Sidewinder Sprockets

[Amber Lamps]

Originally Posted by 6doublefive321

Here's a thought. Lets say two guys have identical bikes. One guy commutes on the interstate back and forth 20 miles and averages about 80 mph on the trip. We'll call this guy Tigger. Another guy, rides 20 miles to work, but cuts across a mountain, and averages 60 mph on his commute. We'll call this guy Warputer. Now, Tigger, since he rides on the interstate, likes his gearing. If you don't believe me, ask him. Warputer, on the other hand, wants a little more torque since he avoids the highway, and stays lower in the rpm range during his commute. Warputer makes a change, which results in 20% change in the gearing towards the lower side. Now, even though the two bikes have significantly different gearing, they are running at the same rpm range through the commute.

The point being, if someone lowered their gearing, they are probably riding at lower speeds, and any additional wear and tear from increased engine speeds will most likely be negligible.

In the end, gearing is just like jacket designs, oil, bike brands, and women. It is personal preference. No one is right, and no one is wrong.

Ya know,I've been ignoring this post as it's from the Neo-Nazi member of the forum but since you all have "Zieg Heiled" along with him,here goes...
I would find it hard to believe that you all don't see the fundimental flaw in this line of reasoning but I have to consider what and whom I'm dealing with here; my total argument revolves around keeping my bike a more all around package. Not strictly for this imaginary commute,not strictly as a canyon carving race bike wanna be and not as a street drag racer.

I originately was simply trying to show that if you use aluminum sprockets and were keeping your bike for over 2 years,a $159 Ti sprocket with a "lifetime" guarantee would be a good deal. Someone countered with the premise of gearing changes to prove my supposition false and here we are. I honestly consider gearing changes pointless unless you are using your bike for some specific purpose that requires it like racing,stunting,top speed runs,etc. I absolutely don't see any reason for multiple gearing changes on a street bike. I would like to think that the person making these changes woud pick his sprocket sizes based on extensive data and not in a "willy-nilly" ,hit or miss fashion.

The engine produces a certain amount of hp(horse power) and torque at any given rpm. It also produces a given amount of vibration and burns a given amount of fuel. The job of the transmission, gear ratio and engine management system is to put that power to the ground considering all of the given parameters. The design team takes all the engine data and designs a trans/gearing package that will utilize that particular engine's characteristics to produce the best compromise to accomodate ALL of that model's intended purposes. To provide the rider with the best all around package for that models intended purpose.

I guess what I mostly fail to comprehend is why you don't just run a lower gear in whatever scenario you're putting forth. If a gearing change "fixes" some supposed deficiency in your bike's power output,wouldn't simply using a lower gear suffice? The point is to be at a certain rpm at a certain speed to achieve maximun acceleration,isn't it?

Lastly,there is such a thing as right and wrong. Some oils are demostratably better than others. Some bikes are better than others,especially in certain catagories. Some types of women are more attractive than others. Some jacket designs offer more protection. Period.

[marko138]

Tiggs....Wouldn't gearing changes be making the bike more suitable to the individual user? So you want an all around package. Myself, I dont commute or ride highways on my bike. Ever. I just don't do it. I ride back roads and tracks. Period. At the track...I hit 4th gear once. To me...I dont need the top end. I'd rather have better accleration down low. So I'll sacrifice the top speed and lower RPM's at cruising speed.

[Amber Lamps]

Originally Posted by marko138

Tiggs....Wouldn't gearing changes be making the bike more suitable to the individual user? So you want an all around package. Myself, I dont commute or ride highways on my bike. Ever. I just don't do it. I ride back roads and tracks. Period. At the track...I hit 4th gear once. To me...I dont need the top end. I'd rather have better accleration down low. So I'll sacrifice the top speed and lower RPM's at cruising speed.

True enough. Besides,your bike is a little different in that, when I had a pre-fuel injection bike, I also changed my gearing for the same reasons. My '95 FZR1000 had maybe a 2000 rpm peak hp "plateau". My bike now has a much longer usable area making gearing changes unnecessary,IMHO. Now that bikes have Fi and sophisticated computer systems that take into account; rpm,speed,throttle position,gear,etc,I just don't think it's needed on a street bike. Anyway, will someone please agree with me that if you use aluminum sprockets and are keeping your bike for a few years,that a $159 lifetime sprocket makes sense? Considering that was my original arguement before I got dragged off into this senseless debate.

[6doublefive321]

Originally Posted by TIGGER

Ya know,I've been ignoring this post as it's from the Neo-Nazi member of the forum but since you all have "Zieg Heiled" along with him,here goes...
I would find it hard to believe that you all don't see the fundimental flaw in this line of reasoning but I have to consider what and whom I'm dealing with here; my total argument revolves around keeping my bike a more all around package. Not strictly for this imaginary commute,not strictly as a canyon carving race bike wanna be and not as a street drag racer.

