Question about Sprocket Size and Cruising RPM

check out his web site. Very useful for gearing changes:

www.gearingcommander.com/

Hi Kai. I run a 520 conversion with 16/45 and a 190/55 on the rear which gives 70mph at @4500rpm in 6th.

I previously ran 15/42 and 16/44, and i've found the 16/45 smoothes everything out more whilst also spinning up seemingly easier, but then that is probably as much to do with the chain being a 520 now.

As for losing grams, the difference is never going to be noticeable, and going to a 15 is actually a -2 on the front, not a -1.

Have fun and good luck :thumbup

Save a few grammes? Are you are out of your mind lol? You'll have a nervous breakdown if you ever have to carry a pillion....... I had a 156 kilos bike over the summer (modded Street Trip R lighter than Daytona) but to be honest with the terrible state of most roads I sometimes wanted more weight, not less. Track is different story.

More seriously the Falco's gearing is different but this is the third RSV I've owned and all of them needed a drop..... I'd always go on the conservative side, drop too far and it'll get buzzy 4th & 5th at mid revs. IMO.

SamSausage said:

Yes, for static weight I would be out of mind but for rotational mass I'm definitely going to try and save every Gram I can.

Click to expand...

I know the difference Sam but as you've implied a couple of grammes of unsprung weight / rotational mass (whichever) is far less important than getting the gearing right, I'm sure we're all agreed on that.

It's an interesting question: to what extent does saving unsprung weight really help on the road? It isn't always a no brainer, I know someone who fitted dymags to a ZX10 and once he got used to them on track days they were fine, but they actually had an adverse effect on the road where the extra weight made the bike feel more secure over the crap we all have to put up with (untidy repairs, botched resurfacing etc etc). Clearly others will beg to differ, but that was his experience. (It's ironic that people spend a fortune on stuff like that when what is sat on top is by far the most limiting factor, a couple of days with Rapid Training or whoever would prolly be the best mod, but thats another story.)

Anyway good luck with it, the Falco dropped one at the front from standard which was about right (but different OE gearing to yours ), ditto for the Tuono.

On my Falco I run 16/45 since I had to buy a new set I decided that the bigger radius on the front of a 16 vs a 15 was a plus. My m8 runs 15/42 which is about the same ratio (1 tooth in front equals 3 in rear).

I like this ratio as it really smoothes out the bike.

As far as weight is concerned, i would never run a 520 unless doing competition racing where wight is more important.

I may well be wrong, but i would expect the 520 chain to be in need of replacement a lot sooner than a 525 or 530. Thats a lot of power for a lil chain like that. Even my 125 had a 520 as OE fitment!

I think another good reason for going to 16 tooth as against a 15 is the chain has an easier life following the larger radius,also the chain guide doesn't get worn as quickly.

At least that's always been my understanding :dunno