Identifying chain - 530 or 532 ? (RF900)

**yod** · 10th July 2007, 13:45

Searched and found a heap of good info on here re the conversion from 532 to 530 for my RF but:

how do i tell if its already been done or not? is it even possible or am i on holiday in take-a-wild-stab-in-the-dark-land?

i cant see any markings on the chain or the rear sprocket to indicate what it is

take it into a shop?

edit: shall I just change both sprockets and the chain?

**sugilite:Me** · 10th July 2007, 14:05

A 532 down to a 520 conversion is more common.
It's best to change chain and sprockets together.
Check around as there are some really well priced all in one 520 conversion kits out there.

**yod** · 10th July 2007, 14:13

found a lot of RF owners saying they've done the 532 to 530 conversion (eg http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/sh...ad.php?t=50515 )

im assuming (and I could be completely wrong) that the difference is the width/size of chain links and therefore the bigger the chain the more hp its designed to handle? I'm not suggesting a 520 or 530 won't handle the RFs output, just clarifying so I understand correctly...

**F5 Dave** · 10th July 2007, 14:37

Whip into JT sprockets website & you will find the conversions they recommend. I went to 530, just fine & a heap cheaper than 532, like really. Decent Chain like DID X ring will cope with the power no drama. The later Bandit 12 that has largely the same fitment as the RF is 530 (or sometimes called 50 series)

I went to 520 on my 750 but it was undergoing a weight-loss program. Hardly worth it on the RF.

Why do you want to know what size you have now? If you just want to replace the chain you will find when you take the chain off that the sprockets really are a lot more worn than you think I promise.

But otherwise the chain & sprocket usually have it written on them or the part number that you can find on websites depending on brand.

**yod** · 10th July 2007, 14:52

Originally Posted by F5 Dave

Why do you want to know what size you have now? If you just want to replace the chain you will find when you take the chain off that the sprockets really are a lot more worn than you think I promise.

But otherwise the chain & sprocket usually have it written on them or the part number that you can find on websites depending on brand.

well, correct me if I'm wrong but dont i need to know what size chain ive got so i can replace with the same size? dont the sprockets and chain match in terms of size?

i'm getting the idea here that most people replace chain and sprockets all at the same time hence it doesnt really matter what's on it now, as long as i replace with something suitable but i'd like to know cos y'know...i'd like to know

**ipod1098** · 10th July 2007, 15:05

clean chain (wd40) or similar, the size is stamped on link/s. same for sprocket.

**yod** · 10th July 2007, 15:15

Originally Posted by ipod1098

clean chain (wd40) or similar, the size is stamped on link/s. same for sprocket.

cheers...i did clean off a few links but couldnt find any markings....will look harder next time

**MSTRS:Me** · 10th July 2007, 15:42

It may be on the links, but definitely on the sprockets. If your chain is stuffed enough to require replacing, do the sprockets too.Otherwise the worn sprockets will just root that new chain double quick.
Get a 'conversion' kit - they run around $300.

**F5 Dave** · 10th July 2007, 15:49

Originally Posted by yod

. . i'm getting the idea here that most people replace chain and sprockets all at the same time hence it doesnt really matter what's on it now, . . .:

bingo. Replace both at once of the same type. The old ones may not look worn but really they are when you compare them to new.

Here you go, RF900 530 conversion using JT
front sprocket part no. 513 -15Tooth
Rear 816 -42T
chain 110 links of 50 pitch chain.

**sugilite:Me** · 10th July 2007, 15:52

Ran 520 conversion kits on 170 hp superbikes with no worries at all....DID x ring

**yod** · 10th July 2007, 16:34

Originally Posted by F5 Dave

bingo. Replace both at once of the same type. The old ones may not look worn but really they are when you compare them to new.

Here you go, RF900 530 conversion using JT
front sprocket part no. 513 -15Tooth
Rear 816 -42T
chain 110 links of 50 pitch chain.

hmmm....i think the parts fiche (which i swiped off some top bloke from around these parts) said the stock sprockets were 15/43....will have to check this....

Originally Posted by sugilite

Ran 520 conversion kits on 170 hp superbikes with no worries at all....DID x ring

so the 520 would be a cheaper kit but probably wear out a bit quicker since it's lighter?

**F5 Dave** · 10th July 2007, 16:46

Ahhhh, Misprint, sorry I read 43 but typed 42. Not that you'd probably notice much. Humble apologies, hate making mistakes.

Yeah 520 will def handle it, but should wear out quicker all things being the same. Back in the day when they were running 630 they did theorise that the weight of the chain help wear it out so everyone went to 530 & just made them better. 532 was an interim fix when power levels went up & chains had to catch up.

DID X ring I agree are great chains.
You get what you pay for & I'd rather pay once rather than twice.

**cowboyz** · 10th July 2007, 17:03

I have a 520 here if you want to stretch it to fit.

**Crisis management** · 10th July 2007, 17:12

For those of you wanting to micro analyse your chain!
Motorcycle chain is identified by a three digit system, the first digit being the pitch and the next two digits being the roller width. These dimensions are in 1/8ths of an inch (3.175mm) so... a 530 chain is 5/8ths of an inch (15.9mm)pitch and 3.0/8ths of an inch (9.5mm) roller width.
All the 5 series chains have the same roller diameter 1/4 of an inch (6.35mm) so only the roller width differs.
Happy measuring.