I do not race my bike nor do I put it into any type of real torque strain(I am getting too old for this)
I know the O-ring chain is the preferred chain but I am trying to save $$$$. Is the reason for O-ring vs non O-ring a safety issue or a dependability issue? Would the non O-ring be safe for a few 3-4 thousand miles? Will the 530 non O-ring work with my stock sprockets which have the original (35k miles) 530 O-ring chain on them at this time?
I was also wondering how to install a chain that already has the master link installed?

 

Easy answer. Non o-ring chains are not for our bikes. Go o-ring.

Also, chains and sprockets (also tires) are one of those places where you're better off spending a little extra up front in order to save a bunch down the road, because a good chain (D.I.D. x-ring is my choice) will outlast a cheap chain by a long shot.

 

Thanks for the quick response. I will go O-ring.

 

non o-ring chains are for, ummmm bicycles!!!!!!!!!!! Most dirt bikes even use o-ring chains now

 

I guess u r right....Back in the late 60's and early 70's when I was first started riding there were no "oring" chains so even on my Kaw 900 the non oring chain did fine.
It has been Years since I had a bike with a chain so I am a little (lot) out of touch with todays new fangled chain technology.
My Harley has a belt and my Goldwing has a drive shaft so I appreciate the update sir.

 

NP, I think the biggest thing is maintenance, a non-oring you have to clean n lube more often. That n dirt n grit can get into the the places the o-rings seal out, so they prolly last longer too.

 

One of my friends Help me out to change my bikes chain, when i return to pick her up i realized that my f***ing friend put a non oring chain to my bike and its useless because everytime that i ride her on the highway i have to adjust the chain because it get loose so easily. I can tell that this chain its finished because i cant adjust it anymore it reach all the adjust.

 

I am going to play the devils advocate here for a bit and say that I used a non O for my commuter for quite some time, and it worked well for its lifespan.



However, if you don't clean that bugger almost every week it stretches easy and the links stick together. This causes "jerks" on your bike from the chain.
This is also very dangerous, but at the time I was poor, and I couldn't afford anything nice.

But after rummaging on ebay I found a 3.00 used oring 520 chain.
That's right. 3 bucks. Soaked it in kerosene, lubed it up, and it has lasted me the last 5000 miles with out even a hiccup.



I would recommend a oring over a standard any day. The risks from a chain breaking are well worth investing in one.

 

IDoDirt and several others (much wiser than I) would recommend you not use a masterlink chain, but to get a rivet kit and avoid using them in general.
It says in the manual not to use masterlinks because they become the weak point of the chain, but as long as you aren't pushing your bike (and as much as I push mine in comparison) I think you will be ok for now until you can get a rivet kit.

But IDoDirt, feel free to step in as the fatherly figure.

 

The "Good old days".
I had a Kwawka & ran it for 12 months on a standard chain on my 160 kay daily commute, but it needed maintenance every day.
What the 'O' ring did was to introduce a sealed link(s) with lube to extend chain life.
Wot you have probably noticed is how small the links are on our bikes, compared to the older variety (660 if my memory serves me) no wonder the bikes weighed in at over 200 kilos.
You can get away with a non 'O' ring, but why bother.
I seem to remember another good thing from the "Old days", & that would be the habit of even newish chains failing (lack of maintenance) & either burying itself in your crankcase (& maybe taking part of your ankle as it passed by) or as happened to me, wrapping itself around the rear sprocket, causing the rear wheel to lock (luckily for me I was only doing 70 kph, in the inside lane in peak hour traffic )