530 x-ring chain on a mk111

Status
Not open for further replies.
No problem., just more info to support what appears to contradict an old myth.
The fact that racers use them and that Jim's Dyno showed no difference, plus my own observations is enough for me.
It could be that the old Oring chains sapped some power, but technology has moved on.

Glen
 
Just for the info, here's what I have observed.
My lightweight Yamaha XT came with an o-ring chain, it was hard to push/roll from my yard into my garage. When that chain needed replacing, I put on a standard chain, non 0-ring.
It is now much, much, easier to push. There's gotta be some friction there somewhere. Maybe it's not significant, but it is noticeable in my case.
Jaydee
 
Getting back to the original subject....................

I purchased a D.I.D VX530 X-Ring chain, and indeed it does fit. Clearance underneath the gearbox sprocket is minimal but once the chain is adjusted there is enough gap there. It is a rivet link - in fact the rivet is a lot narrower than the clip link on my old standard chain. So I'm a happy chappy. As this is my touring bike, there will be bugger all maintenance, a clean rear end as well as the much longer chain and sprocket life compared to a 520.

So I would suggest that MK111 owners should be able to fit an X-Ring without having to go to the effort to downsize to a 520 chain. Just be aware that the D.I.D VX530 is narrower than other X-Ring chains so I would recommend that specific chain.

As far as the loss of power arguments, I'll sacrifice a couple of horses for the convienience if that is the case. I'll just have to twist that throttle a little bit more eh?

Johno :D
 
When I switched from the 530 x-ring to the belt final drive I did before and after dyno runs also. They say the belt is supposed to be more efficient. And it was- maybe the width of the line on the dyno graph. About 1/2 to 3/4 horse on the strip. About the same variation I would expect from one day to the next. Jim
 
It may not matter on the scale of our engine power and dyno resolution power but by golly if ya had to peddle or hand crank a chain I'd shoot who ever ordered O-bsolet ring and buy my own more X-cellent ring chain and not Reynods either.
 
I also ran a 520 x-ring on my racebike. There was no detectable loss on the dyno. Jim
Click to expand...
Yes they are very stiff cold but hot, much less so. Each pair of links entering and leaving the sprockets have to pivot 10-15 degrees and there is more resistance to the links pivoting (than non 'O') but how much? I feel a dyno test coming on although as Jim says...........no detectable loss. I'll keep my 520 'O' for now since I like the low maintenance. Anyway, my Commando never needs any tuning, repairs or other attention of course and the 520 conversion has only added to that experience :p Its not an immaculate machine but I hate oil all over the rear which was always the way with std chain and chainlube, Chainguard, whatever. No I have never tried an Iwis so I don't know if it wouldn't have needed adjusting every 500 miles.
 
I still lube my xring chains but use dry lube, more of a chain wax. This prevents the chain from rusting when riding in the rain. The type I have been using is made by Dupont and it does not fling off, the rims and all else stay clean.

On the subject of power loss, the manufacturers state that the newer x rings chains have half the power loss of the old O ring chains.
With a nonsealed chain in the real world, they are very quickly in a state of wear, that is why we have to adjust the excess slack away.
As soon as some wear takes place, real power loss is happening, the chain is now fighting the sprockets (more wear, now at an accelerated rate on the sprockets.
My clubmate is the owner of Modern Motorcycling in Vancouver, a Suzuki Dealer. They do a lot of dyno tuning and sometimes see a bike with a wavy or uneven output at or near max. This is almost always a worn out chain. Change the chain, the line goes smooth.
With a sealed chain, you have a great many miles where the chain and sprockets are not worn or in a state of wearing each other out, instead are in harmony, matched pitch for pitch.

As far as the push test mentioned by Jaydee, as others have mentioned, that initial resistance to movement felt mainly with the old Oring style, goes away once the chain is put to use and warms up.
The Dyno tells all!

