Can you believe I limped it home on that!

Has anyone considered you cannot test a sprocket that is case hardened using the Rockwell "C" scale?

Case hardening sprockets to .4 mm (.017") depth is a common engineering practice for hardening motorcycle sprockets. There is the engineering opinion that case hardening is preferred to "full" hardening. If you want a "full" hardened sprocket buy one made in Taiwan. Emgo sprockets are "full" hard.

Has anyone considered that the sprocket presented here was 5/8"x3/8", and compromised by turning off one side, when a perfectly acceptable 5/8"x1/4" sprocket was available? If it was a "full" hardened sprocket he would not have been able to turn it down as easily and most likely forced him to buy the proper 5/8"x1/4" sprocket. And even after removing half the hardening he still got 25,000 miles from the sprocket with what looks like a perfectly dry chain.

Has anyone taken a file and ran it across one of the teeth of these "made in England" sprockets? File hard (it will not take a cut) is equivalent of a Rockwell 62+ on the "C" scale. These "made in England" sprockets are certainly file hard, and then some.
HTH
John Healy

Here we go again with the 5/8 x 1/4 idea.

This was done for one reason, in the event of the "proper" 10B-1 chain, in a good quality being unavailable and only
Jap HD chain being offered by dealers, which is too wide and too heavy, people changed to 5/8 x 1/4 instead of
looking for the correct size. Then there are those that wanted a sealed chain, even wider, because they could not
be bothered to maintenance.

As said on here many times, bikes dont break chains they wear to the point of failure. Big heavy chains wear more
than light high quality chains, look the debacle that was 630, used for a year by major motorcycle manufacturers.

Norton Commandos had Renold 110056 chain and it was good. Renold of today is not as good, by a big margin. The
only chains I will sell for this is iwis, the best with a chromised pin (google it) used in automotive product primarily,
and Regina, not as good as iwis but better than the rest.

As for O ring chain, Nortons were not known for massive power output so lets put on a chain that will drag between
4-6 BHP out of the engine, massive arguments about amount of power loss but yes a power loss, notchy gearchange
etc etc all because the rider doesnt want to lube his chain.

These are classic bikes and all old Brit machines need regular TLC, if you want maintenance free riding get a modern
bike.

These bikes gave many miles of trouble free riding if looked after even with chains, not bloody belts, and just because
the quality of chains has dropped off a cliff there are still good chains out there. On the primary side I have sold some
Merc big pin chains for Commandos which work with no adaption needed, keeping the Commando as factory. Have I
sold many........no because unlike Maico and Laverda owners Commando owners are deeply suspicious of change,
something I find hard to understand with belt drive, starters, chain downsizing etc etc, and also suspicious of my
motives. I retired from the chain industry 16 years ago and now work to stop me going senile like my father, who
worked for Renold then ran iwis UK. I am a biker, Bandit 1200, Matchless 1950 G8, Yamaha DT125 1982, and soon
a Triumph T100. I realised the level of knowledge re chain was seriously lacking and now do talks on chain to clubs
and still sell chain in a small way. I am not rich and never will be but I sleep at night. Nobody wants to do chain as
there is no profit in it. Dealers now go for cheap nasty product that will make the most profit and very few have the
first idea about chain.

I read the forums and weep but I also thank the people that do know me and purchase from me, you know who you
are and it is funny to see that some buy chain for one use and then recommend belts in another on the same machine.

I will be here for you if you need me and will try to get my grandsons to take over, if they dont when I pop my clogs,
and I intend to use my brain until I do, the Chain Man will be no more.

As a final point it is funny to see that Harley owners are rushing back to chain from belts, not only due to the fact the
belts are not as good as they seem but the cost of replacement is huge.

