[Mojo1094]

so, it's time for a new chain. my question is, should i go with the stock chain for my 2k750? it's like a 530. some one said to get a 520, but then this cat that owns Jay Riddle Racing said that the 520 chain's are weaker.

is that true? or, am i going to feel a difference between the 520 and the 530. i'm a newer rider, and will be dropping a tooth, but will the chain make a difference? and, if it does, is it weaker?

 

[Ibidu1]

True the 520 is weaker and a 525 or 530 is a lot stronger and will last longer. The stock chain on a 750 and 600 is a 525 chain, the 1000's run a 530.

If your just starting out run a 525 chain and make sure you buy a front and rear sprockets. I would buy both steel and if you keep it well lubed and not to tight it will last you a long time.

1 down on a 750 is just right so you like it.

 

[Mojo1094]

cool beans man. thanks much!!!

 

[wolph69]

i'd stick with stock chain. I thought it was a 525 on 750's though. your'll never feel the difference by going down to a 520. I never did, and it was a waste of money.

 

[WERA276]

Well not to say you will feel the difference of 3/4 of the mods we do to these bikes. In theory the 520 tips the scales a bit lighter so it allows the bike to accelerate faster. Granted alone it won't make a large difference and do much at all. But if you add up the sum of all the little do dad mods.....they may become felt.

But back to the point. Its not fair to say a 520 chain is weaker than a 525 or even 530. All depends on the quality of the chain you buy. I run a top of the line Regina 520 that has a higher tensile strength than many 530's. Same chain that I have seen last a whole season on a GSXR1000 racing.

For the most part the chain is just more narrow, and your sprockets too, thus they can wear a bit quicker. Regarless of what aftermarket sprockets you buy, they are going to wear much faster than the stock ones. Aluminum just gets eat'n no matter how lubed and lean you keep your chain.

Go with a 520, they are easy to find and sprockets are common in many many sizes and usually always in stock with 520 being the racing standard.

 

[Fiddy_Ryder]

chain type and quality is a big part like wera said.. many 520's have a higher tensile stregth than the OEM 525. steel sprockets last longer but alum is lighter. and at $40 a pop id go with alum, or even that new tri metal one with allum carrier and steel outter ring/teeth. as far as chain life, its all in the maintenance. i had a buddy with a stocker have his chain go to shit in 4k miles or so. had stretched spots and tighteness. you could tell when you spun the chain, certain areas would sag more. Thats because he didnt adjust it and didnt lube it properly.

 

[che]

Don't necessarily believe advertised tensile strength numbers. Companies exagerate these values for sales, and to top it off, what values are they publishing? Minimum, average, or maximun tensile strength? RK and EK seem to use max numbers, while DID and Tsubaki use average. It is too hard to compare chains based on numbers.
Within each brand, the 525 is stronger than a 520. 525s will take more abuse than a 520. In fact, I'm lucky to get 3000 miles with a 520 on the track and street riding. Don't waste your money on a 520 unless you are racing on a track.

 

[Mojo1094]

well, i'm not doing any track riding. just street, but i do lots of hard accelleration and launches, i mean, it's a sport bike, right?

but thanks again, i think for now, i'm gonna go 525. they are also a LOT cheaper through my local shop. so, yeah.

when i have a little more cash, i'll try a 520, just to see what's up.

 

[Mojo1094]

well, i ended up with a 520 chain. it was like 80 bux for an X ring, and a 525 would have been 125. sprocket changes are minus one up front and plus one in back, the stock gearing for the back sprocket was out of stock.

it's tough to keep the front down now. hehe. but i love it, much smoother than before. thanks for the advice guys.