wheels would run freer without seals, too. Just grease the bearings and keep the dust covers in good shape. I wonder if anyone would consider doing that?

Hey, at least we don't call each other stuff when we disagree. :thumbsup:

But your wheels would run freer without seals, too. Just grease the bearings and keep the dust covers in good shape. I wonder if anyone would consider doing that?

Hey, at least we don't call each other stuff when we disagree. :thumbsup:

ha ha ain't that the truth....BTW I use speed grease on my wheel bearings:eek:

The O-Ring chain is not so wide that it would scrub the changuide or rub the frame on the side would it?:thumbsup:

I know that some folks have had issues on the '06-'07 450F where the chain has rubbed on the frame, and it happened to me very briefly. What I found is that relying on the axle blocks on these bikes does not get your rear wheel properly aligned, which in turn can cause excessive lateral movement in the chain. I now always use a straight edge on the sprocket to check chain/wheel alignment, and have not had a problem since with O-ring chains. On my bike, the axle blocks don't get me anywhere close to properly aligned.

So you gained 3+ hp with the O-ring chain? That's news. Here's a test on a bike a bit more suitable for comparison to a YZF:

http://www.thumpertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=4092520#post4092520

You are correct, but like I said, it depends on who you ask. Some people are trying to extract the last tenth of hp, so that may be significant to them. Is it to me? No, not on my YZ. I use the non o-ring chain because it was cheaper and I like the fact that it is easy to take on and off without any special tools.

Damian

My answer would be the Renthal, sort of.

The Renthal R1 Gold O-ring chain is made for Renthal by Regina. It's a very good chain, but it costs about $15 more in most cases than the Regina ORN6, which is what the Renthal actually is.

The ORN6 is simply extraordinary. It is very free running for a sealed chain, costs about $60-65, and, if cared for in any reasonable manner at all, is nearly indestructible.

The one one my '03 is now over two years old, and still within wear limits, although it's getting close to being too long for me. In that time, it's been adjusted maybe 3 times total. All I do with it is wash it with Simple Green and a garden hose, let it dry, and spray it with Maxima Synthetic Chain Guard to lube the outer rollers and prevent rust.

There might be something better, I suppose, but why would I go looking for it?

+1:thumbsup:

You are correct, but like I said, it depends on who you ask. Some people are trying to extract the last tenth of hp, so that may be significant to them. Is it to me? No, not on my YZ. I use the non o-ring chain because it was cheaper and I like the fact that it is easy to take on and off without any special tools.

Damian

I've been stuck with this dilemma for a while. My old YZ426 still has a non o-ring chain and it works a treat. On my WR & YZ I run o-ring chains. Even dropped bigger bucks on a Sidewinder Smart chain (which I have yet to fit). To be honest, I feel that chains, sprockets, bearings, oil, filters and fuel all fall into the consumables category. The clay & mud we ride in is hard on the bikes and moving parts. I sure do miss being able to take my chain off easily. Only way to measure for wear is to take it off and that's a pain with the o-ring

Only way to measure for wear is to take it off and that's a pain with the o-ring
That's not true on either point. For one, the ORN6 uses a clip type master (although the outer plate is a press fit to the pins).

Second, the chain can be measured in place:

http://www.thumpertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=8857721#post8857721

I've been stuck with this dilemma for a while. My old YZ426 still has a non o-ring chain and it works a treat. On my WR & YZ I run o-ring chains. Even dropped bigger bucks on a Sidewinder Smart chain (which I have yet to fit). To be honest, I feel that chains, sprockets, bearings, oil, filters and fuel all fall into the consumables category. The clay & mud we ride in is hard on the bikes and moving parts. I sure do miss being able to take my chain off easily. Only way to measure for wear is to take it off and that's a pain with the o-ring

Check Gray's method for checking wear here. :banghead:http://www.thumpertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=850047&highlight=step+caliper

Edit: Gray you were 1 min ahead of me ha ha

Edited by davcon
comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now