Just put in a new renthal 525 chain on my 92 750, had to get a master
link from the bike shop as I have no tool to press on the one renthal
gave me. I also replaced the front sprocket which was slightly larger
in circumferance but 2 more teeth. I rolled down a hill with no
problem but when I put it in gear, I heard some clink and clank than
the chain was on the ground. ****, as I'm writing this I realized I
didn't tighten the chain tensioner on the swing arm. I guess I was too
anxious to get goin, that'll learn me...

bo jangles wrote:
> Just put in a new renthal 525 chain on my 92 750, had to get a master
> link from the bike shop as I have no tool to press on the one renthal
> gave me. I also replaced the front sprocket which was slightly larger
> in circumferance but 2 more teeth. I rolled down a hill with no
> problem but when I put it in gear, I heard some clink and clank than
> the chain was on the ground. ****, as I'm writing this I realized I
> didn't tighten the chain tensioner on the swing arm. I guess I was too
> anxious to get goin, that'll learn me...

do you think it was too loose or too tight? just curious...

On Apr 26, 8:04*pm, paul c <toledobythe...@oohay.ac> wrote:
> bo jangles wrote:
> > Just put in a new renthal 525 chain on my 92 750, had to get a master
> > link from the bike shop as I have no tool to press on the one renthal
> > gave me. I also replaced the front sprocket which was slightly larger
> > in circumferance but 2 more teeth. I rolled down a hill with no
> > problem but when I put it in gear, I heard some clink and clank than
> > the chain was on the ground. ****, as I'm writing this I realized I
> > didn't tighten the chain tensioner on the swing arm. I guess I was too
> > anxious to get goin, that'll learn me...
>
> do you think it was too loose or too tight? *just curious...


I think it pulled the tire in than got bound up, probably too loose

bo jangles <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I also replaced the front sprocket which was slightly larger
> in circumferance but 2 more teeth.

Ye Gods. Up two teeth on the gearbox sprocket? It won't pull the skin
off curdled coffee now.


--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F Triumph Street Triple
Suzuki TS250ER GN250 Damn, back to six bikes!
Try Googling before asking a damn silly question.
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com

(E-Mail Removed) (The Older Gentleman) wrote in
news:1jhlhz0.iytmf01cc4yyoN%totallydeadmailbox@yah oo.co.uk:

> bo jangles <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> I also replaced the front sprocket which was slightly larger
>> in circumferance but 2 more teeth.
>
> Ye Gods. Up two teeth on the gearbox sprocket? It won't pull the skin
> off curdled coffee now.
>
>

I would imagine that if it is low geared like most, it won`t be as bad as
that. I almost always jump up one tooth on every thing but a racer for
easier revs at speed anyway. haven`t had one be too over geared yet.
Usually gives some milage improvement also. KB

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: (E-Mail Removed) ---

On Apr 26, 4:40*pm, bo jangles <mrbojanglesro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I rolled down a hill with no problem but when I put it in gear, I heard some
> clink and clank than the chain was on the ground. ****, as I'm writing
> this I realized I didn't tighten the chain tensioner on the swing arm.

Under power, the slack is in the bottom run of chain, but when
coasting, the slack is in the top run of chain so it can come off the
front sprocket.

I've only had the chain come off the sprockets twice in 50 years of
riding, once was in a motocross race when I was slowing down for the
checkered flag and the chain slack (normal on a motocrosser) shifted
from bottom to top...

(Special message for Mr. Neil J. Murray, editor of Foodnews follows
below

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

**** you, limey cocksucker.

On Apr 27, 6:04*am, Kevin Bottorff <kevyNOS...@netins.net> wrote:

> I would imagine that if it is low geared like most, it won`t be as bad as
> that. I almost always jump up one tooth on every thing but a racer for
> easier revs at speed anyway. haven`t had one be too over geared yet.
> Usually gives some milage improvement also.

The usual rule of thumb for Japanese motorcycles is to install a front
sprocket with *one* more tooth or a rear sprocket with *three* less
teeth.

But Ducatis tend to have rather tall first gears so the transmission
will be more useful on the racetrack, so the general rule of adding
one tooth to the front sprocket doesn't apply.

(Special message for Mr. Neil J. Murray of Foodnews follows below

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

**** you, you obnoxious Limey cocksucker!

Kevin Bottorff <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I would imagine that if it is low geared like most, it won`t be as bad as
> that. I almost always jump up one tooth on every thing but a racer for
> easier revs at speed anyway. haven`t had one be too over geared yet.
> Usually gives some milage improvement also. KB

It might, yes, on some low geared bikes, but a 1992 750 (whatever it is)
is unlikely to be that.

One tooth, yeah, done it myself. Two teeth? Geddoudahere.


--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F Triumph Street Triple
Suzuki TS250ER GN250 Damn, back to six bikes!
Try Googling before asking a damn silly question.
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com

On Apr 27, 12:08*pm, Mark Olson <ols...@tiny.invalid> wrote:

> There are a lot of people who think it's automatically true that loweringRPMs
> is better. *There's a good reason why the engineers who picked the ratios picked
> the ones they did. *And it is not true that lowering RPMs at cruise always
> results in better gas mileage.

The problem is that aerodynamic drag is a velocity squared factor.
Aerodynamic drag is four times as great at 80 mph as it is a 40 mph,
so EIGHT times as much horsepower is required to ride at the favored
highway speed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Special message for Mr. Neil J. Murray of Foodnews follows below


\


\


\


\


\


\


\


\


\


\


\


\


\


\


\


\


\


**** you, you obnoxious Limey cocksucker!

` <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> The problem is that aerodynamic drag is a velocity squared factor.
> Aerodynamic drag is four times as great at 80 mph as it is a 40 mph,
> so EIGHT times as much horsepower is required to ride at the favored
> highway speed.

Duh.

--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F Triumph Street Triple
Suzuki TS250ER GN250 Damn, back to six bikes!
Try Googling before asking a damn silly question.
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com