Sidewinder Sprockets

[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.

[Mr Lefty]

very good point...

[WARputer]

Genius !!!

[marko138]

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.

Greatest post of all time.

[Quick281]

Originally Posted by marko138

Greatest post of all time.

Wurd.

[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.

[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.