I originately was simply trying to show that if you use aluminum sprockets and were keeping your bike for over 2 years,a $159 Ti sprocket with a "lifetime" guarantee would be a good deal. Someone countered with the premise of gearing changes to prove my supposition false and here we are. I honestly consider gearing changes pointless unless you are using your bike for some specific purpose that requires it like racing,stunting,top speed runs,etc. I absolutely don't see any reason for multiple gearing changes on a street bike. I would like to think that the person making these changes woud pick his sprocket sizes based on extensive data and not in a "willy-nilly" ,hit or miss fashion.

The engine produces a certain amount of hp(horse power) and torque at any given rpm. It also produces a given amount of vibration and burns a given amount of fuel. The job of the transmission, gear ratio and engine management system is to put that power to the ground considering all of the given parameters. The design team takes all the engine data and designs a trans/gearing package that will utilize that particular engine's characteristics to produce the best compromise to accomodate ALL of that model's intended purposes. To provide the rider with the best all around package for that models intended purpose.

I guess what I mostly fail to comprehend is why you don't just run a lower gear in whatever scenario you're putting forth. If a gearing change "fixes" some supposed deficiency in your bike's power output,wouldn't simply using a lower gear suffice? The point is to be at a certain rpm at a certain speed to achieve maximun acceleration,isn't it?

Lastly,there is such a thing as right and wrong. Some oils are demostratably better than others. Some bikes are better than others,especially in certain catagories. Some types of women are more attractive than others. Some jacket designs offer more protection. Period.

Originally Posted by TIGGER

True enough. Besides,your bike is a little different in that, when I had a pre-fuel injection bike, I also changed my gearing for the same reasons. My '95 FZR1000 had maybe a 2000 rpm peak hp "plateau". My bike now has a much longer usable area making gearing changes unnecessary,IMHO. Now that bikes have Fi and sophisticated computer systems that take into account; rpm,speed,throttle position,gear,etc,I just don't think it's needed on a street bike. Anyway, will someone please agree with me that if you use aluminum sprockets and are keeping your bike for a few years,that a $159 lifetime sprocket makes sense? Considering that was my original arguement before I got dragged off into this senseless debate.

I don't see a fundamental flaw in the reasoning, and you yourself somewhat agreed to the concept. If, in my riding, I use a different part of the power band, above or below the bike's sweet spot, I will probably make a gearing change. If not, I won't.

And to answer your question, I fully agree that a $159 lifetime sprocket is a marketing gimmick, and for 90% of the riders out there, there would never be a payback. God, I'd like to know how much money has been made over the years because something was sold with a lifetime warranty.

[Dnyce]

Originally Posted by TIGGER

1. what the fuck is a "Veyron"? Is it anything like a moron?
2. Well,if you read my post,I was talking about ALUMINUM sprockets making a $159 Ti sprocket economically feasable and specifically said that it doesn't make sense to a steel sprocket user. Guys that purchase Alum sprockets care about weight savings. BTW most people only change gear ratio once.
3. I mentioned front sprockets to agree that $89 was way too much since fronts don't "seem" to wear out.
4. then why fuck with it? I was merely illustrating that running your bike at higher rpm can have adverse effects which include; lower gas mileage, increased engine wear,increased vibration,inacurate speedometer,confused engine/fuel mapping,etc. Like I said,I ride my bike all the time in various capacities and don't want to narrow it's focus further by modifying the gear ratios.

The engineers spend hours,days,weeks developing the trans,engine control computer and gearing to find an all around good working compromise. For example,an engine might have a definitive rise in vibration at 7000 pm. So the designers set the trans and gearing so that at 70 mph the engine spins at let's say 6500 rpm in 6th gear thus avoiding dead hands and feet after a freeway jaunt. After you installed sprockets with two more teeth in the rear and one less in the front. It spins at 8500 70mph in 6th gear. Now you have sleeping hands and you've lost 5mpg in fuel economy. Yea it's real smart to set your bike up for that one in a hundred rides "Veyron" race and sacrifice your day to day comfort and over all capabilities. Sure.

just my two cents- most guys that really care about the weight savings of a aluminum sprocket are also guys that make gearing changes more often than a commuter guy. those are also usually the same guys that add a slip on, then a full sys, pc, stacks, etc etc. at each modification step, the bike makes more power, and/or the powerband changes, so if you had the perfect ratio when you started-now you need to change it. i dont know how sprocket changes mess with your mapping tho. could be true, but dont make sense. and you missed the one reason that negates the reasons you mentioned-more horsepower! lol

veyrons are sweet, but its more like a 1 in 10000 ride, an anyway i think it was a joke. as far as the dead hands thing-speed limits vary, and are rarely payed attn to as riders are usually more concerned with the flow of traffic. for instance, in a cycle world test of a new bike, they found that right at the cruising speed of 70mph-the engine was in its "really buzzy" spot. guess the designers fell asleep that time lol-and thats not the first time thats happened

you say you dont want to narrow its focus-but actually by changing sprockets based on what you're doing-you can maximize your bikes potential at the track, canyon, stunting, commute and dragstrip. sprocket change takes like 15-20min, lift it up, chain adj's, axle, 6-8nuts, reverse process done deal.


im not gonna comment on the ti sprocket for my personal use, like i already mentioned, as the engine makes more power, the gear ratio needs to change. plus i like to experiment.