Glen
 
To be fair, the suggestion of five hp power loss for a Commando was later changed to five hp power loss for a 127 hp Suzuki Bandit. I still find that one hard to believe as Jims Dyno and other dynos show no difference bewteen non sealed chain and x ring chain. It would be interesting to see Dyno results with nonsealed chain at about 5,000 miles and a sealed chain at same. My guess is that the sealed would show a bit more power than non sealed.
And when did old Bandits become a 127 hp bike?I have always thought they were on the low side of 100 at crank, and sure enough-

http://www.suzukicycles.org/Bandit-seri ... ndit.shtml

Glen
 
UK 120 Bandits pre 2000 were around the 115bhp, overseas, USA, OZ etc etc were lower.

After 2000 they lowered the UK to match which is why pre 2000 machines are wanted.

All to with insurance, pre 2000 same as Fireblade, Blackbird tec group 15/15. After
2000 down to group 10/11. Apparently according to local dealer the high insurance
was stopping 600 owners moving up.

Put the 750 head on and get it chipped and you can get 150+ for little money. Mine
has had the chip and head done along with a Motad system (actually smaller bore than standard
which I dont understand.

Andy
 
All I can find for official ratings UK and otherwise, pre 2000 and post is 98 bhp at crank.
A very powerful 98 hp motorcycle for sure, I rode one awhile back and was quite shocked at the amount of lowdown and midrange. Since the pre 06 bikes use a retuned GSXR 1100 engine, no doubt it could be modded back to sportbike hp levels, which seems to be defeating what Suzukis engineers accomplished with the retune. There goes the Bandit low end and midrange grunt that Suzuki designed it to have.

But this is a Commando forum and they have about 45-50 rwhp on a good day, so 5 hp loss is something one would really notice, it would feel like the brake was jammed on!

Glen
 
ludwig said:
jaydee75 said:
Just for the info, here's what I have observed.
My lightweight Yamaha XT came with an o-ring chain, it was hard to push/roll from my yard into my garage..
Click to expand...

And how much HP do you guess went into that push ?
Now , if you where to TROW that Yamaha over a 2m wall in one swing , maybe then you would use one HP ..

To put this HP thing in perspective :
The fellow in the pic . pulling a train does it with less than 1 HP :

530 x-ring chain on a mk111

( a lot of torque , but low rpm .. )

Even the best trained human can NOT produce 1 HP :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_power .


And then an O-ring eats 5 ( FIVE ) HP ??? ..
Click to expand...
Posted by a man who has put so much effort into weight loss... that picture is a, to say the least, confusing argument!
 
worntorn said:
All I can find for official ratings UK and otherwise, pre 2000 and post is 98 bhp at crank.
A very powerful 98 hp motorcycle for sure, I rode one awhile back and was quite shocked at the amount of lowdown and midrange. Since the pre 06 bikes use a retuned GSXR 1100 engine, no doubt it could be modded back to sportbike hp levels, which seems to be defeating what Suzukis engineers accomplished with the retune. There goes the Bandit low end and midrange grunt that Suzuki designed it to have.

But this is a Commando forum and they have about 45-50 rwhp on a good day, so 5 hp loss is something one would really notice, it would feel like the brake was jammed on!

Glen
Click to expand...

Off topic but....my 07 Bandit (new model 1250cc injected and water cooled) with 96 crank HP goes like a r@ped ape even with an Oring chain. As you say, lots of low and midrange power enough to satisfy me. Almost as much fun as twisting the throttle on my Commando.
 
To be fair, the suggestion of five hp power loss for a Commando was later changed to five hp power loss for a 127 hp Suzuki Bandit
Click to expand...
I think Andy answered his own unasked question really. If we are talking chain efficiency loss (%) as opposed to a fixed loss then 2hp loss on a Commando might be credible when cold. Its the 5hp statement that made us go WHAT?
 
