Sportbike Forums on WristTwisters banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Donut fan
Joined
·
248 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I recently replaced my chain and sprockets with a 17/44 520 conversion using Superlight RS7 steel sprockets and a D.I.D. 520 ERV3 chain and I have two questions:

- I cut the chain to 114 links as recommended, but with slack set correctly my rear wheel is way outside the guide markings, like the chain is too long. There seems to be plenty of adjustment space available, so I can’t see why it’s a problem, but I wanted to get some opinions on whether or not I need to remove another link (hopefully not since I don’t have another pin).

- The front sprocket cover no longer fits. More specifically, the metal chain guide makes contact with the chain if I put it on. Is this chain wider? I’m pretty sure the sprocket was spaced the same on both sides, but maybe I put it on backwards? Anyone else experience this?

Thanks in advance!

Tire Wheel Crankset Automotive tire Bicycle tire

Automotive tire Wheel Motor vehicle Vehicle brake Gear
 

·
That's nacho cheese!
Joined
·
17,774 Posts
It doesn't look to me like your chain is riding on your front sprocket correctly at all. Did you count the teeth and makes sure it is what you ordered? Compare it to the old sprocket to makes sure the tooth pitch is identical. For my own education, what is the 17/44 conversion supposed to get you on the Hornet?
 

·
McTavish
Joined
·
6,524 Posts
Bigdaa is on to something I think!
1
See the part of the picture of the front that shows some chain sideplate grease marking on the sprocket just below the part numbers. That mark is way off from being concentric with the sprocket. The chain and sprocket pitch don't appear to match.
2
The same image also indicates that the chain is not concentric with the plot of the protective steel ring.
3
Now look at the output shaft's end bolt and coned washer. While it may be just due to lens perspective, the appearance is that the washer is not concentric with the sprocket's hub. Is the sprocket hub concentric with the cone washer?
4
The rear sprocket and chain look to match, which IF the case, suggests a chain front sprocket mismatch.
5
Consider that 5xy chain has a pitch of 5/8 " (15.88 mm).
While 6xy chain has a pitch of 3/4" (19.05 mm)

Overall, very unusual.
IF the chain really is a perfect matching fit at the rear, then:
Maybe the front sprocket is for a wider chain, thus forcing it out on the teeth?
Maybe the front sprocket hub is incorrect?
 

·
919 Rider
Joined
·
2,948 Posts
I agree with last two boys. There is something not right with the front sprocket, specifically how the chain sits on the front sprocket. If the parts are correct perhaps try rotating the front sprocket placement one notch on the spline.
 

·
Donut fan
Joined
·
248 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Thanks for the replies. I think some of it looking wrong are camera perspective, but the oil/grease marks do seem to be telling a story. Here's another photo from more straight of an angle, the washer and sprocket look perfectly concentric to me. Also, it's stamped with "20608R" and "17" which is correct for the 919 according to Superlite.
Gear Crankset Bicycle part Bicycle chain Rim


And another with me holding up the stock sprocket for comparison. I can tell that the new sprocket has a slightly larger overall diameter (can't tell from the pic); that would explain the guide not fitting anymore, although I would think that would make for the chain falling on the shorter side of the adjustment markings, not so much longer.

Crankset Gear Bicycle part Rim Bicycle chain
 

·
McTavish
Joined
·
6,524 Posts
1
Yes the cone washer does look nicely concentric in the square on view. I assume the sprocket/shaft fit has been proofed as being normal.

2
Suggest you proof the pitch of the drive sprocket. Simply measure the centreline to centreline at the tips of two teeth. Do it for both the new and old sprockets. They should be the same. If they are, then the pitch of the new sprocket has been confirmed.

3
If 2 above is a pass, then my guess is that the new sprocket is incorrectly wide, perhaps for a 525. Regardless, measure the widths of the two sprockets at the bottom of the roots between two teeth, and at the tips of the teeth. The root width will be wider than the tip width. The new sprocket should have narrow root and tip widths than the original 16 tooth sprocket - as long as the original 16 is in fact a 530.

4
Suggest you also slacken the chain so that you can wrap the front sprocket as much as you can with chain, and see what that reveals/indicates.

It's gotta be something basic, that's for sure.
 

·
That's nacho cheese!
Joined
·
17,774 Posts
I did not realize I was looking at the chain guide in the first pic. I thought I was looking at the actual engine case but now based on the second pic with the guide removed, I think that you can just kiss the chain guide goodbye, however..........it may be the item that saves your case by keeping your chain from wadding up if it breaks.
 

·
Donut fan
Joined
·
248 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Thanks for the suggestions mcromo44, I'll take those measurements tomorrow and report back.

