Strong enough for a weekend of races but those guys change chains regularly or at least their crew does. Most of us in the real world try and get some distance out of our chains. I found that the DID 520 chain was fantastic ... it was the sprockets that did not last very long.

 

Stretch, would you say the 520 would last as long as the 530 under the same riding conditions?

 

I really do not think it would last as long as the 530 all things being equal. There is 50% more surface on the chain roller and sprocket surface. And my own experience had the chain not quite halfway at a little over 7k miles but the rear sprocket was toast. No sense putting on a new sprocket with a worn chain so I opted to go back with the 530.

And while $$ was some of my decision to go back to the 530there was also some lazy mixed in ... just a pain changing out the chain and sprockets every 7500mi. To someone that does not mind those aspects I think it's a great mod. I could tell a difference ... especially when it was wound up.

 

Ok thanks for the opinion chainstretcher! as much as I would like to experience the change in performance for myself, 7500m go by real quick and times are tough for me right now and do not see them getting all that much better by summer. so with you experiencing the relatively quick wear on the sprockets, I will take your word for it and keep well enough alone. kinda sucks, but lazy and $$ seem to be my issues as well. so Im pretty sureI can go another season without, thanks again.

 

you need to find out what sprockets they were and understnad how the chain was taken care of also ( cleaned and lubed ). no offense chainstretcher. not all sporckets and chains are equal period. you should get 10K out of a chain and sprockets to me at a minimum, but a set up is not that expensive to me at $180 for everything ( chain, and both sprockets ) good part too not the cheap crap. so take that at 7500 miles and it cost you $.02 a mile. my guess is you are spending more than that on oil changes.

 

I am willing to bet that not one person on this board is putting down in excess of 200 rwhp (n.a.) and riding the bike as hard as a professional racer does.There is no way a street/trackday bike is going to abuse a chain at the same rate that afull on racing superbike would. There is plenty of anecdotal evidenceabout the sufficient strength/longevity of a D.I.D ERV3 520 chain.

Chances are that the sprocket was not hard anodized aluminum.

I agree but the 520 will last long enough to enjoy the benefits of the reduction in rotating mass and the increase in acceleration that comes with a pitch and ratio change.


Obviously, if it's not something you can easily afford... don't do it.

The sprocket wear has to do with the quality of the sprocket not the pitch of the chain.


Agreed.

 

Sprocket was an aluminumVortex with lightening holes and balanced running on my little bitty 165HP set up. Chain was DID's best 520.

Not in one day, sure. But day after day banging through the gears especially with stop n go real life traffic just as much abuse.

And I'm not convincedeveryone understands the relationship between a 530 and 520. The pitch is the same 5/8 inch ... only the width changes ... so your sprocket width is 50% less material actually transmitting power to the ground. Also acceleration is not changed unless you change the gear ratio. But you can do that with the 530. I kept my ratios the same and the only difference I noticed was accelerating hot out of a curve. From a dead stand still up to 50 to 60 mph there really is no discernable difference.

Having built and run aturbo bike I went through some chains and have tried the most popular brands. DID is hands down the best for me with RK a decent second. Not sure if I still have that old sprocket but the waves starting to form were impressive. Vortex are some of the best sprockets around so I can only imagine what a cheapy aluminum would do.

 

Well, Obviously if I cant afford it...I wont do it! didnt really need you to tell me that but thanks anyways. but Im going to need one or the other (520 or 530) in about another 1000 miles.
Your saying Ill get close to the same milage under the same riding conditions with proper maintenance and top of the line hardware, and, Id notice a big enough benefit to say 'Hey...Im glad I spent the extra money' cause this kicks ***!
Stretch is saying that yeah, there is a benefit, but thinks the cost and labor out-weigh the benefits to a certain degree.

I dont know, I guess Ill have tosee where I stand when the time comes. I do appreciate the input from you guys though!!

 

Therein lies your problem. Vortex is crap. It may pass if you throw out your sprockets after a race weekend but if not ... AFAM sprockets.

Ah sarcasm. While 165hp is noteworthy for a street machine it isn't going to strain the drivetrain anywhere near as much as a +200 rwhp race superbike.

Not in one day and not in 1000 days. How much of your 165hp are you really using in stop n go real life traffic? If you are like the vast majority of riders including myself ... not much.

This is true. I used the term because that is how they are marketed.

That's why I included ratio change. The reduction in rotating mass (over 1 lb.) of the chain does contribute to an increase, however so slight, in acceleration.

Obviously.

Isn't that what matters? We aren't talking about drag racing are we?

Not really.

Whatever, chief. My point was that if you could afford to pay someone to install a new 530 chain. You could afford to buy a quality 520 re-gear kit, a chain tool, and DIY.

Yes.

Cost is negligible and the labor would only become slightly prohibitive if changing out sprockets and a chain is above and beyond your mechanical ability. Wear resistance and tensile strength just aren't that much greater for a 530 vs. a 520 chain in the same catagory.