630 to 520 chain conv.

I think i'm going with a 520 RK chain because it's really light and 8500 tensile strength. A zr550 front sprocket and SS will make me an aluminum rear for 55$. I don't care how long the sprock lasts but I hope the chain don't break. It's rated for a 750cc motor but the guy from Dennis kirk said it would work and he's seen it used on 1000's. Well since i don't want to die i'd like to have a back up opinion like whoooa dude! Or "are you sick or something"? Chain is 80 dollars. LIfe is precious. When i was younger i got my brother a cheaper chain from an outlet store called Nodak. It was what was called a heavy duty chain. It sure looked thin compared to the one on the 600ninja. He ended up almost sliding underneath a car in traffic at 35mph when it broke. Instinct tells me.. i need a second opinion.

I don't know about using a chain with 8500 lbs tensile strength with what you have said about your motor, I would go with something around at least 10,000 lbs.

Just my $0.0000000000002 worth

Here's an excerpt from the following link:

www.peterverdonedesigns.com/chainsandsprockets.htm


520 Conversions :
Many racers and performance riders will mention doing a 520 chain conversion. Most stock bikes come with 525, 530, or 535 chains on them. These are big chains that can handle the power of a modern sport bike and make chain life acceptable for most riders. A 520 chain is much smaller than their counterparts. a 520 chain is much lighter reducing the un sprung weight of the rear end and reducing rotational mass. The life of a 520 chain will be much less than the larger chains as well. While this is a performance improvement, the average rider will benefit more by saving their money and switching the gears that they can while keeping whatever good chain is on the bike in place. If you need to change your chain anyway, then go for it, the cost is not much different that standard parts. A 520 conversion is not recommended on bikes larger than 750cc's.


I recall reading somewhere (but haven't yet been able to again find the source) that racers use the 520 and aluminun sprocket to achieve the absolute minimum weights possible and arn't so worried about the longevity because the chain is replaced so frequently (perhaps between every race) --- seemed logical to me.

Post edited by: Patton, at: 2006/12/30 11:23

More food for thought (does this story have an end?)

Extract from groups.google.com/group/rec.motorcycles....0%231b590a83812b42a0


I have a '96 GSX-R750 and am considering replacing the chain and sprockets. I was thinking about dropping a tooth on the countershaft sprocket and
maybe going to a 520 chain. I've had several friends who race tell me that 520 is the way to go, but I worry about chain stretch/breakage. After all,
why did the bike come with a 530 in the first place.
I do tend to do the occasional - 5-10 per day - wheelie, often with a little clutch assist, but don't do any hard launches or smoky hole shots.


Racers go to 520 because its lighter, resulting in less rotating mass. They also change them out more often and maintain them more than street riders. Manufacturers use a heavier chain then neccessary because they realize most street riders run them far too long before getting a new one.(or oiling and adjusting them). 520's are usually cheaper than 530's
too. If your gonna keep it on the street I would stick with 530 o-ring.

All true, but you should also know that on a CBR600 a 520 non-o ring chain is said to be worth about 4bhp at the rear wheel over the standard 530 o ring jobby. O rings cause more friction you see.

Exactly. I run only non o rings on my race bikes, although after thrwing a chain on my endurance bike after a rain, I might run o-ring in that one.
anyways, On a street bike I would stick with an o-ring for ease of maintenance and longevity. I use 2 chains per year on my race bikes.

I've heard this, too. But I've also heard that it's bullshit. I'd like to see a few dyno charts proving the theory before I'm convinced.

Robert I've heard (and have no citable evidence) that this is temperature dependent: when cold, the friction losses to o-rings is significant, but once warm the advantage goes the other way. This because warm o-rings are more pliable and because no non-o-ring chain more than a few km old has proper lubrication in the pins... so as the remnant grease thins with heat the metal-metal friction increases. I'm running an o-ring (or actually a DID X-ring) on the TZ and haven't noted a loss of power. I have noted the large gouges where the previous owner's near new non-o-ring chain snapped at speed...

This thing is not going to end untill someone says its ok to run a 520 chain. I,m going to make some calls and find out. If they all say the chain is too weak, im going to run a 525 or 30 non o-ring chain. My 630 is so stiff i can hardly push the bike unless i oil it, then it is smooth and quiet, but who wants to waste oil that you can drink.

FWIW, I run a 520 X-ring chain on my Ducati 749R racebike, which puts out 145hp. Usually replace the chain once per season (about 15 race weekends), but the chain often ends up on one of my streetbikes after that. Never had a chain problem. In fact, I can't recall the last time I've seen a chain at the racetrack actually break, although I've seen a few shed their clip-type masterlinks.

I did that conversion on my KZ900. I needed to replace the chain and sprockets anyway. I bought the whole kit from Z1enterprises. I commute 140 miles a day and the chain/sprockets are holding up fine. I don't race it or try burnouts and wheelies,(parts are expensive!),just alot of riding.

Why the heck change? Like going from a 460 Ford to a 302. Sure you'll get the extra 1.2 mpg, but it will wear out 200% faster and not do the job. I'll keep my 630 which is the best chain, regardless of the crap readings saying modern 530 is better, bull crap, 530 is fine, 630 better, 520 worse. What else is there as I'm not up on the new Chinese chain sizes, maybe there's a 220 or something? Need 330 links but they don't rob any power, of course only last 800 miles, but who cares? You'll need a 44t countershaft and a 138t rear sprocket and 328 links to make it perfect.

Any good quality 530 chain will be just as strong as a 630 chain. Reason is that they are not putting and development and work into making new 630 chain since no new bikes are using them. A modern 530 chain will just as strong, if not stronger than an older 630 chain. Ron just thinks that if it is not stock then to him it is crap. Stay away from the 520 and go with a 530. 520 is lighter but unless you are racing you won't notice the difference. I put the 530 on mine because I put a modern rear end on the bik and no one made a 630 chain. I called many places and thay all said " Why would we make a 630 chain for that bike (FZR rear end). The 530 is lighter and just as strong or stronger... and cheaper". I can't say if it made a difference because the bike got a high compression kit, dropped about 150lb, jet kit and so on. I can say that it will be 100 times easier to find a 530 chain rather than a 630. Pretty much any motorcycle shop in the country wil have some 530's in stock. They will not all carry 630's. Just my thoughts and I tend to be full of crap anyway but I am pretty sure about staying away from 520's.

the busas and ZX12Rs run a 530 with no problem, but nobody advises going to a 520, its just too small. maybe for a 636 it would be fine, but I'll never use a 520

I've found that some gsx and r1 riders are using the 520 with an anadized sprocket. Some of these bikes are 150-180hp. It looks as though one needs to buy the best chains out there, and it seems that's about three to chose from, really. I'm calling the company's tech lines to hear it from the pros. Thanks to all for the input on this subject. A couple notes here. Looks like I'll be stuck with 3.7 to 3.9lbs for weight, and I've got a feeling my bike is really going to take off. I started it today with the lawn mower batt. My God that thing sounds good. That's some of the sweetest music my ears have ever heard. Blood, guts, and 520 chain links flying all over the place. Not the best way to die but not bad, only costs 180.00. Wich master link would you like with that sir?

Post edited by: nads.com, at: 2007/01/01 04:25

nads.com wrote:

This thing is not going to end untill someone says its ok to run a 520 chain.

Sounds like you aren't so much asking if you should as you are asking for validation that you made the right decision.