[Amber Lamps]

There's only one thing I want to know...when the FUCK did I
become the forum commuter? Why does everyone reference me that way? I club raced for quite a few years. I appear in two stunt videos. More than half of my bike's miles are put on on back roads. I even went to the dragstrip every Wed for a while for test and tune when I had my 'Busa.

Motherfuckers,I never said that a $159 sprocket was perfect for everyone did I? I said if you use aluminum sprockets,are keeping your bike for a while AND if you're not changing your sprockets all the time like some people a Ti sprocket makes sense. Plus sprockets do not produce horsepower,Jesus. They merely move the hp up and down the speedo in a certain gear,at a given rpm.As far as the "lifetime" warranty goes,I've also said it was crap BUT if the Ti sprocket only last as long as 4 aluminum sprockets,IT STILL PAID FOR ITSELF! Not everyone enjoys changing sprockets when they get home from the "commute" so they can go stunting,or ride the back roads,or hit the dragstrip. I can do anything with my bike adequately for my needs but then I'm not dragging my tail doing 12oclocks,dragging knees on public roads or dragracing my friends on city streets... apparently,I'm not as cool as you guys!

[6doublefive321]

Originally Posted by TIGGER

True enough. Besides,your bike is a little different in that, when I had a pre-fuel injection bike, I also changed my gearing for the same reasons. My '95 FZR1000 had maybe a 2000 rpm peak hp "plateau". My bike now has a much longer usable area making gearing changes unnecessary,IMHO. Now that bikes have Fi and sophisticated computer systems that take into account; rpm,speed,throttle position,gear,etc,I just don't think it's needed on a street bike. Anyway, will someone please agree with me that if you use aluminum sprockets and are keeping your bike for a few years,that a $159 lifetime sprocket makes sense? Considering that was my original arguement before I got dragged off into this senseless debate.

Ooops. Sorry Tigger. I mis-read your post originally (us Neo Nazis are poorly educated) about the payback of a "lifetime" sprocket. If someone keeps a bike several years, and puts bookoos of miles on the bike, the lifetime sprocket would make sense. But, I have been riding since I was 8, and have only changed out 2 sets of sprockets in 30 years. So, for me, a lifetime sprocket would not have a payback. So I both agree and disagree. Maybe I should run for office.

[Amber Lamps]

Originally Posted by 6doublefive321

Ooops. Sorry Tigger. I mis-read your post originally (us Neo Nazis are poorly educated) about the payback of a "lifetime" sprocket. If someone keeps a bike several years, and puts bookoos of miles on the bike, the lifetime sprocket would make sense. But, I have been riding since I was 8, and have only changed out 2 sets of sprockets in 30 years. So, for me, a lifetime sprocket would not have a payback. So I both agree and disagree. Maybe I should run for office.

DO YOU USE ALUMINUM SPROCKETS? IF NOT,I NEVER SAID IT MAKES SENSE FOR YOU! Aluminum sprockets don't last "boo koos" miles in my experience. BTW if in 30 years you've only changed sprocket sets twice,you should take time off from "Rallys" and ride more or take better care of your bikes. Also,I believe David Dukes is looking for a runnng mate,maybe you can hook-up with him...

[6doublefive321]

Originally Posted by TIGGER

DO YOU USE ALUMINUM SPROCKETS? IF NOT,I NEVER SAID IT MAKES SENSE FOR YOU! Aluminum sprockets don't last "boo koos" miles in my experience. BTW if in 30 years you've only changed sprocket sets twice,you should take time off from "Rallys" and ride more or take better care of your bikes. Also,I believe David Dukes is looking for a runnng mate,maybe you can hook-up with him...

What do you want, man? You asked for someone to agree with you, and I did conditionally. I'm at a loss here. The next time I need some advice about bikes, relationships, gear, or anything else, I'll be sure to ask you, as you obviously have all the answers for everything and you are unconditionally 100% correct 100% of the time. Even your opinions are more right than others' opinions. I'm done.

[Quick281]

Originally Posted by TIGGER

Lastly,there is such a thing as right and wrong. Some oils are demostratably better than others. Some bikes are better than others,especially in certain catagories. Some types of women are more attractive than others. Some jacket designs offer more protection. Period.

There is such a thing as right and wrong, but you failed to correctly apply it.

Other than oil testing, I am pretty sure the rest of them are a matter of opinion. Even then, some people would debate oil test results. Yes each one of those have different attributes, but in the end it is up to the end user to decide which attributes are the most important to them and to judge for themselves as to which best suits their needs. Women, Bikes, and Jackets are all matters of opinions. None of them are right or wrong. But, we can firmly conclude the above conclusion as false.