Andy

CHAIN IS THE MOST EFFICIENT METHOD OF TRANSMITTING POWER

Andychain has stated and I quote... CHAIN IS THE MOST EFFICIENT FORM OF POWER TRANSMISSION...... Clearly Andychain has never learnt the art of qualifying statements because as it stands his statement is a load of B******S. Unless oif course it was awind up.......
Now IF Andychain had stated for example.....A power transmission chain being employed CORRECTLY as per the chain manufacturers design manual will have an efficiency of approx 98% .......then no one could argue with it because it is FACT. This was proven by testing in the late 1920s by the U.K. National Physical Laboratory who tested a 1 inch pitch Renold bush roller chain No.7103. It was employed on a 23t driveR wheel and a 57t driveN wheel with a nominal centre distance of 36 inches. The power being trasmitted was 25 H.P. The 23t driveR wheel was rotating at 900 RPM and the 57t driveN wheel at 363 RPM. The drive was enclosed in a Renold Standard Chain Case with lubrication by a Renold Standard OIL pump driven from the slow speed shaft by cycle chain No. 70040 0.5 inch pitch. The duration of the test was 6 hours and the results state ' Mechanical efficiency lies between 98.40 % and 98.90.%'.
Thus testing has proved that a power transmission chain CFAN BE over 98 % effifient if it is employed CORRECTLY but we on our motor cycles have NEVER employed our power transmission chains CORRECTLY. Well I and friends of my youth never did anyway.....
The design life of a Renold chain is stated to be a MINIMUM of 15,000 hours. The design life of a Gates toothed belt is of the order of 20,000 hours and I suspect considerably higher for a Gates Polychain Carbon belt. Thus if your Commando primary and secondary chains were CORRECTLY employed then at 40 mph, 24 hours a day 7 days a week with a wif of throttle you would cover 600,000 miles before possibly needing to replace your chains. But we DO NOT employ our chains CORRECTLY and we swop chain life for employing them incorrectly. We employ them at rediculously high chain speeds with totally inadequate lubrication whilst shoving through them vastly greater power than they were designed to carry if being employed correctly.......
Mr Jack Williams in his design note book from the 1950 for the AJS 7R and E95 motors stated that a drip fed primary chain is no more than 90% efficient and lower still at very high linear chain speeds. He also stated that he had requested oil bath lubrication with the lower run of the chain submerged in oil when at rest.Thus every old Manx / G50 /7R pounding /vibrating along Sulby Straight etc in the Isle of Man etc was throwing away in heaing up the world LOTS of horse power. For a 500 producig say 40 h.p. a chain efficiency of 90 % means a power loss of 4 h.p which is the equivelent of having THREE 1000 watt electric fires heating up the World. Luckily the things were air cooled........ In the 50s and 60s I kicked a few knackered primary chains into hedges etc after a TT walking back from Mr Crows farm wall at Bishops Court to Kirk Michael.... Guess why the 'classic' racing boys employ toothed belts for priumary drive hese days!! We did on our old Atlas in the early 80s and would NEVER used a primary chain again ......
Andychain and others who post on this web site should at least TRY to learn something about a subject before spounting off to the World. On the subject of motor cycle primary chains for example people might like to read page 47 of the book 'Speed and how to obtain it' which states and I quote ............................
.......' It is not always realised what a hard working component the primary chain is. It runs at very high linear speed and, although it comprises a series of plain bearings, it is usually given nothing like enough oil either to lubricate these bearing properly or cool them. Under the best conditions a chain is a most efficient form of power transmission, but even so it absorbs about 2 % of the input power in internal friction. This lost power is converted to heat. The wastage with an inadequately lubricated chain is considerably higher so that several horse power may well be used purely in heating up the chain'.
Some of us older citizens in our youth learnt very early on how hot motor cycle chains get..... I can still remember the pain as I used my finger to check the primary chain tension of John Taylors G50 after a couple of into the 90s laps of the I.O.M. in a Manx G.P. practice session many decades ago... My brain registered the pain and I never made that mistake again......
I note as I look at my old Renold Motorcycle CHAIN Maintenance booklet that it states and once again I quote......' An exposed chain which is not fitted with an efficient oil feed must be removed from the machine every 1,000 miles (or oftener in bad weather), immersed in a paraffin bath and scrubbed perfectly clean. After the paraffin has dried off the chain should be immersed in chain lubricant ...........' Ok so you use O or X ring chain but chains also need lubricant on the outer of the rollers to absorb some of the shock loads as each roller engages with a sprocket tooth .....
Looking at pages 62 and 63 of a Renold publication i note it states for various lubrication systems.....
DRIP FEED................Up to 50 h.p. For chain speeds up to 1,200 ft per min.
OIL BATH.................Up to 50 h.p. For chain speeds up to 2,000 ft per min.
OIL PUMP.................No limitation.
On my Dommy for example at 7,000 rpm primary chain speed was around 6,000 ft per min......... In my youth after a couple opf gentle slow laps(hah hah) around 'The Island' I did not think to myself 'Golly gosh look at that bronze coloured gunge covering the chain.....I guess the chain is incorrectly lubricated......' The poor thing was moving so fast it simply was not lubricated an in my young days when Barry Sheene was racing his Fathers Bultacos friends racing them (and Montesas) would employ Redex in their chain case so the primary chain actually received some form of lubricant and did not fail before the end of a race ......and Mr Phil Heath who was part of the team developing the Norton pressed steel oil bath chain case in the 1930s suggesated to me that the correct lubricant was a straight engine oil of SAE 10 or 20. I still have a couple of new unopened 1 gallon cans of both SAE 10 and 20 knats p*ss.......Think they cost me 50 pence each many decades ago......
A Rotary Norton Service Manager once told me that there are many Norton rotaries with their rear chains enclosed within a proper oil bath that had covered over 80,000 miles and they were still on their original Renold GP chain and sprockets with lots of life still left in them.......He qualified his statement by adding that the owners kept them filled with oil and very quickly replaced any oil seal that had failed. Of course enclosed rear chains do not give the sporty race bike look.... do they !!.......
If anyone wants a copy of the telegram sent to Renold giving the chain test results send me your e mail
address.
Interesting reading on chain...The Institute of Mechanical Engineers ...General Discussion on Lubrication. 1937. Vol 2. Pages 50-54. 'The lubrication of chains with particular reference to transmission chains of the roller type'. Mr R. Coulson of the Renold and Coventry Chain Company Ltd. For a motor cycle related chain article see Motor Cycle Sport April 1976 page 130.........
Please let us try to stick to facts rather than fiction.