Bigdaa... yeah, I should've mentioned that I was holding up the chain guide in that pic, that would have been useful info. :) I chose the 17/44 combo because people have said it was good for lowering rpm at freeway speeds, reducing buzziness. It definitely has done that and I like the way it feels at higher speeds. I'm still getting used to the higher gearing at low speeds though. The bike has enough torque for it to not be a problem, but I was on a rough fire road the other day and I had to feather the clutch a lot more than usual; it's not conducive to that type of riding, but it's not really the right bike for that anyway.
 

·
McTavish
Joined
·
6,524 Posts
Thanks for the suggestions mcromo44, I'll take those measurements tomorrow and report back.

Bigdaa... yeah, I should've mentioned that I was holding up the chain guide in that pic, that would have been useful info. :) I chose the 17/44 combo because people have said it was good for lowering rpm at freeway speeds, reducing buzziness. It definitely has done that and I like the way it feels at higher speeds. I'm still getting used to the higher gearing at low speeds though. The bike has enough torque for it to not be a problem, but I was on a rough fire road the other day and I had to feather the clutch a lot more than usual; it's not conducive to that type of riding, but it's not really the right bike for that anyway.
It sounds as though you've ridden it, so all must be well if it hasn't spit back on you!
Hoping that is the case, then I'm really scratching my head over this one.
 

·
Donut fan
Joined
·
248 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
It sounds as though you've ridden it, so all must be well if it hasn't spit back on you!
Hoping that is the case, then I'm really scratching my head over this one.
Oh yeah, I've ridden it a few times, including a >4 hour ride in the mountains last week. It rides great as far as I can tell, I was simply perplexed by the the sprocket cover/chain guide not fitting and the chain slack indicator line sitting so much farther back than it was (which I've since seen photos of other people's setups being the same).
 

·
McTavish
Joined
·
6,524 Posts
Oh yeah, I've ridden it a few times, including a >4 hour ride in the mountains last week. It rides great as far as I can tell, I was simply perplexed by the the sprocket cover/chain guide not fitting and the chain slack indicator line sitting so much farther back than it was (which I've since seen photos of other people's setups being the same).
I love happy endings!
No matter whose it is.

AND with your rear axle set back a bit more than usual, front end lifts will be a bit more challenging, regardless of whether you're into that or not.
 

·
Wanna free cat?
Joined
·
1,235 Posts
Just looked at mine and the radial center of the sprocket/ chain appears to be centered on the guide. 17t 530
Don't recall the sprockets needing to be faced one way, but imo, that's all it can be. Is the 16t sprocket hub the same on both sides? I'd pull that 17t and have a look, but that's prolly just the ocd talkin.

Automotive tire Tire Automotive design Motor vehicle Wheel



Trimmed the cover to make it easier to see what's goin on in there and wash the gunk out, too.
Automotive tire Rim Automotive design Motor vehicle Gear
 

·
McTavish
Joined
·
6,524 Posts
Just looked at mine and the radial center of the sprocket/ chain appears to be centered on the guide. 17t 530
Don't recall the sprockets needing to be faced one way, but imo, that's all it can be. Is the 16t sprocket hub the same on both sides? I'd pull that 17t and have a look, but that's prolly just the ocd talkin.

View attachment 159004


Trimmed the cover to make it easier to see what's goin on in there and wash the gunk out, too.
View attachment 159005
Thanks for posting this!
I think I know what the problem is!
 

·
McTavish
Joined
·
6,524 Posts
I recently replaced my chain and sprockets with a 17/44 520 conversion using Superlight RS7 steel sprockets and a D.I.D. 520 ERV3 chain and I have two questions:

- I cut the chain to 114 links as recommended, but with slack set correctly my rear wheel is way outside the guide markings, like the chain is too long. There seems to be plenty of adjustment space available, so I can’t see why it’s a problem, but I wanted to get some opinions on whether or not I need to remove another link (hopefully not since I don’t have another pin).

- The front sprocket cover no longer fits. More specifically, the metal chain guide makes contact with the chain if I put it on. Is this chain wider? I’m pretty sure the sprocket was spaced the same on both sides, but maybe I put it on backwards? Anyone else experience this?

Thanks in advance!

View attachment 158992
View attachment 158993
Seeing rufftup's post made me think of something!
So back to this picture of yours.
See the protection ring?
Have a real good look.
Facing out is the flat side AND it's also showing aluminum telltale.
The outer cover is plastic.
The cases are aluminum.
The protection ring is like an snap ring, the controlled flat surface should be against the cases, not the outer cover.
I think you have the protection ring flipped over the wrong way, with the case side facing out instead of in.
It's a five minute check, so you can do it in a flash.

It's a five minute job to check
 

·
McTavish
Joined
·
6,524 Posts
I also noticed that the top bolt hole seems to be broken. Is there a chance the case has been deformed inwards?
Good eye, mate!
I didn't catch that.
Looks like a breakout but still some threaded hole remaining.
As for the case deforming, my guess is that it'd crack before deforming - such a thin section there.
The bike has some history, no question of that.
Trust all is well at your end.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top