Your guess is as good as mine . . . I run -1 up front, and my rear is stock . . . the bike accelerates and runs just fine

I don't see how -2 could cause any damage, but then again, I'm no expert . . .

 

I don't know the correct answer for sure, but I don't see how it could be bad. I have done it before and never had any issues, here is an article on it, i don't think it mentioned stress though.

http://www.sportrider.com/tech/146_0008_gearing/

 

if the front sprocket is to small the chain will wear out prematurely because it has such a small pivot point to get around. -1 seems to be a pretty common change from the stock config. tho.

 

Your better off going with a -1/+3 gearing, A 14t is going to put more pressure on the chain and it will ware out faster.

 

Its an engineering fact that if you use less than 14 teeth you will f**k up the chain. It can't wrap around such a small sprocket (pitch centre diameter is too small). All my textbooks state this fact.

 

All my textbooks state this fact.

Funniest answer yet. cbr600rr 101 class in college?

 

This is sort of a non-issue. Why go 14t if you can already reach very low final drive ratios that are useless for anthing but stunting with just -1/+whatever. It would seem to me that no more stresses on the output shaft are created with 14t. There's no more torque on that output shaft with 14t and the chain can make that turn easily. There is a bit more stress on the chain and sprocket because less teeth are having share the load of pulling the chain. I think more than any other reason not to go less than 15t is the effect of changing the handling of the bike under power. The different angle from sprocket radius to sprocket radius in relation to the axle, swingarm pivot, and output shaft. Also the clearance fron the chain to the top and bottom of the swingarm is reduced.

 

I think the OP is looking for some one to show pictures or be able to tell of their actual experience with 14t up front hurting their bike. Any takers?

 

Ive gone with the 15/45 520 setup and the 600rr is just weak. I want a 1000rr. Im just saying its quick and snappy but theres a hell lot of more power needed.

 

if you need a hell of alot more power than you 600, you are one hell of a rider, my hat comes off to ya!!

a couple of options for ya then, want more power , change the pistions and cam and work the head... 2.buy a thou, 3.turbo, 4.all it the adove with nitrious... go hard ... :01_thumbu

 

Nice one, raptor. So in simpler terms, your chain and sprockets will wear out quicker, though I'm thinking this may be more of a serious worry on a bike capable of a bit more than the RR's 45ft/lbs of torque. No worrys about your output shaft seal, though.

 

Yeah, I think it will wear out quicker and there may be a chance that, should the chain lock up proper, it could jump off the sprocket. But thats just me guessing.

 

Why not go with a 15t front and maybe +4 or 5 in the rear? Wouldn't putting more teeth in the rear do the same thing as dropping teeth in the front?

 

believe it or not... your gearing will effect the power your bike makes, getting to the ground. the potential power loss of a 14t front does not counter balance the gain from the gearing increase.

my proof... a -1/+9 geared 600RR on the dyno.

 

So in short, you're saying that going down 2t in the front is more detrimental than going up say, 6t in the back? Am I understanding you right? Or, I'll put it this way. Changing your front sprocket will affect things more than your rear sprocket?

 

Retard question I know, but I dont care.... How come spockets make you lose power but make it easier to wheelie?

 

When you change your final drive ratios the power output represented in levels of torgue does go up in the lower RPM realm but your horsepower numbers go down essentially dropping your total linear output in final drive. Gains in the lower RPM are negated by the total energy loss on the higher RPM range due to the high internal engine velocities at redline drop-off. Most of the energy expenditures created from the engine become ranked in 1st heat and then 2nd kinetic (motion) where as with the stock final drive, these energy representations are more evenly distributed on a linear curve, and not inducing a cyclic redundant energy loop.


true story.

yeah sure!

 

What did he just say.

 

I went with a 15t front and it worked out good for me. The bike feels a little more responsive.

 

Been running a 520 14T front sprocket on my RR since I turned it into a track bike almost 2 years ago. Allowed me to run the lower gearing (with standard length chain) needed for UK circuits I ride at. Now run 2 extra links in it to give clearance & gearing I want with 190/60 or 190/55 rear tyres. So run like 14/46 with 190/55 rear for Donington GP and Oulton Park. Could run taller gearing but would be in between gears on the straights and don't have time to be working out how many downshifts are needed for each corner. Plus the bike runs sweeter revving it's nuts off.

I look after the chain on the bike and it's not showing any signs of extra wear - there are still no significant tightspots which affect adjustment, and it still puts lots of power to the back wheel. And in reality it's working the 520 chain harder than standard 525 due to smaller contact area plus it's putting a lot more power (120+) through it compared to a standard CBR.

 

I think it's more of a concern on bigger bikes.