Best I can glean off a good scope of dyno reports and percentage of chain efficiency [upper 90's%] implies takes ~ 10 hp from crank to rear patch [regardless of the engine total power output] so chain might drag down .2-.3 hp or 1/5-1/3 hp if spun freely and not much more at max travel rate and torque applied. If ya handle new and old plain chain, O ring and X-ring its pretty easy to sense which you'd rather have on your peddle bike.
 
"But this is a Commando forum and they have about 45-50 rwhp on a good day, so 5 hp loss is something one would really notice, it would feel like the brake was jammed on!"

I WISH I was only down 5HP! The bike loses nearly 13 HP here in Mexico at 7000 ft compared to sea level! On Long Island I saw an indicated 115+; here, the best I've seen is 100 and that's a serious struggle. A shade over 90 MPH (indicated) is pretty much the bike's limit at the local altitude.

But maybe if I tossed the CNW 520 chain and put the oem back, I'd get at least get 5 more hp! ;)
 
Is it running rich? I went up and over several 10- 11,000 ft summits last year, it would pull an 7% grade at 90 with me (260 lbs in riding gear) plus soft bag luggage, maybe 50 pounds. I havent had the old thing out on a big trip for four years and was quite amazed at the power levels. So was the fellow with the $60,000 MV Augusta four. The Commando slowly gained on his MV on the long grades. And he is tiny, with tiny luggage to match!
The MV is a heavy bike, but is rated at 70 BHP. It ought to be long gone against a lowly MK 111 Commando. Maybe that balance pipe is worth the 5.8 hp claimed by Dunstall!
Glen


530 x-ring chain on a mk111
 
worntorn said:
andychain said:
Why do you think racers avoid it.

If you ride daily in all weathers then an O ring is fine for fair weather
use a good non O ring.

As for old Brit bikes they shouldnt have O ring....they never did from factory
and there were few problems.

Andy
Click to expand...

Sorry Andy, have to respectfully disagree on this one. A friend was at Laguna Seca this summer and spent a lot of time with the pit crewsand racers like Danny Pedrosa and the other top guys. He has pics of himself standing beside Pedrosa and Pedrosa is tiny!
They are all running Xring chains on their MotoGP bikes. They toss them after one race. He brought home the 520 x ring from Cal Crutchlow's bike. We checked it against a new 520x ring and the length was identical, so he will run it on his Vincent, probably for 20,000 miles or so.

As far as losing 5 hp by running sealed chain on an old Britbike, I run iton my old Vincent because the bike gets used for touring and would like to run it on the Commando as well. I have ridden with dozens of other Vincents, most with standad chains and we always find out which bike has the most available power on those long Mountain climbs. My 47 with the x ring chain outpulls all but one highly modified Vincent which runs 11 to one compression and a whole host of engine mods. He has an xring chain as well. Actually he has never pulled by as he is afraid to flog the bike for fear of seizure, but having seen it go on the flat, I suspect it would pull pretty hard on a climb, at least until it locks up!

Glen
Click to expand...


I just had to add this... at the IMS in NYC yesterday, they had a World Superbike racing bike on display... here is the chain, looks like a non O(or X)-ring chain to me... Andy?
530 x-ring chain on a mk111
 
Not really .
Cut that rope and watch the fellow fly ..[/quote]

Good response Ludwig... Had to laugh at that one!

I've got nothing to retort with!
 
Yep non O ring.

Before I leave this post it seems strange that all the promotion stuff and all the
bits on the interweb, even fron the chain people, all refer to X ring reducing the
drag and power loss from O ring. Reading some of the comments I would ask the
question, if there is negligable power loss why are they trying to reduce it?

Yes when they get hot the drag reduces, its not rcket stuff, the steel bits expand
giving the bits of rubber more space.

Having hancled hundreds if not thousands of chains I can tell you all the "sealed"
chains are stiff, and the act of bending this round the front sprocket will sap power.

Go back to basics....chain is the most effecient method of transmitting power.....
standard chain chain that is, even over belts, thats why they were used.

Andy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top