I stand humbly corrected.

Just hope nobody wants a chain for a Norton in the near future.

Belts are fine depending what use they are put to just as the inch pitch chain used in the example.

When I see an inch pitch chain on a bike I will then eat my words in the meantime as I talk a load
of bollocks I will retire from the forum

John H,
Thank you for the response. I don’t know why there is a discrepancy between “old stock” and current production in the test method, but I do have at my disposal another hardness tester, which is a Leeb hardness tester. It was the least desirable method due to the size of the part and my fellow coworkers in the Metallurgy lab did not recommend this test device because of this reason and the odd profiles encountered on a sprocket. These Leeb testers are used mainly for large parts. Other test methods would be of a destructive test which is more labor intensive and gets frowned upon if its for govey job work. I will try your file test. The sprocket presented was in fact mentioned that I removed the outside surface earlier up in the thread, and I also purchased an Atlas sprocket if you care to re read. Yes I am the first to admit that I did not address the oil to the chain often enough. This bike is my workhorse and I have neglected the job. :roll: I am contemplating installing a scottoiler system, which I just monitor the oil reservoir. I am wondering if anyone else is using this type of oiler. To be honest I used the X-ring chain conversion for the low maintenance aspect as I do lots of miles with this bike.
Ludwig had an alloy sprocket if I recall. I wonder what kind of mileage he got out of his setup?
I got to find him on another forum and ask.
Cheers,
Thomas
CNN

andychain said:

I stand humbly corrected.

Just hope nobody wants a chain for a Norton in the near future.

Belts are fine depending what use they are put to just as the inch pitch chain used in the example.

When I see an inch pitch chain on a bike I will then eat my words in the meantime as I talk a load
of bollocks I will retire from the forum

Click to expand...

I, for one, hope that you reconsider retirement from this forum. Whether you are right or wrong, your
Contributions to this forum are appreciated and that you are being called a liar speaks more about the character of the other individual than about you and was uncalled for.

Andy - Please don't let Horsebeater get you down. He failed "works well with others" in kindergarten.

Time for one of our moderators to step in here PLEASE...

Another example of a loud mouthed, none value adding wind bag, potentially driving away a perfectly good forum contributor.

I agree with that statement, I get a visual of someone sitting in an armchair smoking a pipe, sniffing burnt Castrol R, listening to Sound Stories of the TT races....covered in cobwebs..........just me thinking out loud............but it could be true!....

