StromTrooper banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
167 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
So I'm replacing the chain on my 09 Wee at 21xxx or so miles. I'm guessing this is the original chain, but the 1st owner replaced the stock 15T with a JTF520.16 sprocket. Yup...that's right...a 520 front sprocket, a 525 chain and a 525/47 rear sprocket. I'm replacing both sprockets with 525 size sprockets (16F/47R) and the chain with a DID525VM2-X Ring. (I'm thinking the gold sideplates will give me at least an extra 5HP and better mileage, too!!:mrgreen:)

My question is...where is the difference between a 520 and a 525 chain? The wear on the 520 front sprocket looks normal. When I mike the base of the throat (between the teeth) of the sprockets I get this...

520 Throat = 0.281-0.288 (over several teeth)
525 Throat = 0.283-0.291 (also over several teeth)

Is this the only difference? Is the extra strength of a 525 chain mostly in the thickness of the sideplates (I already tossed the old chain so I can't measure it)? Inquiring minds like to know!:confused:

Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
Something from my foggy memory says #530 is 1/8" wider than #520. ( doesn't your 525 f. spkt. look thicker than the old 520?)

If thats true, I'm guessing #525 is, ... well, 1/16" wider?

And since the pitch is same 520 or 530, I'd guess it's the same on all 500 series.

dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,663 Posts
5

Just kidding

The leading number is the size or pitch. Without looking it up I think 5 is 1/2 inch but maybe 5/8. A regular grade chain would be a 50

The other numbers 520, 525, 530 basically refer to the increasing strength of the chain normally accomplished with progressively thickening the side plates. The internal dimensions should be consistent but the outsides and weight will grow
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,442 Posts
Chain dimensions:
Azusa Engineering, Inc. Online Catalog - Roller Chain, Motorcycles, etc.

500 series chain: 5/8" pitch (distance between pins)
Roller diameter: .400" all 500 sizes
Width between inner plates--
520: 1/4"
525: 5/16"
530: 3/8"

The wider chain carries the load over a larger area and wears longer, is heavier, and costs more. 525 is right for a Wee. 525 is OK for a Vee and 530 has longer life on a Vee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chrisbre

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,310 Posts
5



The other numbers 520, 525, 530 basically refer to the increasing strength of the chain normally accomplished with progressively thickening the side plates. The internal dimensions should be consistent but the outsides and weight will grow
internal dimensions are wider, rollers are wider and sprockets are wider

if the difference was just thickness in side plates, sprockets would be interchangable


side plate thicknesses are similar across the board, 520 chains are just as stong as 525 and 530 for all practical purpose, difference is in sprocket tooth stength



Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
The jtf520.16 is a 525 pitch. See the JT website

jtf520 is just the part number. It is not the pitch size.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
167 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
HaHa! Well that explains why it seems the same size as the rear 525 sprocket...'cause it IS!!:green_lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,663 Posts
OK I am educated

Now the original VEE had a 520 Chain (I think) so the 525 does produce a small offset

Was this ever corrected in subsequent upgrades?
 

·
FORUM GODFATHER.....R.I.P. PAT
Joined
·
38,104 Posts
OK I am educated

Now the original VEE had a 520 Chain (I think) so the 525 does produce a small offset

Was this ever corrected in subsequent upgrades?
The Vee has always had a 525 chain. Conjecture is it was originally designed for a 530 chain. The parts are the same for all years and there is some argument about whether there really is an offset. Part of the situation involves the deeper inset from the 2mm shorter spacer preventing sprocket cocking that can effect the measurement and cause decreased cush rubber wear and resultant slop.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,647 Posts
If I was to deviate from the 525 chain I would go the other way to a 520. You get less weight and can have the same or more tensile strength. I seriously doubt that your going to have a noticeable difference in chain life from one to the other. Chain life is much more about care, adjustment, and abuse. I have put over 30000 miles on my stock chain and sprockets I am happy with that. I will probably just replace it with the same size x ring.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,310 Posts
If I was to deviate from the 525 chain I would go the other way to a 520. You get less weight and can have the same or more tensile strength. I seriously doubt that your going to have a noticeable difference in chain life from one to the other. Chain life is much more about care, adjustment, and abuse. I have put over 30000 miles on my stock chain and sprockets I am happy with that. I will probably just replace it with the same size x ring.
chains are similar strength, but a tooth on a 530 sprocket is at least 50% stronger than a tooth on a 520 sprocket made of the same material

personally, chains last me around 45,000 miles, a front 525 sprocket lasts me about 15k at best, I easily get 25k from a 530 front sprocket



Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,025 Posts
side plate thicknesses are similar across the board, 520 chains are just as stong as 525 and 530 for all practical purpose, difference is in sprocket tooth stength
Side plate thickness can vary quite a bit between the best chains out there and their lesser counterparts. For a while I saved a couple of links from OEM vs. the best chain I could find, just to show the diff.

Somewhere here, I posted the dimensional differences, although finding it may be a chore (if it's even still here) -- it was prolly five years ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,310 Posts
Side plate thickness can vary quite a bit between the best chains out there and their lesser counterparts. For a while I saved a couple of links from OEM vs. the best chain I could find, just to show the diff.

Somewhere here, I posted the dimensional differences, although finding it may be a chore (if it's even still here) -- it was prolly five years ago.
so I shoulda added "like quality chains"

I can't justify an expensive chain, even the cheapest DID o-ring outlasts my sprockets



Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
Your right about chain maintenance being of most importance and as for expected life, 520 vs. 525... it won't be a huge difference.v What would be huge is sprocket material. Aluminum is just plain stupid, IMO, as far as sprockets go. (Except for competition dirtbikes where weight is a primary concern). Standard steel like Suzukis is the norm and the minimum, IMO. Better is a case hardened steel if it's available.

Again, keeping the grit away is most benefitial.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,442 Posts
Better is a case hardened steel if it's available. Again, keeping the grit away is most benefitial.
Yes, and...case hardening is surface hardening. Once the thin hard surface layer is worn away by that grit the teeth wear quickly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
As it works out that case hardening is very effective. A machinist I know hardened his own creation. Than sprocket exhibited great life as used in a season of enduro racing on a Husqvarna dirtbike. I don't believe he altered his maintenance habits however. That is to say he didn't just ignore chain maintenance because he had what he thought was a "super" sprocket. Chains need lube too.:thumbup:

dave
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top