|
Gearing |
Post Reply 
|
| Author |
 Share Topic Printable Version Delicious Digg Facebook Furl Google Boomarks Google Buzz MySpace Newsvine reddit StumbleUpon Translate Twitter Windows Live Yahoo Bookmarks Topic Search  Topic Options
|
fastestr1 
Newbie 
Joined: February/23/2003 Location: United States Online Status: Offline Posts: 39 |
 Post Options
 Quote Reply
 Topic: GearingPosted: March/17/2003 at 1:39am |
|
Does it matter if you use a 16/46 17/49 or a 18/52? Will the bike pull the same if the final gear ratio is the same?
|
|
|
Just 1 of a few zx12's racing at 60" in the Tx shootout
|
|
 |
|
|
BA
Senior Member 
Joined: February/07/2003 Online Status: Offline Posts: 20 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: April/16/2003 at 6:00pm |
|
Hey there FastestR1, .....from what I've heard and talked to people about, there IS a small mechanical/leverage advantage when going with 'more' angle on the top side of the chain. ie....larger rear sprocket. (with final gear ratio's all being the same) Supposedly this would help to some degree in keeping the front end down. How much of an advantage, hell, I don't know. Just don't forget to factor in the wheelbase change too. I'd rather have the WB than some unknown/unquantitative advantage of more chain angle.
|
|
|
|
|
fastestr1
Newbie
Joined: February/23/2003 Location: United States Online Status: Offline Posts: 39 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: April/16/2003 at 11:50pm |
|
It was a roadracer that told about the angle but that was acouple of years ago.
|
|
|
Just 1 of a few zx12's racing at 60" in the Tx shootout
|
|
|
|
|
BA
Senior Member
Joined: February/07/2003 Online Status: Offline Posts: 20 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: April/19/2003 at 11:53pm |
|
My bad, I meant to state that the advantage would only be off the starting line of course. Per your question though, the bike would pull the same. (assuming no one wants to get nit-picky about frictional losses of a 16T vs 18T front! :)
|
|
|
|
|
H8TOBU
Senior Member
Joined: April/18/2003 Online Status: Offline Posts: 13 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: April/22/2003 at 8:51pm |
|
I was just talking to a friend today about this and without a Dyno you can't prove or disprove anything, but our thoughts lean tward 16/whatever. You go back to the rotating mass argument here. These are smaller sprockets and far fewer links on the chain. When it comes to rotating mass less is best. The same argument could be made for a 15 tooth sprocket but that's silly talk. Chain radius problems. |
|
|
Always cheat; always win. The only unfair fight is the one you lose
|
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