Either that or a spotty 16 year old cutting and pasting the same 5 posts over and over again.

Andy the chain man and beltdriveman in a cage match (wonder what ever happened to belt drive man - he really got people fired up but did know his stuff )

seriously I have Andy's chains in all three of my laverda's (primary, cams and final) and in my Norton final drives - excellent chains and can say nothing but positive words about his contributions here and over in the laverda forum - don't let some *#$#%* run you off Andy

CanukNortonNut said:

John H,
Thank you for the response. I don’t know why there is a discrepancy between “old stock” and current production in the test method, but I do have at my disposal another hardness tester, which is a Leeb hardness tester. It was the least desirable method due to the size of the part and my fellow coworkers in the Metallurgy lab did not recommend this test device because of this reason and the odd profiles encountered on a sprocket. These Leeb testers are used mainly for large parts. Other test methods would be of a destructive test which is more labor intensive and gets frowned upon if its for govey job work. I will try your file test. The sprocket presented was in fact mentioned that I removed the outside surface earlier up in the thread, and I also purchased an Atlas sprocket if you care to re read. Yes I am the first to admit that I did not address the oil to the chain often enough. This bike is my workhorse and I have neglected the job. :roll: I am contemplating installing a scottoiler system, which I just monitor the oil reservoir. I am wondering if anyone else is using this type of oiler. To be honest I used the X-ring chain conversion for the low maintenance aspect as I do lots of miles with this bike.
Ludwig had an alloy sprocket if I recall. I wonder what kind of mileage he got out of his setup?
I got to find him on another forum and ask.
Cheers,
Thomas
CNN

Click to expand...

Thomas,
Before I went to a belt final I used aluminum rear sprockets with a 530 o-ring chain. I used to go through one rear sprocket every season. 8 to 10,000 miles. The lubrication was sometimes spotty -like normal. Jim

. Clearly Andychain has never learnt the art of qualifying statements because as it stands his statement is a load of B******S.

Click to expand...

Mr. Leadbeater, your above is not only an unqualified but unsupported personal attack, prohibited by Jerry Doe in this forum.

Fast Eddie said:

Time for one of our moderators to step in here PLEASE...

Click to expand...

Yes, I think it is.

mikegray660 said:

(wonder what ever happened to belt drive man

Click to expand...

I think you will find J.M. Leadbeater and beltdriveman are one and the same person.

Ha - I think your right LAB!!

L.A.B. said:

mikegray660 said:

(wonder what ever happened to belt drive man

Click to expand...

I think you will find J.M. Leadbeater and beltdriveman are one and the same person.

Click to expand...

comnoz said:

Thomas,
Before I went to a belt final I used aluminum rear sprockets with a 530 o-ring chain. I used to go through one rear sprocket every season. 8 to 10,000 miles. The lubrication was sometimes spotty -like normal. Jim

Click to expand...

Thanks Jim,
"The lubrication was sometimes spotty -like normal. Jim[/quote]"

Yes I have been accused of that as well. :mrgreen:
Cheers,
Thomas
CNN

L.A.B. said:

Fast Eddie said:

Time for one of our moderators to step in here PLEASE...

Click to expand...

Yes, I think it is.

Click to expand...

If you ban this leadbeater guy then where am I going to go for a good dose of condescending sanctimonious diatribe?.. Have you seriously thought about that...? :lol:

o0norton0o said:

If you ban this leadbeater guy then where am I going to go for a good dose of condescending sanctimonious diatribe?.. Have you seriously thought about that...? :lol:

Click to expand...

Yes, I have, and he hasn't been banned, although a 'communication' has been sent, so we shall see what happens.

Andy please dont leave over this bloke he clearly has a problem !i find his posts very funny he trotts out stuff that have been to death in the past as if he is the first person to bring it up!! cheers baz

Dispite the previous conflict,

I am back on topic with a tidbit...
1. " Made In England" sprocket easily cut with a hand file.
2. Side note FWIW: My spare sprocket, made by AFAM for one of those 3rd world bikes (Ducati), tested with my Ames hardness tester, showed 62RC just like the OEM Norton Motorcycle (factory) sprocket.

http://www.afam.com/html/product-catalogue/index.html